About Me

Name:Lady Logician
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Multiculturalism bad? Really?????

 
WOW - I didn't think anyone would have the intestinal fortitude to print this headline.
 
" Multiculturalism is to blame for perverting young Muslims "
 
While the article itself does not say that, it does do an admirable job of putting to rest the myth that there is a "reason" for the hatred that the radicals have for "the West". 
 
"Islamic radicalism did not begin with Muslim grievances over Western foreign policy in Iraq or Afghanistan. It has deep roots, going back to the 13th-century reformer Ibn Taimiyya, through Wahhabism to modern ideologues such as Sayyid Qutb in Egypt or Maududi in Pakistan. "
 
The telling thing, that most people will miss, is this:
 
"Given the world view that has given rise to such grievances, there can never be sufficient appeasement, and new demands will continue to be made" (emphasis added)
 
That is the one thing that the left just will never get!  No matter what we do it will never be enough for the Islamofascists.  If you don't believe me look at what happened to someone who had the audacity to question CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations).
 
"I went to the event because CAIR had advertised that it was open to the public, and regardless, it was held on a public sidewalk in front of a Federal building. I had every right to be there. It was clear that they had a message they wanted to express, and I hoped to get them to speak beyond their scripted press release comments…to get some straight answers about how they really feel about the violence and terrorism committed by Hezbollah that provoked the Israeli response.
 
I wasn’t there more than a couple of minutes when I began to interview a gentleman wearing a kafiyyeh that concealed everything but his eyes. I was asking him about his support for Hezbollah when Dr. Al-Akhras approached us and began telling everyone in the vicinity not to speak to me. I then asked him what his message and I kept rolling as he explained how they were there opposing terror. He was clearly agitated. It was when several of them were telling me about Israel bombing innocent civilians, and I responded by asking them about Hezbollah missiles being fired into Israel killing innocent civilians that Al-Akhras lunged at me and grabbed ahold of my camera as I was filming.
 
At 5’3” and 100 pounds, “ciaospirit” is not a physically intimidating figure. Yet she says Dr. Al-Akhras assaulted her a second time as she was filming him as he addressed the rally – again, all captured on a video she made available on her blog."

One thing that Americans need to be made aware of is this:
 
"Thirty percent of British Muslims would prefer to live under Sharia (Islamic religious) law than under British law."
 
Read that again and let it sink in....30% of British Muslims would prefer to live under Sharia law than live in a free democratic society!  But wait there is more:
 
"Forty-five percent say 9/11 was a conspiracy by the American and Israeli governments. (they must be the ones that watch Countdown with Keith Olbermann - ed)  This figure is more than twice as high as those who say it was not a conspiracy. Tragically, almost one in four British Muslims believe that last year's 7/7 attacks on London were justified because of British support for the U.S.-led war on terror.
 
When asked, "Is Britain my country or their country?" only one in four say it is. Thirty percent of British Muslims would prefer to live under Sharia (Islamic religious) law than under British law. According to the report, "Half of those who express a preference for living under Sharia law say that, given the choice, they would move to a country governed by those laws."
 
Twenty-eight percent hope for the U.K. one day to become a fundamentalist Islamic state. This comports with last year's Daily Telegraph newspaper survey that found one-third of British Muslims believe that Western society is decadent and immoral and that Muslims should seek to end it. " (emphasis added)
 
Are you starting to see yet, dear reader, what it is we are up against? 
 
Cross posted at Savage Republican
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Delving further into the swamp

 
If you really want to see how bad the fever swamp left has gotten, you need look no further than "Countdown" with Keith Olbermann.  Last week brought us a classic example of BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome) courtesy of Newsbusters.  In opening his show Olberman hinted that the attack that was thwarted by British Intelligence was "not quite as real as advertised".  He then went on to imply that the administration used their campaign plan to paint the Dems as "soft on terror" to push the Brits into arresting the terror plotters right after the Connecticut primary - to push Ned Lamont's victory over Bush lackey Joe Leiberman!
 
