If it came down to it, I'd vote for Ron Paul over Hillary, and I'm not a Ron Paul fan. I think he could do less harm to the country in four years than Hillary could. And, he would probably appoint strict constructionists to the Supreme Court, whereas Hillary would certainly appoint Ginsburg type socialists. Whether or not he could get them confirmed is another question.
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
Anyone remember the article I linked yesterday? The Capitol Architect (acting) refuses to put inscriptions containing the word "God" on certificates accompanying flags flown over the U.S. Capitol. I'm sure, however, that if someone wanted to pledge allegience to Allah, it would be fine.
Here is Pelosi's response:
Asked about the issue today at a press luncheon, Pelosi said the
architect's policy was adopted because "people were asking for
statements that not only were religious, beyond using the word God, but
political as well." She said the official policy is to send a
certificate that lists nothing beyond the date the flag flew over the
Capitol and the name of its recipient. She said that members of
Congress who request flags on behalf of constituents can "add whatever
they wish" to the certificates, "whether it is a political statement or
a religious statement."
So, not only does she hate the beliefs that this country was founded on, she is also passing the buck. She has made a unilateral decision changing what I'm sure was a long-standing policy that is totally in conflict with the free-speech and freedom of religion rights that they claim to defend and believe in.
"She said the official policy is to send a certificate "that lists nothing beyond the date the flag flew over the Capitol and the name of its recipient."
I guess times have changed since I worked on the Hill and actually processed these requests for constituents. When I was there, constituents could request certificates indicating for whom, when, and why they wanted the flag flown. From my recollection they (meaning the office of the Architect) would put pretty much whatever somebody wanted on the certificate (within reason, obviously). I even got a few myself...I requested one flown for my dad's birthday, and one for my brother's wedding. We used to do them all the time for Eagle Scout awards and various veterans groups in honor of various people and events. Including those details made the occasion personal and special and went well beyond name and date.
It saddens me that a place where I am so proud to have worked is slowly becoming unrecognizable, much like the rest of this country.
As with Sandy Bugler, Chris is an Un-Paid consultant to the Hillary Campaign.....
Chris was trying to be the BIG STORY again, and looked really "pained" asking a Question and having to shut up and listen....But fear of being asked to step "outside" again by a political fighter, he kept it somewhat under control.
Oil for War, or vise versa, was / is / has been a tired Democratic talking point...it was tried, and it is tired.
Does being "Late" to a Presidential race mean.......you're NOT in the Race ?
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
"Our people have shed more blood for the liberty and freedom of other peoples...than all the other countries put together. And I don't feel any need to apologize for the United States of America" - Fred Thompson
Leon can't answer that question becasue the extent of what he knows about it is the MSM talking points he's been fed. Pretty much, "Rush is bad" is the extent of his understanding on the topic.
At the moment, he is feverishly cutting and pasting anything he can find on the internet into what he thinks will be a coherent reply.
It wont be of course...
Jimbo says - "There is a fine line between freedom of speech and treason"
Anybody else think Fred Thompson needs a visit from the Queer Eye guys?
Come on!!??!!
What has happened to Thompson in the last couple months? He looks sickly. While looks should not be the primary credential for electing someone into the White House, they should look as if they aren't in need of a mega B-12 shot. And, for an actor, he sure doesn't seem very easily spoken when answering a question. I really had high hopes for Thompson, but he seems to need a jump ...
Jimbo, if you're looking at a photo of Hillary's backside, blind would be a blessing. Same, same with Hillary's front, Nancy Pelosi, Jack Murtha, Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid, Helen Thomas, Janet Reno, Rosie, O'Donnell, Chris Matthews, etc.
And, then, listening to the Hillary shriek or her cackle of pseudohumor, deafness might also be a blessing.
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
Second, I made a point of saying "looks"should not be the deciding factor in electing someone. And I am not saying I wouldn't vote for him.
However, when you are standing in a field of many you should look more like a rose with some bloom left on it, for pete's sake. I blame whoever is responsible for making sure Fred's appearance is ready for prime time ... and the fact that he's been in the Hollywood world of make-up and appearance techniques makes it even more obvious someone "handling" him and his campaign is missing the boat here.
Jimbo made a good point. The Presidency ages ya. I am wondering why Fred has seemed to have lost that scowling eagle look he had of just a couple months ago. I want to see THAT Fred standing up there, and, more importantly, sounding stronger when he answers questions.
Unfortunately, a reality of TV politics, previously NOT a problem for Presidential elections. Name a really Fat President...and it will be prior to 1940 and Howdy Doody Time.
But, is the Age of the TV image over ? to be replaced by EVEN MORE Video Images on the WWW ?
Your Cell phone is fast becoming the Super 8 camera of yester year. Silcone face lifts, boob lifts, and Rhinoplasty, won't help Hillary....She needs the Hippo Suction thingie.
Fred's Great Image Hope, is standing Next to his Wife for Photo Ops.
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
and I sure wish someone in America would pick it up and send it round and round and round again!
My hero is the parent who started the whole thing - and imagine someone in our court system agreeing with a common fellow that he has the right to deny teachers the right to indoctrinate his children with falsehoods!
MR. MATTHEWS: Okay. Same question -- deadline, gentlemen, it's so important. Congressman Paul, do you believe the president needs authorization of Congress to attack strategic targets in Iran, nuclear facilities?
REP. PAUL: Absolutely. This idea of going and talking to attorneys totally baffles me. Why don't we just open up the Constitution and read it? You're not allowed to go to war without a declaration of war.
Now, as far as fleeting enemies go, yes, if there's an imminent attack on us, we'd never had that happen in 220 years. The thought that the Iranians could pose an imminent attack on the United States is preposterous. There's no way. This is just -- This is just war propaganda, continual war propaganda, preparing this nation to go to war and spread this war, not only in Iraq but into Iran, unconstitutionally. It is a road to disaster for us as a nation. It's a road to our financial disaster if we don't read the Constitution once in a while.
MR. GIULIANI: It really depends on exigency of the circumstances and how legitimate it is that it really is an exigent circumstance. It's desirable. It's safer to go to Congress, get approval from Congress. If you're really dealing with exigent circumstance, then the president has to act in the best interests of the country.
And the point -- I think it was Congressman Paul -- made before, that we've never had an imminent attack -- I don't know where he was on September 11th. (Laughter.)
REP. PAUL: That was no country. (Applause.) That was 19 thugs. It has nothing to do with a country.
MR. GIULIANI: And there have been -- and since September -- well, I think it was kind of organized in Afghanistan and Pakistan. And if we had known about it, maybe hitting a target there quickly might have helped prevent it.
In any event, we've had 23 plots since September 11th where Islamic terrorists are planning to kill Americans, that we've had to stop. So imminent attack is a possibility and we should be ready for it.
THE RUDY GETS A BIG OLE SHACKITY SKACK SHACK SHACK WITH A BIG SERIES OF SECONDARIES.....
You've missed it with Iran. They could pose an imminent threat to the United States, and probably would if they knew that the world as they knew it wouldn't crumble around them in an instant. Every time one of our ships passes through the Strait of Hormuz the threat is VERY imminent. So, he may have been right about 19 thugs, but he was quite wrong about the imminent Iranian threat.
Problem with Islamic fascists is that they usually do not care about the world situation as much, or see it in the same light we do. (Their valued Centers of Gravity are different than what we perceive them to be)
After all, if your goal is "the return of hidden Mahdi" who is supposedly down a well and will not return until Israel and the US are destroyed ala the return of the Caliphate, and this occurs regardless of destruction of Iran as a state, then "Crumbling" is immaterial.
