Sunday, August 31, 2008
Saturday, August 30, 2008
The McCain campaign has actually pointed out the politics behind those questioning and condemning Sarah Palin's credentials; her detractors have been exposed with the obvious implications of Leftwing (GASP!) BIAS (see the last paragraph in the link, the "Update"!).
WHAT NEXT? Larry King will do a fair interview? Olbermann will act with civility and tell the truth?
naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa Let's not go THAT far!? But, you know what? This UPDATE is pretty darned stunning, a pretty good start? IS THIS AN INDICATION OF THINGS TO COME? Are Republicans going to STOP being shy about exposing dishonesty? We can only hope.
Friday, August 29, 2008
Asa Eslocker Was Investigating the Role of Lobbyists and Top Donors at the Convention
By BRIAN ROSS Aug. 27, 2008
DENVER -- Police in Denver arrested an ABC News producer today as he and a camera crew were attempting to take pictures on a public sidewalk of Democratic senators and VIP donors leaving a private meeting at the Brown Palace Hotel.
Asa Eslocker was investigating the role of lobbyists and top donors at the DNC. More Photos (read the captions on these photos...I personally don't have a problem with elegant affairs in politics; for example, I wasn't pleased when Governor Brown of California gave Prince Charles a bag lunch once while he visited here years ago, trust me, but when the secrecy and cheating like this occurs, well.........not good)
Police on the scene refused to tell ABC lawyers the charges against the producer, Asa Eslocker, who works with the ABC News investigative unit. (click HERE to see the arrest on video, sorry I couldn't embed it; it IS worth seeing, TRUST me.)
A cigar-smoking Denver police sergeant, accompanied by a team of five other officers, first put his hands on Eslocker's neck, then twisted the producer's arm behind him to put on handcuffs.
A police official later told lawyers for ABC News that Eslocker is being charged with trespass, interference, and failure to follow a lawful order. He also said the arrest followed a signed complaint from the Brown Palace Hotel. (A signed complaint by the HOTEL?$$$)
Eslocker was put in handcuffs and loaded in the back of a police van which headed for a nearby police station. Video taken at the scene shows a man, wearing the uniform of a Boulder County sheriff, ordering Eslocker off the sidewalk in front of the hotel, to the side of the entrance.
The sheriff's officer is seen telling Eslocker the sidewalk is owned by the hotel. Later, he is seen pushing Eslocker off the sidewalk into oncoming traffic, forcing him to the other side of the street.
It was two hours later when Denver police arrived to place Eslocker under arrest, apparently based on a complaint from the Brown Palace Hotel, a central location for Democratic officials.
During the arrest, one of the officers can be heard saying to Eslocker, "You're lucky I didn't knock the f..k out of you."
Eslocker was released late today after posting $500 bond.
Eslocker and his ABC News colleagues are spending the week investigating the role of corporate lobbyists and wealthy donors at the convention for a series of Money Trail reports on ABC's "World News with Charles Gibson."
SO, folks...what's up? An investigative reporter can't report on the Democrat bigwigs and huge money people coming out of a public hotel on a public sidewalk? WHO ORDERED THIS ARREST? WHO TALKED TO THE DENVER POLICE and WHY DID THEY ARREST SOMEONE ON A PUBLIC SIDEWALK?
Well, at least they didn't throw him in the Freedom Cages where they kept protesters, huh?
z (thanks, Ronnie!)
Now, I have to admit I am happy but can only base that on what I know about her (which is little) and how this reflects on Hillary and the women vote.
Anybody got any info on Palin? Share it here...let's collect as much as we know. May not be much at this date, BUT, it sure was a maverick, wise and exciting move!
HURRAH! (having said all that, I don't want anyone voting for Obama just because he's Black any more than I want people voting for McCain because he's picked a woman..........BUT.........if she's smart, independent, tough and shares our values.......SHE'S THE ONE. McCain needs to show all of that.....don't you think?)
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Fast forward to next week: What will Obama do now? Who wants to bet he WON'T do an AD congratulating McCain on HIS nomination after the convention .....Who wants to bet he WILL? (will he HAVE to now, by the way!?) And, since he hasn't any MLK kind of reference to 'use' as a way to congratulate without REALLY congratulating, NOW WHAT?
Will Obama congratulate McCain on his accomplishments or ideas, those things he had to criticize tonight? UHOH. (hee hee)
What do you think?!!
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
We got back to our hotel room and, of course, I was gasping for NEWS! (enough with serenity, ocean air, rolling hills and dill sauce! I WANT NEWS!) Got the TV on just in time to see the roll call for New Mexico..."state of the rising sun, Bill Richardson...Native Americans...bblahblah..." (The 'rising sun' is mine, I'm sure that's not it!)
SUDDENLY....New Jersey's squawking about yielding its votes to Illinois(WHY? I don't understand that, but...they seemed fine with it).........AND THEN THERE IS Hillary RODHAM Clinton (as they announced it...why can't they say Barack HUSSEIN Obama without their calling the Right RACIST?..think about that one, it's a little weird, but think about it), like a REAL person, being squeezed through the stifling crowd by secret service..stuffing herself through the throng (I almost typed thong...oh, GOD, what a horrid thought!)...AND THEN THERE SHE WAS WITH NEW YORK's rowdy bunch! Charlie Schumer GRINNING from ear to ear, thinking "Man, it's like NY only HAS one damned senator..AGAIN".............and she starts:
"Madame Chairman............ blahblahblah........I suggest we skip the vote and UNANIMOUSLY VOTE FOR OBAMA AS THE NEXT PRESIDENT"
uhoh. If I was from a State that started with a letter after N and I was that delegation's pick to brag on MY State and had the honor of announcing my State's delegate count, I'd have been CRUSHED, wouldn't you? "Oh, MAN, I'll NEVER be on TV again....Hillary! I wanted MY five minutes of fame!" Seriously, wouldn't you have been sad? Was that a first? anybody know?
