This should be a hate crime, according to "them". After all, he was called a "nigger", so said by witnesses, by the SEIU thugs, while, and before they beat him. Obama has touted being very close SEIU for years. Who should be outraged? I am for one, he, (Gladney), is one of us. Obama should be frothing at the mouth! But he is not.......Is black stopping at the white House? Or do only Liberal Blacks deserve the Law, and Thunder from Obama? Such as Harvard Professor Gates? Barack, first name basis, I am starting to wonder about you. Where is the outrage? No Black Panthers counting coup?
Maybe the Law does not apply to Right Wing Extremist Blacks, Uncle Toms, passing out a simple flag. I forgot to read the bill. Misdemeanor my ass! Maybe I need the needle in my temple, then I too, can conform. Naw..I am who I am, Proud Conservative American!
From a J.P. Morgan research report. It isn't really news, most of us figured it out already, but worth a look anyway. Seems getting a cabinet job with Obama isn't requiring Private Sector Experience. Liberals will argue that private sector experience isn't needed. Looking at the 2 highest on the totem pole, I would adamantly disagree. Eisenhower, and who else but Ronald Reagan.
I'm looking hard for the Obama Administration.....Oh, there it is! Less than 10%!
Now, I'll make this simple for Liberals. If you, are going to build a doghouse, and you want someone to advise you on how it should be done, would you pick someone, uh, maybe a friend from your past, that can spell "doghouse"? Or would you pick someone, like your neighbor, who built a very nice doghouse in his yard? Just a simple question, worthy of a simple answer.
Maybe I am wrong, that doghouse is getting built, well, doesn't much resemble a doghouse, but it is being built.
I know Tiger smacked a tree, and that should be your major concern, the Media, not FOX, says so. But isn't that a strange looking doghouse at the White House?
....The leftist claims that Honduras could not hold fair elections flew in the face of the facts. First, the candidates were chosen in November 2008 primaries with observers from the OAS, which judged the process to be "transparent and participative." Second, all the presidential candidates—save one from a small party on the extreme left—wanted the elections to go forward. Third, though Mr. Insulza insisted on calling the removal of Mr. Zelaya a "military coup," the military had never taken charge of the government. And finally, the independent electoral tribunal, chosen by congress before Mr. Zelaya was removed, was continuing with the steps required to fulfill its constitutional mandate to conduct the vote. In the aftermath of the elections Mr. Insulza, who insisted that the group would not recognize the results, presides over a discredited OAS.
Honduras held an election yesterday for president and Congress, a successful election with almost 400 foreign observers from Japan, Europe, Latin America and the U.S..
The fact that the U.S. has said it will recognize their legitimacy shows that this reality eventually made its way to the White House. If not Hugo Chávez's Waterloo, Honduras's stand at least marks a major setback for the Venezuelan strongman's expansionist agenda.
The losers in this drama also include Brazil, Argentina, Chile and Spain, which all did their level best to block the election. Egged on by their zeal, militants inside Honduras took to exploding small bombs around the country in the weeks leading to the vote. They hoped that terror might damp turnout and delegitimize the process. They failed. Yesterday's civic participation appeared to be at least as good as it was in the last presidential election. Some polling stations reportedly even ran short, for a time, of the indelible ink used to mark voter pinkies.
Latin socialists tried to discredit Honduran democracy as part of their effort to force the reinstatement of deposed President Manuel Zelaya. Both sides knew that if that happened the electoral process would be in jeopardy.
Mr. Zelaya had already showed his hand when he organized a mob to try to carry out a June 28 popular referendum so that he could cancel the elections and remain in office. That was unlawful, and he was arrested by order of the Supreme Court and later removed from power by Congress for violating the constitution.
It is less well-known that as president, according to an electoral-council official I interviewed in Tegucigalpa two weeks ago, Mr. Zelaya had refused to transfer the budgeted funds—as required by law—to the council for its preparatory work. In other words, he didn't want a free election.
It bears mentioning here that originally, Barack Obama and his administration backed Zelaya and called the legitimate ousting of Zelaya, done by legal means from Congress to a judge ordering the military to do so, a "coup."
"At the OAS General Assembly earlier this month in San Pedro Sula -- some of you were with me there -- the United States insisted that the larger debate on Cuba be framed within the OAS’s commitment to democracy and human rights. Along with key partners, we won a reaffirmation of the principles of democracy and constitutional order that define the Organization of American States. Now, the wisdom of our approach, I think, was evident yesterday when the OAS and the Inter-American Democratic Charter were used as a basis for our response to the coup that occurred."
Mr. Zelaya, once a darling of the Honduran upper classes, fell from favor when he began increasing the minimum wage, reducing the price of fuel and allying himself with President Chávez. His critics say he crossed a line when he defied the Supreme Court and pushed a referendum to change the Constitution so that he could run for another term. The court called in the military
That poor Zelaya, hero of the working class and foe of the rich, huh? Except you and I both know that’s now what really happened. In this case, “his critics” included the entire government of Honduras. Zelaya did not merely defy the Supreme Court; he openly violated the Honduran constitution which is crystal clear on the matter of Presidents serving more than one term and on the penalty for anyone who even attempts to change that provision. Both the Supreme Court (which unanimous decision included members of Zelaya’s own party) and the Honduran legislature decided to remove Zelaya, even though they did not need to do so. Their actions were found appropriate by the Law Library of Congress. I suppose you could call all those people “his critics” but that does cover them under an umbrella of understatement that’s so obscure as to be misleading.
Which does seem to be the point.