But do agree that they can serve as a threat anywhere, anytime.
What about Pearl Harbor, wasnt that an attack within the last 220 years? For that matter the Alamo too. How many more "thugs" would be attacking us if we had not pursued them over there?
Perhaps most telling about the real Ron Paul is his petulant attitude toward supporting the eventual Republican nominee.
I believe that is because he is simply using the Republican platform to gain name recognition and a whiff of respectability which he is not availed as a libertarian.
When he eventually folds his standard following the second primary, he will retreat to the Libertarian lines and continue his fight from there with increased funding, name recognition, and credibility.
I agree that Ron Paul is using the Republican debates in an attempt to increase name recognition. His admission that he would not support the eventual Republican nominee is proof that running as a "Republican" is a convenient lie....and I think most libertarians understand that.
The other thing about Ron Paul that elicits the ewww factor is the abundance of extremist goofballs who support him. (Not necessarily speaking of you, sarky)
Concur on the "Ewwww" factor. What I do not think the libertarians realize is that if he continues with this course, he will taint what has been a marginal party. They will be known as "That group who has to hide amongst the respectable."
I've conflated no such thing, and I was pleasantly surprised by the big money, which got media respect rather suddenly, whether you like it or not.
I don't need to promise that, he already did, and the clueless were not listening. Again.
Will you admit the word "when" looks even more clueless than you usually look, which is "considerably"?
I will hide no such thing. I'm proud, actually, of our performance so far in the face of such hate and bias. I feel like Reagan did about libertarians, instead of like the whining losers, so you'll just have to deal with it.
JMR
Paul seems to be caught up in an old 20th century paradigm that wars are fought between states alone.
In a comment he made regarding Irans possession of nuclear capability in a debate several months ago, he tried to equivocate the Cold war with a future conflict with Iran. In his comments he stated he believed we could hold Iran in check due to the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) as we had the Soviets until their economy gave out.
He obviously misses the fact that wars are no longer as clean in the 21st Century.
"IF" Iran were to serreptitiously provide a terrorist group from, let us say Ulan Bator Mongolia a low yield nuclear weapon for delivery into San Francisco Harbor and subsequent detonation, what would be the MAD concept if we are not able to adequately determine who provided it?
Are we going to retaliate against the Ukraine, Russia, North Korea, China, France, Pakistan, India, South Africa, Israel, and Great Britain because they all have the requisite capability?
Or should we solely limit our options to attacks in Ulan Bator?
He, and by extension his philosophy are obviously out of the league in discussing these issues.
I mock. What can I say? If you want a guaranteed reply, as I've said dozens of times, you PM me and your butt's gonna get that reply. If you whine like a little girl publicly instead, I'll mock you instead of answering you respectfully. It's a pattern. Learn from it.
JMR
Excellent, reply to this. In your own words please....
Paul seems to be caught up in an old 20th century paradigm that wars are fought between states alone.
In a comment he made regarding Irans possession of nuclear capability in a debate several months ago, he tried to equivocate the Cold war with a future conflict with Iran. In his comments he stated he believed we could hold Iran in check due to the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) as we had the Soviets until their economy gave out.
He obviously misses the fact that wars are no longer as clean in the 21st Century.
"IF" Iran were to serreptitiously provide a terrorist group from, let us say Ulan Bator Mongolia a low yield nuclear weapon for delivery into San Francisco Harbor and subsequent detonation, what would be the MAD concept if we are not able to adequately determine who provided it?
Are we going to retaliate against the Ukraine, Russia, North Korea, China, France, Pakistan, India, South Africa, Israel, and Great Britain because they all have the requisite capability?
Or should we solely limit our options to attacks in Ulan Bator?
He, and by extension his philosophy are obviously out of the league in discussing these issues.
And I note a lack of FAQ-reading from you, so we're even. Again. You've never seen me run from a debate with you, and it still hasn't happened, you just lack substance because of your avowed refusal to click on those evil link things. Again.
JMR
Michelle Malkin has a very good dust up on the SCHIP debate, the democrats' incurable addiction to putting up "poster children" for their cause(s), and the way questioning the facts about those who are used is spun as mean and intrusive ...
But that, like the fact that we're never hearing anything on health care issues from the ONLY Doctor on stage (and no, that doesn't disqualify other candidates from speaking on health care issues at all; it's simply a measure of "do you really believe they'd do this to Dr. Dean????" media bias, like it or not) I'll probably be told this "is not bias."
JMR
Would love to hear the outcry and demands and condemnations of the world media and human rights groups and the International Red Cross AND the insignificant U.N. on this ... That is if they can take their eyes off the correct portion-size of lemon/almond chicken at Gitmo.
Congress sent a serious wrist-slap to the UN just a couple of weeks ago. Too bad it wasn't plastered all over the news.
Two congressmen voted against it. Guess who they were...
Slow day so I watched a little C-SPAN & C-SPAN 2. What a joke our legilative system is! No quorums, when nays have many sounds over aye, the leader says ayes have it! They try & tack on amendment after amendment, when they should have had the motion ready when it gets to the floor! I wish every American could just take 1 hour of their time and watch this Fiasco, HORSE & PONY SHOW, and, well, I really don't know how to describe it! Just watch a few minutes & see what our great elected leaders are doing or, in most cases, not doing!!
the reason the mooslums can't go head-to-head with the US military - when they try they get their camels kicked. They learned from history, it's easier being a terrorist. (If only they would pre-test, en masse, their suicide missions in their hovels/caves)
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dadV
The Battle of Tours definatly is a very important battle in world history, though probably not as significant as the Battle of LA. Europe's future would probably have been much different if the Franks had been defeated. If you are of European heritage like I am, then your ancestors' lives would have been much different. It's amazing to think about the what if's? of important battles. I have a lot of fun thinking about the significance of the Battle of Hastings. So much future history was changed by that battle that it is mind boggling.
CSM- Pelosi: For 4 months anti-war protesters have been sitting outside my home, hanging their clothes from the trees, putting couches, sofas, chairs, permanent living facilities on my front sidewalk...
What are the chances you are going to hear about a British judge's findings of fact regarding "An Inconvenient Truth:"
In order for the film to be shown, the Government must first amend their Guidance Notes to Teachers to make clear that 1.) The Film is a political work and promotes only one side of the argument. 2.) If teachers present the Film without making this plain they may be in breach of section 406 of the Education Act 1996 and guilty of political indoctrination. 3.) Eleven inaccuracies have to be specifically drawn to the attention of school children.
The inaccuracies are:
* The film claims that melting snows on Mount Kilimanjaro evidence global warming. The Government’s expert was forced to concede that this is not correct.
* The film suggests that evidence from ice cores proves that rising CO2 causes temperature increases over 650,000 years. The Court found that the film was misleading: over that period the rises in CO2 lagged behind the temperature rises by 800-2000 years.
* The film uses emotive images of Hurricane Katrina and suggests that this has been caused by global warming. The Government’s expert had to accept that it was “not possible” to attribute one-off events to global warming.
* The film shows the drying up of Lake Chad and claims that this was caused by global warming. The Government’s expert had to accept that this was not the case.
* The film claims that a study showed that polar bears had drowned due to disappearing arctic ice. It turned out that Mr Gore had misread the study: in fact four polar bears drowned and this was because of a particularly violent storm.