Well, as you know, the PLACE WENT WILD!! They cameras zeroed in on a young Black man wiping tears from his eyes and Z GOT TEARS IN HER EYES!
You heard me!! I WEPT A LITTLE THAT A BLACK MAN WAS NOMINATED TO THE PRESIDENCY OF THE UNITED STATES. Yes, I have to admit it. Very moving moment.
Then I remembered who it is and I woke up. WOULD that it had been Michael Steele, huh?
It is a magic moment, particularly for Black America....a REAL GREAT MOMENT, no matter HOW we can't stand the Democrats' platform.
Did you see Pelosi ask for "ALL IN FAVOR OF OBAMA...Please say AYE! "Those voting NAY?" She didn't wait...she just announced it DONE immediately! 2/3 had voted, so SHUT UP! Were they afraid for America to hear NAY? TYPICAL DEMOCRAT.....the only CHOICE they like is killing babies, have you noticed that?
Chris Wallace, of FOX, said "He never thought this country would nominate a Black man in his lifetime" Did you think that? It never crossed my MIND this wouldn't happen. Did you feel that would never happen in YOUR lifetime? Then Britt Hume says "Well, Jesse Jackson ran and I treated him like any other nominee, I called him "SIR"...etc. " He said he CALLED HIM SIR! Why wouldn't he have? Because he was Black? THAT bothered me! BRITT...what? I hope CNN didn't hear that, WE will never hear the END of it.
Anyway...What are your thoughts? Tell me if you got a TINY bit choked up about the nomination of a Black candidate, or if you just wanted to CHOKE that Black candidate!
(i've gotta say I'm enjoying this convention. Mr. Z is NOT) BLOG ON, pals!! Talk to me!! i'm going in the pool now!!
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
This noon we sat next to Warren Christopher and his wife who were eating fried shrimp and fries. (She took home her cole slaw) Just thought I'd let you know!! A guy at another table near them took his cotton napkin over with a pen to get him to sign it. You can well imagine I DID NOT.
This evening, around five, we had lovely cheeses and quite a delicious Merlot out by our hotel pool. Germans and Englishmen abounded "they're taking advantage of the strong Euro", the girl at the desk tells me. Four Brits were in the hot tub and joined the conversation we were having with a lovely German family. I asked one of the young Brits "So, what's it like in London, as bad as we hear? Tons of burkhas?" He said "WHAT?" I said "I don't know, I had never seen that there, but they tell me you're having big problems and that there are more mosques than churches now in England...."
He grimaced and said "This isn't a RELIGIOUS thing, these are just disgruntled, disaffected YOUTH...this is NOT about religion...we've had situations with different ethnic groups every decade, this isn't anything new or any big deal." (I am NOT making this up, folks). He looked at me as if a third eye'd just formed itself on my forehead. Actually, my head was starting to hurt like it had. I said "Well, I think no-go zones in England where only muslims can enter is pretty terrible for England, don't you?" "There is NO area I wouldn't go. I don't know what you're talking about." he said to me.
"Disgruntled youth" "not a religious thing". Are they misinformed, not informed, or just plain STUPID?
Good that there was PLENTY of that good Merlot.
Monday, August 25, 2008
Sensing the flub, 7-year-old Sasha apparently was prompted to ask: "Daddy, what city are you in?"
"I'm in Kansas City, sweetie." Ahem.
Back to my post.......
Well, she did it! GREAT speech! David Gergen said she validated Obama and his family. Wolf Blitzer (who's been grinning so big all day since this convention started that you'd think he was running), was raving about Michelle. Let's face it, she did a fantastic job. It was moving to hear about her father with MS and her brother's love and support of her and Obama. It was nice to see how proud her mother must have been sitting there in that audience wishing her husband could have seen their girl up there. But...... something bothers me..
What do people with the Obama message mean when they say "You work hard for what you want..." or "You can make it if you try?" They only want to take it away from you....the better you do, the more they'll take from you and give to those who haven't worked as hard as you. Are they confused, and are we supposed to just hush up and buy into it? Thousands have tonight, let's face it. The tears were flowing..you see them?
"You want to say 'hi, Dad'?" Staged? ya, probably. How can a huge event like that not be staged to the nth degree? But, she did a good job. I just don't quite get the duplicitous message.
And, of course, I don't believe she's sincere. And, of course, we see things through our own glasses, don't we, rose colored or not. From what I'm sure the Left'll do to Cindy McCain's speech, considering what they've said about her so far, I guess I should be tougher on Michelle, it's only fair, but what's the point? I don't have to VOTE FOR THEM. That's enough.
If you believe FIRST in your country and YOUR PLATFORM, YOUR DREAM FOR AMERICA....why wouldn't you pick someone you know you could get elected with? With almost total certainty, considering the numbers. THIS is the person with whom you'd succeed for your country!
Sunday, August 24, 2008
Saturday, August 23, 2008
The staffers sit in silence.
Friday, August 22, 2008
Panel wants pot smokers left alone during DNC
Aug 20, 2008 5:40 PM (1 day ago) By STEVEN K. PAULSON, AP
DENVER (Map, News) - A panel convened to implement a voter-approved Denver ordinance making possession of small amounts of marijuana the "lowest law enforcement priority" voted Wednesday to approve a resolution urging police to refrain from making arrests or issuing citations during the Democratic National Convention.