Well first off the Administration doesn't have to do much at all to push the impression that the Dems are soft on terror.  They demonstrate that to the world day in and day out. 
 
Even one of Olbermann's guests, Washington Post reporter Dana Milbank, thought that Olbermann was carrying this a bit far as this excerpt indicates:
 
"Olbermann: "None of us can say for certain why the Bush administration would have pressured British authorities to move early on the terror arrests, but giving them the benefit of the doubt, even doing that, did not the pounding by the Vice President, by Ken Mehlman, by others, still leave the administration wide open for doubt and even suspicion about the timing of all this?"

Milbank: "Well, Keith, that's just the kind of question that emboldens the al-Qaeda types."

Olbermann: "Thank you very much."

Milbank: "Well, it's not really even a matter of suspicion. I mean, Karl Rove came out earlier this year and said, look, this is what our fall campaign is going to be about, it's about stirring up terrorism and then saying that we can protect you better than the other guy. I wouldn't get too bogged down in the timing issue because, if anything, the Bush administration politically would have wanted to wait until September or October when everybody was paying attention. But it's not even an open secret, it's completely out in the open that terrorism is politicized routinely over and over again." (emphasis added)
 
Milbank is correct - terrorism HAS been politicized over and over in the last 5 years - it was a staple of the 2004 election.  He is also correct in his analysis that if the administration was indeed looking for an "imminent attack" to exploit they would have waited until October when people were actually paying attention to the elections.
 
The fact that Keith Olbermann has any viewers is astonishing.  That 375,000 people in this country actually watch this tripe and take him seriously is disturbing.  Then again, I do know some people who think that the Popular Mechanics article (and soon to be book) debunking the 9/11 myths is a government conspiracy so.....
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Buh bye now....

 
That is what the Democratic Party is saying to 2004 VP Candidate Joe Leiberman.  Now that the Kidz have successfully ousted the Senior Senator from Connecticut they are looking for the next hawk.....Hillary Clinton.
 
"The same activists are now seeking to bend Senator Hillary Clinton to their anti-war side or face defeat in the Democratic presidential primaries. Her supporters are concerned that the “jihadist” left, galvanised by the victory of East Coast millionaire Ned Lamont, are on the rise in the Democratic party, starkly affecting its national electoral prospects. "
 
Well you have to give the Kidz credit - they aim high!
 
"Mike McCurry, White House press secretary during Bill Clinton’s presidency, said: “The very idea of centrism is under attack now in the party. We have our own loony left too.”
 
Too?????  Mike - I hate to tell you this buddy, but you own the rights to the loony left!  They are yours and yours alone!
 
I wouldn't worry about Mrs. Clinton though.  She is the one that master the tactic of triangulation.
 
"Clinton quickly shored up her position on the left last week by telephoning Lamont to congratulate him on his victory and dropping $5,000 (£2,650) into his electoral coffers.
 
She also declared that “there is a great deal of difference” between her position on Iraq and Lieberman’s. Days before the primary vote, in a nifty use of her influence on the Senate armed services committee, she summoned Donald Rumsfeld, the defence secretary, and then demanded his resignation for mismanaging the war (a position Lieberman has not taken). "
 
See she's already working her way back to the left.  Not a worry!  Madam Hillary will survive.  That is what she does best.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

A trip into the swamp

 
I don't normally delve into the depths of the fever swamp, but a friend sent me this and I just had to look.  Now the diarist in question is of interest to me and it was interesting to see his side of the story but what was really amusing were the comments of the Kidz.
 
"You're already news, since he's personally attacked you twice. Also talk to a lawyer. If he sent a mass mailing to the whole district attacking you personally, that's libel and slander and you have grounds for a lawsuit. So talk to a lawyer and to the local paper."
 
Said one commenter. Another chimed in with this:
 
"and call a press conference to announce you're suing the b_____.  You're NOT a public person, and this is damaging in so many ways it's not funny.  Call the ACLU too, while you're at it. And the FEC, to find out what money (and whose time) was used to create that flyer. He might be in violation of some FEC regs.  But I'd definitely call a lawyer right now. John Edwards might not be too busy... ;-)"
 
There was lots of advise to "sue the b______"  and that led a self professed lawyer to chime in with this.
 