* The film threatens that global warming could stop the Gulf Stream throwing Europe into an ice age: the Claimant’s evidence was that this was a scientific impossibility.
* The film blames global warming for species losses including coral reef bleaching. The Government could not find any evidence to support this claim.
* The film suggests that the Greenland ice covering could melt causing sea levels to rise dangerously. The evidence is that Greenland will not melt for millennia.
* The film suggests that the Antarctic ice covering is melting, the evidence was that it is in fact increasing.
* The film suggests that sea levels could rise by 7m causing the displacement of millions of people. In fact the evidence is that sea levels are expected to rise by about 40cm over the next hundred years and that there is no such threat of massive migration.
* The film claims that rising sea levels has caused the evacuation of certain Pacific islands to New Zealand. The Government are unable to substantiate this and the Court observed that this appears to be a false claim.
This is great. In other words, in order for a school to show this film, it must come with the warning that global warming is a political ploy and that Al Gore is a liar (and apparently fails at reading comprehension). What a victory for honest debate!
Anybody going to listen to Christopher at the top of the hour or whenever he comes on in your homes to see how much he pats himself on the back?
I am just curious as heck ...plus I am sure it will make me yell at the television and get angry because he is a leftist and knows nothing but how to lie most of the time...lol.
By the way just heard the response again to Christopher from Thompson...
Maria gave a great laugh after that back and forth...I loved it myself, sure took Christopher by surprise did it not...there was a long pause for a yapping leftist know-it-all like Christopher before he got to the next question...
The reason unions are losing membership, I believe, is directly due to immigrant labor.
The immigrants may be illegal but as long as they dont commit crimes and pay taxes, they have my blessing. Those who do not are another story. They should be able to pay taxes without fear of being deported, even if they are illegal.
We should only pay taxes to keep immigrant scientists and others whose intelligence is uncommonly high, here in the US.
They are here illegally and you give them your blessing?
What other criminals get your "blessing"?
v
btw: this string started on the "Debate" blog, I couldn't let this one go unanswered.
Luckily I saved the portion of the Limbaugh thread that the powers-that-be deleted. At least, I THINK it was the powers-that-be that did the deleting. Leon was exposed as the fraud he is.
I don't understand it, that thread has been gutted and I thought there was some good stuff in there. It's just too bad the Leons of the world ruin the fun for everyone.
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it."MM says...
If this is true, Liz will come out and be so understanding that John was under so much pressure from all the nasty media attention during this campaign ... and, of course, her cancer ... And, mostly, poor John was vexed when Ann questioned his manhood by (not) calling him a ... well ... you know ... the other F word ...
Humans originally existed as members of small bands of nomadic hunters/gatherers. They lived on deer in the mountains during the summer and would go to the coast and live on fish and lobster in the winter.
The two most important events in all of history were the invention of beer and the invention of the wheel. The wheel was invented to get man to the beer. These were the foundation of modern civilization and together were the catalyst for the splitting of humanity into two distinct subgroups:
1. Liberals
2. Conservatives
Once beer was discovered, it required grain and that was the beginning of agriculture. Neither the glass bottle nor aluminum can were invented yet, so while our early humans were sitting around waiting for them to be invented, they just stayed close to the brewery. That's how villages were formed.
Some men spent their days tracking and killing animals to B-B-Q at night while they were drinking beer. This was the beginning of what is known as the Conservative movement.
Other men who were weaker and less skilled at hunting learned to live off the conservatives by showing up for the nightly B-B-Q's and doing the sewing, fetching, and hairdressing. This was the beginning of the Liberal movement.
Some of these liberal men eventually evolved into women. The rest became known as girlie-men. Some noteworthy liberal achievements include the domestication of cats, the invention of group therapy, group hugs, and the concept of Democratic voting to decide how to divide the meat and beer that conservatives provided.
Over the years Conservatives came to be symbolized by the largest, most powerful land animal on earth, the elephant. Liberals are symbolized by the jackass.
Modern liberals like imported beer (with lime added), but most prefer white wine or imported bottled water. They eat raw fish but like their beef well done. Sushi, tofu, and French food are standard liberal fare.
Another interesting evolutionary side note: most of their women have higher testosterone levels than their men. Most social workers, personal injury attorneys, journalists, dreamers in Hollywood and group therapists are liberals. Liberals invented the designated hitter rule because it wasn't fair to make the pitcher also bat.
Conservatives drink domestic beer. They eat red meat and still provide for their women. Conservatives are big-game hunters, rodeo cowboys, lumberjacks, construction workers, firemen, medical doctors, police officers, corporate executives, athletes, Piping Designers, Marines, and generally anyone who works productively. Conservatives who own companies hire other conservatives who want to work for a living.
Liberals produce little or nothing. They like to govern the producers and decide what to do with the production. Liberals believe Europeans are more enlightened than Americans. That is why most of the liberals remained in Europe when conservatives were coming to America. They crept in after the Wild West was tamed and created a business of trying to get more for nothing.
Here ends today's lesson in world history: It should be noted that a Liberal may have a momentary urge to angrily respond to the above before forwarding it. A Conservative will simply laugh and be so convinced of the absolute truth of this history that it will be forwarded immediately to other true believers and to more liberals just to piss them off
When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.-Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference.
When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.-Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
here's an idea
October 10, 2007 - 09:00 ET by RoussePsst ... John Cornyn for President ... pass it along.
Sounds good...
October 10, 2007 - 09:05 ET by Prester John...to me.
Or...
October 10, 2007 - 09:10 ET by AtillaKahunaMike Huckabee
Or, Duncan Hunter. I'm
October 10, 2007 - 11:51 ET by MikeBOr, Duncan Hunter. I'm liking him more and more.
If it came down to it, I'd vote for Ron Paul over Hillary, and I'm not a Ron Paul fan. I think he could do less harm to the country in four years than Hillary could. And, he would probably appoint strict constructionists to the Supreme Court, whereas Hillary would certainly appoint Ginsburg type socialists. Whether or not he could get them confirmed is another question.
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
Pelosi and Democrats show more of their true colors....
October 10, 2007 - 09:08 ET by AtillaKahunaAnyone remember the article I linked yesterday? The Capitol Architect (acting) refuses to put inscriptions containing the word "God" on certificates accompanying flags flown over the U.S. Capitol. I'm sure, however, that if someone wanted to pledge allegience to Allah, it would be fine.
Here is Pelosi's response:
So, not only does she hate the beliefs that this country was founded on, she is also passing the buck. She has made a unilateral decision changing what I'm sure was a long-standing policy that is totally in conflict with the free-speech and freedom of religion rights that they claim to defend and believe in.
Hypocrit.
Read the full article at http://blog.clevelan...
Kahuna
"She said the official
October 10, 2007 - 09:51 ET by NCConservative"She said the official policy is to send a certificate "that lists nothing beyond the date the flag flew over the Capitol and the name of its recipient."
I guess times have changed since I worked on the Hill and actually processed these requests for constituents. When I was there, constituents could request certificates indicating for whom, when, and why they wanted the flag flown. From my recollection they (meaning the office of the Architect) would put pretty much whatever somebody wanted on the certificate (within reason, obviously). I even got a few myself...I requested one flown for my dad's birthday, and one for my brother's wedding. We used to do them all the time for Eagle Scout awards and various veterans groups in honor of various people and events. Including those details made the occasion personal and special and went well beyond name and date.
It saddens me that a place where I am so proud to have worked is slowly becoming unrecognizable, much like the rest of this country.
Chriss Matthead was a "Phoney Host"..
