H.S. For Sunday 011308

Cloned Food To Be Approved

Hey folks,

According to the AFP / The Wall Street Journal on Friday Jan 4, 2007, in cased you missed it, the FDA is about to approve cloned food.

The US Food and Drug Administration is expected to declare milk and meat from cloned animals and their offspring safe to eat as early as next week, the Wall Street Journal reported Friday.

I’ve been waiting to see if it is announced that they have, but I have not seen it yet. This really bothers me. We do not know that it is safe. We do not have any long term evidence of it’s effect on the human body. Nothing. Back on December 26, 2006 I posted Cloned Food. Do You Want To Know? In that I talked about an Boston.com story that said this was already a done deal. According to Boston.com THEN.

"WASHINGTON --Federal scientists have concluded there is no difference between food from cloned animals and food from conventional livestock, setting the stage for the government to declare Thursday that cloned animals are safe for the human food supply.

The Food and Drug Administration planned to brief industry groups in advance of an announcement. The agency indicated it would approve cloned livestock in a scientific journal article published online earlier this month.

The agency "concludes that meat and milk from clones and their progeny is as safe to eat as corresponding products derived from animals produced using contemporary agricultural practices," FDA scientists Larisa Rudenko and John C. Matheson wrote in the Jan. 1 issue of Theriogenology."

I said this.

So you are telling me that there is no difference? What about the sped up growth? What effect will this process have on those consuming the meat? Drinking the milk? Already you can see the difference in our kids maturing faster than ever, some blame the milk and hormones along with other preservatives in food NOW. What happens when they start eating cloned meat?

It was an honest question then, even more so now. Back to the AFP

The federal agency decision would come after more than six years of deliberation on the issue, the newspaper said, without naming its sources.

FDA spokeswoman Kimberly Rawlings told AFP that the food agency "is still working to finalize our risk assessment activities" and that it could not say when the process would be complete.

I sure hope so.

The FDA ruled in 2006 that milk and meat from cloned cattle, swine and goats were no different from healthy, conventionally bred animals, but has asked producers not to sell products from cloned animals pending a safety ruling.

As I told you.

It previously described cloning as a more advanced form of breeding technology already used in the cattle industry, such as artificial insemination, embryo transfer and in vitro fertilization, the Journal said.

No it isn’t. NONE of those include the injection of Spend up Growth drugs, all the chemical and other manipulation that they MUST use to clone. It is NOT the same thing. We do NOT know, as Ms. Kimberly Rawlings just told you.

Even if the agency does approve such products, it could be three to five years before US consumers see milk and meat from offspring of cloned animals on store shelves, the newspaper said.

It said that because cloned cattle cost 15,000 to 20,000 dollars per copy, most cloned animals would be used for breeding.

A green light from the FDA would be a milestone for biotech companies that want to center their business on producing copies of prize dairy cows and other farm animals, it added.

Meat or dairy products from cloned animals or their offspring would however likely face deep-seated opposition from consumers groups, some of whom still routinely refer to foods such as genetically-modified corn as "Frankenfood."

"Most consumers do not find this appealing," the paper quoted Marguerite Copel, from Dean Foods Co., one of the top US milk producers, as saying, adding that the company would not sell milk from cloned animals.

Good, then I would be buying from companies like them. I agree, we already have "Frankenfood." and we already have sides effects. Do you REALLY want to eat cloned meat?

The paper said consumer wariness could also lead to a backlash from opponents in US Congress and markets such as the European Union over concerns that it is too early to say for sure if food from cloned animals is safe.

Yes but here is the problem. Some do not even WANT you to KNOW what you are eating. Remember this?

"Consumers are going to be having a product that has potential safety issues and has a whole load of ethical issues tied to it, without any labeling," said Joseph Mendelson, legal director of the Center for Food Safety.

They do not even want to tell you the food is cloned. Get this.

Further concerns center on the higher number of health problems that cloned animals tend to experience at birth, compared to conventionally-bred animals.

The US food industry was divided on the issue, the paper said, with some big food companies saying they are not interested in products from cloned animals or their offspring, while others are actively exploring the possibilities.

Some in the meat industry consider that consumers would come to prefer products from cloned animals, given leaner and larger cuts of meat, it said.

"These animals are not some kind of freaks of nature," James Hodges, president of The American Meat Institute Foundation told the newspaper.

No, they are freaks of man. THAT is the point.

The European Food Safety Authority, the European Union's equivalent of the FDA, would likely deliver its own initial assessment on food from cloned animals next week, but a final decision was not expected for months, it added.

Regulators in countries such as Australia, Canada, France, Japan and New Zealand, which already have livestock clones, although they rarely enter the food chain, would be closely watching the FDA decision, the paper said.

This is scary to me at least. I do not know about you, but I have no desire to become a live experiment on the effects of man-made meat. I do not want to eat, drink, or partake of anything of the MANATURE. {Man made Nature} I most DEFINITELY want to know if what I’m about to buy is cloned.
Peter

Sources:
OPNTalk - Cloned Food. Do You Want To Know?
Boston.com - FDA set to OK food from cloned animals
AFP - US regulators set to approve cloned meat, milk: report

Kucinich Demands Recount, 100 Grand Offered

Hey folks,

This one is fun. Now I caught this story off the PRNewswire / USNewswire. I found many are reporting this, mostly local papers, but I have not seen this reported much in the big ones. Dennis Kucinich, whom I have affectionately nicknamed Ratman, is on a new mission. He demands a recount in New Hampshire.

Dennis Kucinich Asks for Recount in New Hampshire Primary due to Unusual Anomalies in the Results

VelvetRevolution Offers $100,000 Reward for Evidence of Election Fraud in New Hampshire Primary

WASHINGTON, Jan. 11 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Last night, Presidential Candidate Dennis Kucinich formally requested a hand-recount of the votes in New Hampshire. He sent a letter to the New Hampshire Secretary of State asking for a recount of Tuesday's election because of "unexplained disparities between hand-counted ballots and machine-counted ballots."

He added, "Ever since the 2000 election -- and even before -- the American people have been losing faith in the belief that their votes were actually counted. This recount isn't about who won 39% of 36% or even 1%. It's about establishing whether 100% of the voters had 100% of their votes counted exactly the way they cast them." Kucinich wrote, "This is not about my candidacy or any other individual candidacy. It is about the integrity of the election process."

"New Hampshire is in the unique position to address -- and, if so determined, rectify -- these issues before they escalate into a massive, nationwide suspicion of the process by which Americans elect their President. Based on the controversies surrounding the Presidential elections in 2004 and 2000, New Hampshire is in a prime position to investigate possible irregularities and to issue findings for the benefit of the entire nation," Kucinich wrote in his letter. "Without an official recount, the voters of New Hampshire and the rest of the nation will never know whether there are flaws in our electoral system that need to be identified and addressed at this relatively early point in the Presidential nominating process," said Kucinich.

VelvetRevolution.us ("VR"), The Brad Blog and Progressive Democrats of America have been working together to gather and report as much information as possible on the problems associated with the NH primary. VR requested an official investigation and yesterday posted a $100,000 reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of any person or persons who caused a manipulation of the Diebold machines used in the New Hampshire primary election sufficient to flip the Obama/Clinton race, or information that results in an official change of the first place winner of that Democrat race. Kucinich reviewed the material and decided that democracy is best served by a recount.

We believe that such a recount will help restore faith in our elections, and that it will deter any planned fraud in the future. In fact, our position at VR is that all votes should be cast on ballots and all ballots should be counted and audited and, in close elections, there should be an automatic hand recount with independent observers.

VelvetRevolution.us is a non-profit organization dedicated to clean government and honest elections.

SOURCE VelvetRevolution.us

Yes folks, he thinks there was some funny business there. I tend to agree with him on this one. Could it be that people may have been buses in to vote? Could it be that the Crying Game worked?

The thing that is important to remember about this, is that NO amount of recount will put him in the lead. He just actually seems genuinely concerned that this was rigged. I hope he gets it. It will be fun to see the outcome.
Peter

Presidential Radio Address For Saturday 011208

President Bush: "Good morning. I'm speaking to you from the Middle East, where I have been meeting with friends and allies. We're discussing how we can work together to confront the extremists who threaten our future. And I have encouraged them to take advantage of the historic opportunity we have before us to advance peace, freedom, and security in this vital part of the world.