"I would advise Bailey not to bother any attorneys with this garbage, and to quit "helping" congressional candidates.  "
 
That led to an accusation of the poster being a troll.  Her response is classic!
 
"I am attempting to point out that the people here talking about defamation claims don't know what  they are talking about.  What Kline says is a slight exaggeration at best -- it is essentially true.  And its not actionable.  If this guy sued,he would end up paying John Kline money.  Although the diarist is not a public figure, he is working for a public figure and the allegations relate to his work on Rowley's behalf.  This is political speech, and as such, the most first amendment protection is afforded to it, making it is very difficult to prove up a defamation claim.  

If a staffer for a Republican congressional candidate had his own political website with controvertial positions, people on DailyKos would be all over it.  The diarist screwed up bigtime, and writing a diary about it is even more of a disservice to Rowley.  If he really wanted to help her out, he would delete this diary and shut up" (emphasis added)
 
Common sense out of a Kos commenter.  Whoa - whodathunkit....but wait - there is even more common sense out of the poster in question.
 
"What frustrates me is the reaction to this.  Republicans are dirty cheaters?  Tell me something I don't know. Four years ago, Minnesota Republicans spun Paul Wellstone's funeral into electoral victory.  They are going to keep doing it, especially if we keep making it easy for them.  Instead of talking about suing them or exposing Kline for this we should work on not giving the Republicans easy material to work with.  Maybe some self-reflection instead of cheerleading.  Despite all the bitching here, if you read the linked article about this with any objectivity, its Rowley who looks bad.  Time to stop pretending everything is ok when its not.Rowley needs to:
1) issue a statement explaining that this guy was not with the campaign when he went to Kline's office, and that the content on the website was not authorized by the campaign.
2) Sh__can him. "(not a direct quote - Kos may allow that kind of language on his site, but I don't!)
 
What was the reaction of the Kidz to such advice....when they couldn't "shout" the poster down, they ignored her.  Keep on ignoring the views that don't agree with you Kidz and you will continue to loose elections!  It's your choice...  It makes no difference to me whether you pay attention to the common sense advise of a lawyer who knows better or not.  Go ahead, distract yourself with a frivolous lawsuit and while you are off doing that, the Kline campaign will continue to do the work that needs to be done in order to win the election. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Reading, writing and gay rights

 
My friend Amendment X asked (rather rhetorically) how the NEA would respond to a headline in the Red Star that laments about how Americans know little about the US.   I think I know the reason why our children aren't learning about silly little things like "how many houses of  Congress does the US have?" and "how many Congressmen from your state?"  It is because the NEA are teaching "more important things" like acceptance of gays as "normal" and promoting atheism and Islam over the religion of the parents choosing.  I have told (many times) the story of a "Diversity Day" program that was held at the Junior Logicians school 6 years ago.  Speakers to the kiddies included an Islamic Imam and a Native American Holy man.  No Christian pastor, no Jewish holy man.....just Native American and Islam.  When the Logical Husband inquired as to why the school was promoting a religion - a clear violation of the "separation of church and state" the Imam was "uninvited"!  Apparently they didn't think that Native American religion counted as a religion - I don't know.....
 
Phyllis Schlafly (a wonderfully logical lady) writes about the NEA agenda in a recent Townhall article.
 
"The NEA is determined to get control of children at the earliest possible age. One resolution calls for public school programs for children "from birth through age 8," another calls for pre-kindergarten for "all 3- and 4-year-old children," and still another demands "mandatory kindergarten with compulsory attendance."
The anti-parent animus of the NEA is apparent in its insistence that the public schools be in the driver's seat about the teaching of sex. Claiming that every child has the right to "freely available information and knowledge about sexuality," the NEA demands the right to teach children about diversity of sexual orientation and gender identification, incest, and homophobia. "
 
That is the thing that frightens me the most.  These people, who are with my child 6 hours a day, 5 days a week for 9 months want to tell me that they know my child better than I do????  I have already had more than a few discussions with teachers who have no interest in trying to figure out the Junior Logicians learning style, but want to brand him as uncooperative or unable to perform.  We had a teacher this last year who took a kid who was in honors math (and who loved math) and in one year had him in remedial math and hating the subject.  The teacher was astonished when we had the audacity to ask HIM what he did to change the equation.
 