October 10, 2007 - 09:11 ET by JayTeeAs with Sandy Bugler, Chris is an Un-Paid consultant to the Hillary Campaign.....
Chris was trying to be the BIG STORY again, and looked really "pained" asking a Question and having to shut up and listen....But fear of being asked to step "outside" again by a political fighter, he kept it somewhat under control.
Oil for War, or vise versa, was / is / has been a tired Democratic talking point...it was tried, and it is tired.
Does being "Late" to a Presidential race mean.......you're NOT in the Race ?
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
Sector locks
October 10, 2007 - 09:13 ET by JDWSen Clinton;
How many woman:
JDW
Sen Clinton: Founder of Media Matters
JDW -
October 10, 2007 - 09:17 ET by drillanwr#4
and
#5 (Wish she would fall off the face of the Earth ... and take her Crime Family with her)
What drill said
October 10, 2007 - 15:00 ET by BlondeDavid Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Mrs Clinton
October 10, 2007 - 11:05 ET by Chaitealover# 4.
"Our people have shed more blood for the liberty and freedom of other peoples...than all the other countries put together. And I don't feel any need to apologize for the United States of America" - Fred Thompson
hey leon were the
October 10, 2007 - 09:14 ET by TruthMongerhey leon were the soldiers phony or not?
thought so...
so why the lying? really - what is it with you people?
A service of the new NB respect police
Leon can't answer that
October 10, 2007 - 09:20 ET by JimboLeon can't answer that question becasue the extent of what he knows about it is the MSM talking points he's been fed. Pretty much, "Rush is bad" is the extent of his understanding on the topic.
At the moment, he is feverishly cutting and pasting anything he can find on the internet into what he thinks will be a coherent reply.
It wont be of course...
Jimbo says - "There is a fine line between freedom of speech and treason"
i just created a forum on
October 10, 2007 - 09:22 ET by TruthMongeri just created a forum on it
http://newsbusters.org/forums/topic-discussion/why-lying-leon-16246
Here's the stolen valor page:
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/waw/press/2007/sep/operationstolenvalor.html
A service of the new NB respect police
How dare Rush Limbaugh
October 10, 2007 - 10:07 ET by Hero SquadHow dare Rush Limbaugh accurately portray this man as a phony soldier! Such honesty and accuracy cannot be tolerated by today's MSM and the left.
- Hero Squad *
*****
* - Hero Squad is not an actual hero deserving of any medals or military benefits.
not only do libs always lie
October 10, 2007 - 10:18 ET by TruthMongernot only do libs always lie about issues in general
they also insist that we are the liars, not them
they actually lie about us being liars
entertaining as hell for irony fans like me
A service of the new NB respect police
Truthmangler....don't send an invitation...
October 10, 2007 - 09:22 ET by JayTeeLeon isn't here yet....he's defending himself on the Rush post....leave sleeping trolls alone.
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
that's TRUTHMONGER if you
October 10, 2007 - 09:23 ET by TruthMongerthat's TRUTHMONGER if you please:)...
see above
A service of the new NB respect police
relax....monger...it's a pun intended
October 10, 2007 - 09:30 ET by JayTeeOK TM ....I'll limit my insults to Trolls
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
oh... lol:) A service
October 10, 2007 - 09:57 ET by TruthMongeroh...
lol:)
A service of the new NB respect police
Anybody else think Fred
October 10, 2007 - 09:16 ET by drillanwrAnybody else think Fred Thompson needs a visit from the Queer Eye guys?
Come on!!??!!
What has happened to Thompson in the last couple months? He looks sickly. While looks should not be the primary credential for electing someone into the White House, they should look as if they aren't in need of a mega B-12 shot. And, for an actor, he sure doesn't seem very easily spoken when answering a question. I really had high hopes for Thompson, but he seems to need a jump ...
So Drill man...post your pic here, we wanna critique U
October 10, 2007 - 09:24 ET by JayTeeFred isn't as handsome as Ronald R., and the Campaign trail is gonna be a Tough one....IF we're voting on Looks...Then Hillary come in Last.
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
Crypt Keeper
October 10, 2007 - 09:29 ET by JimboAgree, Hillary comes in last in virtually every category in my book…
BUT…
Take note of how much a sitting President ages in his first four years in office. And it seems like even more if there is a second term.
Don’t get me wrong, I like the guy, but I think Thompson will be looking like the crypt keeper after 4 or 8 years!
Jimbo says - "There is a fine line between freedom of speech and treason"
As a Guy (me) in his 60's.....
October 10, 2007 - 09:34 ET by JayTeewho can do 15 pushups, one needs to "Train" for the ravages of Time....Fred needs to acquire a personal Trainer....
you are correct, the White house run is not for people out of Shape. One would think access to a make up Artist would help...
but standing next to Mitt R., makes anyone look Ugly.....
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
You would think an actor
October 10, 2007 - 09:39 ET by balboaYou would think an actor would be more cognizant of his image.
Speaking of actors, you mean
October 10, 2007 - 09:40 ET by JimboSpeaking of actors, you mean like Hillary for example? Have you seen the width of her ass lately?
Jimbo says - "There is a fine line between freedom of speech and treason"
Jimbo....put your hands up, and step away from that Picture
October 10, 2007 - 09:47 ET by JayTeeof Hillary's behind......
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
My mother always said I
October 10, 2007 - 09:54 ET by JimboMy mother always said I would go blind, but in this case, I think she may be right!
Jimbo says - "There is a fine line between freedom of speech and treason"
Jimbo, if you're looking at
October 10, 2007 - 12:00 ET by MikeBJimbo, if you're looking at a photo of Hillary's backside, blind would be a blessing. Same, same with Hillary's front, Nancy Pelosi, Jack Murtha, Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid, Helen Thomas, Janet Reno, Rosie, O'Donnell, Chris Matthews, etc.
And, then, listening to the Hillary shriek or her cackle of pseudohumor, deafness might also be a blessing.
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
Yes, when I was speaking of
October 10, 2007 - 09:55 ET by balboaYes, when I was speaking of Fred, I actually meant Hillary and her ass.
I also called Hillary an
October 10, 2007 - 10:04 ET by JimboI also called Hillary an actor.
Jimbo says - "There is a fine line between freedom of speech and treason"
PLEASE, JIMBO!!!! No more!
October 10, 2007 - 09:56 ET by bassndudePLEASE, JIMBO!!!! No more! Please...
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
LOL – didn’t think of
October 10, 2007 - 09:39 ET by JimboLOL – didn’t think of the Romney thing but you are right on. Maybe they should stick him on the end with McCain by his side next time!
Jimbo says - "There is a fine line between freedom of speech and treason"
JayTee - First, I'm not a
October 10, 2007 - 09:48 ET by drillanwrJayTee -
First, I'm not a man.
Second, I made a point of saying "looks" should not be the deciding factor in electing someone. And I am not saying I wouldn't vote for him.
However, when you are standing in a field of many you should look more like a rose with some bloom left on it, for pete's sake. I blame whoever is responsible for making sure Fred's appearance is ready for prime time ... and the fact that he's been in the Hollywood world of make-up and appearance techniques makes it even more obvious someone "handling" him and his campaign is missing the boat here.
Jimbo made a good point. The Presidency ages ya. I am wondering why Fred has seemed to have lost that scowling eagle look he had of just a couple months ago. I want to see THAT Fred standing up there, and, more importantly, sounding stronger when he answers questions.
