Follow by Email

Monday, March 31, 2008

The Democrats Love To Help The Poor

Why Not Give Them Their Salary?

Hey folks,

I have very little time today, and I MAY not be here tomorrow. There is just some things I have to take care of. But I thought this was interesting. You know that the reality of the situation is this. We do not have poor folks running for President. All the candidates are pretty well off. The Liberals more so than not, TALK about themselves being for the poor. Republicans talk less but do more. I have a solution to help Obama and Clinton win even more votes.

You see folks, the Liberals love to talk about helping the poor. Talk never put food on tables, paid electric bills, or helped cloth people. Talk never helped a family get good jobs that they can take care of themselves. But the Liberals LOVE to talk.

They also love to say we should model our country and certain policies, laws, and benefits after other countries. They say we are behind the times. Universal Healthcare being one example. So may I suggest that Obama and Clinton both pledge to do the same as the South Korean President Lee Myung-Bak? They should take his lead. They should get us out of the dark ages. They should give their Presidential Salaries to the poor. According to CNN- South Korea president to donate salary to poor

(CNN) -- South Korea's new president has pledged to donate his salary to the underprivileged.

Lee Myung-Bak made the pledge during an unscheduled meeting with reporters Sunday in the press room of his presidential office, the state news agency reported.

The president said he would donate his salary during his entire five-year term.

Lee is a former CEO of an engineering and construction company with a vast personal fortune. As mayor of Seoul from 2002 to 2004, Lee donated his salary to the children of street cleaners and firefighters.

"I promised to spend my whole salary earned as a public official on public welfare," Lee told reporters. "My plan to donate the presidential salary to the underprivileged is an extension of that promise."

The news agency did not say how much the president earns in a year.

During the election campaign, Lee, 66, vowed to donate his entire personal fortune of more than 30 billion won ($30.2 million) to the poor. He said at the time he would keep only a retirement house in Seoul.

Now here is a guy who puts his money where his mouth is. HE IS making a difference. So, uh, Obama? Clinton? How about any of the Senators? Hello? Anyone?

{Crickets chirping}

I thought so.

CNN- South Korea president to donate salary to poor

Sunday, March 30, 2008

Sunday Preview 033008

Coming right up

Hey folks,

Welcome to the Sunday edition of the OPNTalk Blog. Today we are talking about quite a few things, the 08 race to the White House, more Global Warming Bunk, who Wal-Mart actually is, who McCain actually is. But up first, I will be putting to rest this completely idiotic debate that has been going on in the news lately, with all this talk on race and racism, “was Jesus a Black man?”

I know some of you will get angry. I know some of you will get those feeling of hate building up inside you. I know this may go against the very thing you have been taught your whole life. I understand that it is important to some of you. So important that it actually DIVIDES the Races even further. But it is what it is, and HE was what He was while He was here on earth in the flesh.

So get yourself a cup of coffee {Mine is Hazelnut}, sit back, and get comfortable. Here we go.

Answering The Question, What Color Was Jesus

Not that difficult to understand

Hey folks,

It’s time we laid this stupid argument to rest. It is stupid and defines logic. Although stupid and completely pointless, it also has the power to divide Christians and breed HATE. The exact opposite of Jesus’s message.

In the news lately, we hear Preachers like Manning, and Wright, along with many others in the Black Community teaching their followers that Jesus was a Black man. I grew up in up state NY. Every picture I ever saw of Jesus, portrayed him as a blond with blue eyes. Put aside for a second that ANY picture EVER of Jesus is nothing more than some artist’s rendition of what they picture Jesus to look like and NOT an actual picture of the man. There were no cameras back then.

So you have these Black extremists and White extremists telling us that Jesus was a Black / White man. That he does not care about the other. That he came for them. {Sigh} I get so tired of this idiocies that I actually find myself getting angry. So it’s time to answer the question, “What color was Jesus?”

I know this is going to be difficult for some of you to understand. I know it is very complex. I know that it might even go against EVERYTHING you were ever taught. But it’s just FACT.

OK, get on the plane. Make yourself comfortable, it’s a long flight. We are heading to Africa. Yup. Africa. We are landing now. Come with me and take a look around. What do you see? African folks. Same African folks that have been there 2000 plus years. They all have the same features. They all have differing variations, but for the most part, they are Black. Dark hair. Brown eyes. ETC. If we were to go in a time machine to 2000 plus years ago, we would see the same people. African folks. Now get a good night sleep. Back on the plane in the AM.

Off again as we come to our next stop. China. Come with me and tell me what you see. Chinese folks. Same Chinese folks that have been there 2000 plus years. They all have the same features. They all have differing variations, but for the most part, they all are around the same size. Same facial features. Dark hair, brown or Green eyes. ETC. If we were to go in a time machine to 2000 plus years ago, we would see the same people. Chinese folks. Now get a good night sleep. Back on the plane in the AM.

Off we go again. This time to Europe. Come with me and tell me what you see. European folks. Same European folks that have been there 2000 plus years. They all have the same features. They all have differing variations, but for the most part, they all White. Differing coloring of hair. Brown or Green eyes. Rarely but sometimes Blue ETC. If we were to go in a time machine to 2000 plus years ago, we would see the same people. European folks. Now get a good night sleep. Back on the plane in the AM.

Now we come to our main destination. Jerusalem. Come with me and tell me what you see. Jewish folks. Same Jewish folks that have been there 2000 plus years. They all have the same features. They all have differing variations, but for the most part, they all a little tanner than us. Brown hair. Brown eyes. ETC. If we were to go in a time machine to 2000 plus years ago, we would see the same people. Jewish folks. If we did go back in a time machine, we could even actually run into Jesus himself. Why? Jesus was born to a Jewish Father and Mother. Jesus was a JEW. Hello? Are you with me on this?

Actually, if you want to be exact, you have to go to Nazareth. Jesus’s earthly Father Joseph and Mother Mary are from there, and there was where Jesus was conceived. If you we to go there today, mostly what you will see is Arabian Jews.

Biblical times are the same as today. There were many races. Many different people. There were Black, White, Asia, ETC. Not everyone in the Bible were White, nor were they Black. They were what they were. Here is an interesting note to some of you. Did you know that racism has been around SINCE there have been races? Sorry, it was not started by White Americans. In Numbers 12, the Bible talks about how Moses was discriminated against because he married a Black women.

1 And Miriam and Aaron spake against Moses because of the Ethiopian woman whom he had married: for he had married an Ethiopian woman.

That tells us that one, racism was alive and well in Biblical times, and two, Moses was not Black as some would like to portray him. The bottom line here is the fact, none of this matters. A Pastor teaching the truth of the Salvation by Jesus The Christ, SHOULD be teaching what the word says. In Galatians 3 it says this.

28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

Today’s terminology? There is neither Black nor White, rich nor poor, we are all one. If these Preachers really feel the need to teach Color, then may I suggest the color Crimson Red? The color of the blood Jesus gave for all mankind.

The Word Of God

Dem Race Getting EVEN Better, Operation Chaos In Full Effect

Limbaugh Must Be Loving This

Hey folks,

A lot of people, the “Drive By Media,” Those I call the MMD {Mass Media drones} Talk Shows, Blogs, even the average America Joe on the street is watching this complete melt down of the Democrat Part. Many are giving Rush Limbaugh credit for it.

Now we have been talking about Obama’s Racist Pastor. The fact Obama denounced the comments but is keeping him on his campaign. Then lied that he did not, no, make that “Of course I knew.” No, make that “Well, I did not hear THOSE comments.” Whatever. Now he is saying that his Pastor APOLOGIZED? Really. I’m not making this up. According to the AP- Obama suggests ex-pastor is contrite By CHARLES BABINGTON, Associated Press Writer

Democrat Barack Obama seemed to suggest in an interview aired Friday that his former pastor has acknowledged that his controversial remarks were inappropriate and hurtful, although there are no public accounts of the minister having done so.

EXACTLY If this is true, then he should tell Pastor Wright to do so publicly. Put it on the record.

Obama discussed his relationship with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright on ABC's The View, which was taped Thursday and aired Friday.