It’s also worth noting that “his critics” also included every printing business in Honduras (none of which would print his illegal ballot, which is why he had them printed in Venezuela) and the head of the armed forces, General Romeo Vasquez, who refused to comply with his illegal order.
In other words, “his critics” include the whole of the Honduran government, the head of the Honduran armed forces, all the printers in Honduras, and the Law Library of the Congress of the United States. Biased or dishonest; you tell me.
Iran's government will build 10 new sites to enrich uranium, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Sunday, a dramatic expansion of the country's nuclear program and one that is bound to fuel fears that it is attempting to produce a nuclear weapon.
Ahmadinejad told the official Islamic Republic News Agency that construction of at least five nuclear facilities is to begin within two months.
The surprise announcement came two days after a censure of Iran by the International Atomic Energy Agency over the Islamic republic's refusal to stop enriching uranium, a key demand of Western powers. The 35-member board of the agency also criticized Iran's construction of a second enrichment plant in Qom, southwest of Tehran.
White House press secretary Robert Gibbs states that if true, "would be yet another serious violation of Iran's clear obligations under multiple U.N. Security Council resolutions and another example of Iran choosing to isolate itself."
The censure from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), with rare backing from Russia and China, provoked anger in Iran where members of parliament demanded the withdrawal of co-operation with UN inspectors.
Question for Obama- How is that policy of engagement working out for ya bud? Still think talking "unconditionally" to our enemies is a bright idea?
Minarets are distinctive architectural features of Islamic mosques, generally tall spires with onion-shaped or conical crowns, usually either free standing or taller than any associated support structure.
The earliest mosques were built without minarets, the adhan (call to prayer) was performed elsewhere; hadiths relay that the Muslim community of Madina gave the call to prayer from the roof of the house of Muhammad, which doubled as a place for prayer. Around 80 years after Muhammad's death the first known minarets appeared.
The Swiss people have just approved a ban on the construction of any new Minarets with 57 percent of the voters backing the proposal that initially no one thought would have the votes to pass.
The reasoning behind the ban is those opposed to the construction of new minarets believe Minarets are "symbols of rising Muslim political and religious power that could eventually turn Switzerland into an Islamic nation."
Right wing politician Ulrich Schluer from the Swiss People's Party told the Swiss website swissinfo.ch that minarets symbolize a political-religious claim to power.
“We do not forbid Islam -- we forbid the political symbol of Islamization, and this is the minaret,” Schluer said. “The minaret has nothing to do with religion; the minaret is a symbol of political victory [of Islam]. The first thing the Turks did when they conquered Constinople -- they installed a minaret on the top of the most important church.”
Amnesty International disagrees and believes this ban violates Switzerland's "obligation" to freedom of religious expression.
Claude Longchamp, leader of the gfs.bern polling institute, is quoted by the Associated Press as saying that the projection also forecasts approval by more than half of the country's 26 cantons, meaning it will become a constitutional amendment.
SATURDAY DECEMBER 5 RALLY IN FOLEY SQUARE: STOP THE TERROR TRIAL IN NYC!
NEW YORKERS TO ATTORNEY GENERAL HOLDER: “WE WILL FIGHT YOU ALL THE WAY!”
What: December 5th rally protesting the NYC based trial of 9/11 conspirators Where: FOLEY SQUARE, MANHATTAN When: Saturday, December 5th, 2009 12:00 noon Who:
The 9/11 Never Forget Coalition, a diverse group of 9/11 victims, family members, first responders, active and reserve members of the military, veterans, and concerned Americans, is holding December 5th rally protesting the plan to bring the 9/11 terrorist conspirators to trial in New York City.
The Coalition formed to fight the decision of President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder to try the 9/11 co-conspirators in New York City’s federal court, effectively giving war criminals the same rights as American citizens while endangering the safety of all New Yorkers.
Two weeks ago, we sent a letter signed by 300 family members of 9/11 victims to the President, Attorney General and Defense Secretary Robert Gates asking them to reverse course. The letter has now been signed by over 120,000 Americans: Read it here and co-sign it here.
Debra Burlingame, founder of 911 Families for a Safe and Strong America, said “Our rally on Saturday, December 5 will tell Attorney General Eric Holder, President Barack Obama and their supporters in Congress: We will fight you all the way! ”
My brother was Charles (Chic) Burlingame, captain of American Airlines Flight 77, which was hijacked and crashed into the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001.
Now I am one of the organizers of a rally being held at noon this Saturday in Foley Square to stop President Obama, Attorney General Eric Holder and members of Congress from bringing sworn enemies of the United States into this country – from bringing war criminals captured on the battlefield, lawfully held as war detainees, into civilian court.
It doesn’t have to happen. We who are opposed to the decision must make ourselves perfectly clear to the powers that be that we will not tolerate this decision.
Two weeks ago, 300 family members of 9/11 victims sent a letter to the President telling him we adamantly oppose this dangerous and unnecessary act. The letter was never acknowledged. Then, one hour after the attorney general made his stunning announcement that unlawful foreign combatants would be tried as civilians, the number of signers to that letter jumped to 45,000. By the end of the day the number was 100,000. Our Internet server couldn’t handle the volume of Americans who had somehow found out about this letter and wished to stand with us.
The attorney general has suggested that those who oppose prosecuting these men here in New York City are afraid – that we somehow don’t have the courage to face Khalid Shaikh Mohammed in court.
How dare this man, who didn’t have the decency to notify victims’ families of his decision to bring these monsters here, imply that we lack courage. Courage is carrying on after watching your loved ones die, in real time, knowing that they burned to death, were crushed to death, or jumped from 100 flights high. Courage is carrying on, even as we waited, in some cases years, for something of our loved ones to bury. More than 1,100 families still wait.
