The U.S. Preventative Services Task Force is suggesting that women in their 40s not get mammograms for early detection of breast cancer. It found that mammograms for women in their 40s do save lives - just not enough for the practice to be considered "routine." (Note: the task force is made up of 16 "health care experts," none of whom are oncologists.)
This new recommendation has people worried that insurance companies will drop mammogram coverage, thus discouraging women to not have the test done.
I can hear it now: "The evil insurance companies wouldn't cover mammograms. Then women found out they had breast cancer and ended up with thousands in medical debt with an insurance company unwilling to help..."
All I could think when I was watching a segment on the news about this was, "Is this what nationalized health care looks like?" A government panel with unqualified (for this topic, at least) members is preaching from its high horse that women should think before getting mammograms. If we have nationalized health care, the preaching will turn into mandating.
Under the guise of "safety" reasons, the Obama administration is going to push for legislation that would give the federal government control of the nation's transit systems.
The Department of Transportation already enforces safety regulations for Amtrak and the airlines - and look what a mess those are - but lacks the authority to enforce those for subways and light rail systems. “Safety is our No. 1 priority when it comes to planes, trains and automobiles,” Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said in a statement on Sunday. “It only makes sense that we should be looking out for passengers who ride subways, too.”
The 6th Condition for Transition to Communism from Karl Marx's The Communist Manifesto:
"Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State."
Banks, car companies, soon transportation. Wake up, people.
"Not long after he was rousted from bed and seized in a predawn raid in Pakistan in March 2003, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed gave his captors two demands: He wanted a lawyer, and he wanted to be taken to New York."
Poor Mr. Mohammed was stolen from his cozy mat in the middle of the night; how tragic for him. The military ought to consider sending warnings to future terrorist targets before they seize them.
Apparently, Mohammed has been overly boastful of his role in the al Qaeda network. He was never really the brains behind any operations (though he did have several ideas which were rejected as impractical by bin Laden); however, he was the one willing to "actually [get] the job done." In fact, he:
"is still considered somewhat of an outcast inside the terrorist network, rarely if ever mentioned in public pronouncements by Mr. bin Laden or his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahri."
Mohammed is a self-proclaimed terrorist. He brags about the role he played in assassination conspiracies against Pope John Paul II and former President Bill Clinton. In 1996 he had an idea to hijack 10 planes and hit civiliantargets in the U.S.
"But demonstrating his tendency toward grandiosity, he overstated his role in many of the attacks, most terrorism experts believe, although they do not dispute his central role in planning the Sept. 11 attacks."
I'm getting a "he really only had a role in planning 9-11, plus he was waterboarded 183 times, and he's not really that big of an al Qaeda target, so maybe we should go easy on him because he wasn't taken seriously by his employer even though all he ever wanted to do was make a name for himself" vibe.
Is the guy who wrote this serious? Why is there ANY sympathy for a guy who wants nothing but to destroy American lives? Thank you, liberals, for once again forgetting about the real victims.
Instead of mourning the deaths of the thirteen innocent people killed at Fort Hood, the left-wing media is lamenting the fact that the gunman is a Muslim (a slight change from ignoring the fact which they did at first).
NPR's Nina Totenberg said, "It really is tragic that he was a Muslim."
Newsweek's Evan Thomas said, "I cringe that he's a Muslim. I mean, because it inflames all the fears. I think he's probably just a nut case. But with that label attached to him, it will get the right wing going and it just -- I mean these things are tragic, but that makes it much worse." (NewsBusters)
So basically what they're telling us is that we can't let one bad apple influence the way we view all members of a culture; but only solong as that culture isn't affiliated with conservatism or the right-wing.
Now, we all remember when Dr. George Tiller was shot and killed by an extremist "pro-life" activist (pro-life is in quotes because obviously someone who goes around shooting people isn't exactly pro-life). The left-wing media constantly affiliated the shooter to the rest of the pro-lifers, assuming that we're all crazy and need to be watched out for.
"Jill Filipovic, of the 'Guardian.co.Uk.' also tried to link Dr. Tiller's death to terrorism. 'Not surprisingly, his killer is strongly suspected to be affiliated with the 'pro-life' movement. If that's the case, it makes Tiller the 10th person in the United States to be murdered by anti-choice terrorists.'" (NewsBusters)
How about this, Jill: Not surprisingly, Major Hasan is affiliated with the Muslim faith. Since that's the case, it makes him the 2oth person in the United States to murder Americans (and 20 is just including the 9-11 hijackers...not to mention the 1993 bombing and every other instance where it was Muslims killing "infidels" for the sake of Allah).
Now I'm not saying that Hasan's reasons for going on a killing spree were the same as the 9-11 hijackers'. But if the media can relate all pro-lifers to the crazy ones, then I can relate all Muslims to the crazy ones.
So we all know that President Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. He is now among the ranks of those such as Mother Theresa, the Dalai Lama, and Nelson Mandela. If it hadn't been for Al Gore winning it in 2007, I would be even more frustrated and confused than I already am.
The Nobel Peace Prize is awarded by a Committee of 5 elected members of the extraordinarily special Norweigan Parliament. According to nobelprize.org, Obama was awarded the prize for "his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples." Now, did anyone know that the deadline for nominations was February 1st? So, Barack Obama was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize three weeks into office? His nomination, clearly, was a placeholder...they wanted to see what he could accomplish because they had that much faith in him. And conservatives are laughed at when we mockingly call reference to him as the Messiah. Go figure.
Okay, so even the Second Coming couldn't get anything accomplished in three weeks. Let's give him a break for that. And he didn't nominate himself, so we can't blame him for that either. However, let's look at his past 8 months in office instead, and see if there's anything deserving of a Nobel Peace Prize there. February: nope March: nope April: European Apology Tour 2009 May: nope June: to Iran: "The world is watching." July: nope August: nope September: nope
I guess all you need for a Nobel nowadays is to grovel at the feet of the Europeans, shake a finger at Iran, and make no tough decisions on your own country's domestic and foreign affairs. Good job, Mr. President!
I completely forgot that it was this weekend! I opened up Drudge today and saw the story on it and thought of those of you who went. I wish I had been there. The article said "up to 2 million" - is that accurate? Because if so, that is absolutely incredible.
I haven't blogged in almost a month due to working a lot towards the end of the summer, packing my life away again for college, moving in, and getting into a routine. Plus, this semester has presented me with much more work than last semester.
In my constitutional law class (something that Nancy, Joe, and the rest of them should be required to take), one guy in the back who thinks he's oh-so-smart said that an overhaul of health care is OK because you don't need the constitution to do that (I suppose you could put health care under the "general welfare" clause, but that's a bit of stretch and obviously I'm not going to argue for that side). And that right there is the problem. Why do we even HAVE a constitution if Congress can do whatever it wants anyways?
An enormous thank you to all of the grassroots supporters and bloggers and everyone who did their part spreading the information and telling Washington that we don't want government running our health care, especially health care as dangerous as HR 3200.
"WASHINGTON – Bowing to Republican pressure, President Barack Obama's administration signaled on Sunday it is ready to abandon the idea of giving Americans the option of government-run insurance as part of a new health care system."
Like music to my ears.
------ UPDATE 08/17/2009
I probably should have mentioned that obviously the war has yet to be won. This is certainly not the end, and we have a long way to go.
I saw a commercial for his show tonight and one segment is: top 10 messages on Sarah Palin's answering machine.
This guy needs to get some new material.
It's never a good sign when a so-called comedian regurgitates the same old over and over again.
A French convert to Islam was told she could not swim at a pool in Paris while wearing a "burqini," a swim suit that covers most of the body. She plans on taking this issue to the courts, which will prove to be another test for France in its determination to remain completely secular. The woman said that if she loses this battle, she cannot rule out leaving France.
Why should France make special exceptions for anyone? If the rule is that you cannot enter a swimming pool fully clothed, then that's the rule. There shouldn't be an asterisk that excludes women in "burqinis" from that rule.
I keep hearing about how the town hall meetings are being populated by eeeevil organized groups. It's just like the tea parties -- you HAVE to organize. You want to make sure that a large number of people are going to show up in order to make a statement. That doesn't mean, however, that there's the conservative equivalent of ACORN making calls saying, "Show up, we'll pay you, bring hand-painted signs." Now, Arlen Specter is saying that the protests are not "representative of America." Really? But somehow, Cindy Sheehan and her group of what, 5? were representative of America? It's sad how hard the Democrats are trying to shut down everyone who is opposing them.
WASHINGTON – California attorney Orly Taitz, who has filed a number of lawsuits demanding proof of Barack Obama's eligibility to serve as president, has released a copy of what purports to be a Kenyan certification of birth and has filed a new motion in U.S. District Court for its authentication.
Now, if the certificate is legitimate, and Obama has to step down, I can imagine all hell breaking loose. Riots would be everywhere. If it's not legit, it will truly discredit any future claims that Obama is not a natural born citizen.
Look, there's a reason people should be against euthanasia. And this is it.
Oregon passed the Death with Dignity Act in 1997. Now the state of Oregon is using that act to its advantage by essentially forcing terminally ill patients to choose a so-called death with dignity. Why don't the liberals think this could happen with a federal plan??
I don't understand why liberals think that a government plan will really be for them or would be in their best interest. Because it won't be. The state will be guilty of the exact thing it's pointing fingers at insurance companies for. But instead of "making money" off of people's pain, the state will be trying to save money off of people's pain.
Gee, the government does something which happens to be a conservative hallmark, it works, and then it gets suspended.
I'm talking, of course, about the Cash For Clunkers program, which has now been suspended.
The $1 billion program has apparently come close to running out of money because of it's popularity. Imagine that. Putting cash back into people's pockets really gives them an incentive to go out and buy.
Now, what is it that Republicans wanted to do instead of a stimulus? Oh, yeah - lower taxes! Imagine if Americans were able to keep more of their hard-earned money instead of having to give it away to the wasteful government?
...is that they're on the wrong side of every issue. If you ask a liberal what his position is on Iraq, Iran, Guantanamo, health care, the economy, etc., he will always choose the side that either makes America out to be the bad guy or the side that would damage America/the American image the most. We all know this. They want to see America fail because then they could joyfully exclaim how they predicted our failure. This is why when Rush said he wanted Obama to fail, the Left had a fit. If Obama fails, America wins. If America wins, liberals lose.
As someone who just went through high school and is entering her sophomore year of college, I have seen firsthand what the "future" thinks of America. It's a fad nowadays to say how hypocritical the United States is and how it only does something if it's to our advantage. It was cool to have anti-Bush pins on backpacks and sit outside during 2nd period with signs that say END THE WAR (by the way, where are those people now? We're still in Iraq. Where's the protests demanding our troops come home now?). Hillary Clinton told us that it was patriotic to question any administration. But when I question the Obama Administration, liberals tell me I'm just a neocon who values the "almighty dollar higher than [people's] well-being."
Now, even if the perfect analogy is staring a liberal straight in the face, the liberal in question can't connect the dots. For example, friend #1 is very studious and works hard to get the grades she's earned. Friend #2 spent the first year partying, was put on academic probation, took 4 baby classes second semester, and has around the same GPA as friend #1. Friend #1 was recently complaining how it's not fair that she works harder than friend #2 but still has the same GPA. I just laughed to myself, partly because arguing with friend #1 has gotten me no where in the past few years, and party because my GPA is higher than both of theirs. Anyhow, friend #1 is basically living socialism (she works harder but is given the same reward as the slacker) yet somehow she's still an Obama fan who believes in all things liberal.
Thus, I think it's impossible to change the mind of a liberal. I've tried it before, and believe me, it doesn't work. They try to discredit everything you throw at them. They don't like it when you tell them something that goes against everything they stand for (in fact, they might get so angry they remove you as a friend on Facebook). The only people who can really be shown that liberalism is a disease are people who are on the fence, people who haven't really made up their mind yet. True liberals won't ever change and will praise Obama 'till the day they die. But, silly people who actually thought Obama was who he said he was and who are now experiencing buyer's remorse can change. Let's just hope we can bring them around before it's too late.
Instead of Quality, Affordable Health Coverage for All Americans, the health care reform bill is now America's Affordable Health Choices Act. Thank goodness, because if it actually passes, I would rather have the acronym that doesn't prove to the world that we really are stupid.
Thank you to Old NFO at Nobody Asked Me... because he provided the link in his most recent post to the actual AAHCA bill. I've been searching for it online for ages...maybe it wasn't put up until now, but anyways, glad I finally have it.
On a Facebook poll about universal health care: 358,201 voted NO (74.7%) 104,794 voted YES (21.8%) 16,724 voted MAYBE (3.5%)
This gives me some hope because a lot of Facebook users are young adults, who tend to be liberal. Also, with a poll with that many participants, I feel like it gives an accurate projection of the rest of Americans' sentiments. However, you can't tell me that the results of this poll are way off from what the results would be if the poll was conducted by a more reliable pollster. But what do I know, I'm not Gallup or Rasmussen. I just like seeing things like this because it makes me feel more hopeful.
I usually bring my iPod to work, but I forgot it so I had to listen to the radio this morning. They did the news maybe five times, and three of those times the Cambridge incident and the president's health care address were mentioned. I was so irritated that the woman reading the news said things like, "He showed his ID, he was in his own house, and they arrested him anyways." It's people like that that vote, people who don't know all the facts and still weigh in on the issue. And then she says, "People are still tuning in to watch the president speak, because 24.7 million watched him talk the other night." She conveniently forgot to mention that his ratings have been going down, and down,and down....
The good news is that Harry Reid announced that the Senate will not be voting on QAHCAA until the fall! What an excellent setback for Obama.
Sgt. James Crowley was doing his job and and the President of the United States told him he acted "stupidly." Now isn't that the pot calling the kettle black. Keepin' it classy, Obama. Keeping it's classy.
In fact, the only people who acted stupidly were Henry Louis Gates, Jr. and the president himself. Gates is a black professor at Harvard University where he is the director of the W. E. B. Du Bois Institute for African and African American Research. From what I read in snippets of the police report, he does not sound like a man who has achieved multiple acclamations and awards. Rather, he sounds like an ill-mannered, arrogant race-biter who's looking to make some money (he's apparently already planning a documentary on racial profiling).
When I Googled Mr. Gates to find out some more about him, I found that the July 16 incident had already been added to the Wikipedia entry on him. I was disappointed to discover that the entry is rather slanted and even distorts and leaves out parts ofthe story in order to present Gates in a more favorable way. Now, I understand that Wikipedia articles can be written and edited by anyone, but the article is currently disabled for editing due to alleged vandalism until July 24. The section on the "racist" incident also has a notification above it which states it may change rapidly because it is a current event.
He doesn't exactly look like he's "coming quietly," does he?
The Wikipedia article makes no mention of the fact that Sgt. Crowley has been teaching a class on racial profiling alongside a black police officer at the Lowell Police Academy for five years. Nor does it mention that Crowley was hand-picked to teach the class by the former police commissioner Ronny Watson, who is black.
Crowley was doing his job. He was responding to a call for a possible breaking and entering. Obviously the first step would be to require ID from the person in the house in order to make sure Gates was who he said he was. If Gates had simply done what a normal person would do and shown his ID and told Crowley "thank you," none of this would have happened. Instead, Gates had a fit and was rightly arrested for disorderly conduct.
I hope Crowley does not back down and apologize, and I think it's a shame that the charges were dropped against Gates. So much for justice being blind and the law applying to every citizen.
I was going to watch the Obama Show last night, but I went out to dinner with my family instead. But from what I have read and heard, the president didn't say anything new; rather, he took some tips from Joe Biden and plagiarized....The Matrix, no less.
The President is trying, and failing, to garner the amount of support he needs to get this done. And hopefully, this will be the beginning of the end for him. A lot of people think that this is his defining moment. He will either be successful and then be truly unstoppable, or he will fail and never be able to come back from from it. I'm praying for the latter.
If I had the time, I would love to shoot a commercial like you would see for Lunesta or Zantac, but have it be a satire on Obamacare.
Obamacare For all too many of us, quality health care is a necessity we simply cannot afford. There are a number of reasons why quality health care is unaffordable, but the result is usually the same. We miss the many benefits of annual doctor visits, preventative care, and even treatment for acute and chronic illnesses. We don't have the luxury of knowing that we or our loved ones will be taken care of if the unexpected happens. It can be frustrating, stressful, and affect how we function every day. What's more, just lacking quality health care may have an impact on your health. If you are among the millions who are currently experiencing a lack of quality health care coverage, we're here to help.
**If you are healthy, sick, or may become sick, Obamacare may not be right for you. Side effects include patient dumping, higher taxes, waiting months or years for average treatment, doctor shortages, and even death.
Talk to your government-sponsored doctor so he can tell you Obamacare is right for you.
Paid for the by U.S. Government
I've been spending the afternoon researching and reading articles on this Obamacare nonsense. It's amazing to me that there are people who actually think it's a good idea. Look, I'm all for some kind of reform, but definitely not reform to this scale, and certainly not the kind of reform that Obama wants pushed through in a matter of weeks. Remember the fiasco we know as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act? We were told if it wasn't pushed through, there would be dire consequences (more dire than what's happening now? Doubt it). We're hearing the same thing about health care reform. Hmmm....
Obama is urging that it's time to get health care reform done. In fact, he wants it done before Congress goes on its August recess.
Could someone explain to me why Obama and company think it's a good idea to push through substandard, shoddy health care reform when something much less complicated, the stimulus package (which could have been even LESS complicated if they just cut taxes), was also pushed through in a matter of weeks and has proven to be a fiasco? And why no one else seems to be asking this question?
Also, why in the world do we have unqualified people making crucial decisions? Obama, Pelosi, Fwank, Reid, and the rest of the lot aren't doctors or insurance providers, nor do they comprehend the term "private sector." Obama has never held a job in a private company or small business. He has never practiced medicine or fought in a war. Yet he acts as if he knows it all, and he's doing a damn good job fooling a lot of people.
How about government reform? I want it to be reformed into the government our brilliant forefathers intended it to be (who didn't draft up a constitution in three weeks (granted, it took the Articles of Confederation to lead to the Constitution)). No more American royalty (Obamas and Pelosi come to mind here); no more infringement of rights (according to some, the 2nd Amendment doesn't apply to states??); no more spending of tax dollars on bailouts, shopping trips to London, unnecessary military planes for elected officials (*cough* Pelosi *cough*), and a host of other absurdities.
But something tells me that anyone who runs on a platform for government reform would not be elected and would be forever ruined by state-run media....
I saw over at Newsbusters that CNN's Michael Ware doesn't think the United States can win the war in Afghanistan "with bombs and bullets," and that it would take "cutting deals" with Al Qaeda in order to come to a solution.
Mr. Ware, back in the 1930s and '40s, there was this guy, Adolf Hitler. European leaders knew he was a threat and wanted to protect their countries, but they didn't want to go to war with him. So they appeased him by giving concession after concession, thinking that cutting deals would save them (please also see the Israeli-Palestinian conflict). However, one thing led to another, and that's when we had something called World War II. Bombs and bullets stopped Hitler and the Nazis, Mr. Ware, not peace talks or deals.
Honestly, the stupidity of people just blows my mind.
In an attempt to redirect the attention away from the Obama Administration's failings on every issue under the sun, Newsweek came out saying that Attorney General Eric Holder may be appointing a prosecutor to investigate the "brutal interrogation practices" of the Bush Administration.
Not only is the attention continuously being brought back to the Bush Administration's anti-terror techniques, the media and those stricken with Obamamania can't seem to get over the novelty of having a black man seated in the most powerful position in the world. In the opening of the Newsweek article, Holder is quoted as saying, "I was so struck by the fact that for the first time in history an African-American was presiding over this celebration of what our nation is all about." It's always, always about race for these people; it's never about capabilities.
It's beensix months. Despite the trillions that have been spent, unemployment has risen and the recession has not improved. If insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results, Washington's Democrats are proving to be downright deranged. They must be running out of ideas if a second stimulus is all they can come up with (God knows they won't consider tax cuts because that would be giving in to the enemy). They regurgitated that "This is the worst recession since the Great Depression" line in order to garner support for Stimulus I. So by suggesting Stimulus II, are they saying they were wrong and that this recession is worse than the Great Depression? I wasn't around then, but I'm pretty sure it's not quite that bad. Will Stimulus II have another 8,000 earmarks? You betcha. But I sleep better at night knowing that a little field mouse population is safe.
I'll be expecting similar b.s. for the next three and a half years.
PS At work today, one woman was talking about how there's no jobs here because everything's made in China and elsewhere, and another woman said, "Obama's going to create jobs!" I almost fell out of my chair.
I don't know where everyone lives, but in New York, the weather has been terrible. Something like 25 out of the 30 days in June there was precipitation. But, it hasn't been insanely hot out, and there have been some record cold days in some parts of the country. Those of us on to the global warming scam use this to our advantage. However, the global warming alarmists out there somehow use it to their advantage as well.
While I was lifeguarding today, a woman came up to me and we were chatting about how nice the weather finally is, and then she says, "You know this global warming is causing us to be a month behind. Like, this month is really June and last month was really May." I just nod and smile. But when someone like her tells me that, I just nod and smile. Also at my job, this 70 something year old guy was asking me about college, and I said I was taking some criminal justice courses. He goes on to say, "Bush is gonna need you," and I'm like, Uh..... So then he goes on a mini rant about how he's ruined this country and the world and blah blah and he's worried about my future and my children's future and all I said was, "I'm worried about what OBAMA is doing." And he says, "Well we still have to see..." No, I think the writing is on the wall. These liberals don't know how to admit defeat!
It came as a shock today to find out that Obama, who listened to a racist Protestant preacher for twenty years and who often boasts his Muslim background, is in fact more Catholic than the Bishop of Rome. Of course, Kathleen Kennedy Townsend over at Newsweek wouldn't know what it meant to be Catholic if Jesus Christ himself told her.
As a practicing Catholic, I'm disgusted at her ignorance and obvious disdain for the Church. In an attempt at journalism, she falsely claims (and this paragraph just exasperates me to no end),
"In truth, though, Obama's pragmatic approach to divisive policy (his notion that we should acknowledge the good faith underlying opposing viewpoints) and his social-justice agenda reflect the views of American Catholic laity much more closely than those vocal bishops and pro-life activists. When Obama meets the pope tomorrow, they'll politely disagree about reproductive freedoms and homosexuality, but Catholics back home won't care, because they know Obama's on their side. In fact, Obama's agenda is closer to their views than even the pope's."
1. Pragmatic approach to divisive policy? You mean, how he just OKed government funding for embryonic stem cell research? How he voted no three times on a bill that would provide babies of failed abortions with medical care? How he gave NKorea a stern talking to and ignored the pleas for help in Iran? How when someone comes to him with a different approach, his answer is, "I won"? Yes, very pragmatic, I say.
2. Reproductive freedoms is such a lovely term for mass baby killing. I don't think it's possible to disagree on homosexuality itself. You don't have to approve of what they do per say, but I don't think disagree is the right word here. Also, Kathleen should pick up a Catechism and read 2358, which says,
3. "But Catholics back home won't care, because they know Obama's on their side." Don't make me laugh, Kathleen. Obama's on Obama's side. He fooled you and made you believe he's on your side, but you're a lot more dense than us conservatives/libertarians/anyone who's been on to him from the beginning.
It never ceases to amaze me (though I should be used to it by now) how these so-called journalists think they can say whatever they want about the Catholic Church, and its members, yet if someone speaks out against Islam, s/he is a bigot.
A black family of 4 and two friends (also black) were confronted by a group of about 50 teenagers, who were all white. One of the teenagers blindsided and assaulted one of the adults and when another adult stepped in to help, the teenagers ganged up on him causing him a concussion and multiple bruises to his head and eye. The group was shouting, "This is our world," and "This is a white world." Al Sharpton and others have come out condemning this racist act of violence.
Okay, so that story is only halfway true. What really happened was a group of black teenagers attacked a white family and two friends. What?? I thought it was the whites who were the bad guys all the time. Right now, the case is NOT being classified as a hate crime. ???? Not really sure why not, because if it was the other way around, it would be.
And if you're feeling particularly awesome, you could bookmark the link and vote every single day until August 12 (because apparently you can vote every 8 hours?).
Thanks so much! ----------
On another note, I briefly watched the Michael Jackson memorial ("briefly" being the key word here) and not 2 minutes after I put it on did Al Sharpton come on and rant about how MJ brought all the races together and made everyone feel comfortable enough to vote for a black president. Yeah....I'm sure Michael Jackson was the reason Obama won and it didn't have anything to do with ACORN, people voting for him simply because he was black, or the fact that the MSM was in bed with him throughtout the election process.
The Supreme Court decided today in a 5-4 decision that the white firefighters in New Haven, CT were unfairly denied promotions based on their race, a decision endorsed by Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor as an appeals court judge.
The four liberal justices dissented in order to cover Sotomayor's ass, and Senator Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Judiciary Committee (he'll be presiding over Sotomayor's confirmation hearings), is coming to the rescue as well. He said she should not be criticized for the unsigned appeals court decision (which he asserts she did not write) and added, "Judge Sotomayor and the lower court panel did what judges are supposed to do, they followed precedent." Reverse racism is precedent? That's pretty sad.
This isn't a case about equal opportunity employment. It's about equal opportunity result. No one was offered a promotion because the result would not have been 5 whites, 5 blacks, and 5 Hispanics.
The 1200-page legislation to curb greenhouse gas emissions barely passed in the House with a 219-212 vote. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi commented, "We passed transformational legislation, which will take us into the future." (But added that no amount of Botox could take her into the future as well.) Obama is now urging the Senate to follow suit. "My call to every senator, as well as to every American, is this: we cannot be afraid of the future. And we must not be prisoners of the past." Beautiful, Mr. President, beautiful. I wonder if any of them even read it? Oh wait, Harry Reid did. "The bill is not perfect, but it is a good product for the Senate."
Obama said the average American would have to pay the cost of a postage stamp per day. Hmm, 44 cents times 365 is $160.60. It's great to ask Americans to pay more taxes at a time when what they need to be doing is spending money (and something tells me it's going to cost more than Barry says it will, so that's probably a low estimate).
"It is paid for by the polluters who currently emit dangerous carbon emissions," Obama said. "It provides assistance to businesses and families as they make the gradual transition to clean energy technologies."
Ohhhh, those eeeeeevil, nasty polluters! People who take advantage of the fact that we live in the 21st century and have the luxury of electricity and cars and air conditioning and so on and so forth.
Just when I thought things couldn't get any more ridiculous in Washington, the Senate goes and unanimously approves a resolution apologizing for slavery. (Unanimously only because if someone voted against it, they would be asked to resign on the grounds of being a "racist.") Senator Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) said, "It is important to have a collective response to a collective injustice." Now I have a two things to say about that:
1) His use of the term "collective injustice" is, quite plainly, moronic. I did not own slaves; my parents did not own slaves; my grandparents did not own slaves; and my great-grandparents weren't even born here, so I'm pretty sure they didn't own any slaves either (heck, my ancestors further back could have been slaves themselves). I'm sure this goes for most Americans out there. 2) We already had a collective response to slavery - the Civil War. 360,000 Union soldiers died in that war - I think that's reparation enough. (Even though the Civil War was more about keeping the Union together than about slavery, the point is that, ultimately, the slaves were freed.)
Carol M. Swain, a professor of political science and law at Vanderbilt University, called the Democratic-controlled Senate's resolution "meaningless" since the party and federal government are led by a black president and black voters are closely aligned with the Democratic party. "The Republican Party needed to do it," she said. "It would have shed that racist scab on the party."
1) Our black president is not even 100% black, AND his father was from Kenya. So I'm not really sure what his being black has to do with it. 2) Racist scab? I don't know any racist Republicans. Sure, there's some crazies still in the South, but there's also some crazies in the Democratic party. See: Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, Bill Ayers...
Look, if the Senate is going to apologize for slavery, I want it to apologize for kicking out the American Indians (I loathe the term "Native American") - oh wait - it already did that by giving them free college. Ok, then I want it to apologize for other social "injustices" - Medicaid, Welfare, ABORTION, and every other stupid, vile, heinous resolution or law that it has ever passed.
While we're on the second Apology Tour, how about the South apologizes for Jim Crow laws, Germany apologizes for Hitler, Rome apologizes for Nero, Greece apoligizes for Alexander the Great, and God apologizes for Eve, mosquitos, and carbon dioxide.
Martin Luther King, Jr. did not spend his life fighting for equality (and eventually dying for it) so that we could have some elitist Senators apologize for slavery some 144 years after it was banned.
My point is, apologizing for slavery and saying that we should all be sorry for it is nauseating.
When we invaded Iraq in 2003, Saddam Hussein hadn't made any threats nearly as bad as as what Kim Jong Il might do. According to Japanese intelligence, North Korea may fire a long-range ballistic missile towards Hawaii sometime around Independence Day. Now, that alone should have caused President Obama to sit down at his desk in the Oval Office and make an announcement Americans, the world, and most importantly, to Kim Jong Il:
"Our good faith has not been returned. The North Korean* regime has used diplomacy as a ploy to gain time and advantage. It has uniformly defied Security Council resolutions demanding full disarmament...
The United States and other nations did nothing to deserve or invite this threat, but we will do everything to defeat it. Instead of drifting along toward tragedy, we will set a course toward safety.
All the decades of deceit and cruelty have now reached an end. Kim Jong Il* and his sons must leave North Korea* within 48 hours. Their refusal to do so will result in military conflict commenced at a time of our choosing.
Before the day of horror can come, before it is too late to act, this danger will be removed. The United States of America has the sovereign authority to use force in assuring its own national security. That duty falls to me as commander of chief by the oath I have sworn, by the oath I will keep.
The United Nations Security Council has not lived up to its responsibilities, so we will rise to ours.
As our coalition takes away their power, we will deliver the food and medicine you need. We will tear down the apparatus of terror and we will help you to build a new Iraq that is prosperous and free.
Yet the only way to reduce the harm and duration of war is to apply the full force and might of our military, and we are prepared to do so.
If Kim Jong Il* attempts to cling to power, he will remain a deadly foe until the end."
-Excerpts from President George Bush's March 17, 2003 address to the nation, with italics showing changes I made to suit today's conflict
Mr. Bush, I am grateful that you had the strength and honor to live up to your oath and protect the American people before it was too late. I can only hope and pray that President Obama will take the rightful course of action; not the easiest; not the one that will keep him popular; but the right course.
Two days ago, Leon Panetta stated that former vice president Dick Cheney is almost "wishing that this country would be attacked again, in order to make his point."
In October, vice president Joe Biden stated, "Mark my words: it will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy...Remember I said it standing here...we're gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy."
Hmm...it sounds to me like it's really Biden, not Cheney, who's wishing for an attack.
Heard on Hannity today that ABC will be delivering the news from the Blue Room in the White House on June 24th. What's on June 24th? A primetime special called "Prescription for America," a program which will cover the president and White House officals pushing for government-run health care. However, ABC will exclude opposing voices on the debate. That means millions of Americans will be fed information from only one side, therefore garnering support for the president's plan.
The RNC Chief of Staff Ken McKay wrote a complaint to the head of ABCNews and received the following response: "ABCNEWS alone will select those who will be in the audience asking questions of the president. Like any programs we broadcast, ABC News will have complete editorial control. To suggest otherwise is quite unfair to both our journalists and our audience."
The infamous imbecile is at it again, filming what he calls a documentary but what I call a load a b.s. The teaser trailer for "Save Our CEOs" aired in theaters this weekend, asking audience members to take money from their pockets and donate it to the major corporations who received bailouts. Mr. Moore failed to mention in his spiel that two of the corporations - Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan - have offered to pay back their share with some resistance from the government.
Moore's hypocrisy is deafening. Here he is, a multi-millionaire taking advantage of the capitalist system we have, yet is quoted as saying, "Capitalism is an evil system." Needless to say, I'll be missing this film. But unfortunately, you know the liberals will be going in droves, and I'll be hearing about how eeeeeeevil those CEOs are and how Moore is just oh-so-great.
After suffering an enormous amount of pressure from the Obama administration, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has suggested the creation of a limited Palestinian state. The conditions would be as follows: a Palestinian disarmament and the Palestinian recognition of Israel as the Jewish state.
Those are the best preconditions suggested to date. Those are the two key issues that need to be dealt with before the Palestinian state can be realized. I'm sure Netanyahu is doing this with some hesitation and is only doing it because if not, he risks losing the United States as an ally.
If Palestine cannot accept disarmament or recognize Israel, there can be no arguing that Palestine wants peace.
And in honor of Flag Day: If anyone, then, asks me the meaning of our flag, I say to him - it means just what Concord and Lexington meant; what Bunker Hill meant; which was, in short, the rising up of a valiant young people against an old tyranny to establish the most momentous doctrine that the world had ever known - the right of men to their own selves and to their liberties. ~Henry Ward Beecher That piece of red, white and blue bunting means five thousand years of struggle upwards. It is the full-grown flower of ages of fighting for liberty. It is the century plant of human hope in bloom. ~Alvin Owsley
You're the emblem of The land I love. The home of the free and the brave. ~George M. Cohan
When my mother's grandparents came to America from Poland, they couldn't have been happier to see the Polish Supermarket, road signs in Polish, and Americans who learned Polish in order to better communicate with them. Oh - wait. That didn't happen. My great-grandparents had to learn English and start brand new lives for themselves without the help of the U.S. government, along with the millions of other immigrants who came to America...legally.
Today, the first Supermercado de Wal*Mart opened in Phoenix in order to cater to the Spanish community, rather than the Spanish community learning to adapt to living in America. There have been times when I've picked up a product in a store and had to actually LOOK for the English.
In no way am I anti-immigration. I am, however, a strong opponent of illegal immigration, benefits for illegals, and adapting to immigrants (illegal and legal) rather than them adapting to us. This whole "let's build a store solely for one community" thing is a step in the wrong direction. Sure, it's great for Wal*Mart (hello profits), but is is great for our country as a whole? Things are being made way too easy for people. Why should a Mexican immigrant learn English when everything is available in his native language? (Para Espanol, oprima el 2.)
The opposition against assimilation has proven to be a problem for Europe and will prove a problem for us as well.
This is from an April 27th column in the Russian newspaper Pravda:
It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American decent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I meant people.
Yesterday, Obama claimed that 150,000 jobs have been "saved or created" (I've been wary of that phrase since the first time it was used). He's also bragging that unemployment has risen but not as much as it has in a long time. That's like a kid telling his mom that he had 6 tests in school with these grades: 100, 90, 80, 70, 60, and 58, and then bragging that that's the lowest drop from the previous grade yet. The point is, IT STILL DROPPED. But back to the "saved or created" b.s. No one -- not the Labor Department, not the Treasury, not the Bureau of Labor Statistics -- actually measures "jobs saved." So it's very easy for the Obamanation to make up this number and not have it disputed because there's no way to prove it wrong, especially since the media has fallen for it and is selling it.
From the Telegraph:
Left-wing incumbents in Germany, Austria, the Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, Hungary, Poland, Denmark, and of course Britain were either slaughtered, or badly mauled [while] Right-wing incumbents in France (Sarkozy) and Italy (Berlusconi) survived the European elections unscathed.
Europe is finally realizing the error of its ways and jumping on the capitalism bandwagon, but somehow we're going down the path that led them to disaster in the first place? Really?
Bill O'Reilly is being blamed for Dr. George Tiller's murder. We heard this kind of bull after the shootings in Binghamton and elsewhere; that time, it was Glenn Beck's fault. Maybe I'm crazy, but when I hear about a murder, the first thing I do is think to blame the actual killer.
The Left has legitimately lost it. They just can't handle the excitement of a black president, a white vice president, and a Hispanic nominee for SC Justice (which is a stunning picture of diversity, I might add). Okay, all kidding aside, what I think is going on here is that the Left has developed such empathy for criminals that they are unable to blame the criminals themselves for their actions. The blame is always shifted from the criminal to whoever can be held responsible for "inciting" the criminal to commit a crime. In the Binghamton shooting, right-wing second amendment defenders were blamed for Jiverly Voong's rampage. The Bush Administration is being blamed for rising numbers of jihad recruits. Gang members and drug dealers are given a pass because they grew up in a poor environment. In the case of Dr. Tiller's death, Bill O'Reilly is being blamed for somehow inciting the gunman to kill Tiller.
The shifting blame game is going to become increasingly popular.
Louis Susman, a 71-year-old retired Citigroup Inc. senior investment banker, helped raise between 200,000 and 500,000 dollars for Obama's campaign, and another 300,000 for his inauguration. Mr. Susman has just been nominated to be the US ambassador to to the United Kingdom.
Look, I understand this isn't the first guy to be nominated for a position simply because he donated or raised hundreds of thousands of dollars. But here we are again witnessing that Obama's mantra of "change" is just an empty one. And the Obamazombies are still foaming at the mouth with excitement, ignoring every blatant sign that their Great Leader is a straw man.
I'm sure as long as Mr. Susman does whatever he can to insult the British, he'll do a fantastic job.
This will be my third post on the topic, but I think it's really important. And I want the liberals who read this to comment.
I found out about this from NewsBusters.
On Memorial Day 2002, Hannity and Colmes interviewed Army Staff Sergeant Troy Dunlap, who was held in Iraq as a POW during the 1991 Persian Gulf War. He was bringing a lawsuit against Iraq and Saddam Hussein for the torture he and other POWs had to endure.
"We have 17 POWs, the injuries range from broken legs, fractured skulls, beatings that were so bad that the body looked like it had been dipped in indigo dye. Techniques that were used where things such as beatings to the point where most of the beatings stopped only when the POW reached unconsciousness, use of electric shock, cattle prods, drug injections."
"In another case described in the lawsuit, Navy Cmdr. Lawrence Randolph Slade remembers fearing for his life 'every single second' of his six weeks in captivity. Guards broke his teeth and his nose, ruptured his eardrums, fractured vertebrae and knocked him unconscious. On four occasions, they put a gun to his head and pulled the trigger. "
"The 200-page suit details beatings of American POWs with pistols, weighted rubber hoses, blackjacks and fists. POWs were subjected to mock executions, threatened castrations and electrical shock. Some were kicked with steel-toed boots or hit on their knees with mallets.In at least one case, a POW plaintiff was so severely starved he ate the scabs off his own body. 'The first night I was there I was sure I was going to die,' the 31-year-old Dunlap said Tuesday. What kept him going, he said, was that a fellow captive was a female flight surgeon, who was seriously injured and sexually assaulted. 'I felt like I had to be strong for her' he said." (Andrew Herrmann, Chicago Sun Times)
The article literally brought tears to my eyes. Starvation to the point of eating your own scabs? While the scumbags at Gitmo gained weight from their three square meals a day?
To the traitors coming to the defense of the three terrorists who were waterboarded: you should be ashamed of yourselves. Where were you when these guys, OUR guys, had burning hot spoons placed on the back of their necks? Where were you when they were systematically starved? Why weren't you there, pointing fingers at the Iraqi teorrists who did this? Why weren't you screaming "torture" then!?
If someone says anything along the lines of "two wrongs don't make a right" or "we are better than them," your argument means nothing. It is IMPOSSIBLE to compare our techniques to theirs. Waterboarding does no physical damage; it creates the illusion of drowning. On the other hand, our guys were scarred and legitimately suffer from the real torture they had to endure.
I am sick and tired of this fascination with diversity. "Obama and Sotomayor stood with Vice President Joe Biden. It was a striking picture of diversity: a black president, a white vice president and a Hispanic nominee to the nation's highest court." What does diversity have to do with ability? It's obvious now that neither the black president or white vice president know what they're doing. But according to the MSM, being a minority is the best attribute one can have when vying for a public position (just ahead of being a tax cheat and a botox-filled clown).
Sotomayor is a graduate of Princeton and Yale Law School (but so is Obama, and we all know how smart of a person he is). "In one of Sotomayor's most notable decisions, as an appellate judge she sided last year with the city of New Haven, Conn., in a discrimination case brought by white firefighters. The city threw out results of a promotion exam because too few minorities scored high enough. Coincidentally, that case is now before the Supreme Court," (AP). Too few? What determines "too few"? What if more minorities scored high enough than whites? Would it still be a case of discrimination? Sickening.
But you know what this is really about? Votes for the Obamanation in 2012. Hispanics usually vote democrat anyways, but by nominating a Hispanic woman to the Supreme Court, Obama is ensuring his securing of the Hispanic vote.
Sotomayor said over ten years ago, "I don't believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstance. It says what it says. We should do honor to it." Let's see if she honors those words.
I am so grateful for all of the armed men and women who have given their lives for this country.
Both of my grandfathers, who I mention below, were WWII vets. Unfortunately I do not know a whole lot about their time in the service. Neither of them talked about it.
Joseph W. Kielbasa 1926-2005 He was stationed in the Philippines and would have had to invade Japan if the bombs weren't dropped. I think my grandmother mentioned once that he never ate rice again after getting back.
Francis X. Smith 1926-2007 He was an ex-POW. In fact, he was captured twice and escaped once.
May they and all those who gave their lives to defend freedom rest in peace.
The Great One has decided. Passenger cars and light trucks will be required to get 39mpg and 30 mpg, respectively. In order for vehicles to be this efficient, they will have to be much smaller and lighter than we see today. The new standards are going to cost car companies billions of dollars, which of course will be passed on to the consumer (Isn't that a GREAT idea? Forcing companies to start spending billions and then forcing consumers to spend more during an economic recession? Sure, by 2016 we might be out...but we might not. And what happens now affects what happens then.).
What bothers me the most is that these new cars are NOT safe. 115 people die every day in car accidents in the United States [citation]. I predict that number will increase significantly once everyone's driving so-called smart cars, and I love how these liberal wackos are so interested in putting the environment before safety. (Speaking of the environment, I actually think it's ignorant for people to think that they can stop climate change. I don't buy that it's man-made. We are not that significant. How do these people think the ice age ended?) If I was starting a family, I would NOT want to buy some cheap, flimsy vehicle to carry my most precious cargo. I guess big brother's not going to let me have a choice in the matter.
But isn't that what it's all about? Limiting our choices? Controlling us? It starts with one thing - fluorescent light bulbs - and then it becomes unstoppable.
I'm going to start taking these things down so I can patent a Bidenisms calendar.
Clearly the vice president was not taught to think before speaking, as he has proved to us time and time again. This time, however, might be the worst yet. He actually disclosed the location of what used to be a secret VP bunker. He even described it in detail. You can read all about it here.
From Reuters: "President Barack Obama said on Wednesday he would fight the release of dozens of photographs showing the abuse of terrorism suspects, over concern the images could ignite a backlash against U.S. troops." (Probably a good idea.)
But honestly, I would LOVE to see these pictures. I can see it now. Terrorist #24 pressing himself into a corner from fear of the caterpillar. Terrorist #16 has dark circles under his eyes from sleep deprivation. But what's this? Oh, it's the Daniel Pearl beheading video! How about we show THAT one to the public right along side photos of detainee abuse, and then continue to call what we do to terrorists "abuse." Wait, we can't. Because it's NOTHING compared to what those animals do to our guys (and Pearl was just a journalist!).
Why, why, WHY are people so concerned with how TERRORISTS are treated? Did they forget that these men are willing to kill themselves in the name of some God? That these men's torture tactics include putting a blowtorch to the skin or hanging one upside down and electrocuting him?
9-11 happened because we weren't on the offensive. Now we and our cities have been kept safe. A major terrorist attack in LA was thwarted thanks to waterboarding.
The problem with liberals is that they think a psycho terrorist can be cured with love and affection, and that if we just torture them with hugs, they'll realize the error of their ways.
On another note, I was having dinner with some of my 09-10 suitemates and politics came up....most of them love Obama. Guess I have some serious work to do starting in August!
I didn't read the whole article because I was afraid there would be plot spoilers (I'm halfway through the book right now). I remember when The Da Vinci Code came out and Catholic priests were telling their parishioners not to go see it. This kind of attitude does not stop people from reading books or seeing movies. When someone tells you not to do something, it just makes you want to do it even more!
This is like banning Harry Potter books in libraries. It's absurd. These are FICTIONAL BOOKS, people. I thought The Da Vinci Code was a great book - but does that mean that I believe that Jesus had kids and His descendents are walking the earth today? No! Banning books/movies is so medieval. And if the Church is worried about getting a bad rep, too late. The media's already brainwashed people into thinking that every priest is a child molestor and every Christian is a psycho.
They are at the top of their game, I tell you. The liberals are the masters of politicizing what a normal, logical, common sense-utilizing person would view as a completely nonpartisan event. See: swine flu. Yes, it was only a matter of time until a left-wing media outlet blamed none other than the GOP for the what, 8 cases in NYC and a few elsewhere in the US? (Before I saw this story on News Busters, a moron I went to high school with posted as his status on Facebook, "GOP stripped $900 million for pandemic preparedness from stimulus package. Oops." Guess he's not the only one making brilliant observations.)
Anyways, MSNBC's (no, I wasn't shocked it was MSNBC either) Ed Shutlz said, "Well, here we go again - Republicans are playing politics with our health. This kind of stuff just makes my temperature go up. I'm boiling over this - as many as 150 have been killed by this flu in Mexico. Cases are popping up allover the United States." Boil away, Ed.
"They play politics with the money, they play politics with the stimulus package to the tune of $870 million for pandemic flu that was stripped out." Listen. It was stripped from the $timulus package because it WASN'T GOING TO STIMULATE THE ECONOMY. Hello!?
"'This is just not a health scare, it's a national security situation,' Schultz grimly declared." Then take it up with your man Janet.
I guess it's just one of those things that you have to deal with when you're the most powerful nation in the world (but how long will that last?).
Me: What is the core of the problem in the Middle East? King Abdullah of Jordan: What is the Israeli-Palestinian dispute? Me: I'm sorry, your majesty, but the correct answer is Islamic extremism.
Yep. And King Abdullah is positive that if the U.S. doesn't play a stronger role in the peace negotiations, there's going to be a new war. I'm not an expert, but it seems to me as if there's already a war going on. Abdullah added, "If it's left to the players, the Israelis and the Palestinians by themselves, we're not going to get anywhere — it can only happen if there is an American umbrella with a determined American president." I was pretty young when what I'm about to mention happened, but wasn't Bill Clinton a "determined American president" who attempted to restore peace (wait, restore? Has there ever been peace?) to that region? And didn't that attempt ultimately fail since we're back to square one? Like I said, the root of the problem is Islamic extremism, and until Iran stops funding terrorist groups and until Obama realizes that these people want to kill us, not have brunch with us, there won't be peace.
But you know what, Abdullah's comment is so....infuriating. It is just another example of someone begging us to help, and then when we do help, we get criticized. And everyone's always telling us to mind our own business. I say let Israel take care of it. Their patience is thinning; they are extremely capable; and I'm pretty sure they're getting tired of all this mierda.
So many of my peers have been brainwashed by the largest, most successful liberal indoctrination camp there is: the public school system. Now that high school's over, they're really in their element: in college, surrounded by liberal professors and liberal classmates. Their beliefs go unchallenged. They are not required to think critically since it takes little to no effort to write a paper on how George W. Bush was the worst president in the nation's history and get an A. I, on the other hand, do have to think critically in order to best refute the liberal ideologies of my non-Western history professor who just happens to be one of the most intolerable liberals on the planet (The Most Intolerable Liberal award goes to a friend of mine who's an aspiring lawyer and politician...I shudder at the thought of him running for office but then perk up at the idea of running against him).
Much to my chagrin, the majority of students on my campus are liberal. You should have seen the Obama inauguration propaganda. There were flyers all over the place and a "celebration party" during the inauguration. Needless to say, I had better things on my agenda.
Getting down to it, my concern is, what's going to happen when my generation becomes the generation that's in charge? Will there be any conservatives left? We see all of the awful things that are happening now with Obama in the White House and the Democrats controlling both houses of Congress. We see how when we the "extremists" speak out against big government and big spending, we are demeaned by unprofessionals, cheerleading for Obama, who have sunk lower than ever before. We see the country that we know and love on the highway to socialism. All I can say is that I think when its my generation in Congress, it's going to be much, much worse than it is now. I certainly hope that won't be the case, but unfortunately, the future is looking very dim.
(I don't like being pessimistic but how can I not be with all the trouble that's been going on?)
My philosophy class had a paper due today and the professor just asked each of us to say what our topic and thesis were, and then briefly elaborate (is that an oxymoron?). I'd say about half the class picked moral issues for their papers: abortion, death penalty, stem cell research, euthanasia. I died a little inside when 4 out of the 6 who did abortion said they were pro-choice. But then one of the pro-lifers said abortion was acceptable in cases of rape (even though she totally contradicted herself by saying first that the fetus was a human and deserves rights....so a child whose father was a rapist isn't a human and doesn't deserve rights? I can't see the logic there...). 3 out of the 4 who did euthanasia were for it. One guy did stem cell research and was for it, but I shot him down and educated the class by telling them that embryonic stem cells have cured nothing but there are over 60 cures from adult stem cells. (And then my boyfriend chimed in that they need government funding because private investors don't want to invest in a lost cause.) At least the few who did the death penalty were for it because they recognize justice needs to be served (and judgment should be left up to God).
It's just sad that life has been devalued so much that people think it's okay to kill an innocent, unborn child just because it's "unwanted," or to kill a person who's chronically ill. Actually, the euthanasia thing is really cloudy for me...I haven't made up my mind completely on that one. But basically, life has been devalued and it's really, really sad. =(
According to the CIA, only three detainees ever have been subjected to water boarding (which, I've heard, is one thing the boys in the Navy have to undergo); those detainees being two top al-Qaeda leaders and another terrorist. When one of the top leaders, Khalid Sheik Mohammad, underwent waterboarding, he revealed that there would be a 9-11 style attack in LA. So thanks to waterboarding, a terrorist attack in LA was thwarted.
I just want to list the other forms of "torture" that was used: slapping sleep deprivation dietary limitations temporary confinement to small spaces
Two wrongs don't make a right, the liberal says? We look bad to other nations, the liberal says (see: Rosa Brooks, who thinks we were attacked because of our "torture techniques")? I don't think you can equate water boarding (which was used on 3 guys) or small space confinement to any of the terrorists' techniques! The terrorists can handle a little sleep deprivation and water boarding. ESPECIALLY if it's going to prevent the loss of innocent American lives.
On his radio show, Ed Shultz (never heard of him) declared, "The country does not feel the same way the teabaggers do...Welcome to the House Unamerican Activities Committee, 2009 version...I can just envision Senator McCarthy somewhere in the depths of Hell just smiling about all of this."
I'm going to use this opportunity to give a little history lesson. McCarthy was right. Exhibit A: The VENONA Project.It proved McCarthy's suspicions and yet, shockingly enough, received little to no coverage. Many of you may be hearing about this for the first time (just as I did when I first read Ann Coulter's book Treason, which is excellent by the way). Roosevelt laughed it off when he was informed that there were communists in his company. Hoover gave Truman a list of known communists in the government and Truman ignored it. Hiss, the Rosenbergs, and others were guilty as sin. But high school history teachers (including mine a few years ago) and liberal professors still tell you that McCarthy was crazy liar. Oh how liberals love distoring history.
It was such an amazing experience, being with thousands of Americans (we took up 4 blocks) in the greatest city in the world rallying against big government and big spending. There were some really great signs and the speakers made excellent points. It's only the beginning!! (I wish I could put some pictures up but I don't have my USB cord..)
One sign said, "I believe in the Constution. I'm a 'Right Wing Extremist.'" And on that note, can I just say that Janet Napolitano should jump off a cliff? Honestly, this woman is more worried about returning veterans and some conservatives who rally peacefully (notice how none of US broke windows or rioted) than she is about Islamic radicals or "undocumented workers." Then she goes and says, "I was briefed on the general topic, which is one that struck a nerve as someone personally involved in the Timothy McVeigh prosecution." Wait a minute, Janet - are you comparing us to Timothy McVeigh? %^&*$@!
Dozens of protesters showed up when former Colorado congressman Tom Tancredo was giving a speech against illegal immigration at UNC. "There's no debate, no space for hate," they chanted. Tancredo ended up leaving after a window was broken and clearly couldn't continue. Apparently police used a small amount of pepper spray and shot tazers into the air (no one was tazered). That tells you how bad it was that police had to resort to such means.
It's really sad how indoctrinated people have become thanks to the public school system and colleges and universities. You know, all the liberals preach is tolerance and acceptance, yet they are the biggest offenders. They only like free speech when it's used to promote liberal ideas.
And the anchorwoman in the video said he was there giving a speech against immigration. Uh, hello, he was speaking out against ILLEGAL immigration. Liberal media is at it again...