“Had the reverend not retired and had he not acknowledged that what he had said had deeply offended people and were inappropriate and mischaracterized what I believe is the greatness of this country, for all its flaws, then I wouldn't have felt comfortable staying there at the church,” Obama said.

Obama spokesman Bill Burton said the senator's remarks did not imply that Wright has expressed misgivings about his statements.

OH? So he is NOT sorry he said them?

Sen. Obama was clearly saying that were Rev. Wright not retiring, he would need to be assured that the reverend understood why what he had said had deeply offended people and mischaracterized the greatness of this country,” Burton said.

{Laughing} Well, I guess that was pointless. Then you have some very powerful superdelegates, not only saying they will vote for Obama, but that Clinton should QUIT all together. According to the LA TIMES Sen. Leahy calls for Clinton to drop out

Vermont's Leahy gives voice to a growing concern among Democrats that a protracted nomination fight will hurt the party in November. By Michael Finnegan and Mark Z. Barabak

Los Angeles Times Staff Writers March 29, 2008

In a sign of growing anxiety over the Democrats' bitter nominating fight, a senior senator urged Hillary Rodham Clinton on Friday to abandon her presidential bid and cede the race to rival Barack Obama. Clinton rejected the notion.

The recommendation from Sen. Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont that Clinton drop out came as Obama picked up support from another senator, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, the state holding the next primary, on April 22.

Maybe because people are getting tire of Clinton LYING all the time?

Separately, Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean signaled his concern over the tenor of the race by urging Obama and Clinton to scale back their rhetorical assaults, saying they risk undermining the effort to beat Republican John McCain in November.

{Laughing} Even one of the most Loony or the LWL is calling for help. That is to funny.

Dean also urged undecided superdelegates -- the party and elected officials who are likely to decide the nomination -- to pick a candidate by July 1 to avoid an irreparable rift at the party's August convention.

"Let the media and the Republicans and the talking heads on cable television attack and carry on, fulminate at the mouth," Dean told the Associated Press. "The supporters should keep their mouths shut about this stuff on both sides because that is harmful to the potential victory of a Democrat."

Well, take comfort there Screaming Dean. Many see McCain as a Democrat anyway. More on that in a second.

McCain has been making mistakes, Leahy said Friday in a written statement, but is “getting a free ride on those gaffes, because the Democratic candidates have to focus not on him but on each other.”

I love this.

“Sen. Clinton has every right, but not a very good reason, to remain a candidate for as long as she wants to,” he said. “As far as the delegate count and the interests of a Democratic victory in November go, there is not a very good reason for drawing this out.”

Translation time. SHE CAN’T WIN. Unless she attempts to STEAL it at the Convention. Which EVERYONE knows she will try to do. Everyone knows what will happen to the Democrat Party if she succeeds as well.

Get this.

"There's a lot of feeling among Democrats on the Hill that the Clintons did very little for the party. It was all about them," said one Democratic lawmaker, an Obama supporter who did not want to be identified in order to preserve a working relationship with Clinton. "We lost seats in Congress, we lost governorships, we lost statehouses. . . . And the whole time defending [President Clinton] through the impeachment process, the entire Democratic agenda got shelved."

All that is true. Along with all this. Folks, these are DEMOCRATS saying these thing. DEMOCRAT are telling the truth about the Clintons.

“There were definitely tensions,” Elmendorf said. “But I haven't heard a whole lot of people say, 'They screwed us on NATFA. They screwed us on welfare reform,'” he continued, citing two of the biggest legislative battles of the Clinton years. “I think most people ended up in a pretty decent place with the Clintons.”

Not really. Most know it also. But Leahy is not alone on his call for her to get out.

Dodd, a former presidential candidate, was more measured than Leahy, telling the National Journal on Thursday that Clinton should drop out of the race next month if voters keep rallying behind Obama.

This cannot sit well with Clinton Inc. They are not use to any of this. You really can trace this back to Rush Limbaugh calling for Journalists to ask Clinton about Drivers Licences for Illegals in NY, which they did, and she flopped BIG TIME. Then you can move a head to when Rush suggested that Republicans switch parties and VOTE for Clinton to keep her in this. It worked. Now we have what we have.

Now to this, from the AP - AP - Party fears tight Obama-Clinton finish By CHARLES BABINGTON, Associated Press

For all their delight in soaring voter registration and strong poll numbers, some Democrats fear the contest between Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton might have a nightmarish end, which could wreck a promising election year.

They really did have this locked up folks. They really should have just walked in and took over the White House, but that is not even a near possibility at this point.

Barring a complete meltdown by Obama, Clinton has almost no chance of surpassing his number of pledged delegates, even if she scores upset wins in states such as Oregon, which votes May 20. But such victories would encourage her to keep criticizing Obama — her only hope for the nomination — and thus heighten doubts about Obama's ability to defeat Republican Sen. John McCain in the fall.

That scenario troubles many Democrats, especially those who feel Obama's nomination is all but inevitable.

Yeah, well so was Clinton. Remember that?

“This is going to give Republicans a chance to try to destroy everything we've been trying to work for for eight years,” said Ken Foxworth, a Democratic National Committee member from Minnesota and superdelegate who backs Obama.

Privately, however, some party insiders worry that these superdelegates may be blithely marching toward a treacherous crossroad, where they will have to choose between a deeply wounded Obama and a soaring Clinton whose success was built on tearing down the party's front-runner in terms of delegates.

Clinton is NOT soaring.

A senior Democratic Senate aide, who would speak only on background because most members of Congress bar their staff members from being quoted by name, called it a nightmare that's getting worse.

The Democrats' optimism of February has been replaced by fear, this aide said, referring to the widely held view last month that Obama was coasting to the nomination after winning 11 straight contests. Clinton halted the skid in Texas and Ohio on March 4 and is favored to win the Pennsylvania primary on April 22.

Even that is now in question.

Obama's nomination is a foregone conclusion, Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., told National Journal. Dodd endorsed Obama after trying for the nomination himself.

He's ahead of Clinton in delegates, popular votes, states won and fundraising. Obama seems nearly certain to finish the primary season far ahead of Clinton financially. At the end of February his campaign had $30 million on hand, while Clinton's had only $3 million more in cash than in debts.

After loaning herself some money. {Smile} Now HERE is something I have NOT heard before. This is interesting. I would not doubt this a bit.

Some Obama supporters question Clinton's motives: They suggest she is counting on a stunning gaffe or shocking revelation to cripple Obama and hand her the nomination. Others float a more sinister possibility, which has found its way into mainstream news accounts: Clinton hopes to damage Obama so severely that he loses to McCain this fall, clearing her path to challenge McCain in 2012, when he will be 75.

Clinton scoffs at such suggestions, and calls on voters to support whomever is the Democratic nominee in November.

Because she plans on making sure it is HER.

Whatever her motives, many Democrats fear that Clinton's continued criticisms can only hurt the man they see as their all-but-certain nominee. They point to a recent Gallup poll, in which 28 percent of Clinton's Democratic supporters said they would vote for McCain if Obama is the party's nominee. Nineteen percent of Obama's supporters said they would vote for McCain if Clinton gets the nod.

I bet you it is MUCH more than that.

Faced with such disturbing trends, some Democrats want party elders either to persuade Clinton to drop out, or to orchestrate enough superdelegate endorsements of Obama to make her defeat inevitable. But high-profile Democrats, including former president Jimmy Carter, former vice president Al Gore, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean, have refrained from such moves so far.

“My job is to make sure the person who loses feels like they have been treated fairly so that their supporters will support the winner,” Dean told The Associated Press.

Indeed, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi drew objections from Clinton backers when she approached the issue by saying she shared Obama's view that superdelegates should be guided by the vote for pledged delegates.

Let the people decide. Why not? By the way, how stupid is Pat Waak?

Pat Waak, chairwoman of the Colorado Democratic Party, said the worriers should relax.

“I actually think it's good for the party to get through this process,” she said. “It gives everybody a chance to be part of it,” she said, noting that Democratic voter registration is soaring in many states.

In Pennsylvania, Democrats have registered a staggering 161,000 new voters since last fall, pushing their numbers over 4 million for the first time. In Oregon, nearly 10,000 voters have refiled as Democrats in the last seven weeks.