Don't get me wrong, we have had good teachers - teachers who looked to us as partners in the Junior Logicians education.  That is as it should be.  The NEA needs to remember that.  They also need to remember that the TAXPAYERS are the ones who pay the teachers salaries and that it is not a good thing to "dis" the boss. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Ethical Decision Making

 
I have followed this story, like most folks, in the pages of the Star Tribune and the blog Minnesota Democrats Exposed.  MDE first broke the story last week.
 
"Rep. John Kline, R-Minn., accused Democratic challenger Coleen Rowley Wednesday of using a "double-agent" to attempt to make an illegal campaign contribution and infiltrate his reelection campaign."
 
Much has been said about the actions of both campaigns in this incident.  The Congressman's detractors complain about the timing of the allegations.  The illegal campaign contribution was apparently made back in February - why did the Kline camp not make their complaint until August?  According to a letter sent out by the campaign, they were going to let it slide but when Ms. Rowley's supporters turned nasty (in letters to the editor and calls to local talk radio) they changed their minds.  I suppose that could be the case, but...
 
I would like to focus on two things.  First is this - the volunteer in question, David Bailey, said that his actions were purely innocent.  I highly doubt that.  The fact that any citizen that is interested in signing up for campaign literature can do so online.  Any citizen that wants to get on the campaign mailing lists can do so online.  In either case - NO CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION IS NECESSARY!  I am on several campaign mailing lists and I have yet to contribute to any of them.  Then there is the fact that he went to the Congressman's local office first (as opposed to the campaign office).  There are strict federal laws against campaign business being done in an elected officials office - and for good reason!  Since Mr. Bailey's blatent attempt to trap an unwitting staffer into commiting a federal crime, the Rowley campaign has promoted him to a paid staff position.  Something certainly seems fishy here.
 
Second is this:

 
"Our campaign has never sent anyone in there to do anything like that," said Rowley campaign manager Terry Rogers. "
 
I don't doubt this for a second.  I imagine that Mr. Rogers is savvy enough to know that these kinds of actions are suicide for a campaign.  However, the culture that has flourished within the Rowley campaign has been less than honorable.  As I have recounted in other posts Ms. Rowley and her campaign has made it a campaign staple to distort and tell outright lies about Congressman Kline.  Their clumsy attempts at distortion are easily disproven by tools such as Project Vote Smart - something that the campaign really should be looking at from time to time.  Then there is the infamous "photo-shopping" incident, something that (again) is blamed on an uncontrolable volunteer.  Obviously the volunteers believe that these actions are condoned, maybe even encouraged, by the campaign otherwise they would not do it.   
 
For someone who has made the phrase "ethical decision making" a staple of her campaign, the Rowley campaign has been rife with less than ethical decisions.  That is the thing that saddens me most.  I love a good, well fought campaign and the Rowley camp has run neither.  It seems to be the norm, right now, for Democratic candidates...
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Well now, I almost missed this

 
I was reading this story in the local Prior Lake MN (which is next door to Savage) paper this weekend.
 
"Veterans Field at Memorial Park would more than quadruple in seat capacity by 2008 under a proposal to bring a Northwoods League baseball team to Prior Lake. The plan calls for expanded seating and other renovations at both Veterans Field, where the league's new club team would play, and Ryan Park, where some local teams would move."
 
Well, this sounds familiar - build us a ball park in order to attract or keep a ball club.  However, this was the part that was missed in the local story.
 