Sorry Drillperson..I'm from Texas...we got no female roughnecks
October 10, 2007 - 10:02 ET by JayTeeMaybe Fred's Late entry, has left him scrambling for an "Image Handler"......we could all learn from Hillary in that area.
But then again, I wouldn't dress up to appear on MSNBC, nobody's watching....
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
Is feminist Naomi Wolf available?
October 10, 2007 - 10:06 ET by RJShe did such a great job with Algore.
"Harry Reid is a complete buffoon." -Lou Dobbs
But then again, I wouldn't
October 10, 2007 - 10:14 ET by drillanwrBut then again, I wouldn't dress up to appear on MSNBC, nobody's watching....
However, compared to Chris Matthews, Fred is Adonis, and even on his worst/weakest answer makes a hell of a lot more sense than Matthews.
this is why fred and paul
October 10, 2007 - 10:02 ET by TruthMongerthis is why fred and paul cannot win the election - they look too old:(
sad but true
it is the bob dole effect
A service of the new NB respect police
TM.....Hillary's doomed then....she looks like a scorned woman
October 10, 2007 - 10:27 ET by JayTeeUnfortunately, a reality of TV politics, previously NOT a problem for Presidential elections. Name a really Fat President...and it will be prior to 1940 and Howdy Doody Time.
But, is the Age of the TV image over ? to be replaced by EVEN MORE Video Images on the WWW ?
Your Cell phone is fast becoming the Super 8 camera of yester year. Silcone face lifts, boob lifts, and Rhinoplasty, won't help Hillary....She needs the Hippo Suction thingie.
Fred's Great Image Hope, is standing Next to his Wife for Photo Ops.
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
Hilary's VOICE
October 10, 2007 - 10:32 ET by TruthMongerHilary's VOICE is the real killer for her - like nails on a black board...
A service of the new NB respect police
The British Are Getting It Right
October 10, 2007 - 09:25 ET by OldSailor88We should be proud of our Brit Brothers. They're getting it right with Chicken Little's crapumentary. Check out this article
I read it, too
October 10, 2007 - 10:13 ET by Cape Conservativeand I sure wish someone in America would pick it up and send it round and round and round again!
My hero is the parent who started the whole thing - and imagine someone in our court system agreeing with a common fellow that he has the right to deny teachers the right to indoctrinate his children with falsehoods!
"Singing Senator" Larry Craig performs with The Village People!!
October 10, 2007 - 09:40 ET by sarcasmoIt was probably inevitable, simply because jibjab exists. :)
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Woow.... Did you see the
October 10, 2007 - 09:52 ET by BDWoow.... Did you see the look that Paul gave Rudy last night after he got logically BAYONETTED.
The man can't hang in the defense/foreign affairs realm.....
Off topic, as usual, I see...
October 10, 2007 - 10:05 ET by sarcasmoBut one thing you didn't see unless you were FAST was the poll results! And you need a look at the FAQ, among other things, BD...
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
MR. MATTHEWS: Okay. Same
October 10, 2007 - 10:14 ET by BDMR. MATTHEWS: Okay. Same question -- deadline, gentlemen, it's so important. Congressman Paul, do you believe the president needs authorization of Congress to attack strategic targets in Iran, nuclear facilities?
REP. PAUL: Absolutely. This idea of going and talking to attorneys totally baffles me. Why don't we just open up the Constitution and read it? You're not allowed to go to war without a declaration of war.
Now, as far as fleeting enemies go, yes, if there's an imminent attack on us, we'd never had that happen in 220 years. The thought that the Iranians could pose an imminent attack on the United States is preposterous. There's no way. This is just -- This is just war propaganda, continual war propaganda, preparing this nation to go to war and spread this war, not only in Iraq but into Iran, unconstitutionally. It is a road to disaster for us as a nation. It's a road to our financial disaster if we don't read the Constitution once in a while.
MR. GIULIANI: It really depends on exigency of the circumstances and how legitimate it is that it really is an exigent circumstance. It's desirable. It's safer to go to Congress, get approval from Congress. If you're really dealing with exigent circumstance, then the president has to act in the best interests of the country.
And the point -- I think it was Congressman Paul -- made before, that we've never had an imminent attack -- I don't know where he was on September 11th. (Laughter.)
REP. PAUL: That was no country. (Applause.) That was 19 thugs. It has nothing to do with a country.
MR. GIULIANI: And there have been -- and since September -- well, I think it was kind of organized in Afghanistan and Pakistan. And if we had known about it, maybe hitting a target there quickly might have helped prevent it.
In any event, we've had 23 plots since September 11th where Islamic terrorists are planning to kill Americans, that we've had to stop. So imminent attack is a possibility and we should be ready for it.
THE RUDY GETS A BIG OLE SHACKITY SKACK SHACK SHACK WITH A BIG SERIES OF SECONDARIES.....
Sorry Mr. Paul but.....
October 10, 2007 - 12:05 ET by OldSailor88You've missed it with Iran. They could pose an imminent threat to the United States, and probably would if they knew that the world as they knew it wouldn't crumble around them in an instant. Every time one of our ships passes through the Strait of Hormuz the threat is VERY imminent. So, he may have been right about 19 thugs, but he was quite wrong about the imminent Iranian threat.
Problem with Islamic
October 10, 2007 - 12:49 ET by BDProblem with Islamic fascists is that they usually do not care about the world situation as much, or see it in the same light we do. (Their valued Centers of Gravity are different than what we perceive them to be)
After all, if your goal is "the return of hidden Mahdi" who is supposedly down a well and will not return until Israel and the US are destroyed ala the return of the Caliphate, and this occurs regardless of destruction of Iran as a state, then "Crumbling" is immaterial.
But do agree that they can serve as a threat anywhere, anytime.
Wonder what Paul considers an attack?
October 10, 2007 - 16:58 ET by general companyWhat about Pearl Harbor, wasnt that an attack within the last 220 years? For that matter the Alamo too. How many more "thugs" would be attacking us if we had not pursued them over there?
Ron Paul is a petulant, simplistic Republitarian
October 10, 2007 - 17:27 ET by RJ...who appeals to simplistic minds.
He's in denial about the proper place of the United States in the world.
Perhaps most telling about the real Ron Paul is his petulant attitude toward supporting the eventual Republican nominee.
"Harry Reid is a complete buffoon." -Lou Dobbs
Perhaps most telling about
October 10, 2007 - 17:32 ET by BDPerhaps most telling about the real Ron Paul is his petulant attitude toward supporting the eventual Republican nominee.
I believe that is because he is simply using the Republican platform to gain name recognition and a whiff of respectability which he is not availed as a libertarian.
When he eventually folds his standard following the second primary, he will retreat to the Libertarian lines and continue his fight from there with increased funding, name recognition, and credibility.
Great points, BD
October 10, 2007 - 17:41 ET by RJI agree that Ron Paul is using the Republican debates in an attempt to increase name recognition. His admission that he would not support the eventual Republican nominee is proof that running as a "Republican" is a convenient lie....and I think most libertarians understand that.
The other thing about Ron Paul that elicits the ewww factor is the abundance of extremist goofballs who support him. (Not necessarily speaking of you, sarky)
Concur on the "Ewwww"
October 10, 2007 - 17:50 ET by BDConcur on the "Ewwww" factor. What I do not think the libertarians realize is that if he continues with this course, he will taint what has been a marginal party. They will be known as "That group who has to hide amongst the respectable."
Hasn't happened yet, despite all your hopes...