Because of Republicans following Rush. Do you REALLY think there are that many people out there that REALLY like Obama OR Clinton? {Sigh}

I went WAY long here. Be right back with some people’s observations on McCain.

AP - Obama suggests ex-pastor is contrite
LA TIMES Sen. Leahy calls for Clinton to drop out
AP- Party fears tight Obama-Clinton finish

Many See McCain As A Liberal

McCain is a RINO.

Hey folks,

I got this in the Emails. This was one I was going to use on Friday but one, time did not allow, and two, I knew I was going to be talking about the 08 Race today anyway. But the sender in closed this note.

“I thought you might find this article interesting. For reasons that remain largely a mystery, he has chosen to take the U.S. down the road of global governance.”

Here it is. It’s from AIM {Accuracy In Media} McCain’s Incoherent New World Order by Cliff Kincaid March 28, 2008

In his March 26 speech to the Los Angeles World Affairs Council, McCain never mentioned the need to preserve American sovereignty. He could have reassured conservatives by stating his forthright opposition to Senate ratification of the U.N.’s Law of the Sea Treaty, which provides for international control over billions of dollars worth of oil, gas and minerals and undermines American claims to North Pole riches. But he chose not to.

Instead, as the Washington Post put it, McCain promised “a collaborative foreign policy,” conducted in coordination with other nations. The New York Times said he distanced himself from “unilateralism” in foreign affairs.

“Liberals are going to love this speech,” conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh said about the McCain address. He said it sounded like the “global test” that liberal Democratic presidential candidate and Senator John Kerry had proposed for U.S. foreign policy in 2004.

Yet, McCain’s new TV ad calls him “the American president Americans have been waiting for.” The public should not be fooled. He is as much of a globalist as Hillary and Obama.

Noting that McCain committed himself to adoption of a new U.N.-sponsored global warming treaty, which would be even more comprehensive and tougher than the Kyoto Protocol, Limbaugh said that “The theme here is that there’s nothing special about America, and that we’re not going to be able to do anything without involving other nations and making them like us and showing them that we intend them no harm and that we want to be good stewards of the planet just as they want to be good stewards.”

The latter was a reference to McCain declaring that “We need to be good stewards of our planet and join with other nations to help preserve our common home. The risks of global warming have no borders.” McCain sounded like another Democrat―Al Gore.

But despite his preference for what appears to be some kind of New World Order, McCain’s prior endorsement of a new Muslim state in Europe by the name of Kosovo could undermine all of his best-laid plans. Recognition of Kosovo could lead to war with Russia and more terrorist problems for Israel.

Scary Rhetoric

Bobby Eberle of GOPUSA commented, “Sen. McCain delivered a laundry list of all things non-conservative.” He said the speech wasn’t conservative or even Republican.

Amanda Teegarden, a grass roots pro-sovereignty activist, was also alarmed. “It is imperative that conservatives listen to this speech―especially if you are concerned about the sovereignty, and the economic survival, of the United States,” she said.

In addition to a new global warming treaty, she noted that McCain’s proposals included open borders in the Western Hemisphere, nuclear disarmament, and a Transatlantic free trade area.

Eberle focused on a segment of the McCain speech that included the statement that “Relations with our southern neighbors must be governed by mutual respect, not by an imperial impulse or by anti-American demagoguery. The promise of North, Central, and South American life is too great for that. I believe the Americas can and must be the model for a new 21st century relationship between North and South. Ours can be the first completely democratic hemisphere, where trade is free across all borders, where the rule of law and the power of free markets advance the security and prosperity of all.”

McCain’s strange rhetoric about “North, Central, and South American life” reflects a view that nation-states are disappearing and being replaced by regional alliances and institutions. He referred to “the powerful collective voice of the European Union,” as if the U.S. response would have to be submersion of our voice in a larger hemispheric entity. But McCain seems to be calling for something beyond even a North American Union (NAU) of the U.S., Mexico, and Canada. He talked about “creating the new international institutions necessary to advance the peace and freedoms we cherish,” as if they would be built on top of the EU and the NAU.

Earlier, McCain had declared, “With globalization, our hemisphere has grown closer, more integrated, and more interdependent. Latin America today is increasingly vital to the fortunes of the United States. Americans north and south share a common geography and a common destiny.” But why should trade with America’s neighbors necessarily lead to a “common destiny?” This implies a political merger of the U.S. with other countries.

Nuclear Disarmament

“We should work to reduce nuclear arsenals all around the world, starting with our own,” McCain said. This appeared to be a call for unilateral nuclear disarmament. He went on to call for the U.S. to lead “a global effort at nuclear disarmament.” This, too, seems to require more reliance on international institutions, in this case the U.N.’s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Indeed, McCain in the past has called for more funding for the IAEA.

McCain added, “We have to strengthen our global alliances as the core of a new global compact―a League of Democracies―that can harness the vast influence of the more than 100 democratic nations around the world to advance our values and defend our shared interests.” But as I noted in a recent piece, “McCain, Soros, and the New World Order,” this is a liberal project that is being currently funded by left-wing billionaire George Soros and managed by former Clinton officials. It has nothing to do with democracy but is intended to create another global institution that will eventually help strengthen the U.N.

After calling for the closing of the terrorist detention facility at Guantanamo Bay (but not saying where he would put the detainees), McCain declared that “There is such a thing as international good citizenship.” This is the kind of rhetoric we would expect from an advocate of world government. If Hillary or Obama were spouting such silly rhetoric, conservatives would be laughing at them.

It goes without saying that McCain is oblivious to the evidence that the man-made global warming theory doesn’t hold up under serious scrutiny. His proposal for “a successor to the Kyoto Treaty” that “delivers the necessary environmental impact in an economically responsible manner” is potentially very damaging to the U.S. economy. But the proposal pleases the Europeans.

McCain talked about the virtues of the “transatlantic alliance,” which served a purpose during the Cold War with the Soviet Union, but went on to say that “Americans should welcome the rise of a strong, confident European Union as we continue to support a strong NATO.” The European Union was devised primarily as a counter to the influence of the U.S. in foreign affairs. It has also proven to be a bureaucratic disaster for the people of Europe. The “strong NATO” has proven to be extremely weak in Afghanistan, where it cannot field enough troops to defeat the Taliban terrorists. Expanding NATO has not resulted in making it stronger.

“The future of the transatlantic relationship lies in confronting the challenges of the twenty-first century worldwide: developing a common energy policy, creating a transatlantic common market tying our economies more closely together, addressing the dangers posed by a revanchist Russia, and institutionalizing our cooperation on issues such as climate change, foreign assistance, and democracy promotion,” declared McCain.

So not only is the U.S. going to move toward common policies for North, South and Central America, but it is going to develop common energy and economic policies with the European Union. Developing a common policy on “foreign assistance” is a recipe for more looting of the U.S. taxpayers. The Europeans have long complained that the U.S. isn’t devoting enough money to “official development assistance,” as the U.N. calls it.

Nightmare Vision

Does McCain’s vision look like an emerging world government? It is certainly a variation of “global governance,” which is the proposal that former Clinton State Department official Strobe Talbott makes in his book, The Great Experiment. Talbott calls McCain a “pragmatist” in foreign affairs, just like Obama and Hillary, and says that he expects his liberal Brookings Institution to have influence over a McCain presidency.

On other issues in his speech, McCain talked tough about Iran and Russia.

The big problem for McCain, as we noted in a recent column, is that his vision of a New World Order is incompatible with his support for making the Serbian province of Kosovo into an independent state. Carving Kosovo out of Serbia is a threat to international peace and security. It has split NATO, which McCain says he wants to expand and strengthen. This policy, which has also been embraced by the Democrats, threatens a completely unnecessary war with Russia, which backs Serbian control of Kosovo and wants to aid the Serbs remaining in the province.

McCain spoke about Israel’s survival, without addressing the reality that Kosovo’s independence has energized the Arab/Muslim push for a Palestinian state that could threaten Israel.

While McCain said that the threat of radical Islamic terrorism is “the transcendent challenge of our time,” he seemed unaware how some of those same forces are behind the push for Kosovo statehood. It just doesn’t make sense to fight Muslim extremists in one place, Iraq, while helping them in another, Kosovo, and even giving them their own state.