Mason Tvert, leader of the group Safer Alternative For Enjoyable Recreation, said officials are ignoring the will of the voters. He said the city still requires violators to show up in court, which he warned could clog the court system
"After the Democratic National Convention ends, there will be hundreds of marijuana cases all showing up at the same time," Tvert said. (Z: WHAT??)
Tvert said based on current numbers, the city is on track to increase that to 1,900 this year, not counting any surge of arrests that might take place during the convention.
DiCroce said police are required to enforce laws, including state laws, if they witness a violation.
"It's certainly not our function to vote on suspending laws for a certain period of time," he told the 10-member panel.
Tvert said the ordinance was not meant to cover public marijuana use.
"We're not suggesting demonstrators publicly use marijuana," he said.
Tvert said conventioneers will be consuming large amounts of alcohol and they should have an alternative. (Z: If they didn't vote Dem, maybe they wouldn't need an alternative to sobriety? I'm only sayin'..)
Lt. Ernie Martinez, representing Denver police on the panel, said police will have bigger priorities during the convention, but police won't give up their authority.
"If something occurs in front of us, we're going to act," Martinez said.
The resolution passed 5-3, with two abstentions.
City officials say the resolution is not binding.
Tvert and his group successfully pushed a 2005 initiative to legalize possession of less than an ounce of marijuana for adults over 21, but the move failed to blunt arrests because authorities continued to enforce state laws. It was patterned after a Seattle law that Tvert said is working.
Tvert tried to pass an identical measure at the state level but was rebuffed by statewide voters.
Admittedly, this is an AP story I butchered so's to keep it legal...I don't want to INFRINGE...but I thought you all ought to see this!! The facts are there, the whole story isn't.
Personally, if I had to attend the DNC convention, I'd be reaching for multiple martinis, but that's just me!! How can they expect ANYBODY to attend stone cold sober. ('Stone' being the operative word with Democrats, apparently, come to think of it~!)
By the way....I saw this story last night, but clicked on my link this morning and it's GONE! (SURPRISE!) so I can't link it for you. BUT, I'd kept the window open and stumbled upon it in my anger that it had been pulled. I HAD IT, and now YOU have it............ Seeems like that DNC convention center will give new meaning to the lyrics; "This JOINT is jumpin'...it's really jumpin'.."
compliments of WV Dottr who went it to my last evening. Thanks!
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Remember I asked you all for ideas that I can include in my preschool classes in order to teach them PATRIOTISM (man was THAT a pain in the neck to color!!) at an early age? Well, it's all happening, and I'm using ALL your ideas in writing my curriculum (thanks!), but I need more help:
I NEED A NAME FOR THE CLASS!
I'll teach them the Pledge of Allegiance and patriotic songs, tell them about Geo. Washington and the cherry tree, I'll tell them about Betsy Ross, and I'll have naturalized citizens tell the kids how lucky they are to be BORN here.....I'll talk about AMERICA every week for thirty minutes. The name has to be something that'll please the parents of the little girl with OBAMA on her yellow T shirt, too. Not saying those people don't love America and won't appreciate the class's motives, but......... HELP!
Today, I got the white gloves the flag bearers will wear when we walk in with Old Glory and put her up on the wall to stay! Tell your local preschools they need to do the same!
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
across Pennsylvania Avenue , where he'd been sitting on a park bench.
He spoke to the Marine standing guard and said, "I would like to go in and meet with President Barack Obama."
The Marine replied, "Sir, Mr. Obama is not President and doesn't
The old man said, "Okay," and walked away. The following day, the
same man approached the White House and said to the same Marine, "I
would like to go in and meet with President Barack Obama".
The Marine again told the man, "Sir, as I said yesterday, Mr. Obama
is not President and doesn't reside here." The man thanked him and
again walked away.
The third day, the same man approached the White House and spoke to
the very same Marine, saying "I would like to go in and meet with
President Barack Obama"
The Marine, understandably agitated at this point, looked at the man
and said, "Sir, this is the third day in a row you have been here
asking to speak to Mr. Obama. I've told you already several times
that Mr. Obama is not the President and doesn't reside here. Don't
hearing your answer!"
The Marine snapped to attention, saluted, and said, "See you tomorrow."
Monday, August 18, 2008
I read some of the transcripts from the Saddleback questions and answers Saturday night and I cut/pasted, cleaned up, removed the transcription numbers, etc.....because I wanted to see what you think. Obama's quotes are in CAPS.
"WHAT I CAN DO IS SAY ARE THERE WAYS THAT WE CAN WORK TOGETHER TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF UNWANTED PREGNANCIES SO THAT WE ACTUALLY ARE REDUCING THE SENSE THAT WOMEN ARE SEEKING OUT ABORTIONS."
Z: How do you reduce a "sense"? Is it not better to try to reduce abortions? Something about that is so typical of what a friend said after reading DREAMS FROM MY FATHER..you're never quite sure what he means. "reducing the sense"?
This was curious, too: "THAT FOR A GAY PARTNERS TO WANT TO VISIT EACH OTHER IN THE HOSPITAL FOR THE STATE TO SAY YOU KNOW WHAT THAT'S ALL RIGHT, I DON'T THINK IN ANY WAY INHIBITS MY CORE BELIEFS ABOUT WHAT MARRIAGE ARE. I THINK MY FAITH IS STRONG ENOUGH AND MY MARRIAGE IS STRONG ENOUGH THAT I CAN AFFORD THOSE CIVIL RIGHTS TO OTHERS EVEN IF I HAVE A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE OR A DIFFERENT VIEW."
Z: From what my gay friends tell me, any gay couple can see a lawyer and settle issues like hospital visitation before it happens, so that's a moot point. His argument that his 'marriage is strong' is the number one leftist belief that straights are threatened in some way by the specter of gay marriage. That's so insulting and desperate.