How dare the attorney general suggest that the firefighters who oppose this trial need to “man up” and let this avowed enemy of America mock their brother firefighters in the country’s most magisterial setting, a federal court.
Let me refresh the attorney general on the meaning of courage. Courage was going into those buildings that day, knowing they might not come out alive. Courage was digging for nine months on hands and knees, breathing in toxic smoke, to find the ravaged remains of brother firefighters, police officers, citizen responders and office workers. This courage was not summoned from false bravado; it sprang from an abiding love of their fellow human beings and a sense of obligation to them, their families and their beloved country….
Daniel Pearl’s dad is sickened by Obama’s 9/11 trial decision
By CARL CAMPANILE
Last Updated: 12:29 PM, November 14, 2009
Posted: 3:15 AM, November 14, 2009
The father of slain Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl slammed the Obama administration’s decision to hold a public trial for admitted 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed — who boasted of killing his son in Pakistan.
Judea Pearl said he was “sick to the stomach” when he heard that the Justice Department decided to prosecute Mohammed in Manhattan federal court.
“I don’t want to hear every morning in the papers what KSM did,” Pearl told The Post last night. “Danny was killed once. Now he will be killed 10 times a day. Leave him alone.”
His son’s beheading in 2002 was caught on a gruesome video that shocked the world.
“The 21st century saw three shocks,” Pearl said. “The first was 9/11. The second was the killing of my son. And the third was the shock today.”
The reporter’s outraged father, a UCLA professor, said a public trial would allow the admitted mass murderer to “boast about his cruelty” and encourage other terrorists to inflict harm.
Pearl said the prosecution of Mohammed should be done in closed session to avoid giving terrorists a platform.
If the Fed's projections are right, the public is going to be very angry next year -- at big business and at the elected officials who have spent trillions of dollars without putting the country fully back to work. Lou Dobbs, the voice of populist anger, may become the nation's hottest politician. President Obama, who has struggled to find a centrist consensus for economic policies, may be tossed like a cork on a stormy sea.
Read the whole Ignatius column, then go read the actual minutes of the meeting... both are linked above.
The problem for the Democrats is they have control of both the House, the Senate and the White House and instead of addressing the very real issue of government spending, they have spent more.
Instead of helping with tax cuts, they are letting them expire and raising taxes. Instead of ending the era of pork spending, they have added so many earmarks into each bill, the deficit projections are now quadrupled.
Now they are trying to push another trillion dollar bill, Obamacare, through and in 2010, the chickens will definitely come home to roost.
So, what changed? Or is there something we should not know? My mistake? I did not snag the PDF file, just a link, which now seems to be a cyber leaf...I apologize for that. I shall be more dillegent in the future. This raises some questions in my mind though, as it should yours.
Update:File is still available, and the worm does appear on page 29. Someone missed the bus, and I smell major bull****.
From The Marston Chronicles This may come as a surprise to you but the Speaker does not have to be elected by his or her own party. It is possible to form a bipartisan coalition and elect a Speaker who is more satisfactory to the minority party. That is what happened in Arizona in 1964 in the State House of Representatives. Ever since achieving statehood in 1912 Arizona had been a typical southern state with segregated schools and Democrats in charge all along. As always happens when one party controls a state for too long, corruption was rampant. Republican members of the legislature could not serve on committees or even introduce bills. As more and more people moved to Arizona from Republican areas of the country, the segregated schools were done away with (before the desegregation decision) and Democrats from the urban areas became an endangered species.
The highest priority of most politicians is the get re-elected and these urban Democrats were in a world of hurt. That is when the Republican minority leader went to what today we would call Blue Dog Democrats and proposed a deal. The Republicans would vote for one of these urban Democrats for Speaker in return for the minority Republican leader becoming the majority leader and being given committee assignments and being allowed to introduce bills. Since these Democrats were well aware that their districts were becoming more and more Republican with every passing year they agreed with this proposal. Yes, the Speaker was still a Democrat but one the Republicans could live with since they were all now part of the majority.
There are 48 Democratic Congressmen from districts that McCain-Palin carried in a horrible year for Republicans. What will happen in 2010 to these folks? A lot of them are going to be toast and they know it. Since the Republicans only need to pick up 40 of these 48 seats to regain control of the House even that is a possibility in a good Republican year. So here is how it works, the Republican leaders approach the Blue Dog Democrats and offer to vote for their choice of one of their own for Speaker in exchange for a Republican becoming Majority Leader. Since the House will reorganize itself in January, there will be a new vote for Speaker then. If a PUMA coalition can be formed by then, Pelosi will be out and a more conservative Speaker will be in. What would that do to the Obama legislative agenda? This is the only hope for survival for a lot of the Blue Dog Democrats because they can go back to their districts and say that they are no longer going along with the leftist agenda but have become bipartisan so why elect a Republican in their place?
Do the country a favor and start behaving like Americans instead of Democrats and Republicans and we will love you for it. Are any of you House Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats ready to do that and save your own job in the process? If you do not do this, we will all be stuck for Pelosi as Speaker for years to come. Do we really want to have this San Francisco socialist become President if something happens to Obama and Biden? In case you have forgotten your civics, the Speaker of the House is third in line to become President. Many people are asking how we can do worse than Obama as President and here is your answer.