This is a contradiction that McCain has failed to address.

“We have incurred a moral responsibility in Iraq,” the Senator declared. “It would be an unconscionable act of betrayal, a stain on our character as a great nation, if we were to walk away from the Iraqi people and consign them to the horrendous violence, ethnic cleansing, and possibly genocide that would follow a reckless, irresponsible, and premature withdrawal.”

This rhetoric strikes a chord with conservatives. Yet, some say that genocide is already occurring in Iraq, in regard to the plight of Christians there. More than half have fled the country since the U.S. invasion, and those who remain are being kidnapped, threatened and murdered. Do we not have a moral responsibility to them? Shouldn’t the U.S. be less concerned about the survival of the Muslim government in Iraq and more concerned about the defenseless and unarmed Christians?

McCain seemed blind not only to the issues that conservatives regard as critical in an election year, but he went out of his way to reach out to liberals and Democrats. The only part of the speech they probably didn’t like was on Iraq.

But if the liberals get beyond their differences with McCain on Iraq, they will not only vote for him but promote his agenda as president. Then, as Rush Limbaugh notes, it may eventually be possible to change the name of the United States of America: “We’ll call ourselves New Europe.” In the process, true conservatism as a political force will be finished in the U.S.

The tragedy of this approach is that it comes from a man who served his country in uniform and risked his life on behalf of the U.S. McCain would have been a natural choice to lead a campaign for restoration of American sovereignty in foreign affairs. He could have been “The American President Americans have been waiting for.”

For reasons that remain largely a mystery, he has chosen to take the U.S. down the road of “global governance,” in which the U.N. and other international agencies, institutions and alliances determine our fate as a nation. It is the same road the Democrats are on. It is a tragedy for our country.

Folks, this is not new. We already KNOW that McCain is a Lib. We all ready know that what he says now, and what he has done in the past are two completely different things. McCain IS a RINO.

I understand were a growing number of you are. McCain, Obama, Clinton, NONE of the IDEA and perhaps even GOOD for the country so what is the point in voting. I get that. I cannot tell you how to vote. I would not even think about it. You have to vote for who you feel is better. Sad thing is, never has it been any truer than it is today, you have to vote for the lessor of evils.

I hear many will not vote. Fine, someone else will pick the President. Some say the will write in names. "That will send a message." No, sorry, it really won't. Whoever wins, is the President. No one will care if you put Micky Mouse or whatever. Bush will leave, the new President will take over, and WE will get to work to attempt to minimize as much of the damage they will do as possible.

McCain’s Incoherent New World Order

You Can’t Make This Stuff Up 033008

De-stress by laying in grave

Hey folks

What do you do to de-stress yourself? I use to go to the gym. I now go for a walk. I find a quiet place and be alone for a bit. I have to admit, I never really thought of THIS. According to Reuters - German vicar offers stress relief in grave

A vicar {a vicar is the representative of any ecclesiastic} in Germany who had the novel idea of helping parishioners escape the stresses and strains of daily life by letting them lie in an open grave was upset when intrusive journalists spoiled the atmosphere.

"I meant it as a meditative exercise," pastor Thorsten Nolting told Reuters. "I wanted people to think about what weighs on them down in the darkness and gather the energy to resist it."

Nolting, from the western German city of Duesseldorf, said his plan went "horribly wrong" when journalists' persistent questioning as parishioners were "laid to rest" earlier this week ruined the serenity of the occasion.

"It wasn't silent, as it should have been. They ruined it. (They) would not go away, even when I asked them," he said.

Uh, Pastor Nolting, you seem a little stressed there, maybe you should lay down. {Smile}

Extraverts who could cope with the incessant questioning were happy to climb down into the two metre long hole, and then rave about their "resurrection", Nolting said.

But a local newspaper said one man was still shaking, 20 minutes after his seven-minute spell in the dank grave ended.

OK. That just falls into my OK category. You know, when there really is no explanation and no way to truly respond to something you just heard or seen. OK.

Folks, you can lay in an open grave if you chose. I think I will continue to de-stress ABOVE ground. Thank you very much.

Be right back

Reuters- German vicar offers stress relief in grave

H.S. For Sunday 033008

Global Warming Offensive?

Hey folks,

The Chicken Little Crowd are getting desperate no. I posted back on Monday the 24th “Chicken Little Crowd To Attempt To Brainwash More Americans. I pointed out that they are getting desperate and are now releasing talking points and arguments for their little group of Sheeple to use when addressing the “Deniers.”

• They think others similar to themselves are jumping on the green bandwagon.

• They get frequent positive feedback for effort.

• They feel able to make a difference by taking concrete steps.

• They think their children will be harmed by global warming, or children encourage the family to lead a greener life.

"This is to good folks. They are TELLING the rest in the movement. Here are the talking points. Read this again. You have to convince people that they are not just sheeple. That everyone is doing it, so they should too. Make sure you give them a pat on the back when they do. Make them feel that they are now a good person. That they matter. That they are heroes for doing this. They also have to believe that THEY can solve it. Don't be going around telling them that there is no hope. Make sure they know 'we can do it.' If all else fails, tell them their kids are going to DIE. That they will blame them for not doing anything about it. Scare them into submission if need be.

What if the people ask for proof? Just tell them that all the Scientist agree that it is real, and they are smarter then them, so they need just accept it. Any Scientists that say it's not real are just kooks, or bought off by big oil.

This is the very definition of Scaryence. Scare Science. Don't forget, if all else fails, the KIDS. Bring up the kids. "

Now we learn that some are urging the UN Security Council to preemptively strike at the “Deniers” This really is funny. It also shows how desperate they are becoming. According to The Christian Science Monitor CSM - The Security Council must act preemptively – on climate change By Gregory Meeks and Michael Shank Mon Mar 24, 4:00 AM ET

The United Nations tackled the task of troubleshooting climate change last month. Between holding special General Assembly meetings at headquarters in New York, bringing 100 environmental ministers to Monaco in the largest meeting of ministers since Bali, and launching a Climate Neutral Network to highlight best practices in tackling global warming, the UN appears to be doing what it can to ensure that climate change does not fall off the political radar. Yet, it still isn't enough. A concerted international strategy, on a par with the seriousness and scope of an UN Security Council resolution, is what's needed to counter this climate crisis.

What was the result of this last chance to save the planet? Remember? They agreed to talk more about it, in a year or two. {Laughing}

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon was right in comparing the effects of climate change to the effects of war, given the potential level of human and environmental devastation potentially wrought by rising sea levels and increasingly catastrophic weather conditions. Philanthropist Sir Richard Branson, who keynoted UN General Assembly deliberations on climate change, was correct to call for a “war room” to adequately respond to a rapidly warming planet.

These people are sick. Greedy, and sick. If they actually believe this. They don’t. But if they did, it would be sad. All together now folks, money, power, and control. Notice the usual wording here? “environmental devastation potentially wrought by rising sea levels and increasingly catastrophic weather conditions.” Not DEFINITELY. But POTENTIALLY. How about nothing is going to happen? {Smile}

Both leaders recognize the need for serious strategy and the comparisons to war were not casually made. The threat to international peace and security calls upon nothing less than the purview of the UN Security Council.

Under Article 39 of the UN Charter, the Security Council maintains the right to identify threats to international peace and security and to devise means to counter these threats. The potential impact of that on climate change is substantial: the Security Council's toolbox includes the capacity to cap greenhouse-gas emissions on every country and sanction those who fail to comply. Both a carbon tax, as well as a carbon-trading scheme, could incentivize countries to reduce emissions below even capped levels.

People are not listening. WE WILL FORCE THEM TO. Although we cannot PROVE any of this. Idiots.

It is a moral imperative that the Security Council acts quickly. While island nations like Palau and the Maldives stand to face warlike scenarios sooner than the Security Council's five permanent (P5) members – China, Russia, United States, Britain, and France are not immune. Moreover, the culpability of the P5's populaces in contributing to climate change must be recognized. China and the US rank as the world's top two greenhouse-gas emitters.