My first stop was Israel and the Palestinian Territories. I had good meetings with Israeli Prime Minister Olmert and Palestinian President Abbas. Both these men are committed to peace in the Holy Land. Both these men have been elected by their people. And both share a vision of two democratic states -- Israel and Palestine -- living side by side in peace and security.

I came away encouraged by my meetings with Israeli and Palestinian leaders. Each side understands that the key to achieving its own goals is helping the other side achieve its goals. For the Israelis, their main goal is ensuring the safety of their people and the security of their nation. For the Palestinians, the goal is a state of their own, where they can enjoy the dignity that comes with sovereignty and self-government.

In plain language, the result must be the establishment of a free and democratic homeland for the Palestinian people, just as Israel is a free and democratic homeland for the Jewish people. For this to happen, the Israelis must have secure, recognized, and defensible borders. And the Palestinians must have a state that is viable, contiguous, sovereign, and independent. Achieving this vision will require tough decisions and painful concessions from both sides.

I believe that a peace agreement between Israelis and Palestinians that defines a Palestinian state is possible this year. Prime Minister Olmert made clear to me that he understands a democratic Palestinian state is in the long-term security interests of Israel. President Abbas is committed to achieving this Palestinian state through negotiation. The United States cannot impose an agreement on the Israelis and Palestinians -- that is something they must work out themselves. But with hard work and good will on both sides, they can make it happen. And both men are getting down to the serious work of negotiation to make sure it does happen.

The United States will do all we can to encourage these negotiations and promote reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians. But the international community has a responsibility to help as well. In particular, the Arab nations of the Gulf have a responsibility both to support President Abbas, Prime Minister Fayyad, and other Palestinian leaders as they work for peace, and to work for a larger reconciliation between Israel and the Arab world. And in my meetings with Arab leaders over the next few days, I will urge them to do their part.

A democratic Palestinian state is in the interests of the Palestinians. It is in the long-term security interests of Israel. And it is in the interests of a world at war with terrorists and extremists trying to impose their brutal vision on the Middle East. By helping the Israeli and Palestinian people lay the foundation for lasting peace, we will help build a more hopeful future for the Holy Land -- and a safer world for the American people.

Thank you for listening."

From The Emails 011108

Hey folks,

It's Friday. Happy Friday to you. Now you know my feelings toward CPS and DCF. I have told the story a few times in the past both here and elsewhere. I told my story in dealing with them. I have told you about all the kids that go missing and a e abused in state custody. I have shared stories of others.

You KNOW how I feel. Some of you said things like, "Well, you know they are just doing their job. They are protecting the children." I explained I understand the need, sad as it may be, to do that. But I'm sorry. These groups have WAY TOO MUCH power and ability to destroy families, and they, in essence, answer to no one. I have a major problem with this.

Well, one of you KNOW this and sent me this article. Talk about my blood boiling over. GET THIS. From World Net Daily.

POLICE STATE, USA
SWAT officers invade home, take 11-year-old at gunpoint
Cops demand boy go to doctor because of fall during horseplay

Posted: January 7, 2008
1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2008 WorldNetDaily.com


Nearly a dozen members of a police SWAT team in western Colorado punched a hole in the front door and invaded a family's home with guns drawn, demanding that an 11-year-old boy who had had an accidental fall accompany them to the hospital, on the order of Garfield County Magistrate Lain Leoniak.

The boy's parents and siblings were thrown to the floor at gunpoint and the parents were handcuffed in the weekend assault, and the boy's father told WND it was all because a paramedic was upset the family preferred to care for their son themselves.

Someone, apparently the unidentified paramedic, called police, the sheriff's office and social services, eventually providing Leoniak with a report that generated the magistrate's court order to the sheriff's office for the SWAT team assault on the family's home in a mobile home development outside of Glenwood Springs, the father, Tom Shiflett, told WND.

WND calls and e-mails to Garfield County Social Services were not returned, and Leoniak, who earlier served as a water court clerk/referee, also was not available.

Sheriff Lou Vallario, however, did call back, and told WND he ordered his officers to do exactly what the magistrate demanded.

"I was given a court order by the magistrate to seize the child, and arrange for medical evaluation, and that's what we did," he said.

According to friends of the family, Tom Shiflett, who has 10 children including six still at home, and served with paramedics in Vietnam, was monitoring his son's condition himself.

The paramedic and magistrate, however, ruled that that wasn't adequate, and dispatched the officers to take the boy, John, to a hospital, where a doctor evaluated him and released him immediately.

The accident happened during horseplay, Tom Shiflett told WND. John was grabbing the door handle of a car as his sister was starting to drive away slowly. He slipped, fell to the ground and hit his head, Shiflett said.

He immediately carried his son into their home several doors away, and John was able to recite Bible verses and correctly spell words as his father and mother, Tina, requested. There were no broken bones, no dilated eyes, or any other noticeable problems.

The family, whose members live by faith and homeschool, decided not to call an ambulance. But a neighbor did call Westcare Ambulance, and paramedics responded to the home, asking to see and evaluate the boy.

The paramedics were allowed to see the boy, and found no significant impairment, but wanted to take him to the hospital for an evaluation anyway. Fearing the hospital's bills, the family refused to allow that.

"This apparently did not go over well with one of the paramedics and they started getting aggravated at Tom for not letting them have their way," a family acquaintance told WND.

"The paramedics were not at all respectful of Tom's decision, nor did they act in a manner we would expect from professional paramedics," the acquaintance said.

So the ambulance crew, who also could not be reached by WND, called police, only to be told the decision was up to the Shiflett familiy.

The paramedics then called the sheriff's office, and officers responded to the home, and were told everyone was being cared for.

Then the next day, Friday, social services workers appeared at the door and demanded to talk with John "in private."

They were so persistent Tom ended up having to get John out of the bathtub he was just soaking in, to bring him to the front porch where the social workers could see him, the family reported.

Then, following an afternoon shopping trip to town, the family settled in for the evening, only to be shocked with the SWAT team attack.

The sheriff said the decision to use SWAT team force was justified because the father was a "self-proclaimed constitutionalist" and had made threats and "comments" over the years.

However, the sheriff declined to provide a single instance of the father's illegal behavior. "I can't tell you specifically," he said.

"He was refusing to provide medical care," the sheriff said.

However, the sheriff said if his own children were involved in an at-home accident, he would want to be the one to make decisions on their healthcare, as did Shiflett.

"I guess if that was one of my children, I would make that decision," the sheriff said.

But he said Shiflett was "rude and confrontational" when the paramedics arrived and entered his home without his permission.

The sheriff also admitted that the injury to the child had been at least 24 hours earlier, because the fall apparently happened Thursday afternoon, and the SWAT attack happened late Friday evening.

Officials with the Home School Legal Defense Association reported they were looking into the case, because of requests from family friends who are members of the organization.

"While people can debate whether or not the father should have brought his son to the ER – it seems like this was not the kind of emergency that warrants this kind of outrageous conduct by government officials," a spokesman said.

Tom Shiflett said when John was evaluated by the physician, "they didn't find anything wrong with him."

He said the paramedics never should have entered his home, but they followed his wife in the front door when she came in.

"My attention was on my son," Shiflett said.

He said the SWAT team punched a hole in his door with a ramrod, and the first officer in the home pointed a gun right in the face of Tom's 20-year-old daughter.

"I don't know where social services ever got started, or where they got their authority," he said. "But I want to know why we have something in this country that violates our rights, that takes a parental right away."

He said he saw a multitude of injuries in Vietnam, and while he recognized that his son needed to be watched, he wasn't willing to turn his child over to the paramedics.

With 10 children, most of them older than John, it's not as if he hasn't seen a bruise or two, either, he said.

"Now I'm hunting for lawyers that will take the case … I'm going to sue everybody whose name was on that page right down to the judge," he said.

Mike Donnelly, a lawyer with the HSLDA, told WND the case had a set of circumstances that could be problematic for authorities.

"In Doe V. Heck, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals held that parents have a fundamental right to familial relations including a liberty interest in the care, custody and control of their children," he said.