So it is a lull in the Tea Party movement, with the Holidays and such, as it should be. But behind the scenes, we are gathering momentum, and not just out in the open. Funds being raised, due to sales of various Party related items, seem to be rising. These funds, will eventually be funneled to Qualified Candidates. And it will only grow from here. Not all is what it seems though. Some money will be misdirected. A Clearinghouse of sorts, should be implemented. That's my opinion. Politico says:
My personal opinion 2? Hook this up with the Qualifying effort, the Super Secret GOP test, (Ah, not so secret anymore), and we may have an "unprecedented" :), landslide in 2010, and beyond....
Say what you will, but the Tea Party is a force to be reckoned with. It is not just the out-in-the -open-in-your-face, that is making us strong. It is Americans, fed up with bureaucratic nonsensical spending. Not all of these Patriots participate in protests, but they will be heard none the less.
I just returned from a week long vacation. I was humbled by the interest shown by many, who oppose our current administration, and will only show this opposition at the voting booth. Case in point: My Mother, 91 years old, and a staunch Democrat, when I walked into her living room, I was greeted by FOX News, on her television set. "unprecedented" :) So watch out! I have said it before, Tea Party, is not going anywhere but forward. "unprecedented" indeed! BHO, does not have all of the rights to this word!
Skeez
"If you push something hard enough, it will fall over." Firesign Theatre
A break from politics for a moment. I am not a huge golf fan, but Tiger Woods is extraordinary and news reports say that Woods was in a car accident on Friday morning, hitting a fire hydrant and tree in his neighbor's yard and being knocked unconscious for approximately six minutes.
His wife says she used a golf club to smash in a window and dragged him out of the car. Orlando Sentinel:
The wife of the world's No.1 golfer Tiger Woods used one of his tools -- a golf club -- to smash open a window of his crashed SUV and then pulled him out of the damaged vehicle after an early-morning accident Friday outside their Isleworth mansion.
By the time a Windermere police officer arrived about 2:25 a.m., Elin Nordegren Woods had dragged her husband out of his 2009 Cadillac Escalade. He was lying on the ground, dazed and bleeding from his lips and with blood in his mouth, Windermere Mayor Gary Bruhn said.
The crash knocked Tiger Woods, 33, unconscious for about six minutes, according to a call report compiled by the Orange County Sheriff's Office and obtained by the Orlando Sentinel. Bruhn said the golfer faded in and out of consciousness.
Windermere police Chief Daniel Saylor said that officers found Woods lying in the street with his wife hovering over him. "She was frantic, upset," Saylor said in a briefing Friday night. She told officers she was in the house when she heard the accident and "came out and broke the back window with a golf club," he said, adding that the front-door windows were not broken and that "the door was probably locked."
"She supposedly got him out and laid him on the ground," he said. "He was in and out of consciousness when my guys got there."
Woods was conscious enough to speak, he said.
"He was mumbling but didn't say anything coherent," Saylor said.
Woods was brought to the hospital in serious condition. He was released shortly after and resting in his home according to ABC News:
Two Florida Highway Patrol troopers tried to interview to Woods Friday evening at his home, but Woods' wife, Elin Nordegren, turned them away, saying he was sleeping, The Associated Press reported.
Christine Brennan, an ABC News sports consultant and USA Today sports columnist, suggested on "Good Morning America Weekend" that there are many open questions.
"What is this? It's completely incongruous to Tiger's image that he would be doing this at 2:30 in the morning," Brennan said. "He's got a wife. He's got two young children. If he's going out to get something for the baby, okay, great, then tell us. I think that's confusing to people and understandably confusing to people."
Frankly I am thinking it is really no one's business what he was doing out at 2 am, he is an adult and as long as he pays for whatever damages were caused and no one else was hurt, that should be the only concerns.
After emails from Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia were leaked showing that a coverup had been implemented to keep any contradictory evidence that did not support man made global warming, we now see that Anglia wasn't the only "officials" providing half the information or even truthful information to the public.
New Zealand is now being accused of the same type of misinformation.
The New Zealand Government's chief climate advisory unit NIWA is under fire for allegedly massaging raw climate data to show a global warming trend that wasn't there.
The scandal breaks as fears grow worldwide that corruption of climate science is not confined to just Britain's CRU climate research centre.
In New Zealand's case, the figures published on NIWA's [the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric research] website suggest a strong warming trend in New Zealand over the past century:
But analysis of the raw climate data from the same temperature stations has just turned up a very different result:
Go read the rest and how the comparisons just do not match up with the actual data.
Make sure to read the followup piece as well with additional questions.
Details and on the ball updating on this global warming farce can be found at Watts Up With That, who deserves kudos for staying on top of all new information as it comes out.
This story gets bigger every day and the U.S. media continues to try to ignore the overwhelming evidence.
If this happened at any school in the United States there would have been hell to pay. First of all the useful idiots in the media would have broken into their regularly scheduled news program with not only this as breaking news, but hourly updates on the condition of the victims. Each and every government official from the President on down would be commenting on this event with the President holding an kicking summit over ice cream at the White House. School officials would be fired at once with total sensitivity training and classes being taught for days. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton would be holding daily rallies in the town. Finally Maxine Waters would hold Congressional Hearings.
So why didn't anything like that happen when a Florida school allowed a 'Kick A Jew Day'?
Ten students at a Florida middle school were suspended after district officials say they participated in "kick a Jew day."
District spokesman Joe Landon says a Jewish student at North Naples Middle School reported being kicked on Thursday. The school's principal addressed the entire student body the next morning and asked for anyone with information about the alleged attack to come forward.
The district determined that 10 students should be punished. They each served one day of in-school suspension Monday.