October 12, 2007 - 06:15 ET by sarcasmoIn fact, quite the contrary, we're the ones with nothin' to hide, it seems....
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Once again you conflate the
October 12, 2007 - 09:55 ET by BDOnce again you conflate the abvility for a small band of folks to gather money, with the ability to gain respectability.
Will you promise me that Paul will NOT run as a Libertarian when he is ejected following the primairies?
Will you promise me that when he does you will NOT support him?
If you will not, you are not a Republican and need to PERMANENTLY hide the libertarian party.
Nope.
October 12, 2007 - 10:00 ET by sarcasmoI've conflated no such thing, and I was pleasantly surprised by the big money, which got media respect rather suddenly, whether you like it or not.
I don't need to promise that, he already did, and the clueless were not listening. Again.
Will you admit the word "when" looks even more clueless than you usually look, which is "considerably"?
I will hide no such thing. I'm proud, actually, of our performance so far in the face of such hate and bias. I feel like Reagan did about libertarians, instead of like the whining losers, so you'll just have to deal with it.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Whining loser? What
October 12, 2007 - 10:12 ET by BDWhining loser? What specifically have I lost. I have my rucksack between my knees and it appears full.....
So, you will not vote for Paul if he runs as a Libertarian? EXCELLENT!!!!!!!!!!!
Concur:Paul seems to be
October 11, 2007 - 09:23 ET by BDConcur:
Paul seems to be caught up in an old 20th century paradigm that wars are fought between states alone.
In a comment he made regarding Irans possession of nuclear capability in a debate several months ago, he tried to equivocate the Cold war with a future conflict with Iran. In his comments he stated he believed we could hold Iran in check due to the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) as we had the Soviets until their economy gave out.
He obviously misses the fact that wars are no longer as clean in the 21st Century.
"IF" Iran were to serreptitiously provide a terrorist group from, let us say Ulan Bator Mongolia a low yield nuclear weapon for delivery into San Francisco Harbor and subsequent detonation, what would be the MAD concept if we are not able to adequately determine who provided it?
Are we going to retaliate against the Ukraine, Russia, North Korea, China, France, Pakistan, India, South Africa, Israel, and Great Britain because they all have the requisite capability?
Or should we solely limit our options to attacks in Ulan Bator?
He, and by extension his philosophy are obviously out of the league in discussing these issues.
No reply from SARC. Flow
October 12, 2007 - 09:56 ET by BDNo reply from SARC. Flow my way. (He will now probably show me a campaign funding flow chart.)
When you whine...
October 12, 2007 - 10:01 ET by sarcasmoI mock. What can I say? If you want a guaranteed reply, as I've said dozens of times, you PM me and your butt's gonna get that reply. If you whine like a little girl publicly instead, I'll mock you instead of answering you respectfully. It's a pattern. Learn from it.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Excellent, reply to
October 12, 2007 - 10:14 ET by BDExcellent, reply to this. In your own words please....
Paul seems to be caught up in an old 20th century paradigm that wars are fought between states alone.
In a comment he made regarding Irans possession of nuclear capability in a debate several months ago, he tried to equivocate the Cold war with a future conflict with Iran. In his comments he stated he believed we could hold Iran in check due to the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) as we had the Soviets until their economy gave out.
He obviously misses the fact that wars are no longer as clean in the 21st Century.
"IF" Iran were to serreptitiously provide a terrorist group from, let us say Ulan Bator Mongolia a low yield nuclear weapon for delivery into San Francisco Harbor and subsequent detonation, what would be the MAD concept if we are not able to adequately determine who provided it?
Are we going to retaliate against the Ukraine, Russia, North Korea, China, France, Pakistan, India, South Africa, Israel, and Great Britain because they all have the requisite capability?
Or should we solely limit our options to attacks in Ulan Bator?
He, and by extension his philosophy are obviously out of the league in discussing these issues.
I note a lack of
October 11, 2007 - 11:19 ET by BDI note a lack of participation from SARC....
I can't be everywhere at once, BD.
October 12, 2007 - 06:13 ET by sarcasmoAnd I note a lack of FAQ-reading from you, so we're even. Again. You've never seen me run from a debate with you, and it still hasn't happened, you just lack substance because of your avowed refusal to click on those evil link things. Again.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
The FAQ were immaterial to
October 12, 2007 - 10:09 ET by BDThe FAQ were immaterial to the conversation. Unless you can prove they were.
Non-topical reponse equals failure to respond.
Michelle Malkin has a very
October 10, 2007 - 09:52 ET by drillanwrMichelle Malkin has a very good dust up on the SCHIP debate, the democrats' incurable addiction to putting up "poster children" for their cause(s), and the way questioning the facts about those who are used is spun as mean and intrusive ...
http://michellemalkin.com/2007/10/09/democrat-poster-child-abuse-the-nutroots-pushback-and-the-continued-campaign-to-silence-the-right/
History Repeating
October 10, 2007 - 10:03 ET by third eyeFred Thompson - F, I take it he's probably not a news junkie
John McCain - D, If you dont have anything nice to say to the base in off election years...
Mitt Romney - C, supports the line item veto, are you kidding me?? Props though on that Thompson joke.
Rudy Giuliani - A, Its all just alittle bit of history repeating...
Mike Huckabee - B, my favorite for vice pres
Ron Paul - D, Please, for the love of god, include some prune juice in your diet sir
Tom Tancredo - D, I dont think hes getting the hispanic vote this year. I was impressed with the honesty I saw, but public speaking isnt his thing.
Sam Brownback - C, "dont talk about my mother"
Duncan Hunter - B, most improved over last debate, but couldnt keep the momentum over the entire debate. Fred Thompson could learn alot from him.
Popularity Contest Grading
October 10, 2007 - 10:22 ET by RJThompson: B, just for putting Chrissy down with "That's your opinion, Christopher."
McCain: C, his story is worn out
Romney: B+, got rid of the slick-hair look, has the Presidential image people like
Giuliani: B+, he's mistakenly trying to fight Hillary before he's solidified his position
Huckabee, B, everybody's favorite "I wish he could get traction" candidate
Paul: F, way out of his league last night, and it showed in his sometimes semi-frantic delivery
Tancredo: C, was he on stage?
Brownback: C, was he on stage?
Hunter: C, was he on stage?
Top 3
October 10, 2007 - 13:34 ET by JDWFree trade, reduce regulations, support private health care, and reduced government spending.
Thompson knew Canada's Prime Minister.
Giuliani realized Canadians would have nowhere to go for health care if we have Hillary-Care.
Romney bet Granholm would tax the debate.
Each presented an A performance.
JDW
Sen Clinton: Founder of Media Matters
The post-debate poll sure vanished-fast.
October 10, 2007 - 10:05 ET by sarcasmoBut that, like the fact that we're never hearing anything on health care issues from the ONLY Doctor on stage (and no, that doesn't disqualify other candidates from speaking on health care issues at all; it's simply a measure of "do you really believe they'd do this to Dr. Dean????" media bias, like it or not) I'll probably be told this "is not bias."
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
BTW -
October 10, 2007 - 10:24 ET by drillanwrWould love to hear the outcry and demands and condemnations of the world media and human rights groups and the International Red Cross AND the insignificant U.N. on this ... That is if they can take their eyes off the correct portion-size of lemon/almond chicken at Gitmo.
Burma: Dissident Dies Under “Questioning”
http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2007/10/10/burma-dissident-dies-under-questioning/
Congress sent a serious
October 10, 2007 - 11:17 ET by Roger the ShrubberCongress sent a serious wrist-slap to the UN just a couple of weeks ago. Too bad it wasn't plastered all over the news.