He also said many social services agencies apply "a one size fits all approach" to cases, regardless of circumstances.

There is so much to comment on in this case, I just do not have time right now to cover it all. Ask me again why I have a problem with CPS and DCS? Tell me again why they have all this power? Tell me again, this is right?

Have a great Weekend, see you Sunday.
Peter

Democrats Need To Control Reid

Hey folks,

In the “Here We Go Again” category, Reid is at it again. According to the AP - Democrats: Iraqi troop buildup a failure, By ANNE FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer 9 minutes ago

One year after President Bush announced his politically unpopular plan to send thousands more troops to Iraq, Democrats are struggling to counter the administration's argument that the buildup succeeded.

The influx of some 30,000 additional soldiers and Marines helped to secure the troubled Baghdad capital and western Anbar province. While more U.S. troops died in 2007 than in any other year since the war began, the death count declined substantially in the final months as operations were in full swing. And in Anbar in particular, local leaders turned against al-Qaida operatives and began cooperating with coalition forces, spurring optimism among U.S. officials that Iraq was reaching a turning point.

The upswing prompted Bush to declare this week that 2007, in the end, "had become incredibly successful, beyond anybody's expectations."

It has. This is just fact. Notice how the Libs have gotten away from the whole Iraq war thing? Now all of a sudden, Reid has decided to bring it up AGAIN? Could it be, because he sees Hillary’s “come back," as evidence that she is NOW once again the enviable next President?

Still, the Iraqi government has made almost none of the political progress that was promised and Iraqi forces remains heavily dependent on U.S. troops — a reality Democrats say isn't lost among voters.

That is just not true. They have made a GREAT deal of progress. They have a long way to go. But Progress has been made. Once again, they do not answer to OUR Congress. Sorry Reid, Pelosi, and anyone else, they are their own people and control the way THEY do things.

"No amount of White House spin can hide the fact that the escalation's chief objective of political reconciliation remains unmet, Iraqis have not demonstrated any readiness to stand up and take responsibility for their own country, and 2007 was the most lethal year yet for American troops," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

Until the surge. That worked, and continues to work.

Public opinion may still be in the Democrats' corner, with firm disapproval of Bush's handling of the war since its inception. But the Iraq debate now must share center stage with hot domestic issues like health care, the economy and immigration. In this week's New Hampshire primary, exit polls showed Iraq took second place to the economy in importance for both Democratic and Republican voters.

OH, so he is going on the polls? Makes sense. That is ALL the Democrats do. Too bad it means NOTHING. The War is NOT the issue that people care about in this election Harry.

The split focus is in sharp contrast to the 2006 elections, which were dominated heavily by the war and put Democrats in power for the first time in 12 years.

Which is also why he is trying to revive it. He thinks, or has been told to think, that now Hillary is again the Candidate of inevitability, if he can turn more people against the war, they will win again in 08. It is STILL all about political show and using our troops as political pawns. Too bad most Americans are tired of it. Don’t believe it. Will reject Congresses political showboating, the way they have every other time they try it. Especially, since we are winning. Things are improving. Progress IS being made.

Of course, the war could easily rebound as the No. 1 issue for voters. The first big test of security gains linked to the U.S. troop buildup in Iraq is at hand. The military already has begun reversing the troop increase and commanders are hoping the drop in insurgent and sectarian violence won't prove fleeting.

We will have to wait to see. But we are withdrawing troops because things ARE improving. We are winning.

At the same time, however, the Pentagon is preparing to send at least 3,000 Marines to Afghanistan in April to bolster efforts to hold off another expected Taliban offensive in the spring, military officials said Wednesday. The move represents a shift in Pentagon thinking that has been slowly developing after months of repeated insistence that the U.S. was not inclined to fill the need for as many as 7,500 more troops that commanders have asked for there.

Which Congress is for. Or at least, what they WERE for.

Democrats are likely to try again to set a timetable on troop withdrawals from Iraq when Congress reconvenes this year. But with Republicans sticking firmly behind the president, Democrats know it is unlikely such measures will pass for now.

{Sigh} Still beholden to the LWL I see. Still owned by Soros. Still talking to the idiots like MorON.org, I mean MoveON, and Media Matters, I see.

Some moderates say they hope 2008 will be the year of compromise, in which Democratic leaders will agree to swing behind softer anti-war legislation in a bid to entice moderate Republicans. Republican support for legislation is crucial because Democrats hold a narrow margin of control in Congress and lack the two-thirds support to overcome a veto.

Timetables, and demands for premature withdraws will fail, just like they have the OTHER 40 something times they were tried. “Some moderates{AKA Libs} say they hope 2008 will be the year of compromise, in which Democratic leaders will agree to swing behind softer anti-war legislation in a bid to entice moderate Republicans.” Then someone better talk to Reid.

Sen. Ben Nelson, a conservative Nebraska Democrat, said he hopes that this year more attention will be drawn to his proposal that would restrict the mission of U.S. troops but not set a timeline for redeployments. However, he said, he's not sure what leadership will do just yet.

"Everybody's trying to figure out what is going to work," said Nelson.

How about this Bill, how about letting the troops do their job? How about actually running THIS country. You know, getting stuff done HERE, things the American people ACTUALLY care about?

Absent a deal on troop withdrawal legislation, Democrats this year are expected to tackle other war-related legislation intended still to challenge Bush's Iraq policies or highlight problems with the war. For example, the Senate this year might take up its version of a House bill that would ensure contractors working in Iraq can be prosecuted by U.S. courts.

I have great hopes for 2008, but it looks like the Dems and the LWL still just want to play the SAME games. Now that Hillary is again deemed the Candidate of inevitability by some in the Mainstream Media, Congress is starting to pander to the Far Left Lunatic Fringe again. The LWL. They will accomplish the same as they have last year, and every time they do this. Nothing.

See you tomorrow
Peter

Clinton Did It

Hey folks,

Those are words I hope to NEVER be able to utter in the up coming General Election. Clinton did it. But remember what I told you on Sunday? Obama said to Clinton, "Your likable enough Hillary." I said this.

But she is not. She does not have what she tries to portray. When she is talking to Southerners, she has an accent. When she is talking to Blacks, she has a Black accent. She makes stories up. Completely makes stuff up about her life and experience. She has tried EVERYTHING to fool, I mean, GET people to like her. When she TRIES to show that she is fired up, or passionate about this or that, all we hear is SCREECHING. When she is asked something that she does not like, all we hear is a cackling laugh. People ARE learning who she is. Someone who will lie, cheat and steal to get what she wants. Most American still find that offensive.

On the Democrat side, I see a battle between Obama and Edwards. But NEVER count Clinton out. If she can not win fairly, she still could find a way.

Well, she did it. She won New Hampshire. It was close. As close to predict a lawsuit if she lost by that much, or if any Democrat loses by this much in the General. But she still won. You cannot EVER count Clinton out. All those people that were saying that she was going to pull out were premature in their prediction at best. She is OBSESSED in becoming the next Supreme Leader, I mean, President. She is most likely in this until the end.

Money is no problem. She has nothing better to do. Oh yeah, is she not STILL the Senator in NY? Well, like I said, she has nothing better to do. Bill wants back in also. The LWL want her in. That includes Soros. The Clinton machine is working full steam ahead. After her rebirth in New Hampshire, look for her, the Soros controlled media, and Clinton owned and controlled Blogs out there, Media Matters, MoveOn, ETC. to step up their attacks on Obama now, BIG TIME. They will now do ANYTHING they have to to NOT have a repeat in Iowa.

But this should tell you something. On the Republican side, MacCain did not just win, he won in a landslide. Really? Yup. Huckabee came in third. You have to remember that New Hampshire is a VERY Liberal state. So of course the Libs will do well there. So we'll have to wait and see how this all pans out in time.

Now what I think SHOULD happen is this. On the Democrat side, Clinton, Obama, and Edwards should go on. Everyone else most likely should just get out of the race. On the Republican side, McCain, Romney, Huckabee, and maybe Giuliani, should go on, all others, sad to say, Thompson should most likely get out. This is not going to happen though. Thomson is waiting to see what happens a little bit down the road, and Kucinich seems a little obsessed. But it's starting to be time to concentrate on those that actually stand a chance of winning now.