Landon says the first 20 minutes of the school day, which is normally used for reading and tutoring, will now be used to teach students about respect, kindness and ways to prevent bullying.
No criminal charges have been filed.
I would bet you any amount of money that if the victim was black not only would charges be filed, but they would be charged as adults.
Nice school they have at North Naples Middle School. So nice that they teach the basics in education: Reading, Writing, Arithmetic, Anti-Semitism. Just the basics. You can contact them here by e-mail or phone them at 239-377-4600, their FAX is 239-377-4601. I am sure they would love to hear from you on this.
Oh and for the record, the next 'Kick A Jew Day' try kicking these Jews and see what will happen:
Recently emails from the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia have come to light when computer hackers broke into the University's servers and posted hundreds of emails showing that some researchers manipulated data to prove global warming exists and hid data that showed contradicting evidence.
(Click to enlarge)
In one leaked e-mail, the research center's director, Phil Jones, writes to colleagues about graphs showing climate statistics over the last millennium. He alludes to a technique used by a fellow scientist to "hide the decline" in recent global temperatures. Some evidence appears to show a halt in a rise of global temperatures from about 1960, but is contradicted by other evidence which appears to show a rise in temperatures is continuing.
Jones wrote that, in compiling new data, he had "just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (i.e., from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline," according to a leaked e-mail, which the author confirmed was genuine.
The leaked documents (see our previous coverage) come from the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia in eastern England. In global warming circles, the CRU wields outsize influence: it claims the world's largest temperature data set, and its work and mathematical models were incorporated into the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's 2007 report. That report, in turn, is what the Environmental Protection Agency acknowledged it "relies on most heavily" when concluding that carbon dioxide emissions endanger public health and should be regulated.
Last week's leaked e-mails range from innocuous to embarrassing and, critics believe, scandalous. They show that some of the field's most prominent scientists were so wedded to theories of man-made global warming that they ridiculed dissenters who asked for copies of their data ("have to respond to more crap criticisms from the idiots"), cheered the deaths of skeptical journalists, and plotted how to keep researchers who reached different conclusions from publishing in peer-reviewed journals.
One e-mail message, apparently from CRU director Phil Jones, references the U.K.'s Freedom of Information Act when asking another researcher to delete correspondence that might be disclosed in response to public records law: "Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise." Another, also apparently from Jones: global warming skeptics "have been after the CRU station data for years. If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, I think I'll delete the file rather than send to anyone." (Jones was a contributing author to the chapter of the U.N.'s IPCC report titled "Detection of Climate Change and Attribution of Causes.")
Congress may probe into this information, but wait..... seems those making noise and those wanting an investigation are Republicans.... birds are chirping loudly but no other sounds are coming from our Democratic politicians.
Democratic politicians are not the only ones trying hard to ignore the whole mess either.
Nope, as NewsBuster's points out spectacularly, the Houston Chronicle has an editorial headlined "As a crucial climate change conference nears, more evidence of a warming globe," completely ignoring the evidence showing the very same researchers hiding information to the contrary of their headline.
P.J. Gladnick, who wrote the NewsBuster's piece, noticed something extraordinary.
The Chronicle's readers won't let them cover up the contradicting evidence and are making sure to take the writer to task... big time.
Go look at NewsBuster's to see how the readers did more homework than the Chronicle did.
The Daily Mail reports that one of the scientists at the ehart of this major scandal, is being pressured to quit.
The scientist at the heart of the climate change scandal was under growing pressure to quit last night.
George Monbiot, a leading environmentalist, said Phil Jones should resign from the Climatic Research Unit over leaked emails that appear to show researchers suppressed scientific data.
More emails came to light yesterday, including one in which an American climatologist admitted it was a travesty that scientists could not explain a lack of global warming in recent years.
You can download and view all the emails for yourself from Wikileaks.
Climatic Research Unit emails, data, models, 1996-2009
Released November 21, 2009 Summary
This archive presents over 120Mb of emails, documents, computer code and models from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, written between 1996 and 2009.
The CRU has told the BBC that the files were obtained by a computer hacker 3-4 days ago.
This archive includes unreleased global temperature analysis computer source code that has been the subject of Freedom of Information Act requests. The archive appears to be a collection of information put together by the CRU prior to a FoI redaction process.
A Google search using the keywords "East Anglia emails" brings up thousands of hits and a Google News search brings up even more.
This has exploded and the more information that comes out, the more damaging this is for everyone involved and it goes to show that despite attempts to cover up any data that contradicts the popular theory, it is now all public knowledge.
Navy SEALs have secretly captured one of the most wanted terrorists in Iraq — the alleged mastermind of the murder and mutilation of four Blackwater USA security guards in Fallujah in 2004. And three of the SEALs who captured him are now facing criminal charges, sources told FoxNews.com.
The three, all members of the Navy's elite commando unit, have refused non-judicial punishment — called an admiral's mast — and have requested a trial by court-martial.
Ahmed Hashim Abed, whom the military code-named "Objective Amber," told investigators he was punched by his captors — and he had the bloody lip to prove it.
I can say it no better than Michael Goldfarb has, when he states, "Maybe there's a whole lot more to this story than is currently being reported, but it'd have to be pretty terrible stuff to convince me that three Navy SEALs who successfully captured a high-value target now deserve to be court martialed for their service. A fat lip? That's enough to get you rough military justice from the Obama administration, but blow up the World Trade Center and you get all the due process rights of the civilian criminal justice system. Sounds fair, right?"
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 27% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-two percent (42%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -15. This is the lowest Approval Index rating yet measured for President Obama (see trends).