They want the UN to go to WAR with America and China. {Laughing} War to save the planet from you evil Americans.

Not surprisingly, this may well account for the Security Council's reluctance to tackle climate change with carbon caps and concomitant sanctions. The P5 has a hard enough time wrestling with resolutions that put parameters on their own political prowess. To expect them to write a resolution that restricts their right to pollute may be unrealistic. But the alternatives to inaction on this issue are dire.

No they are not DIRE. THERE IS NO THREAT

Disappearing Pacific islands, due to rising sea levels, are projected for within our lifetime. Catastrophic weather conditions accosting the coastal regions of China, the US, and the UK, once mere prediction, are already taking place. Conflicts escalating over depleted natural resources, due to disrupted and rising temperatures, are already occurring. The planet may not wait patiently until the Security Council overcomes its propensity for political pandering.

That entire sentence is bunk. Where are Islands disappearing and what is the PROVABLE link to Man-made Global Warming? Conflicts over depleted natural resources? Where? What about the conflicts that are happening because people can not longer afford corn and wheat? Because they are being used to the growing failure of Ethanol? Are the tempts STILL Rising? PROVE IT Just more Scaryence folks. NOT ONE WORD of the above paragraph is true.

Unless we act now, and with formidable preemptive force, more of this is what could face the international community. Transcending the Security Council's usual scope of nation-state conflicts, climate change-related conflict will affect all of us – with particular devastation to developing countries not represented by the P5. Thus it is incumbent upon the Security Council, which has a responsibility to protect weaker member states, to step up and save the world.

These people are nuts folks.

A global threat requires global commitment. And that commitment can be best coordinated in the Security Council.

Representative Gregory Meeks (D) of N.Y. is vicechair of the House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific and the Global Environment. Michael Shank is the government relations adviser at George Mason University's Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution.

Both of THESE people are nuts. But then again, I’m just a denier. {Laughing} HEY, that’s what Father Al says. He says I believe in the flat Earth. Check out this VIDEO.

Wrong Father AL. The movement is growing. More and more people are seeing you as the hypocrite you are. More and more Scientists are calling GW what it is. An unproven scam. Now the Chicken Little Crowd wants to declare WAR on you if you are intelligent enough to actually THINK about the FACTS and REAL Science. They do not care anymore about convincing you that Man-made Global Warming is real. They are getting desperate now because they can’t convince you. So NOW they want to force you. Unbelievable.

OPNTalk - Chicken Little Crowd To Attempt To Brainwash More Americans
CSM - The Security Council must act preemptively – on climate change
Al Gore on 60 Minutes

IWA For Sunday 033008

First time ever, an entire Corporation

Hey folks,

It’s SUNDAY Time for the IWA. Yes, you read that correctly. For the first time ever, I am awarding an entire Corporation the Idiot of the Week. That Corporation? Wal-Mart

OK, I’ll be honest here. I actually worked for Wal-Mart in one of their distribution centers for about eight months. On paper, it sounds like a GREAT job. GREAT pay, good benefits {If you can afford the chunk they take out of your pay,} and a GREAT future. Once there, I found the complete opposite.

The pay is good, if you get your hours. But if it’s slow, they send you home. I had to drive 45 minutes to get to work, then on many occasions, once I got there, I was told sorry, go ahead and go home. One pay period I remember getting like 44 hours for two weeks. Then you have the completely unreasonable quotas. If you did not meet them, you got wrote up. If you did not meet them because you were in the office getting wrote up for ANYTHING else they write you up for, oh yeah, I’m sorry, they call it coaching, you got wrote up for getting wrote up. One time I asked how to handle a situation that gave me more work to do, they told me, I did it, THEY were wrong, I got wrote up. {Laughing} True story.

Then you have security like and an army walking around to make sure you are working. They see something they do not like, right, wrong, or indifferent, you get wrote up for that as well. They tried very hard to brainwash me into thinking I was part of the Wal-Mart Family. We all had to do this little cheer at the start of the shift. We all had to stretch together because they care. {Smile} We all had to speak nice about Wal-Mart. ETC. Sorry, I could only last eight months in what the employees there called “The Pit.”

So I know first hand how Wal-Mart treats it’s employees, but THIS? According to AOL News - Wal-Mart Sues Disabled Ex-Employee CNN Posted: 2008-03-29 09:54:15

JACKSON, Missouri (March 29) - Debbie Shank breaks down in tears every time she's told that her 18-year-old son, Jeremy, was killed in Iraq. The 52-year-old mother of three attended her son's funeral, but she continues to ask how he's doing. When her family reminds her that he's dead, she weeps as if hearing the news for the first time.

Shank suffered severe brain damage after a traffic accident nearly eight years ago that robbed her of much of her short-term memory and left her in a wheelchair and living in a nursing home.

It was the beginning of a series of battles -- both personal and legal -- that loomed for Shank and her family. One of their biggest was with Wal-Mart's health plan.

Eight years ago, Shank was stocking shelves for the retail giant and signed up for Wal-Mart's health and benefits plan.

Two years after the accident, Shank and her husband, Jim, were awarded about $1 million in a lawsuit against the trucking company involved in the crash. After legal fees were paid, $417,000 was placed in a trust to pay for Debbie Shank's long-term care.

Wal-Mart had paid out about $470,000 for Shank's medical expenses and later sued for the same amount. However, the court ruled it can only recoup what is left in the family's trust.

The Shanks didn't notice in the fine print of Wal-Mart's health plan policy that the company has the right to recoup medical expenses if an employee collects damages in a lawsuit.

ALWAYS read the fine print. ALWAYS.

The family's attorney, Maurice Graham, said he informed Wal-Mart about the settlement and believed the Shanks would be allowed to keep the money.

“We assumed after three years, they [Wal-Mart] had made a decision to let Debbie Shank use this money for what it was intended to,” Graham said.

The Shanks lost their suit to Wal-Mart. Last summer, the couple appealed the ruling -- but also lost it. One week later, their son was killed in Iraq.

“They are quite within their rights. But I just wonder if they need it that bad,” Jim Shank said.

No. Folks, I hate to break this to your. But your beloved “family oriented” Wal-Mart, is nothing more than a greedy, money hungry Corporation that cares nothing more than for their bottom line. Money. Their CEOs and upper management could afford anything they want to. But they could not care less about the little people. As long as you keep giving them your money that is. Why do you think at the time I left the Distribution Center there was like a 68 percent turnover rate?

In 2007, the retail giant reported net sales in the third quarter of $90 billion.

$90 BILLION and they decide to take ALL the money this family has.

Legal or not, CNN asked Wal-Mart why the company pursued the money.

Wal-Mart spokesman John Simley, who called Debbie Shank's case “unbelievably sad,” replied in a statement: “Wal-Mart's plan is bound by very specific rules. ... We wish it could be more flexible in Mrs. Shank's case since her circumstances are clearly extraordinary, but this is done out of fairness to all associates who contribute to, and benefit from, the plan.”

That is just complete Bull. That is not even bunk. That is just outright BULL. John Simley could afford to give the money back to this family himself if he so chose. I bet you he does not care that much.

Jim Shank said he believes Wal-Mart should make an exception.

“My idea of a win-win is -- you keep the paperwork that says you won and let us keep the money so I can take care of my wife,” he said.

They do not care.

The family's situation is so dire that last year Jim Shank divorced Debbie, so she could receive more money from Medicaid.

Jim Shank, 54, is recovering from prostate cancer, works two jobs and struggles to pay the bills. He's afraid he won't be able to send their youngest son to college and pay for his and Debbie's care.

“Who needs the money more? A disabled lady in a wheelchair with no future, whatsoever, or does Wal-Mart need $90 billion, plus $200,000?” he asked.

They don’t need it, but they will take it.

The family's attorney agrees.

“The recovery that Debbie Shank made was recovery for future lost earnings, for her pain and suffering,” Graham said.

“She'll never be able to work again. Never have a relationship with her husband or children again. The damage she recovered was for much more than just medical expenses.”

Graham said he believes Wal-Mart should be entitled to only about $100,000. Right now, about $277,000 remains in the trust -- far short of the $470,000 Wal-Mart wants back.