If anything, last night proves that this will continue to be fun to watch. Just remember what is REALLY on the line here. America itself.
Peter

Hillary Facing Defeat Not Pretty

Hey folks,

No, I’m not going to talk about the Crocodile Tears, or lack of by Hillary. I’m not going to tell you she is going to drop out. I’m not even going to tell you that she is more than scared. Well, OK, I AM going to tell you she is more than scared.

This is the day. As a matter of fact, as of midnight, some towns around New Hampshire have already started voting.

I caught this last night. It from the AP - Emotions run high on eve of NH primary By DAVID ESPO and PHILIP ELLIOTT, Associated Press Writers

Her voice quavering, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton struggled Monday to avoid a highly damaging second straight defeat in the Democratic presidential race. Republicans John McCain and Mitt Romney scrapped for success on the eve of a New Hampshire primary that neither could afford to lose.

"You're the wave, and I'm riding it," Sen. Barack Obama, the new Democratic front-runner, told several hundred voters who cheered him in 40-degree weather after being turned away from an indoor rally filled to capacity.

Obama has been drawing large, boisterous crowds since he won the Iowa caucuses last week, and a spate of pre-primary polls showed him powering to a lead in New Hampshire, as well.

Clinton runs second in the surveys, with former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina third, and the former first lady and her aides seemed to be bracing for another setback.

You can spin one loss, not two. THAT is the sad truth.

At one stop, she appeared to struggle with her emotions when asked how she copes with the grind of the campaign — but her words still had bite. "Some of us are ready and some of us are not," she said in remarks aimed at Obama, less than four years removed from the Illinois Legislature.

YOUR not ready. Better yet, America is not ready for YOU. It’s not that you are a women, it’s that we are not ready to lose this great country to a Supreme Leader Wannabe. You have been under the delusion that you are entitled to the White House. You have been under the delusion that you do not need to answer to the people. You sold out to a few hard core LWL members. YOU Hillary, YOU are to blame for where you are.

YOU told us what you wanted to do. YOU said,

"The other day the oil companies reported the highest profits in the history of the world. I want to take those profits and I want to put them into a strategic energy fund that will begin to fund alternative, smart energy, alternative and technology that will begin to actually move us toward the direction of independence. I have to tell you, I am not running for president to put Band-Aids on our problems. "

The Democratic senator said what the Bush administration touts as an ownership society really is an on your own society that has widened the gap between rich and poor.

"I prefer a 'we're all in it together' society," she said. "I believe our government can once again work for all Americans. It can promote the great American tradition of opportunity for all and special privileges for none. "

"There is no greater force for economic growth than free markets. But markets work best with rules that promote our values, protect our workers and give all people a chance to succeed, she said. Fairness doesn't just happen. It requires the right government policies. "

"We have sent a message to our young people that if you don't go to college ... that you're thought less of in America. We have to stop this, she said. Our country cannot run without the people who have the skills that are taught in this school. "
Just to name as few. Then I told you this on Oct 21, 2007

Campaign for America's Future co-director Roger Hickey just said this.

“Congressional conservatives and the president are the culprits who have stood in the way of a new progressive direction for our nation”

“A new progressive direction for our nation” SOCIALISM He just came out and said it.

If you vote the LWL to stay in power, and you vote someone like Supreme Leader Wannabe Hillary into the White House in 08, you WILL have someone in power who has antepenultimate power. Like what we just read by CNN “We will do what we have to do to approve the constitutional reforms that the president proposes because that is what the people want,” will be heard over and over again in OUR OWN Country. The only way to stop this? DO NOT ALLOW IT. YOU have the power. YOU either support or condone the Socialist quest by the LWL, in turn helping it to rise to power, or YOU do not allow it. YOU are the fuel. The choice is YOURS. Get educated. Get ready. When the time comes, go VOTE.

You do not think this can happen here? There are some here working really hard on MAKING it happen. YOU are the only thing standing in the way.

Make no mistake about it. They WOULD go this far. You HAVE been listening. You have heard. More and more of you are understanding who she is. She is finding out, YOU do NOT agree with her, and it shows.

Back to this article.

Her husband, the former president, pointed out the obvious Sunday night in remarks before a college audience. "We can't be a new story," he said, speaking in something of a jocular tone. "I can't make her younger, taller, male."

Still, Sen. Clinton's aides have urged her to show more passion and emotion — including laughter — to give voters a sense of her warmer side.

How do you show that of which you do not possess?

By coincidence or not, she did so as she set out on a final day in New Hampshire.

Oh, FAKE IT. OK, I talked about it.

"You know, I had so many opportunities from this country. I just don't want to see us fall backwards," she said at a morning campaign stop, her tone changing and voice quavering.

STOP!!!! WAIT!! I just caught that. Did you? She just said. "You know, I had so many opportunities from this country.” I HAD?

"You know, this is very personal for me. It's not just political. It's not just public. I see what's happening. And we have to reverse it."

What exactly do you think she sees happening? Her losing? Just a thought.

Edwards criticized Clinton as ill-suited to bring about change. "The candidate — Democrat or Republican — who's taken the most money from drug companies is not a Republican. It's a Democrat and she's in this race tomorrow morning," he said.

That’s true. She also took illegal donations. Like the ones from families that can barely afford to feed themselves, yet are able to give your thousands of dollars?

You know, it also might be this simple. Look at all those that she is seemingly going to bring with her. They are all 90s Clinton staffers. Even Sandy Burglar is there. CHANGE? Think about it.
Peter


Sources:
Ap - Emotions run high on eve of NH primary
OPNTalk - Why Socialism Is Possible

H.S. For Sunday 010508

Bird Flu Watch Continues

Hey folks

As you know I’ve been doing a continuing series on the Bird Flu. This is something that is lurking out there that DOES pose a very real threat, that it seems very few people seem to be aware of. According to USA Today last Monday.

Bird flu still a threat 10 years after leap to humans

In Hong Kong, when a mysterious avian flu virus jumped from poultry to people for the first time, killing six of the 18 people infected, world health experts sounded the alarm. They warned that the stage was set for a global flu pandemic.

That was 10 years ago, and the virus, known as H5N1, has not yet changed in a way that would allow it to spread easily from person to person. But health experts say the danger has not diminished.

"It is still a threat as long as we have transmission in poultry," says flu expert Arnold Monto of the University of Michigan. "We have absolutely no precedent of having had this transmit in the bird population in so many different places, and having, almost every week, reports of another human case."

Does this NOT mean it’s GROWING. Becoming more common?

Among the most recent infections in people reported by the World Health Organization was the death of a man in Indonesia Dec. 13 and the first case in Burma, also known as Myanmar, in a child who was hospitalized in November and has recovered. The first confirmed case in Pakistan involved the death of a 25-year-old man Nov. 28 whose brother, a veterinarian, became sick after culling infected poultry. The vet, whose infection with H5N1 is suspected but not confirmed, recovered.

What does THAT mean? If he is alive and still a vet, he has recovered. If you cannot find him, then, chances are he didn’t. “The vet, whose infection with H5N1 is suspected but not confirmed, recovered.” Do you not think you should find out? I know, they are trying to NOT cause panic. However, why not CONFIRM his status.

In 1997, officials in Hong Kong, hoping to stamp out the virus, ordered all chickens in the territory, more than 1 million, to be slaughtered. That action, led by the city's health director, Margaret Chan, who is now director-general of WHO, appeared to work, and the virus receded. But it re-emerged in China in 2003 and began to spread.

Since 2003, WHO has confirmed 346 infections in 14 countries, and 213 deaths.

The virus has traveled far: It has turned up in countries in Asia, Africa, Europe and the Middle East, says Tim Uyeki, a medical epidemiologist with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "Just in 2007, we've seen the first reports of human cases in Laos, Nigeria and Burma," he says. "Cases tend to coincide with poultry outbreaks and spike in winter," he says, "so it would not be surprising to see cases increasing."

If it is spreading, then one could make the logical assumption that it CAN happen here.

Uyeki says the highly pathogenic form of H5N1 has never turned up in North America in wild birds, poultry or people. And because of heightened awareness of the pandemic threat, governments around the world have started to prepare.