Fifty-two percent (52%) of Democrats Strongly Approve while 68% of Republicans Strongly Disapprove. Among those not affiliated with either major political party, just 16% Strongly Approve and 51% Strongly Disapprove (see other recent demographic highlights from the tracking poll).
51 percent of unaffilated voters, those not affiliated with either party, strongly disapprove of Obama's job performance compared to just 16 percent strongly approve.
Among all voters, 54 percent disapprove while 45 percent approve.
Obama's signature obamacare has also reach an all time low in support according to the same article:
From The Marston Chronicles Perhaps you recognize this as an acronym for the ungrammatical expression, "There aint no such thing as a free lunch."The point of this expression is that nothing in life comes free. The critical word is "comes". Those things you give are free if you truly do not expect or want anything back in return. Anything you receive comes at some cost to you. Such is the case with a so-called free lunch. Not only is someone or some institution paying for it, such as a charity or the government, but it still comes at a cost to you. There is no way anyone in this country can get a totally free ride. We all pay taxes. Even if you pay no income taxes, you still pay sales taxes on most things you buy and so do charities on the things they buy.
Of course, there are those who do everything they can to get as much of a free ride as possible and let others pay for it. Believe it or not, this comes at a terrible cost to such a person. It comes not as a monetary cost but as a loss of something far more important: freedom. Such a person is now dependent upon someone else or some institution for their very sustenance. How is this any different from being a peasant or serf totally dependent upon the whim of the local baron for everything? We no longer have barons running our lives but something far worse: the government. So what makes the government far worse? The baron only ruled his own estate; the government rules all of us.
So what is so bad about that since we live in a democracy? All that means is that we get to elect the people who decide exactly how much some unelected government official gets to run our lives at literally the point of a gun. Now none of this is usually all without some purported "good" intent. The problem with this is that "the road to hell is paved with good intentions". Most of what the government promises to do for us sounds good on the surface. As always, the devil is in the details. After all, who can argue against free lunches for the poor kids at school, free health care for those who cannot afford it and for that matter everything free for all of us who cannot afford it? Where do we stop and who gets to decide who is poor and cannot afford some good thing?
That is where we come back to tanstaafl. Who is going to pay for all of these "free" goodies that are not free at all? Some folks propose that the rich pay for all of these freebies. They already pay 70% of all taxes in this country. Soaking the rich to subsidize the poor says they should pay 100% of the taxes. Obviously, the rich would soon be on their way to some tax free haven more than they already are if we did that. Even if they stayed, how much more would we raise in tax revenue? There is only another 30% to be gained on top of the current amount. In fiscal year 2009, all of the governments in the United States are expected to have revenues of $4,636,000,000,000. If we get the rich to pay all of the taxes, that 30% will raise another $1,390,800,000,000 for a total of $6,026,800,000,000. That should solve the problem, shouldn't it? Well, no, because all of those same governments are expecting to spend $6,456,000,000,000 in that same year. In other words, all of the various governments are already planning to run a deficit of $1,820,000,000,000. Making the rich pay all of the taxes will not even cover the projected deficit.
Since even making all of the "rich" pay all of the taxes, which isn't happening, still won't cover our existing expenses, how can we in good conscience add one damn thing to our expenditures? That means no new health care, no cap and trade, no nothing. That is the financial aspect of all this mess. That does not cover the loss of freedom in not being able to make your own choices. It is the young people under thirty who will suffer the most. Ironically this is the group that elected the folks currently running the show. People under thirty do not need general health insurance only catastrophic health insurance but they will either have to buy it, pay a whopping fine or go to jail under the current proposals. That is so their premiums can pay for the health care of their grandparents who really do need it. Not only that, but they will be saddled with the debt this "free" health care will add to the current deficit of $1,820,000,000,000 by at least doubling it to $3,620,000,000,000 for each and every year after it takes effect for as far into the future as we can project it. When will this fiscal insanity cease? January, 2011 (the date the next congress takes office) seems a long way off.
Wall Street Journal reports that Joseph Lieberman has drawn a line in the sand on Obamacare. If any form of the public option is included, he will not vote for the bill:
Sen. Joseph Lieberman, speaking in that trademark sonorous baritone, utters a simple statement that translates into real trouble for Democratic leaders: "I'm going to be stubborn on this."
Stubborn, he means, in opposing any health-care overhaul that includes a "public option," or government-run health-insurance plan, as the current bill does. His opposition is strong enough that Mr. Lieberman says he won't vote to let a bill come to a final vote if a public option is included.
Probe for a catch or caveat in that opposition, and none is visible. Can he support a public option if states could opt out of the plan, as the current bill provides? "The answer is no," he says in an interview from his Senate office. "I feel very strongly about this." How about a trigger, a mechanism for including a public option along with a provision saying it won't be used unless private insurance plans aren't spreading coverage far and fast enough? No again.
So any version of a public option will compel Mr. Lieberman to vote against bringing a bill to a final vote? "Correct," he says.
Huffington Post reports that Former DNC Chair Howard Dean has told them that Senate Democrats are "in deep trouble."
"So this is really tough. I didn't anticipate being in this position. I thought it would pass. Maybe Harry has some magic up his sleeve. But I don't see how he gets those four votes [Sens. Joseph Lieberman (Conn.), Mary Landrieu (La.), Blanche Lincoln (Ark.) and Ben Nelson (Neb.)] without compromising the bill," Dean concluded.
The former Vermont governor warned that if the party allowed the four moderates to further water down the bill (or defeat it altogether) it could lead to primary challenges or a drop in fundraising from the party's base.