"Prior Lake, on the other hand, is finalizing details on an agreement with former Star Tribune executive editor and publisher Joel Kramer, who contacted Mayor Jack Haugen in early July."
 
Joel Kramer....that name sounds familiar...former Star Tribune editor and publisher Joel Kramer.....OH HIM!!!!!
 
" Several well-off Minnesotans who believe more tax money should be pumped into public initiatives said the state can start with them. More than 200 wealthy Minnesotans signed a full-page ad appearing Thursday in the Star Tribune asking the state to raise $2 billion for various initiatives by increasing the state's tax burden for high-salary earners. "We need to invest more in our future," said Joel Kramer, former publisher of the Star Tribune and founder of the think tank Growth and Justice, which organized the "Invest for Real Prosperity" fiscal strategy.
 
Co-chair of "Works for Minnesota" the group of leftists that decided that "we can afford to pay more state taxes!", founder of a leftist think tank which wants to take money from the middle class under the guise that the money is really coming from "the rich".  Now he wants to force the citizens of the City of Prior Lake to build him a baseball stadium for his semi-pro team?  I hope that the people of Prior Lake realize what is being foisted on them by someone who can afford to build his own stadium. 
 
Cross posted at
Savage Republican
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Peaceful purposes?

 
Anyone see this reported on THIS side of the pond?
 
"Border guards seized a British lorry on its way to make a delivery to the Iranian military - after discovering it was packed with radioactive material that could be used to build a dirty bomb. "
 
Hmmmmm......
 
"The lorry set off from Kent on its way to Tehran but was stopped by officials at a checkpoint on Bulgaria's northernborder with Romania after a scanner indicated radiation levels 200 times above normal. "
 
Surely this was some innocent misunderstanding...right?
 
"On board they found ten lead-lined boxes addressed to the Iranian Ministry of Defence. Inside each box was a soil-testing device, containing highly dangerous quantities of radioactive caesium 137 and americium-beryllium." (emphasis mine)
 
Well this certain sheds a whole new light on the peacefull purposes of the Iranian governments nuclear program, doesn't it?????
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The real modern day Hitler

 
A lot of people have thrown out the "Hitler" insult in recent years - refering to President Bush as "Hitlerian" and now equating Israel to Nazi Germany.  But are those comparisons accurate?  Let's compare Hitler with another current leader and see who is really Hitlerian.
 
First we have Hezbollah:
 
"Just like Hitler fought the Jews, we are a great Islamic nation of jihad, and we too should fight the Jews and burn them."
— Hisham Shamas, political science student, at a symposium hosted by Hezbollah's Al-Manar TV at Lebanon's largest and only government-run university, Université Libanaise, November 29, 2005"
 
Then there is this from a 1920 speech made by Adolph Hitler:
 
"For us, this is not a problem you can turn a blind eye to-one to be solved by small concessions.  For us, it is a problem of whether our nation can ever recover its health, whether the Jewish spirit can ever really be eradicated.  Don't be misled into thinking you can fight a disease without killing the carrier, without destroying the bacillus.  Don't think you can fight racial tuberculosis without taking care to rid the nation of the carrier of that racial tuberculosis.  This Jewish contamination will not subside, this poisoning of the nation will not end, until the carrier himself, the Jew, has been banished from our midst. "
 
Then there is the President of Iran:
 
"I invite the faithful to wait for good news,” Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said last Tuesday. “We shall soon witness the elimination of the Zionist stain of shame.”
 
This is reproduction of the profile of the 1939 Time Man of the Year - ADOLPH HITLER!
 
"Lesser men of the year seemed small indeed beside the Fuhrer. "
 
Now compare this to the fawning remarks that Mike Wallace recently made regarding President Ahmadinejad.
 
"Wallace said, "He's an impressive fellow, this guy. He really is. He's obviously smart as hell."
 
The Bible teaches of a time when good is called evil and wrong is called right.  It certainly appears that we are quickly reaching that point in time.  And that is not a good thing for a lot of people.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

What happens when your friends turn on you?

 
This happens.....
 