"There has been a lot of progress in this area, but more needs to be done," Uyeki says. "We need much better collaboration, communication and sustained funding for strengthening of both animal health surveillance and public health surveillance."

Scientists are monitoring strains of the ever-evolving virus so if it does become easily contagious, pandemic preparations can move into high gear.

WHY WAIT?

Indonesia has the most cases: 116 people infected, of whom 94 have died. But health officials there have balked at sharing virus samples, believing they could be used to create a vaccine the country might not be able to afford. "WHO, in recognition of this problem, is trying to address this issue," Monto says, "But there has not been a satisfactory conclusion."

Meanwhile, Uyeki says, preparedness for a flu pandemic should not stop.

"The risk continues, people continue to be infected, we've had new countries affected and the mortality rate is higher than 60%," he says. "Though human infection with H5N1 is rare, especially compared with seasonal flu that causes 36,000 deaths each year in the USA," he says, "the pandemic threat is ongoing."

I understand what he is saying, but that number of the flu deaths is somewhat misleading. At lease key information is missing. Who, What, Where, When and How, being the most obvious. Right NOW is when we should be moving into high gear on this. While the threat is low. We have the money in many areas that is being wasted. Lets move that money to find a way to treat this more effectively, if not find an outright cure. Why not do this NOW, since we KNOW this is an ever growing threat? Makes sense, does it not?
Peter

IYW For 2007

Hey folks,

It’s Sunday. Time for the IWA. But not only is it Sunday, it the first Sunday in January 2008. That means it’s time for the Idiot of the YEAR award, or the IYW.

For those of you who may be new here, this is the time that we go back and look and all the idiots of 2007, and come up with a winner. The biggest idiot of 2007. This is always hard. There were a lot of Idiots, from all walks or life. Sometimes, there are quite a few that deserve this honor.

In 2007, we had Politicians, Priests, and normal people. We had a Father who advocates underage drinking and Mothers who allowed their Daughters to self destruct reaping benefits of fortune and fame from it. The Mothers are in the top 5. We had OJ, for the THIRD time and last years IYW winner. He was in the top ten. Even Cindy Sheehan made the list.

So the Top Five broke down like this

5- Cindy Sheehan - IWA for Sunday 071507
4- Eunice Spry - IWA for Sunday April 22, 2007
3- Monsignor Tommaso Stenico - IWA For Sunday 101407

OK, so we are down to the last two. This one wasn’t exactly difficult in deciding the bigger Idiot. They both, not only effected more than just themselves, but others as well.

Number two, and the runner up is none other than our favorite Stanton Peele - IWA for Sunday 093007 Remember him? This is the guy that advoctes underage drinking so that kids will not be drunks later in life? Idiot.

But this years winner is more than deserving of it. Actually, I’ll tell you the truth. What made my finally decision was the front page of the papers YESTERDAY. I looked down at one of my favorite coffee stops and thought I saw a misprint. It said “Brit To Be Tied.” in big bold letters. I thought to myself, how could you miss THAT misprint? Then I saw the picture. It was Brittany Spears tied up in the straight jacket, or something like that, on her way to some hospital, or mental health place. According to the story, it seems that her “Babies Daddy” came to get the kids. Some Idiot Judge ACTUALLY gave them joint custody. She refused to give them up. When the police arrived, she was reported to be “On Something,” so they hauled her off.

This brought back to mind our IWA Winner For Sunday 122307

Now I said this, then.

But in these cases, Britnay and Jamie, who’s to blame? Lynne Spears. Plain and simple. She even admitted it. Congratulations Ms. Spears, for caring more about what your daughters can do for you, fortune and fame wise, then you do about your daughters well being, you ARE the Idiot of the Week. Good luck on your new book.

Yup, she wrote a book, produced a movie, and now, is writing a PARENTING book. Who in their right mind is EVER going to buy a Parenting book from this idiot? I know, some of you thought I was a little hard on her. I do not think I’m being hard enough.

OK, Joshua is two and a half. I have a long way to go. But NOW is when I am laying the foundation of Right and Wrong. As well as the fact there IS Right and Wrong. Now is the time I start showing him the way to go. But he is not, and will forever understand I am the Parent, and HE is the child. I know I’ll deal with the things most parents deal with. A rebellion stage, pushing the envelope, making bad decisions, ETC. These are a time of learning. When he becomes of age, get’s a job, moves out of the house, THEN, he will have the complete freedom to live his live as he wishes. Until then, Daddy rules.

Lets say that I have done all that I could do, he decides to go down the wrong path. It will be his choice at that time. I will STILL try to help him. But ultimately, the final decision is his. But I’ll tell you this, he has kids? I feel that the kids are in a destructive environment? You better bet your house on the fact I will do ANYTHING I need to do to get my Grand kids out of it.

Lynne Spears, just does not seem to care for either the well being of her own kids, nor her Grand kids. She is too busy collect money and acquiring fame off her Daughters. Plain and simple again. I mean, really, to make a statement like, “I didn’t raise my children to have Hollywood careers. This all just exploded in my face, and big dreams became big headaches,” makes one ask then, how did they get into it?

Then you said this.

“I wish I’d been there more while she was touring,” Spears says. “But I couldn’t be. I had the other kids to look after.”

Did a great job with Jamie Lynn, don’t ya think?

Then THIS statement.

“I have no idea how she got pregnant because she doesn't break curfew.”

Shows that maybe you are too ignorant to BE a parent. But, I think I’ll stick to the whole, fortune and fame thing.

Congratulations Lynne Spears, for allowing one of your Daughters to self destruct to the point they just hauled her off tied up to a Hospital, allowing your second Daughter to date and have sex with an ADULT, leading to a pregnancy, and then truly believing that people want to read a “Christian” Parenting book by YOU? You receive what you crave so much, yet another vote of recognition. Yet another award. You ARE the IDIOT OF THE YEAR {whistles blow, bells sound, confetti falls} One question. What should we expect for your other child?
Peter

Saturday Night Fights?

Hey folks,

Happy Sunday to you. It seems the big news today is going to be analysis of the double header of Presidential Debates last night. Was it the Saturday Night Fights that some were calling it and expecting? No. Not really. They took the gloves off, no doubt about it. But what it really was, was crunch time. Tuesday and New Hampshire are coming quick. They actually started DEBATING. That and Hillary started looking a little scare a desperate. As well she should.

In the Republican debate, it seemed that all were going after Romney. I thought that was a little odd, since Huckabee won in Iowa. What I’ll admit is I did not know at the time because it has not been widely reported, even this morning, is the Mitt JUST won most Wyoming delegates. The only place I could find ANY kind of numbers on this was the New York Times. They say that he won eight. Followed by Fred Thomson with three, and Duncan Hunter with one. So maybe THAT was the reason.

In the debate, we saw the Candidates actually start debating. Some highlights most will be talking about is most likely going to be McCain and Romney debating McCain's Amnesty Bill. Yes folks, that WAS what it was. When Romney called him on it McCain retorted with no matter how many times and how much money Romney spends to say it was an Amnesty Bill, it “will never be true.” Then he proclaimed. "I've never supported amnesty."

I loved the response Romney gave, he said, "What he describes is technically true, which is his plan does not provide amnesty because he charges people $5,000 to be able to stay."

{Laughing} He’s right. So, so far, it seems that we could be looking at a Romney and Huckabee in NH. Both with wins now, and both growing in popularity. You see folks, most people haven’t really been paying attention. Now we are IN 08, more and more people are. This is debate what? 116? But now the day grows closer, in their States and the General election just over 300 days away, more and more people WILL be.

I actually enjoyed the Democrat debate a little more. We saw some interesting exchanges. We also saw Hillary appearing to be scared and a little desperate. As well she should be. I’m I the only one who gets sick, every time I hear her proclaim, "I have 35 years of experience making change?" I thought it was 35 years of helping poor kids. Or was it 35 years with health care? Or, never mind. How about this. PROVE it. Release the documents and SHOW us. Anytime she gets backed into a corner, she says, "I have 35 years of experience making change.”

But you could see it. She is scared. She spent all this money and time trying to connect with people. Trying to show them she has passion, emotion, and is likable. She just can not do it. Why? Because she doesn’t have passion, emotion, except anger, and she is NOT likable. People just do NOT like her. Period.