Refusing to give up the fight, the Shanks appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. But just last week, the high court said it would not hear the case.

That’s because if Wal-Mart is good at anything other than buying and selling cheap Chinese made products, it is covering themselves. Their case is legally sound. The Supreme Court would have to actually violate the law to overturn the Wal-Mart “victory.” Of course they will not do this.

Graham said the Shanks have exhausted all their resources and there's nothing more they can do but go on with their lives.

Jim Shank said he's disappointed with the Supreme Court's decision not to hear the case -- not for the sake of his family -- but for those who might face similar circumstances.

For now, he said the family will figure out a way to get by and “do the best we can for Debbie.”

‘Luckily, she's oblivious to everything,” he said. “We don't tell her what's going on because it will just upset her.”

And Wal-Mart will go on making Billions of dollars without a second thought of this meaningless, in their eyes, disabled person. They won their money back. Screw her. They probably think she would be better off dead anyway. Right?

This is “your Wal-Mart” folks. THIS is “YOUR” Wal-Mart. I remember when Wal-Mart first came to town. They put all the Mom and Pop businesses out of business. Bigger competitors? Well, they pretty much closed down too. Some say they will not shop at Wal-Mart. But good luck. They have and continue to do everything they can to make sure that, THAT is not an option.

Congratulations Wal-Mart. For screwing this family and showing us who you really are at the same time, you ARE the Idiot of the Week. You are even in the running for Idiot of the Year. I truly hope you lose some sales for this one. At the very least, oh, I don’t know, lets say $500,000 this year, just to make up for the money your STOLE from this family. Talk about taking candy from a baby.

AOL News - Wal-Mart Sues Disabled Ex-Employee

Saturday, March 29, 2008

Presidential Radio Address for 032908

President Bush Radio Address 032908

President Bush: "Good morning. It's not every day that Americans look forward to hearing from the Internal Revenue Service, but over the past few weeks many Americans have received a letter from the IRS with some good news. The letters explain that millions of individuals and families will soon be receiving tax rebates, thanks to the economic growth package that Congress passed and I signed into law last month.

Americans who are eligible for a rebate will get it automatically by simply filing their taxes. If you are not a tax filer, you should visit your local IRS office to fill out the necessary paperwork so you can get your rebate on time.

The growth package also contains incentives for businesses to invest in new equipment this year. On Wednesday I visited a printing company in Virginia that has decided to use these incentives to purchase new software. As more businesses begin taking advantage of these incentives, investment will pick up and so will job creation. And together with the individual tax rebates, these incentives will help give our economy a shot in the arm.

For many families, the greatest concern with the economy is the downturn in the housing market. My Administration has taken action to help responsible homeowners keep their homes. In October, we helped bring together a private sector group called the HOPE NOW Alliance. HOPE NOW has helped streamline the process for refinancing and modifying mortgages, and it runs a national hotline to connect struggling homeowners with mortgage counselors.

On Friday, I visited an impressive mortgage counseling center in New Jersey. At the center, I met with homeowners who have been able to get help, thanks to HOPE NOW. One of them is Danny Cerchiaro. Danny owns a home in New Jersey that also serves as a studio for his movie production company. When Danny and his wife learned that their adjustable rate mortgage was resetting to a higher rate this past summer, they became concerned about their financial security. So Danny called HOPE NOW for help. Less than two months later, he was able to get a more affordable fixed-rate mortgage. And today Danny calls the mortgage counselor who helped him, "the magic lady."

Theresa Torres from Kansas City is another homeowner who has been helped. Theresa called HOPE NOW after she and her husband fell behind on their mortgage payments in December. A mortgage counselor helped Theresa modify her mortgage. Today she no longer worries about losing her home.

There are hundreds of thousands of homeowners like Theresa and Danny who could benefit from calling HOPE NOW. If you're a homeowner struggling with your mortgage, please take the first step toward getting help by calling the hotline at 888-995-H-O-P-E. That's 888-995-H-O-P-E.

HOPE NOW can help homeowners find the right solution for them. One solution for some homeowners is a new program we launched at the Federal Housing Administration called FHASecure. This program has given the FHA greater flexibility to offer struggling homeowners with otherwise good credit histories a chance to refinance. So far this program has helped more than 130,000 families refinance their mortgages. And by the end of the year we expect this program to have reached nearly 300,000 homeowners in all.

This is a good start, and my Administration is committed to building on it. So we're exploring ways this program can help more qualified homebuyers. The problems in the housing market are complicated and there is no easy solution. But by supporting responsible homeowners with wise policies, we'll help them weather a difficult period, we will help get our economy back on track, and we will ensure America remains the most prosperous Nation in the world.

Thank you for listening."

Friday, March 28, 2008

From The Emails 032808

Hey folks,

Happy Friday to you. Since it IS Friday, it's time to go to the Emails. I know I have said this in the past, but I really mean it. This week? {Laughing} I CAN'T chose just one. I really just can't chose. I'm sitting here looking at all the Emails and find my self saying "YES. I'll use that one. NO, WAIT! This one. NO, But I have to comment on this one." So you get THREE today. Just deal with it. {Smile}

First up, this one from Heartland Perspectives. This is what I keep telling you folks. The Movement is growing. More and more REAL Scientists are coming out of the wood work to tell you that Global Warming is nothing more than a SCAM. When they do, especially a VERY predominant and RESPECTED Scientist, they get slammed and there is an immediate attack on their character to attempt to dis-credit them. Remember the talking points and the tactics I showed you from the Chicken Little Crowd themselves? Well, how dare a Scientist violate them. Get this.

ABC’s Shameful Global Warming Character Assassination

Written By: James M. Taylor
Published In: Heartland Perspectives
Publication Date: March 26, 2008
Publisher: The Heartland Institute

The nasty tone and gutter tactics of global warming alarmists and their media allies {The Chicken Little Crowd} reached a new low on Easter Sunday when ABC aired on its nightly news and published on its Web site a character assassination of prestigious scientist S. Fred Singer. Singer, one of the most respected and impeccably credentialed atmospheric scientists in the world, deserves much better than the media mafia hit ABC delivered on him.

From the very first sentence, the ABC News hit-piece revealed gratuitous nastiness and personal venom. “His fellow scientists call him a fraud, a charlatan, and a showman,” ABC News said of Singer.

Really? Singer is Distinguished Research Professor at George Mason University and professor emeritus of environmental science at the University of Virginia. A small sampling of his additional professional qualifications includes positions as chief scientist for the U.S. Department of Transportation; dean of the School of Environmental and Planetary Sciences at the University of Miami; director of the National Weather Satellite Service; and director of the Center for Atmospheric and Space Physics at the University of Maryland.

So, which “fellow scientists” feel so supremely qualified as to call a scientist with Singer’s impressive credentials such nasty names? The story does not identify a single one.
{Of course} What specifically makes Singer a “fraud, a charlatan, and a showman”? ABC News refuses to say.

Because they CAN'T. The Chicken Little Crowd CAN'T win ANY argument with those using REAL Science and REAL Facts. This is because they are not using REAL Science. It nothing more than Scaryence. {Scare Science} Bogus, and complete bunk.

ABC News states Singer “argues, against overwhelming scientific evidence, that a warmer planet will actually be beneficial.” Where is the overwhelming evidence that a colder planet is better than a warmer planet? ABC does not say.

Of course.

Let’s see what hard science has to say. By virtually every measure, the warming of the twentieth century produced a far more healthy and vibrant environment than the preceding Little Ice Age. Growing seasons are longer, crop production is at record levels, forests are expanding, deserts are shrinking, soil moisture is higher, and human life spans have never been longer. Yale University economics professor Robert Mendelsohn reports that until and unless global temperatures rise another 2.5 degrees Celsius--something that would not occur for at least a few centuries even if current trends continued--global warming will continue to bestow more benefits than harm upon human health and the environment.

Does recognizing and presenting such facts make Singer a fraud and a charlatan?

Similarly, ABC News asserts that polar bears “are starving because the Arctic ice cap is shrinking.” That is simply a lie. The global polar bear population has doubled since 1970, despite legal polar bear hunting. Starving animal species do not double their numbers in so short a time, even if starting from a low number.


ABC News also claims, “Scientists say there is no other side. The debate about global warming is over.” How is it, then, that more than 19,000 scientists have signed a document known as the Oregon Petition, presenting scientific evidence that humans are not creating a global warming crisis? Even New York Times science reporter Andrew Revkin acknowledges that “For every Ph.D. there is an equal and opposite Ph.D.” who disputes the assertion that humans are causing a global warming crisis.

Told you so.

ABC News claims “scientists from NASA, from Stanford University and from Princeton” dismiss Singer’s research as “fabricated nonsense.” Which scientists? ABC doesn’t say. Assuming they exist, why doesn’t ABC News also mention that the head of NASA is on record as siding with Singer’s analysis?

Doesn't fit the agenda.

ABC News also conveniently forgets to mention the NASA and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) scientists attending the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change who agree with Singer. In addition, the story conceals the fact that the Princeton scientist who so frequently makes such mudslinging attacks is a longtime staffer of the Environmental Defense Fund activist group.

ALL ABOUT MONEY, Control, and POWER folks. It all comes back to THIS.

When a person devotes his entire life to scientific enlightenment, and produces research and scientific findings that are so admired and respected by his peers that he achieves the very highest of professional positions and honors, he deserves better than despicable character assassination from media propagandists. ABC News has disgraced its entire profession.

They are not alone. They want ratings, and of course, money as well. They will go with whoever pays them more. The NEWS is now more like a business. They want to make money just like any other business. So they report what they are TOLD to.

You can keep believing in this bunk if you want, just leave me out of it. I will live the way I chose. I will drive want I want. I will have the light bulbs I want. I will set my OWN temperature in MY house. I will will not EVER bow to the scam. Nor will I ever kiss Father Gore's ring. Sorry, but I'm losing patients with those that are ignorant enough to buy this garbage. I really am. If you chose to do so, then remain ignorant. There is to much REAL Science and FACTS that contradict even the most hardened claims of Man-made Global Warming, to even have FAITH in the possibility of it being real.

Be right back.


Note: "From The Emails" is a weekly segment in the Friday edition of the OPNtalk Blog. If you care to send in News Articles, Comments, Stories, or anything else you may wish to share, please feel free to send it to As always, you never know what you are going to see here.

From The Emails 032808 2

Hey folks,

Here is another one. This one is from the Wall Street Journal - A FARC Fan's Notes

March 25, 2008; Page A22

A hard drive recovered from the computer of a killed Colombian guerrilla has offered more insights into the opposition of House Democrats to the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement.

A military strike three weeks ago killed Raúl Reyes, No. 2 in command of the FARC, Colombia's most notorious terrorist group. The Reyes hard drive reveals an ardent effort to do business directly with the FARC by Congressman James McGovern (D., Mass.), a leading opponent of the free-trade deal. Mr. McGovern has been working with an American go-between, who has been offering the rebels help in undermining Colombia's elected and popular government.

Mr. McGovern's press office says the Congressman is merely working at the behest of families whose relatives are held as FARC kidnap hostages. However, his go-between's letters reveal more than routine intervention. The intervenor with the FARC is James C. Jones, who the Congressman's office says is a "development expert and a former consultant to the United Nations." Accounts of Mr. Jones's exchanges with the FARC appeared in Colombia's Semana magazine on March 15. This Mr. Jones should not be confused with the former Congressman and ambassador to Mexico of the same name from Oklahoma.

"Receive my warm greetings, as always, from Washington," Mr. Jones began in a letter to the rebels last fall. "The big news is that I spoke for several hours with the Democratic Congressman James McGovern. In the meeting we had the opportunity to exchange some ideas that will be, I believe, of interest to the FARC-EP [popular army]."

Mr. Jones added that "a fundamental problem is that the FARC does not have, strategically, a spokesman that can communicate directly with persons of influence in my country like Mr. McGovern." Semana reports that in the documents Mr. Jones "rules himself out as the spokesman but offers himself as a 'bridge' of communication between the FARC and the congressman." Semana says when it spoke with Mr. Jones, he verified the letter and explained that "he made the offer because the guerrillas need interlocutors if they want to achieve peace and that it is a mistake to isolate them."

But communications among FARC rebels suggest the goal was to isolate Colombia's government. A letter that Reyes wrote to top FARC commander Manuel Marulanda on October 26 reads: "According to [Jones's] viewpoint, [President Álvaro] Uribe is increasingly discredited in the U.S. . . He believes that the safe haven [for the rebels] in the counties can be had for reasons mentioned. Congressional Democrats have invited him to Washington to talk about the Colombian crisis in which the principal theme is the swap."

Semana reports that Mr. Jones made some proposals to the FARC, including a Caracas meeting with representatives of Venezuela, Colombia, the FARC, other South American countries, U.S. Congressmen and the Catholic Church. "It would be almost impossible for Uribe to reject such a meeting," Mr. Jones wrote, "without burning himself a lot, nationally and internationally. If he persists in being against it, I have understood that there are ways to pressure him from my country [the U.S.]."

In a letter to Semana, Mr. Jones said his words were taken out of context. He says he is not in favor of the "violent methods of the guerrilla" or "the military solutions" of the government. He had only a professional relationship with the FARC and had to address them as he did because he had to build trust. Mr. McGovern's office says it knew what Mr. Jones was doing and engaged with him because "we need to find an interlocutor who could discuss these things including the safe haven" for the guerrillas.

We think the documents reveal something else entirely: Some Democrats oppose the Colombia trade deal because they sympathize more with FARC's terrorists than with a U.S. antiterror ally.

Of course they do, but we already KNOW this. This is why it is no big deal for people like The Traitor in The House Pelosi to play political games with our men and women in uniform. Play games with the safety and security of our own country. This is why they are the way they are. They LOVE these people. They only wish THEY had the power that the terrorist, Dictators, and Tyrants have.

Folks, this is why we have to limit their power. This is why there must be a balance in Government. This is WHY we cannot let people like Supreme Leader Wannabe Hillary to win the White House. Most definitely NOT with a LWL controlled House and Senate.

Be right back.

Wall Street Journal - A FARC Fan's Notes

Note: "From The Emails" is a weekly segment in the Friday edition of the OPNtalk Blog. If you care to send in News Articles, Comments, Stories, or anything else you may wish to share, please feel free to send it to As always, you never know what you are going to see here.

From The Emails 032808 3

Hey folks,

Now this one from Senator Bill Nelson himself. I know, he's a Democrat, but I am with him on this one.

March 27, 2008

Dear Peter,

This morning in Tallahassee, I spoke before our state Senate on a subject that has become all too familiar to Florida—the right to vote and to have that vote count as intended.

I commended the Florida Senate and Governor Crist for banning touch-screen voting machines; last fall, I filed legislation in the U.S. Senate requiring that no vote for federal office be cast on a touch-screen voting machine starting in 2012. I also proposed a system of six rotating primaries from March to June in each presidential election year.

But these actions are just a beginning.

When I return to Washington, I will propose a legislative package that calls for early voting in every state, allows every qualified voter in every state the option of casting an absentee ballot, gives grants to states that develop pilot projects for mail-in balloting and secure Internet voting, and eliminates machines that don't produce a voting paper trail.

And, I will propose that we amend the U.S. Constitution to abolish the Electoral College, giving citizens direct election of their president by popular vote.

Let's not forget: it was more than 230 years ago that our Founding Fathers declared that all men are created equal. But the country still had to wait 94 years before former slaves were given the vote. And it took another 50 years before women in America were allowed to vote.

This country cannot wait that long to fix the flaws we still see in our election system. The blessings of liberty cannot wait. The time for reform is now.

Thank you Senator. I really mean that. Why not let the PEOPLE vote. Uh, just a suggestion though, why not start with getting rid of all the insanity of the Democrat nomination procedures along with the superdelegates? Like I said, just a suggestion.

Have a great Weekend. See you Sunday.

Note: "From The Emails" is a weekly segment in the Friday edition of the OPNtalk Blog. If you care to send in News Articles, Comments, Stories, or anything else you may wish to share, please feel free to send it to As always, you never know what you are going to see here.

Thursday, March 27, 2008

Road Getting Rocky For Dem Hopefuls

Hey folks,

Happy Thursday. The road to victory, and the White House, seem to be getting pretty rocky for the Democrat hopefuls. McCain? well, he is just kinda there.

Yesterday was all about Clinton being caught lying. Told you this would be going on for days. Now today, Reuters is reporting a new poll that shows an eight percent drop in approval. I really found this NBC poll interesting until I read the last paragraph. But most of the news out there is how, because of their actions, and the fact more and more people are FINNALLY figuring out that they both LIE, both of them are beginning to feel the heat.

According to Reuters- Clinton takes hit in new poll on White House race
Wed Mar 26, 10:53 PM ET

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's positive rating has dropped to a new low of 37 percent in an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll released on Wednesday.

According to the poll, the New York senator's positive rating slid 8 percentage points in two weeks and she had a negative rating of 48 percent in a week where she admitted making a mistake in claiming she had come under sniper fire during a 1996 trip to Bosnia.

Along with the fact it has been established that this was not just a misspeak, but an outright lie that she has told over and over again.

Clinton's Democratic rival, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, also saw a slight dip in his positive rating, to 49 percent from 51 percent, the poll found.

That was due to his Uncle, uh, Pastor, uh Racist friend's comments.

NBC said 32 percent of respondents said Obama "sufficiently addressed the issue" and 26 percent said he needed to say more about the Wright controversy.

More than half of those surveyed -- 55 percent -- said they were "disturbed" by the videos of Wright that were widely circulated on television and the Internet, the poll found.

Now I found this next part interesting. It just didn't make that much sense to me compared to other polls I have seen.

In head-to-head matchups, Obama and Clinton were even at 45 percent. In general election matchups, Obama led McCain by 44 percent to 42 percent and McCain led Clinton by 46 percent to 44 percent.

When asked which candidate could unite the country if elected, 60 percent said Obama, 58 percent said McCain and 46 percent said Clinton.

The poll of 700 registered voters was conducted on Monday and Tuesday and had a margin of error of 3.7 percentage points.

REALLY? Then I read this.

NBC said its pollsters oversampled African-Americans to get a more reliable cross tabulation on questions regarding Obama's speech on race.

Oh. OK, Well THAT makes sense. We do not know how much they OVERSAMPLED African-Americans. They could have ALL been for all we know. But that would make sense why 60 percent still feel Obama can still unite the country. {Sigh} He really just can't.

But then you have this story from the AP - Obama seeks to quell flap over pastor
Thu Mar 27, 1:44 AM ET

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama on Wednesday sought to quell concerns over anti-American remarks by his former pastor, saying people are paying too much attention to a small number of "stupid" comments.

But it's not Barack. It shows a history and what appears to be a common practice by a Racist person using the pulpit to spew hate.

"This is somebody that was preaching three sermons at least a week for 30 years and it got boiled down ... into a half-minute sound clip and just played it over and over and over again, partly because it spoke to some of the racial divisions we have in this country," Obama told an audience in this central North Carolina city.

"There are misunderstandings on both sides," the Illinois senator said. "We cannot solve the problems of America if every time somebody somewhere does something stupid, that everybody gets up in arms and forgets about the war in Iraq and we forget about the economy."

{Laughing} Change the subject, CHANGE the SUBJECT!! Sorry, but you did not do enough to convince people that this has NOT effected you. We hear what you are saying. But then we hear your wife. Then we hear your Pastor of twenty years. Then we see you will not disassociate yourself with him. YOU are running for President. YOU want us to trust you on the economy. You want us to TRUST you on the War? You cannot even denounce a Racist? Separate yourself from him? HE IS STILL employed by your campaign?

On Tuesday, Obama's rival for the Democratic nomination, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, weighed in directly, saying: "I think that given all we have heard and seen, he would not have been my pastor."

The controversy began earlier this month when videos of Wright's sermons surfaced, including one in which the pastor shouts "God damn America" for its treatment of minorities.

Wright has said the U.S. government invented AIDS to destroy "people of color" and also has suggested that U.S. policies in the Middle East and elsewhere were partly responsible for the 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and the Pentagon.

In the speech last week, Obama sharply condemned Wright's remarks and the preacher's refusal to acknowledge progress in race relations. But he refused to repudiate his longtime spiritual mentor, saying he could no more disown Wright than he could disown his white grandmother.

Wright has canceled some planned public appearances this week. Obama said Wednesday he has spoken with the pastor.

WAIT!!!!! WRONG!!! Wright has not cancelled anything. THEY cancelled Wright. These speaking engagements were to take place in Black Churches. THEY cancelled HIM. They understand what it means to distance themselves from this man. Why can't Obama get it?

"I have talked to him. I have not asked him to do anything," the Illinois senator told reporters.

That is the point. Then you have this, which I find funny. Pelosi being told to butt out of the Superdelegate race. According to Reuters - Clinton backers warn Pelosi on superdelegate rift By John Whitesides, Political Correspondent
Wed Mar 26, 8:17 PM ET

A group of prominent Hillary Clinton donors sent a letter to House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Wednesday asking her to retract her comments on superdelegates and stay out of the Democratic fight over their role in the presidential race.

The 20 prominent Clinton supporters told Pelosi she should "clarify" recent statements to make it clear superdelegates -- nearly 800 party insiders and elected officials who are free to back any candidate -- could support the candidate they think would be the best nominee.

Pelosi has not publicly endorsed either Clinton or Barack Obama in their hotly contested White House battle, but she recently said superdelegates should support whoever emerges from the nomination contests with the most pledged delegates -- which appears almost certain to be Obama.

She does not want a woman to take a higher position than her. {Laughing} Right now SHE is the most powerful Woman in Government. She also does not LIKE Hillary. This is getting good folks.

"This is an untenable position that runs counter to the party's intent in establishing superdelegates in 1984," the letter from the wealthy Clinton backers said.

No, the party's intent for the Superdelegates to to ignore voters. To put into place whomever they want. In this case, Hillary.

"Superdelegates, like all delegates, have an obligation to make an informed, individual decision about whom to support and who would be the party's strongest nominee," said the letter signed by some of Clinton's biggest fund raisers.

Told you they are laying the ground work for the nomination steal.

Superdelegates have emerged as likely kingmakers in the fight between Clinton and Obama. The letter was another sign of growing Democratic tension over their nominating battle.

Neither candidate is expected to have enough pledged delegates won in state-by-state contests to clinch the nomination when voting ends in June, leaving the choice in the hands of the superdelegates.

Both candidates have wooed them heavily, with Obama contending they should follow the will of Democratic voters and Clinton arguing they should vote for the candidate with the best chance of winning the presidential election in November -- which she says is her.

Translation time "SCREW the voters. They are to stupid to know who to vote for. So it is up to you to do the right thing. Crown me as Supreme Leader."

Among the signees of the letter were prominent Democrats and Clinton supporters like Robert Johnson, founder of Black Entertainment Television; Bernard Schwartz, former chairman of Loral Space and Communications; and venture capitalist Steven Rattner.

The signees reminded the House leader from California of their support for the party's House campaign committee and said "therefore" she should "reflect in your comments a more open view" about superdelegates.

"We appreciate your activities in support of the Democratic Party and your leadership role in the party and hope you will be responsive to some of your major enthusiastic supporters," the letter said.

Listen to the kooks. You better do the right thing and shut up if you want to keep your power.

The Obama campaign said the Illinois senator would support the election efforts of House Democrats no matter what the outcome of the nomination fight.

"This letter is inappropriate and we hope the Clinton campaign will reject the insinuation contained in it," Obama spokesman Bill Burton said.

Clinton spokesman Phil Singer said Clinton had made the case superdelegates should exercise independent judgment about who would be the best for the party and the country.

"Few have done more to build the Democratic Party than Bill and Hillary Clinton. The last thing they need is a lecture from the Obama campaign," he said.

{Laughing} You REALLY can't make THIS stuff up folks. You really can't. You just need to sit back and watch.

Reuters- Clinton takes hit in new poll on White House race
AP - Obama seeks to quell flap over pastor
Reuters - Clinton backers warn Pelosi on superdelegate rift