"If you have members refusing to vote for Reid on procedural issues you will have a revolt in the party," Dean said. "What is the point of having a 60-vote margin? This is going to be death for the [Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee] and the [Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee]. Why would anyone donate to them if they're supporting candidates who defeat the Democratic agenda?"
Last but not least, The Hill with some choice Lieberman quotes peppered through their piece titled "One year after retaining his gavel, Lieberman threatens health bill."
Lieberman criticized the bill crafted by Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.), which does not call for a public option and is viewed as the most conservative bill put forward by a Democratic leader.
In an interview on Fox Business Network last month, Lieberman said, “I’m afraid that in the end the Baucus bill is actually going to raise the price of insurance for most of the people in the country.
“If you ask me, I’d say we should really focus on what’s called healthcare delivery reform,” Lieberman added. “To me, the first big step is to make some changes that really do bend the increasing costs of healthcare down.”
Pressed on ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday, Lieberman emphasized his yes vote on Saturday to proceed to debate on healthcare reform
“I voted [Saturday] night, as 59 others did, to go along with debate,” said Lieberman. “But I want us to begin not only debating healthcare reform, but doing something about healthcare reform. I don’t think anybody thinks this bill will pass as written.”
On his position as chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Lieberman states "Look, I’m grateful my colleagues enabled me to continue as chairman. I hope that I’ve done a good job, including the Fort Hood hearings … But when the caucus welcomed me back into the caucus and enabled me to continue as chairman of the committee, I think they understood that I’d been reelected as an Independent, and that I wasn’t going to view issues through the prism of partisan politics, but that I’d do what I thought made sense — for my state, for my country. And that’s what I’ve done. I certainly didn’t sign on to walk the party line, whenever anybody showed me where it was."
It has been suggested by many that Reid will push the public option right to the edge, so that he can say he "tried", then drop it in order to get a bill, any bill labeled "Healthcare reform", passed.
Last Wednesday, a group of 9/11 family members and New York first responders attended the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in which Attorney General Eric Holder testified about his decision to prosecute Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the 9/11 co-conspirators in a New York City federal court. Mr. Holder stumbled through several tough and pointed questions about the dangers of giving war criminals the same rights as American citizens and blurring the mission of our war fighters. He was visibly unnerved by the presence of the families and the first responders. We want to keep the pressure on him, as well as President Obama, who we were shocked to learn was AWOL on this reckless decision.
Nearly two weeks ago we sent a letter signed by 300 family members to President Obama, AG Holder and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. After Mr. Holder's announcement last Friday, another 120,000 people (as of today) have signed the letter in support of our position. Many of these individuals are family members from all three attack sites, active & retired FDNY, PAPD & NYPD, first responders from throughout the country and active, reserve and retired members of the military.
We are holding a press conference on Tuesday, November 24, at noon in Battery Park, Clinton Castle for the 9/11 families and first responders/survivors. We chose to hold it on Thanksgiving Week in the hope that our fellow Americans will join us in sending our prayers and messages of thanks to our troops and first responders, who bear the brunt of the decisions made in Washington. At that time we will announce the details for a large rally in New York City on Saturday, December 5, at noon at a location to be announced at the press conference.
Going forward, we think it is important that the rally be tightly focused on the issues of keeping 9/11 war crimes trials out of civilian courts, keeping foreign terrorists off U.S. soil, and reversing the policy of returning to pre-9/11 days when the U.S. Government responded to deadly terrorist attacks with arrest warrants.
It comes to our attention that the MEMRI Blog highlights an article from the Saudi _al-Watan_ in Arabic that - according to an Afghan source - the United States is talking to the Taliban seeking to trade control of 5 provinces in exchange for the cessation of attacks on US bases. MEMRI summarizes:
An Afghan source in Kabul reports that U.S. Ambassador in Afghanistan Karl Eikenberry is holding secret talks with Taliban elements headed by the movement's foreign minister, Ahmad Mutawakil, at a secret location in Kabul. According to the source, the U.S. has offered the Taliban control of the Kandahar, Helmand, Oruzgan, Kunar and Nuristan provinces in return for a halt to the Taliban missile attacks on U.S. bases.
Kunar province borders the Khyber Pass region where the majority of US and NATO supplies pass enroute from Pakistan. And the 4 remaining four provinces constitute fully the southern 25% of Afghanistan's territory.
"This is not a war of choice. This is a war of necessity," Obama told the annual Veterans of Foreign Wars conference -- cautioning that the insurgency would not be defeated overnight. "Those who attacked America on 9/11 are plotting to do so again. If left unchecked, the Taliban insurgency will mean an even larger safe haven from which Al Qaeda would plot to kill more Americans."
Is Obama actually prepared to surrender gained ground to the Taliban in secret agreements, while pretending to understand the danger they pose in public?
If true then Obama is far more dangerous to America than most originally thought.
Never a good thing to be compared to Jimmy Carter, known as the worst president ever, especially when the person asking if Obama is sending "Carteresque Signals" is Chris Matthews, the man who once said that a "thrill went up his leg" listening to Obama speak.
Matthews:Welcome back. The word these days is optics, visuals, signals. In the Carter presidency, the optics were not exactly robust, and Ronald Reagan rode that to a big victory in 1980. Is the Obama White House sending some Carteresque signals these days? Some see that in the deep bow to the Emperor of Japan, an unforced error say critics. Then there was, there was what happened in China: Obama got nothing in the way of concessions over there in spite of playing the polite visitor. And his effort to speak directly to the Chinese was jammed by the government. Third, that decision to try the terrorists up in that federal court in New York City. Again, nothing that had to be done, and critics say it shows that Obama, his team doesn't understand this is a war we're in. David, that's the question. These optics are everything in a president. Carter used to carry that garment bag over his shoulder. This president is he making mistakes like in China like in Japan?