Regarding EVIL, he said "NOW, THE ONE THINK THAT I THINK IS VERY IMPORTANT IS FOR US TO HAVE SOME HUMILITY IN HOW WE APPROACH THE ISSUE OF CON FRONTING EVIL, BUT YOU KNOW A LOT OF EVIL HAS BEEN PERPETRATED BASED ON THE CLAIM THAT WE WERE TRYING TO CONFRONT EVIL. Q. IN THE NAME OF GOOD? A. INTO THE NAME OF GOOD. AND I THINK ONE THING THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT IS HAVING SOME HUMILITY IN RECOGNIZING THAT, YOU KNOW, JUST BECAUSE WE THINK OUR INTENTIONS ARE GOOD DOESN'T ALWAYS MEAN THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING GOOD."
Z: Use humility in confronting EVIL? WHAT?
"I WOULD NOT NOMINATE JUSTICE SCALIA ALTHOUGH I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY DOUBT ABOUT HIS INTELLECTUAL BRILLIANCE BECAUSE HE AND I JUST DISAGREE,"
Z: Maybe I'm being too hard on him here, and we all know whichever side wins appoints judges who've shown a slant in one or the other direction, but to come out and say I DISAGREE SO HE CAN'T SERVE? just smacks of something funny to come out and say it like that.
LIKE IN KATRINA. IF I TOOK PEOPLE TO KATRINA AND I WANTED TO HIRE SOME PEOPLE TO DO RELIEF, I WOULD STILL -- IF I TOOK FEDERAL MONEY TO HELP IN THAT RELIEF I WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO SAY, I ONLY WANT PEOPLE TO BELIEVE LIKE WE DO? A. IT'S ONE OF THOSE SITUATIONS WHERE THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAILS. I THINK GENERALLY SPEAKING FAITH BASED ORGANIZATIONS SHOULD NOT BE ADVANTAGED OR DISADVANTAGED WHEN IT COMES TO GETTING FEDERAL FUNDS BY VIRTUE OF THE FACT THAT THEY ARE FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS. THEY JUST WANT A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD BUT WHAT WE DO WANT TO MAKE SURE OF IS THAT AS A GENERAL PRINCIPAL WE'RE NOT USING FEDERAL FUNDING TO DISCRIMINATED BUT THAT IS ONLY WHEN IT COMES TO THE NARROW PROGRAM THAT IS BEING FUNDED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. THAT DOES NOT AFFECT ANY OF THE OTHER MINISTRIES THAT ARE TAKING PLACE.
Z: SO, no faith-based institutions can get government help because Catholic organizations only hire Catholics, or Jews only hire Jews? Most religious groups DO only work with those interested in that particular cause; most churches are full of Christians, most synagogues doing good are only full of Jews......that's natural. SO, he's saying that they shouldn't be advantaged or disadvantaged ...sounds great, except they can't be advantaged if they receive federal money. Oops. That DOES 'affect....ministries.." doesn't it? Don't the red and purple words contradict his point?
I DON'T THINK THAT THERE IS A HARD AND FAST LINE AT WHICH YOU SAY, OKAY, WE ARE GOING IN. I THINK IT IS ALWAYS A JUDGMENT CALL. I THINK THAT THE BASIC PRINCIPLE HAS TO BE THAT IF WE HAVE IT WITHIN OUR POWER TO PREVENT MASS KILLING AND GENOCIDE AND WE CAN WORK IN CONCERT WITH THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY TO PREVENT IT THEN WE SHOULD ACT. NOW, WE HAVE TO DO SO -- WE HAVE TO DO SO I THINK THAT INTERNATIONAL COMPONENT IS VERY CRITICAL. WE'RE NOT -- WE MAY NOT GET 100 PERCENT AGREEMENT, BUT -- Q -- GO TO THE WAR WITHOUT APPROVAL? A YES, BUT I THINK YOU TAKE AN EXAMPLE LIKE BOSNIA WHEN WE WENT IN AND UNDOUBTEDLY SAVED LIVES. WE DID NOT HAVE YOU UN APPROVAL BUT THERE WAS A STRONG INTERNATIONAL CASE THAT HAD BEEN MADE THAT ETHNIC CLEANSING WAS TAKING PLACE. AND UNDER THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES WHEN WE HAVE, WITHIN OUR POWER, WE SHOULD -- YOU KNOW WE SHOULD TAKE ACTION.
Z: Wouldn't he consider 300,000 dead Kurds at Saddam's hands "ethnic cleansing"? Are those massacres less important to him than Bosnia? And why, if, like he said, it was "within our power to prevent MASS KILLING AND GENOCIDE" shouldn't we go in even if the internatinoal component was 'critical'?
WE'RE TRADING PARTNERS UNFORTUNATELY THEY ARE NOW LENDERS TO US BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T BEEN TAKING CARE OF OUR ECONOMY THE WAY WE NEED TO BE. I DON'T THINK ANY OF US WANT TO SEE MILITARY CONFLICT WITH CHINA SO WE WANT TO MANAGE THIS RELATIONSHIP AND MOVE THEM INTO THE WORLD COMMUNITY AS A FULL PARTNER BUT WE CAN'T PURCHASE THAT BY IGNORING THE VERY REAL PERSECUTIONS THAT ARE TAKING PLACE..
Z: But, he wants to tax OUR CORPORATIONS, OUR MANUFACTURERS, OUR BUSINESSES more HERE in America. How then, can our companies compete against China? That's "taking care of our economy in the way we need to be?" that's puzzling.
WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO CONSIDER AND EVEN COMMIT TO DOING SOME KIND OF EMERGENCY PLAN FOR OTHER FANS LIKE PRESIDENT BUSH DID WITH AIDS ALMOST A PRESIDENT'S EMERGENCY PLAN FOR ORPHANS TO DEAL WITH THIS ISSUE? A I CHEATED A LITTLE BIT. I ACTUALLY LOOKED AT THIS IDEA AHEAD OF TIME AND I THINK IT IS A -- I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA.
Z: He "cheated a little bit..." he "Actually looked at this idea ahead of time.." Does that mean he had the questions? Or is he implying that this is the only one subject he actually boned up on before the show? Either one is suspect, in my opinion. Nobody's brought that up in the media, as far as I can tell. And, as usual, if a liberal saw this post, they'd just write it off as "Conservative nonsense" and people actually believe truth is nonsense if it's presented by FOX or a blog.
Meanwhile, I'm hearing that the left is saying McCain heard some of Obama's questions and answers....that he answered too quickly. That's totally untrue and, in fact, Obama got there earlier so he was told one MORE question, the adoption one, than McCain was told beforehand. Here's the truth about who knew what, but it doesn't make the media.
"OBAMA MUST WIN" is the call of the media, Andrea Mitchell, etc. There's something so wrong in America today and we need to start to come up with ways to try to fix her. Now.
Sunday, August 17, 2008
The Democrat Party has become the Lawyers' Party. Barack Obama and
Hillary Clinton are lawyers. Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama are
lawyers. John Edwards, the other former Democrat candidate for
president, is a lawyer, and so is his wife, Elizabeth. Every Democrat
nominee since 1984 went to law school (although Gore did not
graduate). Every Democrat vice presidential nominee since 1976,
except for Lloyd Bentsen, went to law school. Look at the Democrat Party in Congress: the Majority Leader in each house is a lawyer.
The Republican Party is different. President Bush and Vice President
Cheney were not lawyers, but businessmen. The leaders of the
Republican Revolution were not lawyers. Newt Gingrich was a history professor; Tom Delay was an exterminator; and, Dick Armey was an economist. House Minority Leader Boehner was a plastic manufacturer, not a lawyer. The former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is a heart surgeon.
Who was the last Republican president who was a lawyer? Gerald Ford,
who left office 31 years ago and who barely won the Republican
nomination as a sitting president, running against Ronald Reagan in
1976. The Republican Party is made up of real people doing real
work. The Democrat Party is made up of lawyers. Democrats mock and
scorn men who create wealth, like Bush and Cheney, or who heal the
sick, like Frist, or who immerse themselves in history, like Gingrich.
The Lawyers' Party sees these sorts of people, who provide goods and
services that people want, as the enemies of America . And, so we
have seen the procession of official enemies, in the eyes of the Lawyers' Party, grow.
Against whom do Hillary and Obama rail? Pharmaceutical companies,
oil companies, hospitals, manufacturers, fast food restaurant chains,
large retail businesses, bankers, and anyone producing anything of value in our nation.
This is the natural consequence of viewing everything through the
eyes of lawyers. Lawyers solve problems by successfully representing
their clients, in this case the American people. Lawyers seek to
have new laws passed, they seek to win lawsuits, they press appellate
courts to overturn precedent, and lawyers always parse language to favor their side.
Confined to the narrow practice of law, that is fine. But it is an
awful way to govern a great nation. When politicians as lawyers
begin to view some Americans as clients and other Americans as opposing parties, then the role of the legal system in our life becomes all-consuming. Some Americans become 'adverse parties' of our very government. We are not all litigants in some vast social class-action suit. We are citizens of a republic
that promises us a great deal of freedom from laws, from courts, and from lawyers.
Today, we are drowning in laws; we are contorted by judicial
decisions; we are driven to distraction by omnipresent lawyers in all
parts of our once private lives. America has a place for laws and
lawyers, but that place is modest and reasonable, not vast and
unchecked. When the most important decision for our next president
is whom he will appoint to the Supreme Court, the role of lawyers and
the law in America is too big. When lawyers use criminal prosecution
as a continuation of politics by other means, as happened in the
lynching of Scooter Libby and Tom Delay, then the power of lawyers in
America is too great. When House Democrats sue America in order to
hamstring our efforts to learn what our enemies are planning to do to us, then the role of litigation in America has become crushing.
We cannot expect the Lawyers' Party to provide real change, real
reform, or real hope in America . Most Americans know that a
republic in which every major government action must be blessed by
nine unelected judges is not what Washington intended in 1789. Most
Americans grasp that we cannot fight a war when ACLU lawsuits snap at the heels of our defenders. Most Americans intuit that more lawyers and judges will not restore declining moral values or spark the spirit of enterprise in our economy.
Perhaps Americans will understand that change cannot be brought to
our nation by those lawyers who already largely dictate American society and business. Perhaps Americans will see that hope does not come from the mouths
of lawyers but from personal dreams nourished by hard work. Perhaps
Americans will embrace the truth that more lawyers with more power
will only make our problems worse.
HOLY SMOKE! UPDATE...look what happened near the Alps in Southern Germany. A married couple, in their sixties, was caught hanging like this and rescued...those are live electrical lines so it was QUITE a rescue. As Mr. Z added in his email to me about it "I'm happy this didn't happen to the couple marrying on those planes!" (me, too!)
Saturday, August 16, 2008
NOW? After watching the Rick Warren 2 hours? I am VOTING FOR (I said FOR) McCain.
I am voting for McCain because I LOVED NEARLY EVERY SINGLE THING HE SAID TONIGHT! Yes, faith-based assistance in New Orleans beats (and STILL is) those FEMA buses all lined up with nobody in them HANDS down...yes, I believe life begins at conception (what is it if it isn't life, an Amana refrigerator?)..yes, I believe that parents out to have a choice about their child's schooling!..yes, I believe we MUST beat "radical extremists", YES I believe our kids need inspiration to love America again...and yes, I don't believe you need money to be rich and I don't believe in 'redistribution'. Etc.