It was even brought up in the debate. She was asked what she could say to voters who seemed to have a problem with liking her, and those that seemed to like Obama more, she said this.

"Well, that hurts my feelings. ... But I'll try to go on."

She agreed that Obama was likable, then said this.

"I don't think I'm that bad."

That grew a lot of laughter from the crowd there. I was laughing when I heard this. Obama kind of waved her off a bit, I guess he was trying to be polite. He said this.

“You're likable enough, Hillary."

But she is not. She does not have what she tries to portray. When she is talking to Southerners, she has an accent. When she is talking to Blacks, she has a Black accent. She makes stories up. Completely makes stuff up about her life and experience. She has tried EVERYTHING to fool, I mean, GET people to like her. When she TRIES to show that she is fired up, or passionate about this or that, all we hear is SCREECHING. When she is asked something that she does not like, all we hear is a cackling laugh. People ARE learning who she is. Someone who will lie, cheat and steal to get what she wants. Most American still find that offensive.

On the Democrat side, I see a battle between Obama and Edwards. But NEVER count Clinton out. If she can not win fairly, she still could find a way.
Peter

Presidential Radio Address for Saturday 010508

President Bush: "Good morning. On Tuesday, I will board Air Force One and depart for a trip to the Middle East. This is a region of great strategic importance to the United States, and I'm looking forward to my visit.

My first stops will be in the Holy Land, where I'll meet with Israeli Prime Minister Olmert and Palestinian President Abbas. I will encourage both leaders to move forward with the peace negotiations they began last November in Annapolis. This is difficult work. It will require tough decisions on complex questions. But I am optimistic about the prospects. And I will make clear that America is deeply committed to helping both parties realize the historic vision we share: two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security.

During the second part of my trip, I will visit five of America's key allies in the Arab world: Kuwait, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt. I will thank the leaders of these countries for their friendship. I will urge them to strongly support negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians. I will discuss the importance of countering the aggressive ambitions of Iran. And I will assure them that America's commitment to the security of our friends in the region is strong and enduring.

I know it is not always obvious why events in the nations of the Middle East should matter to the American people. But in the 21st century, developments there have a direct impact on our lives here. As we saw on September the 11th, 2001, dangers that arise on the other side of the world can bring death and destruction to our own streets. Since then, extremists have assassinated democratic leaders from Afghanistan to Lebanon to Pakistan. They have murdered innocent people from Saudi Arabia to Jordan and Iraq. They are seeking new weapons and new operatives, so they can attack America again, overthrow governments in the Middle East, and impose their hateful vision on millions.

On my trip, I will consult closely with our partners in the war against these extremists. I will reaffirm our pledge to use every necessary tool of intelligence, law enforcement, diplomacy, finance, and military power to bring our common enemies to justice. The terrorists and extremists will not let down their guard, and we must not let down ours.

At its core, the battle unfolding in the Middle East is more than a clash of arms. It is an ideological struggle. On one side are the forces of terror and death. On the other are tens of millions of ordinary people who want a free and peaceful life for their children. The future of the Middle East depends on the outcome of this struggle, and so does the security of the United States. We know that societies growing in tolerance and hope are less likely to become sources of radicalism and violence. So America will stay engaged in the region. We will support democrats and reformers from Beirut and Baghdad to Damascus and Tehran. We will stand with all those working to build a future of liberty and justice and peace.

Prevailing in this struggle will not be easy, but we know from history that it can be done. After World War II, many said that advancing freedom in Europe and East Asia would be impossible. Yet America invested the time and resources to help nations make the transition from dictatorship to democracy. There were trying moments along the way, and progress did not arrive overnight. But with patience and resolve, we have seen an extraordinary return on our investment -- vital regions of the world that live in stability and prosperity and peace with America.

I believe a similar transformation can take place in the Middle East. At this decisive moment in their history, the people of the Middle East can have confidence in the power of liberty to overcome tyranny and terror. And all who step forward in freedom's cause can count on a friend in the United States. I look forward to sharing this message in the region.

Thank you for listening."

From The Emails 010508

Hey folks,

Welcome to a very special From The Emails, Saturday edition. This article was just pointed out to me yesterday. The person said this.

"I watched the Iowa vote on Fox. I saw what you were talking about also, and that bothered me." {They are talking about how Edwards was ahead in the beginning, then Obama jumped ahead out of the blue? Maybe that Huckabee won?After reading this article, I'll go with the Huckabee win.} "I just saw this and thought you might like it."

Thank you for pointing it out to me. It is from Ronald Kessler who is chief Washington correspondent of Newsmax.com. Posted at Newsmax.com - Huckabee Win May Be a Fluke. Friday, January 4, 2008 10:18 AM

Mike Huckabee’s win in Iowa may be a fluke attributable largely to the fact that 60 percent of Republicans who voted in the caucuses described themselves as evangelical Christians.

That means they are big boosters of a candidate who is a former southern Baptist minister and suspicious of Mit Romney’s Mormon religion. Many evangelicals consider the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints to be a non-Christian cult.

In entrance polls in the Iowa Republican caucuses, almost half of those who said they were evangelicals said they were voting for Huckabee. Eight in 10 of Huckabee’s supporters said they are born again or evangelical Christians, compared to fewer than half of Romney’s backers.

Thus, in Iowa, Romney — who won 25 percent of the vote vs. Huckabee’s 34 percent — ran into a perfect storm arrayed against his candidacy.

The national story may be quite different. In contrast to Iowa, voters in this Tuesday’s primary in New Hampshire are not so interested in a candidate’s religion but rather more interested in a candidate’s record, particularly when it comes to taxes.

That is an area where Romney outshines Huckabee. As Massachusetts governor, Romney turned a $3 billion deficit into a surplus without raising taxes. In contrast, by the end of his 10-year tenure, Huckabee was responsible for a 37 percent hike in the sales tax in Arkansas. Spending increased by 65 percent — three times the rate of inflation.

New Hampshire voters are also more likely to give weight to Huckabee’s record when it comes to pardons. On that issue, Huckabee looks even more liberal than former Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis, who lost to George H.W. Bush in part because of a furlough program that allowed convicted murderer Willie Horton out of prison on a weekend pass, when he raped a woman.

As Arkansas governor, Huckabee commuted or pardoned 1,033 criminals, including 12 murderers. In contrast, Romney as governor granted no pardons or commutations while he was governor.

Clearly, Iowa voters gave little thought to whether Huckabee could win the White House. In a poll conducted for The Associated Press of voters entering Iowa’s caucuses, Huckabee voters indicated that values outranked electability in importance for them. Six in10 of his backers said the most important quality in picking a candidate was someone who shared their values, while a third of his supporters said he says what he believes. Nearly two-thirds of Huckabee voters also said it was very important that their candidate share their religious beliefs. One in five of Romney’s voters felt that way.

Fewer than one in 20 of Huckabee voters said they thought he had the best chance of winning in November. John McCain and Romney each won a little more than a third of voters who said the top priority was that a candidate “has the right experience.” Only 7 percent said the most important attribute was a candidate’s electability. Half of those backed Romney.

Huckabee also benefited by portraying Romney as a flip-flopper who is not pro-life. The fact is that while most of the candidates have changed position on some issues, Romney has made a clear change on only one issue. While he has always been personally pro-life, like Ronald Reagan, he is a convert to the pro-life position when it comes to public policy. But as governor, Romney took pro-life stands, vetoing bills that authorized embryo farming, therapeutic cloning, and access to emergency contraception without parental consent.

That track record is far more important than his endorsement of Roe v. Wade more than a decade ago during a debate with Sen. Edward M. Kennedy. But in interviews and in the ad that Huckabee released to the press but did not run, Huckabee claimed that Romney signed a bill that gives a $50 co-pay for an elective abortion in his state’s health care plan. In fact, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has twice ruled that any health insurance plan that uses states funds cannot deny medical benefits for abortions.

Thus, neither Romney nor the state legislature had any say in whether abortions would be covered.

Finally, Huckabee benefited from the unprecedented number of televised debates. His folksy style and sense of humor won over many voters. But when Huckabee is under fire from good questioners, he becomes defensive and irritable. As he comes under more press scrutiny, Huckabee’s image may start to show some cracks.