The following was sent to me by Pastor Ed of Do The Right Thing. Written by SusanKaminski, it would be a good thing if it was sent to every editor in America. Maybe BO would see it, too. Read on:
Dear Editor:
While I'm eating my Thanksgiving dinner with my family this year, I'm going to have a hard time enjoying it knowing that our President is willingly allowing our men and women in Afghanistan to die while waiting for him to make up his mind whether or not to give them the resources they need for survival.
I was heartsick while reading a chat room that is sometimes visited by soldiers currently serving in Afghanistan, ask us to please pray for their safety because each day things get worse, and they don't know when they are going to get the help they need. Pastor Ed Boston, Of Hope Wesleyan Church in Hope, IN works with deployed soldiers and veterans through an on-line ministry called Do The Right Thing. He has confirmed the stories and the concerns of those currently serving.
These brave men and women went where they were told to go and are doing their very best, so how deranged is it to send them there as sitting ducks while the elite politicians play golf in between paying off their friends for political favors.
There is something so seriously wrong with our government allowing the Secretary of the Treasury to get away with funnelling obscene amounts of money to his friends in the auto unions, not to mention the developing corruption story coming out of the Goldman Sachs relationship. Simultaneously, this administration is obsessed with taking over 1/6 of our economy through socialized healthcare! All the while, as if they are invisible, the President is completely ignoring our brightest and best who are literally dying in Afghanistan.
These same politicians campaigned on how Afghanistan was the war we "should" be in, and most Americans agreed with them, and yet they have absolutely no conscience at allowing these men to be slaughtered when it is within their power to protect them. It is beyond me how they sleep at night.
So we'll eat our Turkey and be grateful that we live in the greatest country on earth, but first I'll call and write to all of my legislators and plead with them not to sit down to their dinner until they have gotten our military the support they need, and stop sending our children to slaughter like the bird they are about to consume.
Sderot (pronounced sderr-ROHT) is the only town and the Western Negev is the only region in the entire world in which missiles are fired towards civilian population in the 21st Century.
Yet in spite of the lie by Hamas that they will not fire rockets into Israel again, a promise to the world in fact, missiles have been fired and one exploded inside the city of Sderot.
The Israel Air Force carried out an air strike against terrorist operations in Gaza overnight in retaliation for a Kassam rocket fired at the western Negev on Saturday. The rocket exploded in the city of Sderot, according to the IDF Spokesman's Office, but caused no injuries or damage.
In response, IAF fighter jets targeted and identified hitting two weapons factories in the northern and central regions of Gaza early Sunday. They also struck one smuggling tunnel located in the area of Rafiah, along Gaza's southern border with Egypt.
The air strikes were carried out despite an announcement Saturday by Hamas "Interior Minister" Fathi Hamad that the terror organizations had cut a deal with allied groups to temporarily halt the rocket attacks. Hamad told reporters at a news conference in Gaza the decision had been made in order to give people time to "rebuild" following the IDF's counterrorist Operation Cast Lead.
"The IDF will not tolerate any attacks by terror organizations against Israel and its citizens," said the IDF in a statement.
Nearly 270 rockets and mortar shells have been fired at Israel since the end of last winter's counterterrorist operation on January 18. This is in comparison to more than 3,300 rockets and mortars fired in the year before the IDF carried out the operation, the IDF spokesman pointed out.
In the past month, Hamas terrorists have again slowly begun increasing the number of rocket attacks on Israel, with approximately 15 rockets and mortar shells fired to date.
While 15 is not a large number, they do help to create the atmosphere of terror to Sderot. Sderot is the only town in the world in which between 74% and 94% of children aged 4-18 exhibit symptoms of post-traumatic stress, says Natal, the Israel Center for Victims of Terror and War. Those numbers are not present in Gaza where according to the Lame Stream Media Anti-Semites, the children of Gaza have experienced the most vicious and inhumane attacks in the history of the world. Where is the PTSD and other psychiatric disorders in these children?
Just imagine this is your kitchen on Thanksgiving:
Just imagine this is your bathroom:
Not a pretty picture is it.
There is much you can do. Write your Congressman and Senator, write the President. Tell them that Hamas' constant attacks on civilians (they very seldom target military personal) is unacceptable under The Geneva Conventions of War and other International Agreements.
Contact your local newspaper, especially after they write a story condemning Israel for attacking Gaza in response to the Hamas attacks on Sderot.
Become informed. The people of Sderot have been on the forefront of the War on Terror for the last 8 years. They have put their families at risk, sacrificing good physical and mental health in this war. It is time their stories, their struggle comes out. The Sderot Media Center is a good place to start. Their on-line resource page is full of facts (not propaganda) for you to use, especially if you are a blogger. You can find it here.
I ask all who read this to keep the people of Sderot in their prayers. Pray that G-d will send a miracle to them. That they can live in peace and quiet.
And if you are able to, please send a little donation their way. The funds are used to help the people of Sderot. Each penny you send will bring comfort to citizen of that beleaguered town. Just click here and follow the directions. For those who wish to sponsor one of their projects, just click here. You will discover the projects that the Sderot Media Center is working on.
Hugh Hewitt is leading a rally at the Federal Building in Westwood in Los Angeles to prevent the current health care system from being destroyed. Also, the attack on women's luscious yummy bouncies must stop. Leave their lovelies alone!