I had calls from friends earlier tonight, during Obama's hour, saying "I can't believe he's going to beat Obama..Obama's so glib, so smooth."
These same callers (including Mom of Armenian hamburger fame!) called during McCain's first commercial and said "I can't BELIEVE this guy. I've never seen THIS SIDE of MCCAIN." A friend called and said her mother, an Irish Catholic dyed-in-the-wool Democrat called and basically said "Okay....I get it. I'm voting for McCain!"
I'm voting McCain. FOR him, not just against Obama. I am SO happy I got a little teary!
ELLEN has to teach OBAMA to dance? I'll be she's never gonna give HIM up.
That's Rick Astley
Friday, August 15, 2008
Does shock jock hate speech lead to violence?
BY JENNA KERN-RUGILE Jenna Kern-Rugile is a frequent contributor to Newsday.
August 13, 2008 For the full article, click this link.
On July 27 a man walked into the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church in Knoxville and opened fire, killing two people and seriously wounding seven others. As someone who has chosen Unitarian Universalism as her faith, I was shaken by the news. Unitarian Universalism congregations, like ours on Long Island, define themselves as a "liberal religious community" - not liberal in the political sense, but because we believe in open-minded discourse and welcome people of all persuasions.How could such a community become the target of hate?
Police in Knoxville were quoted as saying that the man, later identified as Jim D. Adkisson, 58, targeted the church "because of its liberal teachings and his belief that all liberals should be killed because they were ruining the country, and that ... the Democrats had tied his country's hands in the war on terror and had ruined every institution in America with the aid of media outlets." But where might Adkisson have come up with such ideas? Might the shooter have heard talk-show host Rush Limbaugh say that "liberalism is the greatest threat this country faces" and "the Islamofascists are actually campaigning for the election of Democrats" ......... O'Reilly has stated that "the far left in America is dominated by haters, people who despise their own country."... David Hudson, a scholar at The First Amendment Center, told me, "The First Amendment protects lots of offensive, repugnant speech." I'd say the above statements fit that description perfectly......those of us who reject the rhetoric of extreme right pundits can still speak out and try to put pressure on the corporations that air their shows and the advertisers who sponsor them. Censorship, no. Exercising our free speech and spending our dollars in sync with our values, absolutely.
ONE DERANGED NUT kills people in a church and it's the fault of Conservatives.
ONE DERANGED NUT kills a doctor who kills an abortionist and it's the fault of Conservative CHRISTIANS.
Does anyone see a pattern here? Is this really honest and is it the 'high road' the author insinuates she's taking? Here's Brent Bozell's response to this Newsday piece.
I happen to agree with everything I put in bold above, does that make me a potential killer? Oh, and I'm a CHRISTIAN. Be afraid....be VERY afraid! Some of the statements of Conservative talk show hosts are tough, let's face it, but ANYTHING as tough as KEITH OLBERMANN?? And, of course, the most important sentence in this Newsday article, the one not addressed again, was: "Someone who goes as far as shooting up a church is obviously mentally unbalanced. "
Why is it considered "SHOCK" to tell someone's truth just because it isn't a liberal viewpoint?
z...thanks to Priscilla who found the Newsday piece.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
"John McCain's campaign has been working overtime to ridicule Barack Obama as The One, the rock-star celebrity with adoring fans, the politician with the chutzpah to announce his candidacy in a speech about Abraham Lincoln. So it was a bit surprising to watch the opening of McCain's town hall meeting in York, Pa., on Tuesday." (Z: Thus starts an article in Time Magazine. Here are 'highpoints' of the article, and then we'll talk integrity, okay?)
It goes on: "What's not such a good thing is the way campaign culture tries to slap down candidates who don't seem to fit someone's definition of "ordinary Americans." One would think the presidency would require a rather extraordinary American, but modern candidates are apparently supposed to pretend to be just like us."
Z likes this part: "This is silly enough when candidates are attacked for their wealth or supposedly elitist habits; it's hard to see how John McCain's multiple mansions or $500 shoes detract from his economic plans, and just about impossible to see how Barack Obama's decision to vacation near his grandmother in Hawaii undercuts his claim to economic leadership. But ever since the wealthy Whig William Henry Harrison's brilliant "log cabin and hard cider" campaign, candidates have tried to strike Everyman poses, and missteps that have made them look "out of touch" - like George H.W. Bush checking his watch during an economic debate, or John F. Kerry windsurfing off Nantucket, or even Bill Clinton of Hope getting an expensive haircut - have created major political headaches. (Z: "near his grandmother"..how sweet! and "EVEN Bill Clinton", the superstar, the one they love, EVEN he made a 'misstep' Him? ... and "multiple MANSIONS", can we continue the talk about the details behind the purchase of Obama's mansion?!)
The article continues: "McCain began with an impassioned message about the fighting in Georgia, urging the crowd to care about a "tiny little democracy, far, far away" that might seem irrelevant to their day-to-day lives. "History is often made in remote and obscure places," McCain said. Even if you don't share McCain's bellicose ideas about Russia, there was something inspiring about his appeal to the conscience of the crowd, his insistence that the struggles of Georgians should be the concern of Americans. But the audience just listened quietly, offering only a few subdued golf-claps - until McCain mentioned Georgia's oil pipeline, and called the conflict a new reminder that it's time to do something about higher gas prices in America. Then the crowd erupted, and gave McCain a standing ovation." (Z: how about context with how Russian's involvement in Georgia could affect US in far scarier terms than oil?)