He may be right. I do detect a bit of, "Oh, he only won because of those dumb Christian hicks in Iowa, and there ain't enough of them to get him all the way to the White House," in this article, but not really that much.

I do tend to agree with him on the point that I truly believe that most people WILL judge ALL the Candidates on the issues, and on their record. That is the way it SHOULD be. But, I guess we'll see how it plays out. One state at a time.
Peter


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 opntalk@netscape.net and as always, you never know what you are going to see here.

Iowa Surprises

Hey folks,

Happy Friday to you. Iowa surprises? Not really. Here is the break down.

Republican side: Huckabee wins 9 points ahead of nearest rival. 34 %. Romney second with 25 % . Followed by Thomson with 13.4% and McCain with 13.1%.

Democrat side: Obama comes back from trailing Edwards, who was leading as the numbers came in, and wins it with 37 %. Followed by Edwards with 29.7%. Hillary coming in third, if you will, with 29.5% and finishing last is Richardson with just 2%

On the Democrat side, Senator Joe Biden bowed out.

"There is nothing sad about tonight. We are so incredibly proud of you all. So many of you have sacrificed for me and I am so indebted to you. I feel no regret. I ain't goin' away.

I want to thank the people of Delaware and I'll be going back to the Senate as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee," he said.

Should McCain now do the same? I doubt it. He all of a sudden has a surge behind him, including a little help from the Mainstream Media. This is why I feel Huckabee won. No one was really pushing against him. There were a few negative stories out there, but they amazingly disappeared as fast as fast as they came out. Even the Democrat contenders did not attack Huckabee all that much.

The answer to this is simple. The Mainstream Media and the Democrat Party both WANT Huckabee to win the nomination. In many the same ways as some on the Right, would LOVE to see Supreme Leader Wannabe Hillary to win the Democrat nomination. They do not feel that either can possibly win, making it an easy victory in the General elections.

Now I’m sure that we are going to hear today, how “Iowa really doesn’t matter that much anymore.” “You have to understand there was a low turn out.” “Hillary is so brave to go there when she knew she was going to lose.”“ It showed her character.”“ How brave she was facing a no win scenario” ETC.

The winners of course say they are unifiers, and how they will bring both sides together, which is what they ALWAYS say. Even the Democrats said this in 06. Look what we got then. Onward to New Hampshire.

This is interesting though. According to Union Leader.com - McCain says he must win New Hampshire

MANCHESTER – Sen. John McCain says he must win New Hampshire and he's confident Republican primary voters will give him another stunning victory here come Tuesday.

The Republican presidential hopeful made his declaration in an exclusive interview last night with the New Hampshire Union Leader as he arrived in Manchester for the final campaign push.

So time is ticking by for McCain again. New Hampshire SHOULD be a must win for all those that finished poorly in Iowa. But we will have to wait to see.

Special Saturday edition of the From the Emails segment tomorrow. See you then.
Peter

Hitting Close To Home

Hey folks,

Today is the day in Iowa. I let you know tomorrow what is happening there. But today, I want to explain why I posted the Health and Science edition this week, and share a response I received on the topic.

On Sunday, I posted Scaryence Again.

Here we go again with more Scaryence. My new way of describing “Scare Science.” Scaryence is the way some use Science to scare people into conformity, participation in this or that, and basically, just to further agendas. Global Warming is a perfect example of Scaryence.

But this week we are talking about you. Yes, you. Now we all know that things happen to us as we get older. We all know that we slow down a bit. We have aches and pains, here and there. We get tired quicker. ETC. All of a sudden, what seems to be over night, we can’t do the things we use to do.

So some in the scientific community have decided to use this fact, that we all know and feel, the older we get, to make more money. Yup. Money.

Basically, this article by Reuters - Most older adults have brain disease: study By Megan Rauscher Fri Dec 28, 3:34 PM ET bothered me quite a bit.

Most older persons with dementia (i.e., memory and other cognitive impairments) had more than one type of pathology in their brain causing the impairment, Schneider told Reuters Health.

"This most commonly was Alzheimer's disease pathology and cerebral infarcts (strokes), followed by Alzheimer's disease and Lewy body disease, a disease related to Parkinson's disease," she said.

The point of their article?

Based on this study, write two neurologists in an accompanying editorial, "we may wish to maximize medical management of vascular risk factors in the growing elderly population, regardless of whether cognition is still normal or there are signs of overt dementia."

So basically, they want to scare you into spending more money on treating the possibility of you getting what you may already have, even if you do not have it.

I have been questioned about my reason for posting this. It was a, "who cares?" type of question. Then I got this response in the Comment section.

"Hi Peter, thanks for the post. I think though that the revelation, or acceptance, that we all accumulate multiple brain pathologies as we age can actually mitigate against the over-medicalization of dementia. If we accept that all brains age over the continuum of one's life and accumulate vascular changes, inflammation, abnormal proteins (such as amyloid and tau, the hallmarks of Alzheimer's), oxidative stress, etc...it breaks down the notion that there are discreet categories of dementia (ie. "Alzheimer's disease", "Parkinson's")that we can cleanly diagnose and target. I think you might appreciate and enjoy a book that I've co-authored with Dr. Peter Whitehouse, a neurologist at Case Western Reserve University, called "The Myth of Alzheimer's: What You Aren't Being Told about Today's Most Dreaded Diagnosis" (St Martin's Press), and is due for release on Jan.8th. You can check out our website if you have a chance www.themythofalzheimers.com . I'm presently trying to develop a blog and will make sure to "blog roll" you (if I have the vernacular right, hahah). anyhow, thanks for the post, and happy new year to you,
take care,"
Danny George

I would like to answer both here this morning.

First, why did I post this. The simple fact is it hits me pretty close to home. All my childhood, I knew my grandfather as a zombie. He had Parkinson's. Back in those days, they felt the best way to treat it was to actually FREEZE parts of the brain. This was an attempt to slow the progression and help stop the tremors. Didn't work that well. My Grandfather knew what was going on around him, but could not communicate all the well at all. Could not do anything for himself. I watched my Grandmother have a heart attack and die, after taking care of him 24-7 for the first 11 years of my life.

This effected me more than I could possibly know at the time. As I got older, I started wanting to know all about this disease. Then came other famous people that got it. Most notable as of late, Michael J Fox. We have come a long way in the treatment of Parkinson's. As long as Michael takes his meds, he can pretty much live a normal life. I see this as a most positive step forward.

Then I met Vera. Vera was a SHARP 91 year old little lady. We would talk pretty much daily about all kinds of things. She is the one that actually introduced me to my Wife. I loved spending time with her. Then in just a span of about two years, I watched her drift away. Some days were normal, others, she thought I was her son, Son in-law, sometimes her long dead Husband. I saw her once bright, loving , and wise , eyes, slowly glace over. She pasted on a completely different person that I met. She was diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease.

These are horrible diseases. I know first hand. So when some decide to use them as scare tactics to make more money, I get upset.

To Danny, Thank you for your post. I mean that. You said. "I think though that the revelation, or acceptance, that we all accumulate multiple brain pathologies as we age can actually mitigate against the over-medicalization of dementia." I agree. I think over medication is prescribed in many cases. Treatment for many ailments.

"If we accept that all brains age over the continuum of one's life and accumulate vascular changes, inflammation, abnormal proteins (such as amyloid and tau, the hallmarks of Alzheimer's), oxidative stress, etc...it breaks down the notion that there are discreet categories of dementia (ie. "Alzheimer's disease", "Parkinson's")that we can cleanly diagnose and target."

Very interesting point.

"I think you might appreciate and enjoy a book that I've co-authored with Dr. Peter Whitehouse, a neurologist at Case Western Reserve University, called "The Myth of Alzheimer's: What You Aren't Being Told about Today's Most Dreaded Diagnosis" (St Martin's Press), and is due for release on Jan.8th. You can check out our website if you have a chance www.themythofalzheimers.com ."

I did and I will definitely be looking forward to reading it. Thank you very much. I hope it goes fast. I hope many people will take the time to read it. The more educated we become, the less frightening these diseases and the threat of these become. I have to wonder, other than the obvious, money, if some Doctors now a days over medicate some, in stead of actually looking to treat them. The "easy way out."