"My brief and unhappy experience with the hate and vitriol of bloggers on the liberal side of the aisle comes from the last several months I spent campaigning for a longtime friend, Joe Lieberman.
This kind of scary hatred, my dad used to tell me, comes only from the right wing--in his day from people such as the late Sen. Joseph McCarthy, with his tirades against "communists and their fellow travelers." The word "McCarthyism" became a red flag for liberals, signifying the far right's fascistic tactics of labeling anyone a "communist" or "socialist" who favored an active federal government to help the middle class and the poor, and to level the playing field.
I came to believe that we liberals couldn't possibly be so intolerant and hateful, because our ideology was famous for ACLU-type commitments to free speech, dissent and, especially, tolerance for those who differed with us. And in recent years--with the deadly combination of sanctimony and vitriol displayed by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and Michael Savage--I held on to the view that the left was inherently more tolerant and less hateful than the right.

Now, in the closing days of the Lieberman primary campaign, I have reluctantly concluded that I was wrong. The far right does not have a monopoly on bigotry and hatred and sanctimony. "
 
It's not pretty, but it is is something that those on the right have been getting from our esteemed friends on the left for the last 15 years.  It is a lesson on what the far left is turning the Democratic Party into. 

UPDATE:  Jack Kelly has this take on the Lamont victory, the reaction of the "nutroots" and the history of previous attempts of the far left to hijack the Democratic Party.  It is a must read as all of his articles are.


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

It was 50 years....

 
that a much needed organization was founded...the NAACP.  Fifty years ago, segregation and racial discrimination were reality!  There were black only seats on the bus and lunch counters and schools...separate but equal was the catch phrase of the day!
 
Today however, much has changed.  Blacks and whites work side by side in industry, in schools and in every aspect of American life...and yet there is still a great divide in incomes and social status.  Why is that, one may ask.  One thought (as put forth in this NY Sun piece) is thinking.  Precisely "victim like thinking".
 
"Fighting racial discrimination" is what black America needed most in the days of official segregation and open bigotry. The race issues that are important today do not lend themselves to charismatic indignation: the Earned Income Tax Credit will never inspire sonorous oratory. But if charismatic indignation is the only way you feel like you matter, then your efforts will gradually part ways with activism and devolve into performance. Today, it would appear that "fighting racial discrimination" is less what black America needs than what Julian Bond needs. Or, as the NAACP's president, Bruce Gordon, reportedly said in his own speech to the convention, it's time to end "victim-like thinking."
 
Unless we get rid of the mentality that thinks someone is "owed" a house and a living and medical care and a car and and and....we are never going to be rid of root causes of todays resentment toward minorities.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Profits...what profits?

 
The next time that someone mentions that we need an "excess profits" tax to be applied to big oil, please refer them to this Washington Times story.
 
"The top 20 U.S. and Canadian oil companies actually invested 50 percent more than they earned in the past 10 years in efforts to produce more oil, but adverse geopolitical developments conspired to give them fewer opportunities to expand production while fading oil fields in the U.S. and elsewhere forced them to spend substantially more just to maintain current production, according to the study by the Ernst & Young accounting firm."
 
The top 20 invested 50% more than they earned...what does that mean?  It means that for every dollar earned in profit, the top 20 oil companies SPENT $1.50 to expand production!  So every dollar they earned, actually lost them $.50!
 
Now let's take that beyond textbook economics to the real world numbers.
 
"The study found that the top companies -- including Exxon Mobil, ConocoPhillips and Chevron, among others -- took in a mind-numbing $5 trillion in revenue from sales of oil and related products between 1995 and 2005. After subtracting the cost of equipment, leases, labor and other operating expenses, the companies posted whopping profits of $336 billion.     Over the same time span, however, the companies spent even more than they earned -- $550 billion -- on oil exploration and development. Some of them went deeply into debt to finance new ventures, especially during times of lean profits. "
 
So in a ten year period the oil companies spent $550 billion on exploration and earned on $336 billion in "profits".  Does a $ 210 billion loss (over 10 years) sound like "excess profits" to you?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

National Security

 I had to bring back an oldie in light of today's news out of Great Britian (H/T KAR)

"O'BRIEN: I'm just curious. You say there is no terrorist threat. And, actually, I read that twice. I was like, hang on. What? Let me go back
(CROSSTALK)
MOORE: Yes. I put it in there twice just so you could read it twice.
O'BRIEN: Right. There is no terrorist threat.
MOORE: That's correct."