Here's the last bit: "McCain dutifully gave the questioners the you-first responses they were looking for, trying his best to show he could feel their pain. "I probably should have mentioned what you all already know: These are tough times," he said. It was hard not to wonder whether a man who endured such extraordinary pain for more than five years in Hanoi is really as troubled by dropping real estate values as he tried to suggest. But his supporters seemed to appreciate his rather ordinary answers, and they certainly appreciate his remarkable life story; when he was done, he was mobbed by adoring fans."
Time finishes the longer article with: "Wait: A remarkable life? Adoring fans? Clearly, he's unfit to serve." Sarcasm...since Time Magazine believes that being a rock star with little experience makes one fit to serve.
SO. Serving in the military as long as he did, suffering like he did in Vietnam and serving twenty years in the Senate are compared with Obama's celebrity status of having done nothing important in the senate and speaking to Berlin like a rock star? Those are comparable and McCain should be ashamed of himself for suggesting that Obama's celebrity status isn't quite what we're looking for in a PRESIDENT? Having friends like Ayers and Farrakhan and Jeremiah Wright (and more) and being the sweetheart of Hollywood celebs is the same as McCain's record of fighting those things Ayers, Farrakhan and most celebs stand for, fighting for those things that are PRO AMERICA and down on communism and racism? amazing. (By the way, this story was on the Yahoo homepage this morning...LOTS of people saw this)
You know, I'm not a huge fan of McCain's and you all know my horribly low opinion of Obama, but does Time Magazine really have this much trouble figuring out what traits and what background make a man fit to run for President of the United States? I don't. You don't, either.
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
No one likes war. War is a horrific
affair, bloody and expensive. Sending our men and women into battle to perhaps die or be maimed is an unconscionable thought.
Yet some wars need to be waged, and
someone needs to lead. The citizenry and Congress are often ambivalent or largely opposed to any given war. It's up to our leader to convince them.
That's why we call the leader 'Commander in Chief.'
George W's war was no different. There was lots of resistance to it.
Many in Congress were vehemently against the idea. The Commander in
Chief had to lobby for legislative approval.
Along with supporters, George W. used
the force of his convictions, the power of his title and every ounce
of moral suasion he could muster to rally support. He had to assure
Congress and the public that the war was morally justified, winnable
and affordable. Congress eventually came around and voted overwhelmingly to wage war.
George W. then lobbied foreign governments for support. But in the
end, only one European nation helped us. The rest of the world sat on
its hands and watched.
After a few quick victories, things started to go bad. There were many
dark days when all the news was discouraging. Casualties began to mount.
It became obvious that our forces were too small. Congress began to
drag its feet about funding the effort.
Many who had voted to support the war just a few years earlier were
beginning to speak against it and accuse the Commander in Chief of
misleading them. Many critics began to call him incompetent, an idiot
and even a liar. Journalists joined the negative chorus with a vengeance.
As the war entered its fourth year, the public began to grow weary of
the conflict and the casualties. George W.'s popularity plummeted. Yet
through it all, he stood firm, supporting the troops and endorsing the
Without his unwavering support, the war would have surely ended, then
and there, in overwhelming and total defeat.
At this darkest of times, he began to make some changes. More troops were added and trained. Some advisers were shuffled, and new generals installed.
Then, unexpectedly and gradually, things began to improve. Now it was the enemy that appeared to be growing weary of the lengthy conflict and losing support. Victories
began to come, and hope returned.
Many critics in Congress and the press said the improvements were just
George W.'s good luck. The progress, they said, would be temporary. He
knew, however, that in warfare good fortune counts.
Then, in the unlikeliest of circumstances and perhaps the most historic example of military luck,
the enemy blundered and was resoundingly defeated. After six long
years of war, the Commander in Chief basked in a most hard-fought victory.
So on that historic day,
Oct. 19, 1781, in a place called Yorktown , a satisfied George
Washington sat upon his beautiful white horse and accepted the
surrender of Lord Cornwallis, effectively ending the Revolutionary War.
WHAT? Were you
thinking of someone else?
"What we are doing at the moment is sending a signal that the U.N. is back. The U.N. is back to stay. The U.N. is back to have its footprint increasing, its activities increasing." And JUST when we thought things were going so well in Iraq.
"With violence at four-year lows across Iraq, the United Nations is also venturing further into the tempestuous world of Iraqi politics." Sure. Because they're not QUITE 'tempestuous' enough.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
.....there am I with them." Matthew 20:18
CHINESE FAITH From the Wall St. Journal
August 12, 2008
President Bush attended church in Beijing on Sunday, worshipping with Chinese Christians and singing "Amazing Grace." But what happened outside the church says more about the state of religion in China. (Z: kind of a metaphor for most of the Olympics?)
Earlier that morning, Hua Huiqi, the pastor of an illegal underground Christian church, was detained by police as he was biking to the service that Mr. Bush was to attend. His whereabouts are still unknown. Mr. Hua's brother, who was briefly detained, said Mr. Hua only wanted to worship at the church where he was baptized. (Z: could poor Pastor Hua be in the cycling race? ya, sure. Pray for him)
China's constitution allows freedom of religion, but in practice religion is tolerated only insofar as it is controlled by the state. The only legal churches are those run by the State Administration of Religious Affairs. Those who choose to attend "house" churches -- roughly half of China's Christians -- face harassment or detention. That reality contrasts with the better face Beijing has put on its religious tolerance at the Olympics, where athletes have been provided with everything they might need to practice their faith. (Z: care to guess which ones?)
China's leaders are afraid of religion because they see it as a political threat. Citizens with faith and a moral compass are harder for the Communist Party to control. Mr. Bush gently rebuked China's religious restrictions as he left the church. "God is universal, and God is love, and no state, man or woman should fear the influence of loving religion." (Z: no comment)
z (and thanks, Ronnie!)