Of course you "have the vernacular right." {Laughing} to Blog roll the OPNTalk. I thank you for joining us and hope you visit often. Please feel free to share any more information you wish. In this or any other areas, any time.

You see folks, I become passionate about this type of thing, having lived with it. I do not wish ANYONE to have to suffer from these things. I hope we can find cures in the future. This is why when I see someone practicing Scaryence, I get upset with it. I will alert you anytime I see it.

Thank you again Danny, and I hope this answered some questions others of you may have had. See you tomorrow with an update on Iowa.
Peter

The Big News is Obvious,

Hey folks,

Good to be back, again. Hope you all had a great Holiday season and a happy New Year Eve. I know I have a hectic week coming, but we’ll be back to normal soon.

So I start scanning the news this morning, and all I can really find is the obvious. Tomorrow is Thursday's Iowa caucuses. The first look at what some say is a must win for those wanting to be serious in getting the Party’s nomination. All the candidates are doing everything they can to encourage voters to turn out. Duh.

Story after story is all about what this one is saying and that one is saying about getting people out to vote. Restating their positions, which ever they may be yesterday, so on so forth. But this one article caught my attention.

From the AP - Clock running down on Bush presidency By BEN FELLER, Associated Press Writer Mon Dec 31, 6:06 PM ET

Just the title of this is a reality check for some of the Candidates. Seriously folks, I have been saying this for nearly two years. Bush is OUT. Forget Bush. Tell us what you are planning on doing to make this country better. Boy did they ever. Socialism, tyranny, and it is that simple. But you know, some in the Mass Media only have less than a year to take shots at him. Look for more stories like this one.

President Bush's final-year agenda is a stripped-down list of what he can realistically hope to get done, since the clout he once touted is fading away.

Bush will venture to four other continents, get more involved than ever in trying to forge Middle East peace, and continue to command two wars that assure his relevancy to the end. As Iraq improves, he must now deal with renewed violence in Afghanistan and upheaval in Pakistan.

At home, Bush will try to extend two domestic achievements that are dear to his legacy — the No Child Left Behind education law, and tax cuts that otherwise expire in 2010.

Long gone are the big ideas of Social Security and immigration reform, which collapsed on Capitol Hill. His final State of the Union speech in late January is expected to reflect today's policy reality, eschewing new initiatives in favor of unfinished proposals.

WAIT a second. So now we are blaming Bush for the KILLED countless attempts of Amnesty? He couldn’t get it done? Thank God, but I thought the talking points was HE killed it. {Sigh}

As at any time, Bush has forces pushing against him. But the ones in 2008 are stronger.

A hostile Congress awaits the president as he returns from fishing, cutting brush and clearing trails at his secluded Texas ranch. Bush and the Democratic Congress clashed all year on the war, spending, health care and tactics for interrogating terror suspects.

Just like he was waiting for them to come back from vacation that they took before doing NOTHING. Passing NOTHING. Like spending bills, supporting the troops, running the government. You know, those annoying little things that get in the way of their BDS, constant political shows, and attacking the President.

"It's going to be a year of angst and struggle — more of '07," said James Thurber, an American University political scientist who researches relations between the two branches.

In political terms, Bush's last year in office is really less than 12 months.

The attention of the nation and much of the world has shifted to those who want his seat in the Oval Office. The Republican nominee for president could be settled by the multistate primaries on Feb. 5, meaning someone else will be the unofficial head of the party.

As happens EVERY election.

The opportunity for legislation in the election-year will be short, too, as little is expected to get done after Congress adjourns for a summer break. Democrats are gunning for the White House and the bigger majorities they need to govern Congress as they want.

Socialism.

Bush's year begins with a nine-day trip to the Middle East, a hands-on peacemaking venture that could shape his legacy — a word that Bush and his senior aides don't use.

I hate to break this to you Libs out there, President Bush could not care less about a legacy. He truly believes, as do many of us, that history will see him in quite a good light. He is doing what he truly believe is right, regardless of polls or popular opinion. That takes a certain, and rare, kind of person. Some cannot understand this, because their whole career is controlled by polls and a quest for a legacy. Ask Bill.

Starting Jan. 8, the president is scheduled to travel to Israel, the West Bank, Kuwait, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

The trip is exactly the kind of process-driving diplomacy that Bush has avoided in the past, said Jon Alterman, a Mideast expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. It reflects how his presidency has gone, Alterman said, as Bush once talked of bold transformation but now tries to shepherd more incremental progress.

Let’s see, maybe because he is constantly fending off idiocies of those who are obsessed with his destruction?

The latter approach is favored in the Middle East, but Bush's waning power will follow him, Alterman said. Some leaders don't want to give concessions to a short-term president.

"Friends and foes in the Middle East at a senior level have almost no curiosity about what the last year of this presidency holds," Alterman said.

{Sigh} Do I, a mere Layman in foreign affairs, really have to explain that? Seriously, this is NORMAL. It is NOT “this Presidency” it’s EVERY Presidency. Foreign Leaders are always more cautions and less willing to deal with ANY President in their last year. They are ALWAYS more interesting in who’s next. It’s a smart policy.

If I was the President of Petertopia, and I am attempting to deal with the President of the USA, I would be more concerned with the next one, in the last year. I could cut a dream deal with this one, but what happens in 12 months? Will the next President continue and honor our agreement? If not, why should I bother dealing with this one? This is normal.

The Mideast trip sets the tone for a busy year of foreign travel.

In February, Bush is expected to visit Africa to promote the global fight against AIDS, and highlight the United States' role in that effort.

He will also go to Romania in April for a NATO summit; to Japan's Lake Toya in July to meet with leaders of industrialized countries; to China in August for the Summer Olympics; and to Peru in November for the annual summit of leaders of Pacific Rim nations.

It is common for presidents to head abroad in their final year as the domestic consumption of their message diminishes. But Bush's aides say most of his trips would have happened in any year, and the narrative that Bush is escaping overseas is overstated.

Completely ridiculous as well.

Bush's State of the Union will be one of his final times in command of a prime-time audience. He is expected to use it to rally support for unfinished items, such as expanding the domestic energy supply and health care options, as opposed to last-minute policy ideas.

"We understood after immigration reform failed that this is not a Congress that's likely to pass big things," said Ed Gillespie, the president's counselor. "Once they adjourn for the Fourth of July, it's hard to imagine they'll do much beyond appropriations bills. That's a realistic assessment, and the State of the Union will likely reflect that."

Bush invoked his veto power like never before in 2007, with effectiveness. But it may have erased what little chance was left of broad, meaningful compromise with lawmakers.

You can not compromise with complete insanity. Most of those things he vetoed, were that, insanity.

Lots of key items remain to be done, including terrorist surveillance legislation.

The president is also likely to stick to economic themes in 2008. He is aware that the public is frustrated and restless, which could sink Republicans in the next election.

Wishful thinking.

His message is that his administration is trying to help people deal with their mortgage crises, energy bills and education concerns.

"The underpinnings of our economy have proven strong, competitive, and resilient enough to overcome the challenges we face," Bush said Monday in his end-of-the-year message. It is just that kind of rosy picture that leads his Democratic foes to say Bush is out of touch.

Not if you look at the numbers.

Still looming, as always, is the fate of the war in Iraq.

Another key milestone comes in March with an update to Congress by Gen. David Petraeus, the top military commander in Iraq, and Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador there.

Bush remains the decider on when, and whether, U.S. troops will return home.

"It may be the tone for the entire year is set by events he cannot control," Thurber said. "The biggest unknown, of course, is what's going to happen politically in Iraq, and he can't control that, even though they have pushed and cajoled. It is a tricky situation."

Folks, you can look for more and more stories like this as time DOES tick by for President Bush. Even more and more attempts to show Bush, AKA ALL Republicans, are failures and incompetent. The only way to bring change is vote Democrat. Forget their real intent, what they have actually told you, and what they have already been caught doing. Illegal contributions, starting websites as attack machines, Amnesty, Pork, threats to the media, ETC. Just vote for them, they ain’t Bush. Hey, it worked on 06.

However, look what we have gotten since.
Peter

Happy New Year

Wishing you all a Very Happy and Healthy New Year.

Peter