Two congressmen voted against it. Guess who they were...
Well, I think they might be
October 10, 2007 - 12:54 ET by drillanwrWell, I think they might be the perfect "ticket" for some political party ... in the solar system ... in some galaxy ... somewhere ...
UAW
October 10, 2007 - 10:28 ET by JDWBREAKING- Chrysler workers begin walkout
JDW
Sen Clinton: Founder of Media Matters
C-SPAN & Our HOUSE & SENATE
October 10, 2007 - 10:35 ET by PawpawNSlow day so I watched a little C-SPAN & C-SPAN 2. What a joke our legilative system is! No quorums, when nays have many sounds over aye, the leader says ayes have it! They try & tack on amendment after amendment, when they should have had the motion ready when it gets to the floor! I wish every American could just take 1 hour of their time and watch this Fiasco, HORSE & PONY SHOW, and, well, I really don't know how to describe it! Just watch a few minutes & see what our great elected leaders are doing or, in most cases, not doing!!
Sorry to admit, folks, but
October 10, 2007 - 10:40 ET by wiwfSorry to admit, folks, but I'm a victorymonger
The Rocky Mountain Collegian: Illustrating Idiocy
close cousin to me A
October 10, 2007 - 10:44 ET by TruthMongerclose cousin to me
A service of the new NB respect police
Happy 38th anniversary to
October 10, 2007 - 11:56 ET by Roger the ShrubberHappy 38th anniversary to "In The Court of the Crimson King", and happy 1275th anniversary of the Battle of Tours...
And that's
October 10, 2007 - 13:48 ET by FastEdthe reason the mooslums can't go head-to-head with the US military - when they try they get their camels kicked. They learned from history, it's easier being a terrorist. (If only they would pre-test, en masse, their suicide missions in their hovels/caves)
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
Battle of LA
October 10, 2007 - 16:47 ET by Carl KolchakThe Battle of Tours definatly is a very important battle in world history, though probably not as significant as the Battle of LA. Europe's future would probably have been much different if the Franks had been defeated. If you are of European heritage like I am, then your ancestors' lives would have been much different. It's amazing to think about the what if's? of important battles. I have a lot of fun thinking about the significance of the Battle of Hastings. So much future history was changed by that battle that it is mind boggling.
Here is a link about the imporant Battle of LA.
http://www.militarymuseum.org/BattleofLA.html
"I've always been crazy, but it's kept me from going insane" Waylon Jennings
Ha!
October 10, 2007 - 21:36 ET by dervishI always thought Spielberg just made that movie ("1942") up -- who knew it was the prequel to "Saving Private Ryan?"
Yeah, Thank God for Vinegar
October 11, 2007 - 09:22 ET by BDYeah, Thank God for Vinegar Joe Stillwell.....
Carl, quit spreading lies
October 11, 2007 - 10:17 ET by Roger the ShrubberCarl, quit spreading lies and propaganda. I do not see Snake Pliskin listed anywhere on the website you linked us to...
I heard he was dead...
October 11, 2007 - 11:17 ET by BDI heard he was dead...
With the Dollar falling
October 10, 2007 - 13:39 ET by FastEdhas anyone else seen the Vicente Fox talk of the "AMERO"? See the fantasy designs, at the link provided.
Seems the hold out was Chavez - who woulda thunk?
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
Hard to find
October 10, 2007 - 14:07 ET by JDWCSM- Pelosi: For 4 months anti-war protesters have been sitting outside my home, hanging their clothes from the trees, putting couches, sofas, chairs, permanent living facilities on my front sidewalk...
JDW
Sen Clinton: Founder of Media Matters
She sounds galled that as a
October 10, 2007 - 14:51 ET by BDShe sounds galled that as a membe rof the chosen political race, she is being hampered by other like-minded idiots.
Al Gore
October 10, 2007 - 15:30 ET by unitaryexecutiveWhat are the chances you are going to hear about a British judge's findings of fact regarding "An Inconvenient Truth:"
In order for the film to be shown, the Government must first amend their Guidance Notes to Teachers to make clear that 1.) The Film is a political work and promotes only one side of the argument. 2.) If teachers present the Film without making this plain they may be in breach of section 406 of the Education Act 1996 and guilty of political indoctrination. 3.) Eleven inaccuracies have to be specifically drawn to the attention of school children.
The inaccuracies are:
* The film claims that melting snows on Mount Kilimanjaro evidence global warming. The Government’s expert was forced to concede that this is not correct.
* The film suggests that evidence from ice cores proves that rising CO2 causes temperature increases over 650,000 years. The Court found that the film was misleading: over that period the rises in CO2 lagged behind the temperature rises by 800-2000 years.
* The film uses emotive images of Hurricane Katrina and suggests that this has been caused by global warming. The Government’s expert had to accept that it was “not possible” to attribute one-off events to global warming.
* The film shows the drying up of Lake Chad and claims that this was caused by global warming. The Government’s expert had to accept that this was not the case.
* The film claims that a study showed that polar bears had drowned due to disappearing arctic ice. It turned out that Mr Gore had misread the study: in fact four polar bears drowned and this was because of a particularly violent storm.
* The film threatens that global warming could stop the Gulf Stream throwing Europe into an ice age: the Claimant’s evidence was that this was a scientific impossibility.
* The film blames global warming for species losses including coral reef bleaching. The Government could not find any evidence to support this claim.
* The film suggests that the Greenland ice covering could melt causing sea levels to rise dangerously. The evidence is that Greenland will not melt for millennia.
* The film suggests that the Antarctic ice covering is melting, the evidence was that it is in fact increasing.
* The film suggests that sea levels could rise by 7m causing the displacement of millions of people. In fact the evidence is that sea levels are expected to rise by about 40cm over the next hundred years and that there is no such threat of massive migration.
* The film claims that rising sea levels has caused the evacuation of certain Pacific islands to New Zealand. The Government are unable to substantiate this and the Court observed that this appears to be a false claim.
This is great. In other words, in order for a school to show this film, it must come with the warning that global warming is a political ploy and that Al Gore is a liar (and apparently fails at reading comprehension). What a victory for honest debate!
Well ...
October 10, 2007 - 15:40 ET by drillanwrThe GW crowd made this bed (THE DEBATE IS OVER! IT'S A SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS!) ... Looks as if they have to lay in it.
Christopher
October 10, 2007 - 15:47 ET by bigtimerAnybody going to listen to Christopher at the top of the hour or whenever he comes on in your homes to see how much he pats himself on the back?
I am just curious as heck ...plus I am sure it will make me yell at the television and get angry because he is a leftist and knows nothing but how to lie most of the time...lol.
Somehow I knew you'd watch, BT
October 10, 2007 - 15:50 ET by RJYou're a political junkie...just like me.
And the answer is yes, I will be watching. :^)
"Harry Reid is a complete buffoon." -Lou Dobbs
ROFL...Can't help myself
October 10, 2007 - 15:56 ET by bigtimerROFL...Can't help myself RJ!
By the way just heard the response again to Christopher from Thompson...
Maria gave a great laugh after that back and forth...I loved it myself, sure took Christopher by surprise did it not...there was a long pause for a yapping leftist know-it-all like Christopher before he got to the next question...
I am still giggling....
in respect to Matthew Sheffield...3rdeye missed my point...
October 10, 2007 - 15:59 ET by vrwc13I see your point
October 10, 2007 - 12:26 ET by third eye
The reason unions are losing membership, I believe, is directly due to immigrant labor.