THIS is the mentality of the "spokespeople" of today's left. THERE IS NO TERRORIST THREAT!!!

So the next time we hear about a terrorist plot that has been foiled (like today), you will not be surprised at all to hear the
response out of the Kos Kidz and the DUmmies.....

And they wonder why Republicans say that they are weak on National Security....
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Hypocracy and Global Warming

 As I have mentioned before, global warming is NOT decided fact. The one thing I really had not touched on, and it is important for the discussion, is the manner in which the global warming alarmists treat those who dare to disagree with them. I mentioned here how the proponents of global warming were demanding that Max Mayfield (Mister Hurricane) resign from NOAA because he stated that it was not a given fact that global warming was the cause of last years very active hurricane season. However, this story takes the conversation a step further. The writer wrote an article saying that global warming (as a phenomonon caused by mankind) was not a given. The responses he got were quite typical leftist debate style.....

"Dear Mr. Rohrich: You are an idiot."

Well, that settles it......global warming must be true ...I mentioned Mr. Rohrich's dealings with the fever swamp in a previous post, but I wanted to bring it up again in this context because of the zealotry and hypocracy that the leadership of the global warming movement leaders (like former VP Al Gore). For you see while the rank and file of the global warming movement (like Mr. Rohrich's correspondent) are living the austire life - trying hard to live a "carbon-neutral lifestyle, their leadership is only "talking the talk". When it comes to following his own counsel (Switch to compact fluorescent light bulbs, use a clothesline, drive a hybrid, use renewable energy, dramatically cut back on consumption), the former Vice President has a long way to go.

"Public records reveal that as Gore lectures Americans on excessive consumption, he and his wife Tipper live in two properties: a 10,000-square-foot, 20-room, eight-bathroom home in Nashville, and a 4,000-square-foot home in Arlington, Va. (He also has a third home in Carthage, Tenn.) For someone rallying the planet to pursue a path of extreme personal sacrifice, Gore requires little from himself.
Then there is the troubling matter of his energy use. In the Washington, D.C., area, utility companies offer wind energy as an alternative to traditional energy. In Nashville, similar programs exist. Utility customers must simply pay a few extra pennies per kilowatt hour, and they can continue living their carbon-neutral lifestyles knowing that they are supporting wind energy. Plenty of businesses and institutions have signed up. Even the Bush administration is using green energy for some federal office buildings, as are thousands of area residents.
But according to public records, there is no evidence that Gore has signed up to use green energy in either of his large residences. When contacted Wednesday, Gore's office confirmed as much but said the Gores were looking into making the switch at both homes. Talk about inconvenient truths. "

Uh oh.....busted!!!!! And that dear readers, is one of many reasons why I have fallen away from the Democratic Party. They love to preach about all of the sacrifices that we Americans need to make "for the common good" and yet when push comes to shove, they are the last ones to make the same sacrifices that they demand that the rest of us make. That and the simple fact is, they are claiming that global warming is fact, when the fact is - the jury is still out on that one.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

You sir are a.....

 Weenie????? I read this story and two thoughts crossed my mind. First was "this deserves news print?" and second was "Look whose talking!"

"Pawlenty to Mark Kennedy: 'You're a Weenie,' " runs the headline on a news release Tuesday from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC)."

OK, OK - that's not really what he said...he said that Republican candidates who "run" away from the President were weenies....saying it was "bailing out on a friend just because they havi a tough go". Fair statement...can't argue much with the governor there. Using that logic though (Mr. Governor) can we speak about politicians who run away from their base????? I know that there are more than a few in the base that would like to talk to you about that.....
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive