Dog Brothers Public Forum
Return To Homepage
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
August 05, 2015, 03:28:50 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
87319 Posts in 2281 Topics by 1069 Members
Latest Member: ctelerant
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 56 57 [58] 59 60 ... 91
2851  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / I wonder if it about HC law on: January 25, 2011, 12:38:44 PM
"Common Cause's letter isn't only an unfair attack on two Supreme Court justices. It is an assault on the judiciary and an effort to silence conservative voices."

Yesterday, Rachal Madcow was manic with glee discussing Thomas's apparant failure in not disclosing some tax issue with his wife. 
I almost wanted to prescribe her depakote to get her to stop drooling over the non issue.

The liberals are going after the conservative court in a big way lately.  They must be quite fearful of the possibility of a HC strike down.
2852  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / "and the pursuit of Happiness" on: January 25, 2011, 12:27:18 PM
The Declaration guarantees the *pursuit* of happiness not happiness.  If we listened to the Democrats one would think everyone is guaranteed a home, health care, retirement, easy work, equal income, and every protection from every bad thing anyone could imagine is wrong with the world.  It is like a relative of mine said, everyone should be guaranteed equal chance in life not equal outcome.


***IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America
hen in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

— John Hancock

New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton

Massachusetts:
John Hancock, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery

Connecticut:
Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott

New York:
William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris

New Jersey:
Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark

Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross

Delaware:
Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean

Maryland:
Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia:
George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

North Carolina:
William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn

South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton

Georgia:
Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton***


2853  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / More sensible health care on: January 24, 2011, 02:26:55 PM
Everything starts with repeal
By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, January 21, 2011

Suppose someone - say, the president of United States - proposed the following: We are drowning in debt. More than $14 trillion right now. I've got a great idea for deficit reduction. It will yield a savings of $230 billion over the next 10 years: We increase spending by $540 billion while we increase taxes by $770 billion.
He'd be laughed out of town. And yet, this is precisely what the Democrats are claiming as a virtue of Obamacare. During the debate over Republican attempts to repeal it, one of the Democrats' major talking points has been that Obamacare reduces the deficit - and therefore repeal raises it - by $230 billion. Why, the Congressional Budget Office says exactly that.

Very true. And very convincing. Until you realize where that number comes from. Explains CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf in his "preliminary analysis of H.R. 2" (the Republican health-care repeal): "CBO anticipates that enacting H.R. 2 would probably yield, for the 2012-2021 period, a reduction in revenues in the neighborhood of $770 billion and a reduction in outlays in the vicinity of $540 billion."

As National Affairs editor Yuval Levin pointed out when mining this remarkable nugget, this is a hell of a way to do deficit reduction: a radical increase in spending, topped by an even more radical increase in taxes.

Of course, the very numbers that yield this $230 billion "deficit reduction" are phony to begin with. The CBO is required to accept every assumption, promise (of future spending cuts, for example) and chronological gimmick that Congress gives it. All the CBO then does is perform the calculation and spit out the result.


In fact, the whole Obamacare bill was gamed to produce a favorable CBO number. Most glaringly, the entitlement it creates - government-subsidized health insurance for 32 million Americans - doesn't kick in until 2014. That was deliberately designed so any projection for this decade would cover only six years of expenditures - while that same 10-year projection would capture 10 years of revenue. With 10 years of money inflow vs. six years of outflow, the result is a positive - i.e., deficit-reducing - number. Surprise.

If you think that's audacious, consider this: Obamacare does not create just one new entitlement (health insurance for everyone); it actually creates a second - long-term care insurance. With an aging population, and with long-term care becoming extraordinarily expensive, this promises to be the biggest budget buster in the history of the welfare state.

And yet, in the CBO calculation, this new entitlement to long-term care reduces the deficit over the next 10 years. By $70 billion, no less. How is this possible? By collecting premiums now, and paying out no benefits for the first 10 years. Presto: a (temporary) surplus. As former CBO director Douglas Holtz-Eakin and scholars Joseph Antos and James Capretta note, "Only in Washington could the creation of a reckless entitlement program be used as 'offset' to grease the way for another entitlement." I would note additionally that only in Washington could such a neat little swindle be titled the "CLASS Act" (for the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports Act).

That a health-care reform law of such enormous size and consequence, revolutionizing one-sixth of the U.S. economy, could be sold on such flimflammery is astonishing, even by Washington standards. What should Republicans do?

Make the case. Explain the phony numbers, boring as the exercise may be. Better still, hold hearings and let the CBO director, whose integrity is beyond reproach, explain the numbers himself.

To be sure, the effect on the deficit is not the only criterion by which to judge Obamacare. But the tossing around of such clearly misleading bumper-sticker numbers calls into question the trustworthiness of other happy claims about Obamacare. Such as the repeated promise that everyone who likes his current health insurance will be able to keep it. Sure, but only if your employer continues to offer it. In fact, millions of workers will find themselves adrift because their employers will have every incentive to dump them onto the public rolls.

This does not absolve the Republicans from producing a health-care replacement. They will and should be judged by how well their alternative addresses the needs of the uninsured and the anxieties of the currently insured. But amending an insanely complicated, contradictory, incoherent and arbitrary 2,000-page bill that will generate tens of thousands of pages of regulations is a complete non-starter. Everything begins with repeal.

2854  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Politics of Health Care on: January 24, 2011, 01:30:30 PM
Interesting to note the gov is giving some control to primary care in Britain.  Being the czar here Berwick seems to think British model is the model we should follow I don't know what to make of it.  Other than it is obvious guaranteeing care to everyone and expecting to control costs with primary care is likely to fail.

If, as I am not clear from this article, that the government is giving up and saying to primary care doctors - here we give you X amount of money and you spend it however you think best and take the rest for your salaries - than - if that the case - expect a big problem.  This formula has been used by mangaed care and is a recipee for cut throat health care.  Imagine going to a doctor who you know will make more money denying care to you.  His/her judgement on every single decision is now clouded by their knowing that.  Is that what we want.  I have seen that first hand.  I wouldn't dream of going to any doctor with that in mind.  The doctor will constantly balance what he can deny you with the risk of if it's wrong - getting his ass sued.  To protect that he/she will document up the wazoo as much as possible.

That is how they sometimes get away with it. 

The whole idea we will bend the cost curve down while providing care to 50 million more is aburd.  And they are guaranteeing everyone get the same?
We will all pay more and get less.  Not more. 

Oh sure Gifford would get managed care.  Yeah right.
2855  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / part two on: January 24, 2011, 01:22:36 PM
Britain Plans to Decentralize Health Care
Published: July 24, 2010
Twitter
Sign In to E-Mail
 
Print
 
Single Page
 
       
Reprints
 
Share
CloseLinkedinDiggMixxMySpaceYahoo! BuzzPermalink (Page 2 of 2)



The government has promised that the new plan will not affect patient care and that the health care budget will not be cut. But some experts say those assertions are misleading. The previous government, controlled by the Labour Party, poured money into the health service — the budget is now about three times what it was when Labour took over, in 1997 — but the increases have stopped. The government has said the budget will continue to rise in real terms for the next five years, but it is unlikely that the increases will keep up with the rising costs of care and the demands of an aging population.

“The real mistake that is being made by the health secretary is to drive through an ideologically determined program of reorganization which is motivated by the principle of efficiency savings,” said Robin Durie, a senior lecturer in politics at the University of Exeter. “History shows clearly that quality will suffer as a consequence.”

Dr. Durie added, “The gulf between the rhetoric of the white paper and the technicalities of what is involved in the various elements of the overall reorganization being proposed is just extraordinary.”

For example, he asked, how will the government make good on its promise to give patients more choice — a promise that seems to require a degree of administrative oversight — while cutting so many managers from the system?

“How will the delivery of all this choice be funded?” Dr. Durie asked. “And how will the management of the delivery of choice be funded?”

Dr. Vautrey said the country needed to have a “mature debate about what the N.H.S. can and cannot afford.”

He said: “It is a sign of the mixed messages that government sends out. They talk about choice and competition and increased patient expectations at the same time as they tell the service they need to cut costs and refer less and prescribe less. People need to understand that while the needs of everyone may be met, their wants will be limited.”

As they prepare for the change, many doctors are wondering whether it will be permanent this time around.

“Many of our colleagues have seen this cycle of change repeatedly,” Dr. Vautrey said. “Many would look at previous reorganizations and compare it to this one and wonder how long the current change will last before the next one comes along.”

2856  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Part 0ne British care back to doctors on: January 24, 2011, 01:21:40 PM
Britain Plans to Decentralize Health Care
By SARAH LYALL
Published: July 24, 2010
Twitter
Sign In to E-Mail
 
Print
 
Single Page
 
       
Reprints
 
Share
CloseLinkedinDiggMixxMySpaceYahoo! BuzzPermalink LONDON — Perhaps the only consistent thing about Britain’s socialized health care system is that it is in a perpetual state of flux, its structure constantly changing as governments search for the elusive formula that will deliver the best care for the cheapest price while costs and demand escalate.

Enlarge This Image
 
Andrew Testa for The New York Times
The new British government’s plan to drastically reshape the socialized health care system would put local physicians like Dr. Marita Koumettou in north London in control of much of the national health budget.
Even as the new coalition government said it would make enormous cuts in the public sector, it initially promised to leave health care alone. But in one of its most surprising moves so far, it has done the opposite, proposing what would be the most radical reorganization of the National Health Service, as the system is called, since its inception in 1948.

Practical details of the plan are still sketchy. But its aim is clear: to shift control of England’s $160 billion annual health budget from a centralized bureaucracy to doctors at the local level. Under the plan, $100 billion to $125 billion a year would be meted out to general practitioners, who would use the money to buy services from hospitals and other health care providers.

The plan would also shrink the bureaucratic apparatus, in keeping with the government’s goal to effect $30 billion in “efficiency savings” in the health budget by 2014 and to reduce administrative costs by 45 percent. Tens of thousands of jobs would be lost because layers of bureaucracy would be abolished.

In a document, or white paper, outlining the plan, the government admitted that the changes would “cause significant disruption and loss of jobs.” But it said: “The current architecture of the health system has developed piecemeal, involves duplication and is unwieldy. Liberating the N.H.S., and putting power in the hands of patients and clinicians, means we will be able to effect a radical simplification, and remove layers of management.”

The health secretary, Andrew Lansley, also promised to put more power in the hands of patients. Currently, how and where patients are treated, and by whom, is largely determined by decisions made by 150 entities known as primary care trusts — all of which would be abolished under the plan, with some of those choices going to patients. It would also abolish many current government-set targets, like limits on how long patients have to wait for treatment.

The plan, with many elements that need legislative approval to be enacted, applies only to England; other parts of Britain have separate systems.

The government announced the proposals this month. Reactions to them range from pleased to highly skeptical.

Many critics say that the plans are far too ambitious, particularly in the short period of time allotted, and they doubt that general practitioners are the right people to decide how the health care budget should be spent. Currently, the 150 primary care trusts make most of those decisions. Under the proposals, general practitioners would band together in regional consortia to buy services from hospitals and other providers.

It is likely that many such groups would have to spend money to hire outside managers to manage their budgets and negotiate with the providers, thus canceling out some of the savings.

David Furness, head of strategic development at the Social Market Foundation, a study group, said that under the plan, every general practitioner in London would, in effect, be responsible for a $3.4 million budget.

“It’s like getting your waiter to manage a restaurant,” Mr. Furness said. “The government is saying that G.P.’s know what the patient wants, just the way a waiter knows what you want to eat. But a waiter isn’t necessarily any good at ordering stock, managing the premises, talking to the chef — why would they be? They’re waiters.”

But advocacy groups for general practitioners welcomed the proposals.

“One of the great attractions of this is that it will be able to focus on what local people need,” said Prof. Steve Field, chairman of the Royal College of General Practitioners, which represents about 40,000 of the 50,000 general practitioners in the country. “This is about clinicians taking responsibility for making these decisions.”

Dr. Richard Vautrey, deputy chairman of the general practitioner committee at the British Medical Association, said general practitioners had long felt there were “far too many bureaucratic hurdles to leap” in the system, impeding communication. “In many places, the communication between G.P.’s and consultants in hospitals has become fragmented and distant,” he said.

The plan would also require all National Health Service hospitals to become “foundation trusts,” enterprises that are independent of health service control and accountable to an independent regulator (some hospitals currently operate in this fashion). This would result in a further loss of jobs, health care unions say, and also open the door to further privatization of the service.

2857  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of His Glibness on: January 24, 2011, 11:56:14 AM
Doug,

"Yes maybe by accident, really it is the radical leftism of his mother.  That is likely what drew her to the African student as much as race.  Obama's other mentors and colleagues had far more direct influence than his father: Bill Ayers, Rev. Wright etc."

And as noted, his college transcripts, his full birth certificate (albeit debatable as to importance), his pre national politics history all seems vague.  We know he did drugs. But we have heard as far as I know, nothing from the leftists he knew and associated with.  Dead silence and only for talk radio and Fox we would know nothing of any of it.

Bizzare.

Not one person from College remembers him?

Yes I agree it is all water under the bridge anyway.  He and the progressive forces behind him need to be beaten on the issues.
2858  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / The Progressive front man on: January 24, 2011, 11:26:51 AM
Crafty, Doug and GM,
I agree with all of you the Republicans need to keep up the pressure and to do their best to control the airwaves.  Obama, as do all Presidents have the big advantage of the bully pulpit.
I agree with Dick 100%  and particularly so since he is one of if not the architects of the Clinton resurrection it certainly behooves the right to listen to him on the best strategy to deal with Clinton 2. 

Yet just sticking it back at the gangster bamster has it risks as I pointed out with Newt's failed policy of a government shut down that led to HIS not Clinton's down fall.

I don't know exactly how to avoid this and look strong and not just become a compromiser which will result in the gangster getting a second term (again of course barring some unforeseen events like a secoind dip in the economy.)  I am not confident about Boehner at this point but perhaps I am prejudging.   Certainly Morris felt he made a huge mistake on the tax compromise BEFORE the lame duck session was over.  Not a good start.  Krauthammer certainly thouth Boehner gave away the farm.

Getting the progressive front man out is without a doubt the only way to save our country from decline IMHO.

So far I don't see anyone on the right who has the charisma to do it.  Forget Romney - no charisma (my nephew worked for him for his first run) .  Forget Palin no crossover appeal.  Forget Huckabee - too wishy washy.  Newt my choice probably does not have swing voter appeal.  Jindal who my nephew works for now as press secretary does not appear to be prime time national material.

Hopefully someone with the right stuff will bubble up before 2012.
2859  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Nearly check mate. on: January 24, 2011, 10:33:04 AM
Obama has just placed a check on the Republican team if you will.  If he is able to keep up the moderation and bipartisan facade then it is check MATE.  Barring of course something unforeseen (to sound like David Gordon when speaking of the markets).

The Republicans are on the defensive already.  They come off as too wimpy they lose.  If they come off as the p0arty of no they probably lose as well.  (remember shutting down government backfired on Newt).  Calling Obama as a socialist who wants to redistribute wealth while obviously true is not going to win swing voters.  Remember 50% pay no Federal income tax so they don't care about this.  Remember most union empolyees are very happy to have the rich pay into their pensions.  That is thus NOT a winning strategy.  The winner gets the swing voters.  The Republicans in my view must go beat the media trails everyday convincing why Obama has been bad for the US.  Unfortunately even that has risks too.  Remember how adept the Clintonites were in neutering the Repubs in the 90's?  Even when the Repubs would come out with good ideas that ring true Clinton would steal the idea and make it his own  - case in point - welfare reform.  He took and was gloriusly given all the credit for it by the MSM.  Even the Blacks were kissing his hand on the issue when indeed we all know it never would have happened without Republicans.  So Obama has checked the Repub party.  He could easily make it check mate.  He is not a genius.  The formula is already proven an written out for him.  All he has to do is follow the script.  There are many progressives around him who will keep him to it.

****WILL “CENTRIST” OBAMA WIN?
By Dick Morris And Eileen McGann01.21.2011Share this article
 
On this, the second anniversary of his inauguration, President Obama is clearly showing a determination to change his image, replacing his hard left dogmatism with a seeming flexibility and openness to the views of the center. Will it work? Will it lead to his re-election? Are we only one-quarter of the way through a two term Obama presidency?

If the Republican Party wimp out and embraces a moderate agenda, trying to meet him in the middle, Obama will succeed and will be with us for six more years. But if the GOP defines itself in stark contrasts and pushes conservative policies, we will beat him. The key is to test Obama’s centrism by confronting him with bold demands to rollback health reform, undo his massive spending, deregulate community banks, enable state bankruptcies, and block pending executive orders to impose carbon taxes, card check unionization, and FCC regulation of talk radio and the Internet.


We have got to make the gentile and lulling waves of Obama’s new-found moderation crash up against the rocks of Republican demands. Then the leftist rib tide that lurks underneath the seemingly calm waters will be exposed and, in the ensuing surf, he will flounder.

Obama’s moderation is only tone deep. Its hallmarks have been the Daily appointment, his Tucson speech, his sham efforts at deregulation, and his forced acceptance of the Bush tax cuts. Now let’s see what he does with health care repeal, spending cuts, and the rest of the Republican agenda.

The Republican Study Committee proposal calling for $2.5 trillion in spending cuts over ten years is a great place to start. The GOP should take the key elements of it and tack them on to the debt limit increase bill and demand that Obama either sign the bill with the cuts or get no rise in the debt limit. As Senator Pat Toomey (R-Pa) suggested in a recent op-ed, the government can function without borrowing more for a few months. And during that time, let all of America debate whether or not to cut the budget. Let Obama be on display – day after day – pleading for more spending and borrowing. What will become of his centrism then?

The Study Committee proposal is especially brilliant in its avoidance of any cuts in Social Security and Medicare. Republicans squandered their momentum from Bush’s re-election in 2005 by pushing Social Security reform and won in 2010 by fighting Medicare cuts. To cut or “reform” either program right now would be a disaster. But when it comes to EPA, the Department of Education, Amtrak, the federal workforce, highway construction, public works, stimulus spending, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and other non-defense discretionary spending – cut away!

The key to winning the election of 2012 is to force Obama to defend his agenda of 2009-2010 by demanding its repeal and rollback. Republicans need to make him spend 2011 and 2012 defending the programs that brought him down in 2010. And we must also enact budget riders blocking his attempts to jam through by executive orders (even as he postures about cutting federal regulation) carbon taxation, FCC regulation of talk radio, and card check unionization. These issues are all winners.

Obama hopes we forget his past liberalism. After all, in 1996, who remembered Hillarycare? Who voted against Clinton because of his 1993 tax hikes? Nobody. So we need to force these issues to the fore again in 2011 and 2012. We must make Obama run on his record of 2009-2010 by demanding its repeal and forcing him to fight again the same battles that cost him the House in 2010. That is the path to victory.****

2860  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / gangsterbamster on: January 24, 2011, 09:49:53 AM
It wouldn't surprise me that he includes some adorable soundbite in his con job speech tomorrow like "the era of big government is over".  That said the writing is on the wall.  But also thw swing voters will adore it tooth and nail:

Right off Drudge this morning. 
What a corrupt administration!

***Three SEIU Locals--Including Chicago Chapter--Waived From Obamacare Requirement
Monday, January 24, 2011
By Fred Lucas
(CNSNews.com) – Three local chapters of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), whose political action committee spent $27 million supporting Barack Obama in the 2008 presidential election, have received temporary waivers from a provision in the Obamacare law.

The three SEIU chapters include the Local 25 in Obama’s hometown of Chicago.

The waivers allow health insurance plans to limit how much they will spend on a policy holder’s medical coverage for a given year. Under the new health care law, however, such annual limits are phased out by the year 2014. (Under HHS regulations, annual limits can be no less than $750,000 for 2011, no less than $1.25 million in 2012 and no less than $2 million in 2013.)

The SEIU, with more than 2 million members nationally, includes health care workers, janitors, security guards, and state and local government workers.

The three SEIU locals, covering a total of 36,064 enrollees, are covered by the federal waivers, according to the Department of Health and Human Services.

HHS gave a waiver to Local 25 SEIU in Chicago with 31,000 enrollees on Oct. 1, 2010; to Local 1199 SEIU Greater New York Benefit Fund with 4,544 enrollees on Oct. 10, 2010; and to the SEIU Local 1 Cleveland Welfare Fund with 520 enrollees on Nov. 15, 2010.

So far, the Obama administration has issued waivers to 222 entities, including businesses, unions and charitable organizations. Of that total, 45 were labor organizations.

A total of 1,507,418 enrollees are now included in the waivers. More than one-third -- 512,315 – of the enrollees affected were insured by union health plans.


SEIU Local 1199’s health plan put a $50,000 cap on medical expenses for its New Jersey nursing home workers, according to 1199 SEIU spokeswoman Leah Gonzalez. That’s $700,000 under the 2011 limit stipulated by HHS regulations.

In September, HHS announced it would grant waivers to employers to prevent some workers from losing their benefits if the insurer could not meet new health care law’s requirements on annual limits. The waivers are granted by HHS if the department determines “compliance with the interim final regulations would result in a significant decrease in access to benefits or a significant increase in premiums,” according to a Sept. 3 memo by Steve L. Larson, director of the HHS Office of Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight.

Local 1199, SEIU's Greater New York Benefit Fund, requested the waiver specifically with respect to its separate plan for New Jersey members, according to Gonzalez. This waiver primarily affects low-wage New Jersey nursing home workers whose health care plan provides medical, hospital, prescription, dental and vision benefits.

The New Jersey members now have an annual maximum health care benefit of $50,000. Gonzalez said fewer than 1 percent of members have ever reached that cap, and that those members who did received additional help.

“The members’ health benefits are paid for by the employer and are negotiated through collective bargaining,” Gonzalez said in a written statement to CNSNews.com. “Several years ago, facing limited dollars from the employers for this small group, the members themselves chose how to shape their health plan to get the most out of their coverage.”

Gonzalez added that prescriptions are excluded from the cap. “For example, if a member maxes out from a hospital stay, she/he can continue to get their life-saving medications throughout the year while accessing alternative coverage at low-cost community clinics.”

Neither SEIU Local 25 nor Local 1, nor the national organization responded to CNSNews.com’s request for comment.

The SEIU's Committee on Political Education made $27,829,845.91 in independent expenditures on Obama’s presidential campaign in 2008. SEIU-affiliated groups in Illinois have long supported Obama’s campaigns and endorsed him for the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate in 2004. In 2008, the national union backed Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination.***
2861  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Unions on: January 24, 2011, 09:40:48 AM
"Better yet, perhaps President Obama should take the lead."

Yeah right.

No Democrat will do this.  Federal, State, county or municipal level.

We the tax payers are being held hostage to government employee unions.

"President Obama, either unwilling, or perhaps unable"

What in Obama's history has EVER given the impression he is/was ever willing to do anything about this?  Why can we not call an ace of clubs and ace of clubs?
2862  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / cover-up complete on: January 22, 2011, 11:10:20 AM
Hawaii governor silenced and cover- up is now complete:

***Associated Press Mark Niesse, Associated Press – Sat Jan 22, 4:56 am ET
HONOLULU – A privacy law that shields birth certificates has prompted Democratic Gov. Neil Abercrombie to abandon efforts to dispel claims that President Barack Obama was born outside Hawaii, his office says.

State Attorney General David Louie told the governor that privacy laws bar him from disclosing an individual's birth documentation without the person's consent, Abercrombie spokeswoman Donalyn Dela Cruz said Friday.

"There is nothing more that Gov. Abercrombie can do within the law to produce a document," said Dela Cruz. "Unfortunately, there are conspirators who will continue to question the citizenship of our president."

Abercrombie, who was a friend of Obama's parents and knew him as a child, launched an investigation last month into whether he can release more information about the president's Aug. 4, 1961 birth. The governor said at the time he was bothered by people who questioned Obama's birthplace for political reasons.

But Abercrombie's attempt reached a dead end when Louie told him the law restricted his options.

Hawaii's privacy laws have long barred the release of a certified birth certificate to anyone who doesn't have a tangible interest.

So-called "birthers" claim Obama is ineligible to be president because they say there's no proof he was born in the United States, with many of the skeptics questioning whether he was actually born in Kenya, his father's home country.

Hawaii's health director said in 2008 and 2009 that she had seen and verified Obama's original vital records, and birth notices in two Honolulu newspapers were published within days of Obama's birth at Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital in Honolulu.

Health Department spokeswoman Janice Okubo again confirmed Friday that Obama's name is found in its alphabetical list of names of people born in Hawaii, maintained in bound copies available for public view.

That information, called index data, shows a listing for "Obama II, Barack Hussein, Male," according to the department's website.

"The index is just to say who has their records within the department. That's an indication," Okubo said. "I can't talk about anyone's records."

The Obama campaign issued a certificate of live birth in 2008, an official document from the state showing the president's birth date, city and name, along with his parents' names and races.***

2863  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of His Glibness on: January 21, 2011, 02:06:41 PM
Doug,

Excellent post.

What is your take on "dreams *from* my father"?

I haven't read this book or D'Suza's book, "The Roots of Obama's Rage" but it is certainly curious Obama seems to take up the philosophy of his father who he may have never known and appears to have not cared one iota for the boy other than just sleeping with the white woman.

Yet Obamas grandparents who appear to have been good to him he throws under the bus as just a bunch of white people.

2864  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Unions/orgainzed crime on: January 21, 2011, 12:07:44 PM
Unions dominated by organized crime. I've had longershoreman patients who tell me about this.  I suggested to one black patient who has arthritis to go for some sort of supervisory position.  His response, Blacks don't get those.  It is who you know.  What is becoming evident is many of the union employees are now getting looted by the union bosses.  I know of one union where the members are actually suing the union for money that disappeared out of their pension funds.
There is a definite tie with organized crime and the music business.  It ain't just the Italian mafia.  apparently there is a Irish one, posssibly a Jewish one and th eBlacks have their own gangs.  Why cannot anyone get into these crooks can only be explained that it is not a poltical issue or the wealth from the entertainment business is too easy to spread around - I don't know.

In any case I am sure most Americans would be astonished at how organized crime permeates our culture, our society, all the way up to the highest levels of government.
I know that I am surprised by how easy it is to bribe almost ANYONE.  I f I don't see it with my own eyes I am not sure I would believe.  Few fully grasp it even when I explain it.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/the_mob/2011/01/21/2011-01-
2865  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: US-China on: January 21, 2011, 10:16:17 AM
Correct. It isn't the education in general it is what type of education.

Here in NJ we have *enormous* numbers of Asians and Middle Easterners pouring in getting IT jobs, MDs, opening businesses (patel-hotel-motel), working in or owning franchises in banks, 7 -11s, dunkin donuts, gas stations and on and on and on.  Yet I have countless American borns coming in complaining of their stress and how it is not worth looking for a job that doesn't pay them what they want when they can easily get the same or so in unemployment checks.


The other day they were interviewing some sort of College football player who was some sort of big shot player and all.  He was speaking and couldn't even speak decent English.  I am thinking what a joke.  This guy gets a college degree and can't speak decent English.  I could never imagine anyone other than a jock getting all the way through a four year college without being able to put a decent grammatically correct sentence together.

The left perpetuates the nanny state and it only gets worse, spreads like a metastatic cancer.  Chinese and Indians will run us over. The Mexicans they are a different breed.   Education does not seem to be a factor for them like the others I noted.  It appears to be cultural.


2866  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Will not post on link on: January 21, 2011, 09:46:42 AM
Crafty,
I tried to move the post over as you requested but I cannot seem to do it.
In addition I tried to find the topic under heading you have but cannot find that either.
ccp
2867  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Lance Armstrong and Sports Illustrated on: January 21, 2011, 09:43:29 AM
"Like so many other athletes before; is Lance Armstrong lying?"

Answer is, of course he is.  When I witness first hand how an ENTIRE industry can be corrupt (music) than it comes no surprise to me the same would go for sports athletes.  As always it is all about the money and for these people many of whom are self indulgent narcissists also the fame.  They have no problem cheating, lying stealing.  Whatever it takes.  Like his ex girlfriend Sheryl Crow who claims writing songs stolen from Katherine (no she doesn't do the stealing - she just buys them from the people who do) I am totally convince this guy is a liar.   That said now what?  The answer.  Nothing.  Just like the music industry which will go on as it always has.



***Lance Armstrong Retorts Angrily At New Doping Allegations

Lance Armstrong - Tour de France champion Lance Armstrong was in no mood to answer questions on new doping allegations.
According to Bleacher Report, Sports Illustrated came out with new doping allegations against seven-time Tour de France winner Lance Armstrong.
The following day, Lance Armstrong was bombarded by reporters.
Reportedly, Armstrong first said, "I have nothing to say."
Pressed, he repeated, "Like I said, I have nothing to say. I perused it...there's nothing there."
When questioned again, Armstrong retaliated:
"Dude, are you that stupid? What part of 'I'm not commenting' is not clear to you?"

Like so many other athletes before; is Lance Armstrong lying?***

2868  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Lance Armstrong /sports Illustrated on: January 21, 2011, 09:42:36 AM
"Like so many other athletes before; is Lance Armstrong lying?"

Answer is, of course he is.  When I witness first hand how an ENTIRE industry can be corrupt (music) than it comes no surprise to me the same would go for sports athletes.  As always it is all about the money and for these people many of whom are self indulgent narcissists also the fame.  They have no problem cheating, lying stealing.  Whatever it takes.  Like his ex girlfriend Sheryl Crow who claims writing songs stolen from Katherine (no she doesn't do the stealing - she just buys them from the people who do) I am totally convince this guy is a liar.   That said now what?  The answer.  Nothing.  Just like the music industry which will go on as it always has.



***Lance Armstrong Retorts Angrily At New Doping Allegations

Lance Armstrong - Tour de France champion Lance Armstrong was in no mood to answer questions on new doping allegations.
According to Bleacher Report, Sports Illustrated came out with new doping allegations against seven-time Tour de France winner Lance Armstrong.
The following day, Lance Armstrong was bombarded by reporters.
Reportedly, Armstrong first said, "I have nothing to say."
Pressed, he repeated, "Like I said, I have nothing to say. I perused it...there's nothing there."
When questioned again, Armstrong retaliated:
"Dude, are you that stupid? What part of 'I'm not commenting' is not clear to you?"

Like so many other athletes before; is Lance Armstrong lying?***

2869  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of His Glibness on: January 21, 2011, 09:40:30 AM
"Challenge Obama on his record and his governing agenda"

Surely.

There is another issue about 2 state empolyees stating they verify a document that later cannot be found.

Sounds like the US Copyright Office.

It should bother when government officials entrusted with keeping documents secure are/may be lying.

I know for a fact that a person(s) at the Copyright Office tmapers with documents in coordination with people taking things out of our house.

Since it only affects us no one else can give a shit.

But in the case of Obama the whole country should be giving a shit.
2870  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Politics of Health Care on: January 20, 2011, 03:07:40 PM
Personally the HC bill is secondary.  Actually as a primary care provider some actually think I should be grateful for the Democrat bill as it attempts to boost primary care.
But I am totally against it.  I am totally against the entire liberal agenda which this is just a part.  I agree with Morris.  Now the Republicans and teaparties have to fight even harder.  The bamster charm offensive is in full gear.  Unfortunately Clinton showed him the way and it works.  Already Bamster is doing better in the polls. Not a good sign.  I just wish conservatives would just stop telling how smart Obama is.  He is just reading scripts.  He is nothing more then the front guy for what is really going on.

***DickMorris.com OBAMA’S CHOICETHE PERILS OF PALIN »RIGHT MUST FIGHT ROUND 2
By Dick Morris01.19.2011Share this article
 
Published on TheHill.com on January 18, 2011

Now for the counteroffensive. The House Republicans are pushing to repeal ObamaCare. While they will doubtless succeed in the House and either fail in the Senate or face an Obama veto, their decision to raise and debate the issue is a crucial one. As happened when it passed last year, ObamaCare will ignite a national controversy.

But are conservatives prepared to win the debate? When ObamaCare was being pushed through Congress by the likes of Pelosi, Reid, Obama and Emanuel, the right was galvanized. Rallies, demonstrations, town-hall forums, television ads, letters to the editor, television commentary — all bombarded the nation, emphasizing the faults of the bill. But now these voices are stilled, complacent, perhaps exhausted. Or are they intimidated by the liberal spin on the Gabrielle Giffords shooting that we all must lower our voices?


Already, liberal groups and unions are running ads calling on House Republicans not to repeal ObamaCare. One such spot, paid for by Americans United for Change, says:

“Members of Congress know that their health insurance plan can’t deny coverage for their kids. Congressmen can rest assured that their insurance plan won’t drop their families if they get sick. The Affordable Care Act gave your family the same protections that members of Congress get. But Republicans want to take that protection away from your family. They want to put insurance companies back in charge. Call Congress. Tell them you deserve the same health insurance protection they get. Tell them: Don’t repeal the Affordable Care Act. You deserve the same health insurance protections as Congress.”

Where is the conservative reply? Where are the conservative voices? Could the opportunity to repeal ObamaCare give the left a chance to make its case without an answer?

Voters still oppose ObamaCare. The Rasmussen Poll has them backing repeal by 55-40. But if opponents of the program remain complacent, those numbers could change quickly.

Republicans need to remind America that the huge increases they are now paying in their health insurance are concrete evidence of the impact of the mandates in ObamaCare. They need to point out that the $500 billion of Medicare cuts are coming and that, already, reductions in physician fees are driving thousands of doctors to close their doors to Medicare patients. The Republicans need to explain how ObamaCare creates an entirely new entitlement and will swell the deficit.

Voters don’t buy the argument that ObamaCare will cut the deficit. According to Rasmussen, 45 percent say that repealing the program is more likely to cut the deficit, while 33 percent say leaving it on the books will be a better way to reduce it. Republicans need to underscore this linkage.

The larger point is that the new Republican House gives conservatives a chance to re-litigate the battles they lost in Congress in 2009 and 2010. At each turn, they need to re-fight the battle for public opinion and carry it each time. A president usually sets the agenda. But conservatives can keep the focus on the unpopular spending and legislation Obama jammed through a Democratic Congress by pushing for de-funding and repeal.

Republicans won’t get repeal. But they will be able to de-fund the program. They can block the IRS from enforcing the individual and employer mandates and can stop the Department of Health and Human Services from slicing $500 billion from Medicare and implementing healthcare rationing. But it will be a long fight. Republicans will have to demand these concessions as a prerequisite for approving the budget and perhaps even a debt-limit increase. They will need to stand their ground in the face of the hue and cry that they are being irresponsible and holding the nation hostage.

And they’ll need public opinion on their side!

They will need the Tea Party to get loud and conservative groups to start advertising. It’s the second round. A round the opponents of ObamaCare can win. But they mustn’t go to sleep. They need to wake up!***
2871  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Hawii verified his original certificate on: January 20, 2011, 02:00:54 PM
Oh really? So Fukino and Onaka have personally have claimed to have visually verified Bamster's birth certificate.  Sounds like a coverup to me.

Remember this:   

****Obama's Birth Certificate Verified By State
Health Department Receives Multiple Requests For Copies
POSTED: 12:12 pm HST October 31, 2008
UPDATED: 1:26 pm HST November 1, 2008
 Email  Print
HONOLULU -- The state's Department of Health director on Friday released a statement verifying the legitimacy of Sen. Barack Obama birth certificate.

The state has received multiple requests for a copy of Obama's birth certificate. State law does not allow officials to release the birth certificate of a person to someone outside of the family.

There were rumors that Obama was born in Kenya, where his father is from. The Constitution requires that the president be a natural born citizen of the U.S.

While many sites and news organizations have released copies provided by the Obama campaign, the rumors have persisted.

"There have been numerous requests for Sen. Barack Hussein Obama’s official birth certificate. State law (Hawai‘i Revised Statutes §338-18) prohibits the release of a certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in the vital record," DOH Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino said.

Fukino said she and the registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, have personally verified that the health department holds Obama's original birth certificate.

"Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures," Fukino said.

Fukino said that no state official, including Gov. Linda Lingle, ever instructed that Obama's certificate be handled differently from any other.

Some Obama critics claim he was not born in the United States.

Multiple lawsuits were filed to try and force Obama to provide proof of citizenship. Earlier Friday, a southwest Ohio magistrate rejected a challenge to Obama's U.S. citizenship. Judges in Seattle and Philadelphia recently dismissed similar suits.
Copyright 2008 by KITV.com. The Associated Press contributed to this report. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.****
2872  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of His Glibness on: January 19, 2011, 11:56:00 AM
"But I also have pointed out that Obama's strategy of concealing the records and dismissing the "Birthers" as cranks is not working in the longer term."

Well this is the point of my original post above.  Obama is *not playing any strategy in 'not' producing* the best evidence.  He is not producing best evidence because he can't.  For whatever reason his birth certificate is no where to be found.  Therefore he takes the next strategy which is as it always is with him (like past associations with radicals) is to cover up, deny, attack those who question this as crazy, misguided, politcally motivated, racist, and the rest.

As for W's military guard duty I will have to admit the evidence I have read is that he certainly did have a Senator's son's *no show* ghost-like service.
I don't recall seeing any credible evidence he ever showed up like everyone else was supposed to do.  Certainly sounds like someone doing a favor for a powerful father.

It reminds me of another Senator's son's service during Vietnam - Algore.  He ran around the rear lines as some sort of "reporter"?  That said, he was there at all deserves him credit.
2873  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of His Glibness on: January 19, 2011, 11:19:48 AM
But there was something about McCain's being born on a military base that was figured to be the inclusionary argument I think.
2874  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of His Glibness on: January 19, 2011, 10:58:34 AM
GM,

Well I don't know what he presented for his passport.  It doesn't appear it was any kind of copy of a long birth certificate.  Here in NJ one can get certified copies if one loses the original.

His mother was a citizen so isn't that alone mean he is automatically a citizen?
Again the issue is not citizenship.  It is constittutional eligibility for being President.
2875  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / entertainment on: January 19, 2011, 10:53:31 AM
Piers Morgan.  I couldn't find a thread to place this under.  Katherine and I watched Piers on cable interviewing Oprah and on this other show he does following rich and famous locales.  We both thought he is excellent.  Frankly much better than Larry King who perhaps was burned out.

He almost got Oprah to cry when he mentioned the program would be aired on MLK day.  She was clearly teary eyed.  Apparantly every interviewer has been trying unsuccesfully to get her tearful in an interview.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piers_Morgan
2876  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / "Birthers" may be right all along on: January 19, 2011, 10:38:23 AM
Wow.  Let's see the MSM deal with this now.  Remember Crafty you asked why on this board why doesn't Bamster simply produce his birth certificate and put to rest the questions of his birth place.  Now we have the answer.  His "long" version of his birth certificate cannot be found.  Just a written in notation. 

So what was the evidence he was born here.  Some newspaper articles?  Whether he was born here or not matters not with regards to citizenship since his mother was a citizen.  But it certainly does matter with regards to his eligibility for President.  I do not underestimate the possibility there is some sort of coverup.

Just stating that because the Hill couldn't find anything therefore nothing exists does not explain this.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BORN IN THE USA?

Hawaii governor can't find Obama birth certificate
Suggests controversy could hurt president's re-election chances

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: January 18, 2011
8:05 pm Eastern


By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2011 WorldNetDaily



Neil Abercrombie
 
Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie suggested in an interview published today that a long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate for Barack Obama may not exist within the vital records maintained by the Hawaii Department of Health.

Abercrombie told the Honolulu Star Advertiser he was searching within the Hawaii Department of Health to find definitive vital records that would prove Obama was born in Hawaii, because the continuing eligibility controversy could hurt the president's chances of re-election in 2012.

Donalyn Dela Cruz, Abercrombie's spokeswoman in Honolulu, ignored again today another in a series of repeated requests made by WND for an interview with the governor.

Toward the end of the interview, the newspaper asked Abercrombie: "You stirred up quite a controversy with your comments regarding birthers and your plan to release more information regarding President Barack Obama's birth certificate. How is that coming?"

In his response, Abercrombie acknowledged the birth certificate issue will have "political implications" for the next presidential election "that we simply cannot have."

Get the free, in-depth special report on eligibility that could bring an end to Obama's presidency

Suggesting he was still intent on producing more birth records on Obama from the Hawaii Department of Health vital records vault, Abercrombie told the newspaper there was a recording of the Obama birth in the state archives that he wants to make public.

(Story continues below)

     


Abercrombie did not report to the newspaper that he or the Hawaii Department of Health had found Obama's long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate. The governor only suggested his investigations to date had identified an unspecified listing or notation of Obama's birth that someone had made in the state archives.

"It was actually written, I am told, this is what our investigation is showing, it actually exists in the archives, written down," Abercrombie said.

For seemingly the first time, Abercrombie frankly acknowledged that presidential politics motivated his search for Obama birth records, implying that failure to resolve the questions that remain unanswered about the president's birth and early life may damage his chance for re-election.


"If there is a political agenda (regarding Obama's birth certificate), then there is nothing I can do about that, nor can the president," he said.

So far, the only birth document available on Obama is a Hawaii Certification of Live Birth that first appeared on the Internet during the 2008 presidential campaign. It was posted by two purportedly independent websites that have displayed a strong partisan bias for Obama – Snopes.com released the COLB in June 2008, and FactCheck.org published photographs of the document in August 2008.

WND previously reported the Hawaii Department of Health has refused to authenticate the COLB posted on the Internet by Snopes.com and FactCheck.org.

WND has reported that in 1961, Obama's grandparents, Stanley and Madelyn Dunham, could have made an in-person report of a Hawaii birth even if the infant Barack Obama Jr. had been foreign-born.

Similarly, the newspaper announcements of Obama's birth do not prove he was born in Hawaii, since they could have been triggered by the grandparents registering the birth as Hawaiian, even if the baby was born elsewhere.

Moreover, WND has documented that the address reported in the newspaper birth announcements was the home of the grandparents.

WND also has reported that Barack Obama Sr. maintained his own separate apartment in Honolulu, even after he was supposedly married to Ann Dunham, Barack Obama's mother, and that Dunham left Hawaii within three weeks of the baby's birth to attend the University of Washington in Seattle.

Dunham did not return to Hawaii until after Barack Obama Sr. left Hawaii in June 1962 to attend graduate school at Harvard University in Cambridge, Mass.

Conceivably, the yet undisclosed birth record in the state archives that Abercrombie has discovered may have come from the grandparents registering Obama's birth, an event that would have triggered both the newspaper birth announcements and availability of a Certification of Live Birth, even if no long-form birth certificate existed.

WND has also reported that Tim Adams, a former senior elections clerk for the city and county of Honolulu in 2008, has maintained that there is no long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate on file with the Hawaii Department of Health and that neither Honolulu hospital – Queens Medical Center or Kapiolani Medical Center – has any record that Obama was born there.


2877  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / correction on: January 18, 2011, 01:42:19 PM
"he should get away with this"

he should *not* get away with this

Pardon
2878  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of His Glibness on: January 18, 2011, 01:25:51 PM
Doug,

This is absolutely infuriating to me.  Clinton did this in the 90's as we all know and got away with it.  He would stand there with a straight face and say things as though that were the case all along - and he got away with it.  His polls went right up.  The fact he was a gigantic liberal for two years prior made no difference though I do have to say he never did get over 50% of the vote.  If the cans had a stronger candidate than Dole the outcome could have been different I suppose.

Yet here is Bamster trying to pull off the same scam.  So many said he is too much of an ideologue to do this.  Yet the Democrat team behind him are gettinghim to do it.
The jornolist media will drool over this con,  support him in every way possible - not call him on any of it.  And let him get away with it tooth and nail.

NO I am not happy this guy is supposedly compromising, he is supposidly learining, he is supposidly reaching out to the other side for the benefit of governance and doing the work of the "people".  He is full of shit, he is a liar, he is scamming us, and he should get away with this.  If team Republilcans cannot come up with a media strategy that calls this guy out, that does not let the left play the sob story game, that stands for America and explain to AMerica why they are right and this guy wrong than I will just drop out of the political process altogether. 
2879  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Suddenly the friend of business on: January 18, 2011, 10:42:28 AM
Like the con of Clinton I am beside myself watching the triangulation strategy unfold again.  How the public could let the most radical leftist President we have ever had get away with this I don't know.  But his friends in the media are already talking of a "learning curve", and his "growing into the job", and "maturing".  Now that he can't ram it all down our throats he is suddenly this.  And the swing voters will eat it all up and his poll numbers will go us and likely the Republicans who have no equivalent mouthpiece will not be albe to get past this and indeed are already showing signs they will cave in with compromise.  All the while the msm push for friendly debate on the issues and deligetimize any angry vocal opposition.  If Republicans cannot learn from history we are doomed.  I will try not keep posting about this. 

***Obama orders review of government regulations
            WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama on Tuesday ordered a government-wide review of regulations with the goal of eliminating those that hurt job creation and make the economy less competitive.

Obama took action after unveiling his plan in an op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal in which he said some rules have placed "unreasonable burdens on business -- burdens that have stifled innovation and have had a chilling effect on growth and jobs."

The executive order marked Obama's latest move to repair relations with U.S. business, which were frayed amid bitter debate over his overhauls of Wall Street regulations and healthcare that some business leaders said would stymie corporate America.

[ For complete coverage of politics and policy, go to Yahoo! Politics ]


Obama has struck a more business-friendly tone since his Democrats lost the U.S. House of Representatives and saw their Senate majority reduced in November congressional elections widely seen as a verdict on his handling of the stumbling economy and persistently high unemployment.

It was not immediately clear, however, how far-reaching Obama's new regulatory strategy would be in changing the way the federal government operates.

Despite Obama's promise, the administration's legislative victories are producing dozens of new regulations, on everything from credit card fees to health insurance premium increases, to the annoyance of the business community.

Obama said he would require that in the future, government agencies "ensure that regulations protect our safety, health and environment while promoting economic growth."

He also issued a memorandum to all executive agencies calling for "more transparency and accountability in regulatory compliance" and a second one on the need to "reduce burdens on small businesses whenever possible," the White House said.

Business leaders say government regulations, including those being written for the healthcare and financial reform, have hurt job creation at a time of nearly double-digit unemployment.

"It's a review that will help bring order to regulations that have become a patchwork of overlapping rules, the result of tinkering by administrations and legislators of both parties and the influence of special interests in Washington over decades," Obama wrote.

The president, noting that small businesses create most new jobs in the economy, also said he would direct the government to make a greater effort to reduce the burden regulations place on them.

While vowing to eliminate rules that are "not worth the cost, or that are just plain dumb," the president said his administration would not shy away from writing new rules to address "obvious gaps" in government oversight.

(Writing by Eric Beech and Matt Spetalnick; editing by Mohammad Zargham)***

2880  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Politics of Health Care on: January 18, 2011, 09:44:11 AM
The Dem strategy among the entire political party and the complicit journolist MSM is now clear. 
They will *fix* the non popular portions of Healthcare (thus appearing to be compromisers while at the same time they will mitigate any unpopularity of their party).

Also, the Dems are already playing the sympathy card (scrapping this bill will hurt so many people, 127 million poeple benefit from this yada yada yada) and the cans are essentially silent.  Cans also have to meet head on the already multiple airway claims about why this bill will not help as many people as it will *hurt*.

The Republicans are already being outdone.  They should be hitting airwaves incessantly as to why the whole bill has to be scrapped and started over and the Dems cannot pick and choose and make every single line of the 2000 page morrass into some sort of separate topic for "vigorous debate".

I think we've lost.  I am not confident about our "leadership".  Boehner looks like an idiot crying all the time.  The first time was touching.  The last several times are bizarre - like said, the "weeper of the House".
2881  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / NYT journolist schpeel on: January 17, 2011, 10:50:46 AM
Doug,
The NYT piece is the beginning of the jornolist/dem politician onslaught response to Repubs efforts at HC repeal.
I heard Bamster has said he would be willing to alter the HC bill.  Again showing he is the great compromiser, the conciliator of our age. rolleyes
Now he doesn't have free reign to ram it all down our throats so he is suddenly such a marvelous compromiser. rolleyes
If I can see this coming a mile away so must our Republican leaders.

Unfortunately, we are also seeing signs they plan on dealing with it by also compromising.  They may be afraid to risk being labeled the party of no and shutting down government which does not go well with the swingers based on history from the 90's.

Thus I think efforts to repeal/block HC will fold as the Republicans will try to meet or one up the Bamster with looking like they are working with the other side IMO.

A new MSM buzz word is "governing".  The republicans can either fall into this trap or risk being tarnished as "shutting down" government.
The two parties *MUST* compromise to do the business of "governing" (Not my opnion but  MSM).  Obviously the MSM idea of governing is ramming endless thousand page bills down the throats of taxpayers.
2882  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / all politics on: January 15, 2011, 12:55:17 PM
If most people who come to this country illegally and their children were potential Republicans and not Democrats we would see the entire military on the border.

2883  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Parenting Issues on: January 15, 2011, 11:32:32 AM
"What Chinese parents understand is that nothing is fun until you're good at it. To get good at anything you have to work, and children on their own never want to work, which is why it is crucial to override their preferences."

What a great point of view.

Throughout my life I hear people tell me while I am learning something how "easy" it is.

Well sure, it is easy once you understand it or are good at doing it.  Getting to that point is hard work.

Like using email is "easy".   No its not when you are first learing it.  Yes it is once you know how to do it.

""stressing academic success is not good for children"

You won't find any Jewish parents telling their children this.

Many of my middle aged unemployed pts who cannot find jobs.  What can I say if they didn't finish high school let alone don't have a college degree.



2884  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: The Emasculation of Men In Contempory Society on: January 15, 2011, 10:10:07 AM
This story also speaks to the failure of the legal system to protect someone like her who is being stalked.
Yeah she could get a restraining order but that is not going to stop a determined guy like this.

You won't hear Spitzer telling this story while he rants about gun control.
2885  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / The most likely candidate for the "falling man" on: January 14, 2011, 04:41:42 PM
No one will ever forget that picture.  I just google around to find out who he was.  Apparantly most suspect it was this man.  His family reportedly cannot look at the picture.  I find it tear jerking and I didn't even know him:

http://www.americanmemorials.com/memorial/tribute.asp?idMemorial=2137&idContributor=12959
2886  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics on: January 14, 2011, 04:16:26 PM
Doug and GM,
Reading your posts is reassuring.  cool I hope you are right.
2887  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics on: January 14, 2011, 03:38:39 PM
GM,

If that is what it will take to be rid of this guy then it is for our own long term collective good as a nation that the next two years see all of that on your list.

It is *that crucial* we get rid of this guy IMO.

The leader of the free world cannot be a con artist.
2888  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics on: January 14, 2011, 02:48:52 PM
"Right now no one knows how far he will go with his head fakes, but his point in keeping power and popularity is to further implement what we call leftism, not to move to the middle"

Doug,

The phoney one ain't fooling me or you or anyone else on this board except maybe JDN ( grin), but it is the swing voters who I worry will fall for the coordinate effort between Bamster's new people (Daley - a banker no less) and the jornolists in the media who will try and make  them beleive he is a centrist, he is a moderate and anything else is a myth made up by the looney right.

There were a lot of people cheering for him the other night.  They can't all be Democrat teachers who make up most of the Dem conventions.  Did you notice the lower lip being pushed up frequently?  Clinton did that all the time to con us into thinking he really was feeling pain in his gut.  There are obviously enough voters who are that stupid.
2889  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Dems and the journOlist strategy on: January 14, 2011, 12:29:30 PM
Watch for the jornOlist talking points to include this Dem response to the REp efforts to repeal Health Care.

The Dems and their media minions will be all out claiming the Repubs are trying to take patients "rights" away:

***Greg Sargent writes in the Washington Post  (1/14) The Plum Line, "At a House Dem leadership meeting last week, Dem leaders decided that" The Patient's Rights Repeal Act "is the phrase they will officially use to brand the House GOP's push to repeal health reform, aides tell me." Sergeant adds, "With House Republicans set to press forward with repeal next week, the idea behind the Dem talking point is to emphasize what repeal would take away from you -- and to position the plight of the patient in the center of this battle." Meanwhile, "Dems are gearing up for a major campaign against repeal, in hopes that it will give them another crack at selling the American public on the law by highlighting its most popular provisions and arguing that repeal would do away with them."
***
2890  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics on: January 14, 2011, 10:40:43 AM
I caught Karl Rove being interviewed this am on Fox being asked (by that fox - what is her pretty name again?) about Bamster's being advised and obviously going to the middle.
I think Rove is in denial about it.  He said it is still a question as to whether the Bamster's heart is in it or not.
The answer is of course it isn't.  But his advisors are obviously winning the argument.  Evidence in support of this conclusion include the triangualtion speech at the memorial ceremony, the "centrist" (Rove's own description for) Daley for WH chief of staff, the deal with Republicans over the taxes etc.

This is exactly what I feared.  Bamster will pretend he is a moderate, pretend he loves American ("be all we can be"), pretend he is standing for us. The "swingers" who always decide elections in the national races will forget or not care what he did to us the first two years and will fawn all over him as though he was like this all along.  Clinton proved that is what happens.  It is a joke that swingers who cannot make up their minds what they want are the ones who decide our futures but that is the case.

Time will tell for sure but I guess Krauthammer is right that Bamster having just made it *more likely he will win* re election in 12 than not.  Though I completely disagree with him that it is because he is so smart.  He is just the front man reading the scripts.  It is the advisors around him, particularly the Clintinites who have been so adept at this.  And the MSM loves it.

Why the ONE walked into the room and she opened her eyes for the first time - give me a break.
2891  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics on: January 13, 2011, 06:04:38 PM
Doug,

I sure hope you are right.
I made the mistake of turning on MSNBC last night and I heard someone mention that Presidents giving memorial speeches goes back to Gettysburg!  Only could MSLSD compare a couple of people killed by a crazy man to Gettysburg.   And yeah right Bamster's reading of a script, for what, a half hour is the same as Lincoln's hand and self  written few minute speech done to honor war dead, and explain the reason for a war is even remotely comparable.

The service became a political rally when Obama came in.
2892  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics on: January 13, 2011, 02:01:49 PM
"BTW, I think President Obama gave a fine speech at the memorial last night"

Did you notice he repeatedly did the lower lip thing like Clinton?  I never saw Obama do that before.  It was staged to portray emotion.

He tried to be more postive about America like Reagan yet show emotion like Clinton.

I suspect this means he is going to do the triangulation thing like Clinton and pretend he is more like one of us (in order to change us).

This worked quite well for Clinton whose approval ratings rose overnight and never went back down.

If I am right and Obama does this he too will win over the swingers and his numbers will likewise rise well above 50%.

Therefore unless the Republicans can come up with a winner who doesn't look like a dead fish and do promotional Brittany Spears and Viagra commercials like the respectable but very uncharismatic guy in '96 - we are looking at 4 more years of the Bama.
2893  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics on: January 11, 2011, 09:59:11 AM
GM, I agree.  What amazes me is how the MSM makes it sound like the anger on the right is all being driven and stoked by talk radio and Fox, etc.
Quite the contrary.  I don't think many who listen to these shows are really that influenced.  I think most of the listeners are *already* the choir.  They are listening because they already have come to the same conclusions and we all tend to seek those who validate our views.

For example,  I have come to the conclusion that Bamster does not inherently like whites, Jews, or America.  I did not come to this conclusion after listening to talk radio.  I listen to talk radio because they have concluded the same and I listen to vent.  The left strategy is to belittle and deligitamize this frustration every way possible.  They decrie that it is "fringe", "hate", "bigots", "crazy" (birthers  angry), or misguided (Obama is really a moderate angry).

Even Joe Scarborough was essentially blaming Fox talk radio, Palin, Beck this AM.
I used to like that guy.  I don't know what has happened to him in his apparent quest to be seen as a moderate and fit in over there at MSNBC.
He must be having an affair with that broad.  What's her name?  The one who is the daughter of the ugliest national security advisor (to Carter- no less) we ever had in government.

I guess the only question remains is how is Bamster going to play this.  Probably his script is already written for him ala Clintonesque, "I feel your pain" and he will show "leadership" and avoid politics (let others do that) and triangulate.  The MSM will be adoring, drool and go orgasmic again, with quotes like, "this is what he ran on".

I guess I should be glad to have the President do that but frankly I am not because I know this guy is a radical dressed in sheeps clothing.

After being conned for years with Katherine's music by everyone and anyone I know a con (usually) when I see one.

Now that he doesn't have huge majorities in both houses to ram through his agenda he has ultimately been pulled kicking and mumbling towards the center by those around him who are desperately trying to keep him popular and relevant for 2012.

It is no accident the MSM made it a policy to show us how he read a biography on Reagan over his break in Hawaii.  No matter how hard they try this guy is no Reagan.
Yet the swing voters as I have pointed out are easy fodder for manipulation and persuasion and they will fall for all this as they always do.  You can fool some of the people all of the time.
2894  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / tu quo quo on: January 10, 2011, 03:38:03 PM
From Michelle Malkin's piece and explanation of "tu quo quo":

Tu quoque
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about the logical fallacy. For the historical quotation "Tu quoque, Brute, fili mi", see Et tu, Brute?. For the play by John Cooke, see Greene's Tu Quoque.
 
A case of Tu quoque: "By Jove, what extraordinary headgear you women do wear!"—ironic reference in PunchTu quoque (pronounced /tuːˈkwoʊkweː/ [1]), or the appeal to hypocrisy, is a kind of logical fallacy. It is a Latin term for "you, too" or "you, also". A tu quoque argument attempts to discredit the opponent's position by asserting his failure to act consistently in accordance with that position; it attempts to show that a criticism or objection applies equally to the person making it. This dismisses someone's viewpoint on an issue on the argument that the person is inconsistent in that very thing.[2] It is considered an ad hominem argument, since it focuses on the party itself, rather than its positions.[3]

Contents [hide]
1 Illegitimate use
1.1 You-too version
1.1.1 Legal aspects
1.2 Inconsistency version
2 See also
3 References
 

[edit] Illegitimate use
In many cases tu quoque arguments are used in a logically fallacious way, to draw a conclusion which is not supported by the premises of the argument.

[edit] You-too version
This form of the argument is as follows:

A makes criticism P.
A is also guilty of P.
Therefore, P is dismissed.
Examples:

 :"He cannot accuse me of libel because he was just successfully sued for libel."
Person 1: It should be illegal to make clothing out of animals.
Person 2: But, you are wearing a leather jacket.
Person 1: Never smoke cigarettes. It is a terrible addiction.
Person 2: I just saw you smoking a few minutes ago.
[edit] Legal aspects
In common law, a legal maxim exists stating a person cannot approach the courts of equity with unclean hands. If there is a nexus between the applicant's wrongful act and the rights he wishes to enforce, the court may not grant the applicant's request. To illustrate, if a landlord breaches a term in a tenancy agreement and then issues an eviction notice to the tenant for the tenant's breach of a term in the tenancy agreement, the law might permit the tenant to stay because of the landlord's own breach of the tenancy agreement.

This argument has been unsuccessfully used before the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in several cases when the accused tried to justify their crimes by insisting that the opposing side had also committed such crimes. However, the argument tu quoque, from the basis of international humanitarian law is completely irrelevant, as the ICTY has stated in these cases.[4][5][6][7]

Historically, however, at the Nuremberg trial of Karl Dönitz tu quoque was accepted not as a defense to the crime itself, or to the prosecution proceedings, but as a defense only to punishment.[8] Otto Skorzeny and officers of Panzer Brigade 150 successfully used tu quoque evidence at the Dachau trials to be acquitted of violating the laws of war by using American uniforms to infiltrate Allied lines in the false flag Operation Greif in the Battle of the Bulge.

[edit] Inconsistency version
This form of the argument is as follows:

A makes claim P.
A has also made past claims which are inconsistent with P.
Therefore, P is false.
This is a logical fallacy because the conclusion that P is false does not follow from the premises; even if A has made past claims which are inconsistent with P, it does not necessarily prove that P is either true or false.

Examples:

"You say aircraft are able to fly because of the laws of physics, but this is false because twenty years ago you also said aircraft fly because of magic."
Senator Smith: It is important that we all vote for this legislation.
Senator Jones: You just said last week that voting for it was a bad idea.
[edit] See also
Pot calling the kettle black
And you are lynching Negroes
Unclean hands
[edit] References
^ Random House Dictionary
^ Bluedorn, Nathaniel (2002, 2003). The Fallacy Detective. pp. 54. ISBN 0-9745315-0-2. 
^ Logical Fallacy: Tu Quoque
^ Judgment of the Trial Chamber in Case Kupreškić et al.. (January 2000), para. 765
^ Judgment of the Trial Chamber in Case Kunarac et al.. (February 2001), para. 580
^ Judgment of the Appeals Chamber in Case Kunarac et al.. (January 2002), para. 87.
^ Judgment of the Trial Chamber in Case Limaj et al. (November 2005), para. 193
^ Yee, Sienho (2004), "The Tu Quoque Argument as a defence to International Crimes, Prosecution, or Punishment", Chinese Journal of International Law, 3, p. 87-133.
[hide]v · d · eFallacies of relevance
 
General Absurdity · Accident · Ad nauseam · Argument from ignorance · Argument from silence · Argument to moderation · Argumentum ad populum · Base rate · Compound question · Evidence of absence · Invincible ignorance · Loaded question · Moralistic · Naturalistic · Non sequitur · Proof by assertion · Irrelevant conclusion · Special pleading · Straw man · Two wrongs make a right
 
Appeals to emotion Fear · Flattery · Nature · Novelty · Pity · Ridicule · Children's interests · Invented Here · Island mentality · Not Invented Here · Repugnance · Spite
 
Genetic fallacies Ad feminam · Ad hominem (Ad hominem tu quoque) · Appeal to accomplishment · Appeal to authority · Appeal to etymology · Appeal to motive · Appeal to novelty · Appeal to poverty · Appeals to psychology · Appeal to the stone · Appeal to tradition · Appeal to wealth · Association · Bulverism · Chronological snobbery · Ipse dixit (Ipse-dixitism) · Poisoning the well · Pro hominem · Reductio ad Hitlerum
 
Appeals to consequences Appeal to force · Wishful thinking
 
2895  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Political Rants & interesting thought pieces on: January 10, 2011, 02:15:40 PM
"Are we to wonder why an angry, grassroots Tea Party spread -- or why it was instantly derided by our experts and technocrats as ill-informed or worse?"

Yet according to the media we should all stop our angry rhetoric, we should all hold hands and calm discussions,  "conversations" (using the term from the shameless Spitzer), all the while we are getting screwed from here to kingdom-come from the left and their elites, they steal our money, bribe voters with it, talk our country down here and abroad, fail to protect our boarders, unilaterally decide to alter our culture, our norms, our way of life, give our hard earned achievements away, and on and on.

That is why I say on the other thread that the right will not be silenced and that the responsibility for murders rests with the guy who commited them and why our politicians many of whom are certainly corrupt are owed no more special privileges.  Talk radio, Sarah Palin, Fox, Beck, and even Olberman bare no responsibility for the crimes.  End of story.

And like I pointed out my opinion on the other thread how brave some politicians are in Mexico who really do risk their lives fighting crime and refuse bribes can you imagine our politicians doing the same here?  Why they take bribes without their lives at stake here.

2896  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Gender, Gay, Lesbian on: January 10, 2011, 12:40:45 PM
Not surprising.

This is the next step after gay marriage in the ascendancy of the gay lifestyle as a choice and simply an alternative and just as normal as heterosexual marriage, child rearing, etc.

I mean we already have the rich gay celebs having children and becoming parents.  Elton John, the lesbian comedian (what's her name).

The MSM *celebrates* this as part of its progressive agenda.

Anyone opposed, is a homophobe, needs couseling, is mean spirited, a bigot and the rest.

It used to be gays told us what they do in the bedroom is none of anyone else's business.  I agree.  But now they tell us it is everyone's business.
2897  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics on: January 10, 2011, 12:13:50 PM
Olberman worked on his usual day off over the weekend to immediately turn this into a rant against the evil right.

The fact that the killer appears to have had more politically in common with *his* opinions will of course be ignored.  I don't suppose he will get on the air and state he should tone down *his* rhetoric or of course try to pin the blame on himself.

A lot of people are angry in this country.  And with good reason.  Those to the right of the spectrum will not be silenced.

Like Doug posted, lets try, convict, and execute this murderer the one and only one responsible (as far as we know at this point) for murder.


2898  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics on: January 10, 2011, 10:33:08 AM
"We (who survive) will live our lives in and out of metal detectors and cameras with emptied water bottles because of nutjobs like this one."

And now the calls from our brave elected officials to pass more laws for their protection.

We don't need any more laws.  It is reasonable for major security for the President but we have enough laws already for them IMO.

Last night on 60 minutes was the segment on the mayor of Santiago, Mexico who was kidnapped and killed because he refused to play ball with the local drug terrorists.
Now there is a hero!   Can you imagine any of our brave lawmakers in this country truly risking their lives to fight drug terror?  All the brave Mexicans who are trying to fight the terror they live with everyday because of the cowards and punks in this country who sell and do drugs.

Real courage is choosing between "silver and lead" as they are forced to do in Mexico.

2899  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politically (In)correct on: January 07, 2011, 03:12:56 PM
The interesting "Story of US" on cable pointed out many of the railroad crews were Irish.   They were apparently drinking while working - even when they were using dynamite to blast through rock to lay the tracks.

Some of them apparently wished they had been holding flowers after the many reported accidents including blowing themselves to bits.  I thought of the above famous photo when I heard this.  Hell they didn't need Al Quaida.

2900  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / what was political correct is now political incorrect on: January 07, 2011, 02:58:10 PM
I never forgot how my sixth grade teacher showed us a watered down picture of the following *true* picture in our history book.  In the book the picture shows the guys on the trains waving bouqettes of flowers!  The teacher told us that this was BS (He probably said it more nicely) and in the real picture the guys were holding whiskey bottles.  He was absolutely correct.  When the East and West transAmerica railroad line was finished these guys (many were Irish I understand) were getting sloshed on whiskey not throwing flowers at each other.  But when I was in sixth grade in the sixties political correctness would not allow school grade children to see the "great men of the American West" drinking booze - I suppose.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e4/1869-Golden_Spike.jpg
Pages: 1 ... 56 57 [58] 59 60 ... 91
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!