The immigrants may be illegal but as long as they dont commit crimes and pay taxes, they have my blessing. Those who do not are another story. They should be able to pay taxes without fear of being deported, even if they are illegal.
We should only pay taxes to keep immigrant scientists and others whose intelligence is uncommonly high, here in the US.
They are here illegally and you give them your blessing?
What other criminals get your "blessing"?
v
btw: this string started on the "Debate" blog, I couldn't let this one go unanswered.
Luckily I saved the portion
October 10, 2007 - 16:01 ET by Roger the ShrubberLuckily I saved the portion of the Limbaugh thread that the powers-that-be deleted. At least, I THINK it was the powers-that-be that did the deleting. Leon was exposed as the fraud he is.
I don't understand it, that
October 10, 2007 - 16:31 ET by MightyMouthI don't understand it, that thread has been gutted and I thought there was some good stuff in there. It's just too bad the Leons of the world ruin the fun for everyone.
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Why was it deleted?
October 10, 2007 - 16:34 ET by balboaWhy was it deleted?
Just guessing: It was in
October 10, 2007 - 16:37 ET by MightyMouthJust guessing:
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
What if.......
October 10, 2007 - 16:43 ET by JayTeeleonitsky SPOKE...and no one Replied ?
I think we're arriving at said point, pretty quickly.
He was even on the Debate live Chat last nite......he's everywhere, he's everywhere...oops, he's deleted.
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
In regards to Leon, try this...
October 10, 2007 - 16:47 ET by vrwc134 Do not answer a fool according to his folly,
or you will be like him yourself.
5 Answer a fool according to his folly,
or he will be wise in his own eyes. Proverbs 26
...or sometimes you feel like a nut, some times you don't.
v
"At least I am a guy and not desperately trying to be one." Leon
Hi JT... I'm glad I got
October 10, 2007 - 16:50 ET by bigtimerHi JT...
I'm glad I got off the live chat when I did if the little one came on later...(I can only imagine what that must of been like...thank goodness)...lol.
No idea, Bal. No idea... I
October 11, 2007 - 10:14 ET by Roger the ShrubberNo idea, Bal. No idea... I think Mark or someone else got annoyed with the bantering and bickering...
Coulter regarding Johnny Edwards affair
October 10, 2007 - 17:12 ET by bigtimerI just heard Ann Coulter say on Tucker that news is breaking now about John Edwards having had an 18 month affair...
Wanna' bet it is gonna' be no big deal with the msm, they will play it down?
Wanna' bet Hillary the Cackle and friends are/were behind this getting out?
too funny....she says it is coming from or going to be in the National Enquirer...which I would trust more than the NYT's, LAT's or WaPO...lol.
bt -
October 10, 2007 - 17:33 ET by drillanwrIf this is true, Liz will come out and be so understanding that John was under so much pressure from all the nasty media attention during this campaign ... and, of course, her cancer ... And, mostly, poor John was vexed when Ann questioned his manhood by (not) calling him a ... well ... you know ... the other F word ...
drill... El
October 10, 2007 - 17:38 ET by bigtimerdrill...
El Correcto...
I thought the same way...really, when it came to her... she is not about to let a little snafu like this stop her from the WH is possible.
Nah.
October 10, 2007 - 21:38 ET by dervishSomehow, this will all be Ann Coulter's fault. Wait and see.
Difference between libs and conservatives
October 10, 2007 - 17:24 ET by saw the lightA friend of mine sent me this:
THE TWO MOST IMPORTANT EVENTS IN ALL OF HISTORY:
Humans originally existed as members of small bands of nomadic hunters/gatherers. They lived on deer in the mountains during the summer and would go to the coast and live on fish and lobster in the winter.
The two most important events in all of history were the invention of beer and the invention of the wheel. The wheel was invented to get man to the beer. These were the foundation of modern civilization and together were the catalyst for the splitting of humanity into two distinct subgroups:
1. Liberals
2. Conservatives
Once beer was discovered, it required grain and that was the beginning of agriculture. Neither the glass bottle nor aluminum can were invented yet, so while our early humans were sitting around waiting for them to be invented, they just stayed close to the brewery. That's how villages were formed.
Some men spent their days tracking and killing animals to B-B-Q at night while they were drinking beer. This was the beginning of what is known as the Conservative movement.
Other men who were weaker and less skilled at hunting learned to live off the conservatives by showing up for the nightly B-B-Q's and doing the sewing, fetching, and hairdressing. This was the beginning of the Liberal movement.
Some of these liberal men eventually evolved into women. The rest became known as girlie-men. Some noteworthy liberal achievements include the domestication of cats, the invention of group therapy, group hugs, and the concept of Democratic voting to decide how to divide the meat and beer that conservatives provided.
Over the years Conservatives came to be symbolized by the largest, most powerful land animal on earth, the elephant. Liberals are symbolized by the jackass.
Modern liberals like imported beer (with lime added), but most prefer white wine or imported bottled water. They eat raw fish but like their beef well done. Sushi, tofu, and French food are standard liberal fare.
Another interesting evolutionary side note: most of their women have higher testosterone levels than their men. Most social workers, personal injury attorneys, journalists, dreamers in Hollywood and group therapists are liberals. Liberals invented the designated hitter rule because it wasn't fair to make the pitcher also bat.
Conservatives drink domestic beer. They eat red meat and still provide for their women. Conservatives are big-game hunters, rodeo cowboys, lumberjacks, construction workers, firemen, medical doctors, police officers, corporate executives, athletes, Piping Designers, Marines, and generally anyone who works productively. Conservatives who own companies hire other conservatives who want to work for a living.
Liberals produce little or nothing. They like to govern the producers and decide what to do with the production. Liberals believe Europeans are more enlightened than Americans. That is why most of the liberals remained in Europe when conservatives were coming to America. They crept in after the Wild West was tamed and created a business of trying to get more for nothing.
Here ends today's lesson in world history: It should be noted that a Liberal may have a momentary urge to angrily respond to the above before forwarding it. A Conservative will simply laugh and be so convinced of the absolute truth of this history that it will be forwarded immediately to other true believers and to more liberals just to piss them off
stl... This is
October 10, 2007 - 17:35 ET by bigtimerstl...
This is grrrreat...I LOVE this!
Thank you so much...
I am going to copy and send to some folks if you don't mind!
Pure talent.
Dave R for president!
October 10, 2007 - 20:14 ET by Dave RHell, we could do far worse.
And we are probably about to, LOL.
When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.-Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference.
A chicken (little) for every pot!
October 10, 2007 - 20:17 ET by RJ...sorry, Dave, couldn't stop myself... :^)
RJ, Actually, it is a chicken for every GRILL. LOL.
October 10, 2007 - 20:25 ET by Dave RWhen I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.-Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference.
}}---> Credit is due Whoopi
October 11, 2007 - 02:48 ET by Cool ArrowWe trash her a lot, but her recent comments on the VIEW deserve a note of thanks.
Just trying to be fair.
~LYDSEXICS UNTIE!~
}}---> Net attack?
October 11, 2007 - 05:17 ET by Cool ArrowWhat gives. I can't access Drudge and a bunch of morning locals aren't in here?
Did I miss the memo?
~LYDSEXICS UNTIE!~
Testing
October 12, 2007 - 09:02 ET by nofateTesting. Testing.
"The future is not set. There is no fate but what we make for ourselves."
michaelyon-online.com