A president's pension currently is $191,300 per year. Assuming the next president lives to age 80. Sen. McCain would receive ZERO pension as he would reach 80 at the end of two terms as president. Sen. Obama would be retired for 26 years after two terms and would receive $4,973,800 in pension.
Therefore it would certainly make economic sense to elect McCain in November. This one made me laugh..but ya know..??!!
Monday, August 11, 2008
Sunday, August 10, 2008
Saturday, August 9, 2008
Mr. Z had to write and get the Olympics off his chest, which, in itself deserves a medal just from the sheer 'weight' of it!:
I am a huge sports fan, I was an excellent all-round athlete when I was young, so why would I not watch the Olympics? My wife is really unhappy I’m not going to be watching this year so I thought I’d explain:
- The Olympic ideal is dead. When it was pure sports, it was still fun. The “spectacle” part is more important than the honest athletic competition and it seems suddenly to be more important to participate than to win. Today, it is all about money. No athletic or moral principles. The athletes used to be “amateurs” – today they are mostly professionals, at least in those categories which attract most spectators. For me, an athlete who is barely surviving with very little financial help to compete in a “niche” sport does more to represent the Olympic idea than a Dirk Nowitzki who probably earns $15+ annually with the Dallas Mavericks (and I have nothing against Nowitzki nor professional basketball which I actually barely miss watching a game of “Go Lakers!”, but they should not participate in the Olympics).
- The International Olympic Committee (IOC) is as worthless as the U.N. because it has grown into a hugely corrupt organization which does not care about the athletes but only about money. I thought that that would be changed when Rogge came into power, but it hasn’t. The way they gave into the Chinese was astonishing, as if it’s honest and forthcoming to say the internet will be made available to the journalists “to the extent possible”. That’s not honest, it’s revealing, and they got a free pass!? Also, the games should not have been given to Beijing because it was foreseeable that the Chinese didn’t change their stand on human rights.
- The world witnessed what happened in the latest Tibet incident how China hasn’t changed. Many “world” politicians condemned the actions, most of them said that they would, as a consequence, not participate in the opening ceremony – and you know what happened. Their egos got in the way of keeping that promise, so all these would-be-Napoleons showed up, including Bush, Sarkozy, and Putin (I am actually not surprised about him, since Russia is not much better than China relative to human rights). Germany’s Angela Merkel held her ground and did not go…she deserves respect for that.
- If all of that is not enough – NBC has bought the rights for TV. Now they do what the Left does best, they decide for us what we are supposed to see. Meaning, the choice is very limited, interrupted every 3 minutes by commercials, showing only the major sports, and of those, only the first two or three best in the competition (what happened to Olympic ideals?). To top it off, they have mostly commentators who don’t know what they are talking about. Given the 15 hour time difference to Beijing, I suppose they are mostly not showing the competition live, but canned, which provides an excellent opportunity to make enough time available for the insufferable ads. I can’t watch that, it absolutely drives me nuts!
- And then there is DOPING. Because it is all about money, and despite the Olympic ideal it has become all about winning, almost all athletes in the major sports are doping to reach their goals. Some of the athletes are caught, most are not. That has to do with statistics (how do you control 10,000+ athletes on a constant basis?), but also with improved doping methods which are almost non detectable. The newest hit is stem cell doping, very effective, and the chance of detection is almost zero. Two facts among others stick out…. the track and field team of Russia has already been decimated by the officials having found that eleven athletes were doping, and undercover actions in China have proven how easy it is to get doping in China. There are countries which are relatively more honest, like Germany (controls are far more stringent there than anywhere else, from what I have heard), but other countries are really bad about it – some of them, because they feel it is a “trivial offense” (like Italy or Spain – see the Tour de France), others because they MUST win, such as Russia, China, and, yes, the United States (dare I mention Marion Jones and her ex-husband, Hunter, Floyd Landis, Major League Baseball, etc.?).
I feel for the “true” athletes; they prepare for 4 years to participate, then they have to perform in air which is difficult to breathe and against competitors they are sure are doping. And, in addition, the media doesn’t take note of them since they belong to ‘fringe sports’, and showing those on TV doesn’t provide TV a big audience, creating a loss of ad revenues. This is, I am sorry to say, capitalism at its worse. The Olympics are mostly about money and cheating. I would have liked to have watched true athleticism, but all we (minus me) are going to see are the disciplines in which nobody has a chance to win without doping.
Mr. Z ("up close and personal!")
Z: ADDS: This made me so sick I had to post it. And I believe it ties with Mr. Z's post and some of your comments. So many of us are just plain whores......is $50 million so worth it that you'd not play for your own country, your own city? Kobe's making gazillions as it is........how much richer can you be? Yes, I'm Republican, but........!! And yes, I'd be THIS hurt and angry if it wasn't Kobe Bryant of the Lakers, my home team. And is he over there shmoozing with other countries NOW? Who paid for his ticket room/board over there in China? US? You think he traveled coach? It's not the money, Kobe could afford to pay his own way probably more than America can right now, but it's the principle...and there he is......interviewing?
Friday, August 8, 2008
Thursday, August 7, 2008
Was someone paid off? What a stunning message this sends.....he was found guilty on enough counts to possibly warrant 30 years to life. He will be out in 5 months.
Chew on that, folks. Does this jury decision say this? : "We're America, we're so sorry to have hurt this guy's feelings; we're so sorry that he had to suffer at Gitmo, we're just so sorry that this happened at all. We're over zealous, we know we have nothing to fear and sending strong messages to those who want us dead isn't nice." of course it does
I'm honored to have been asked to be on The Gathering Storm Radio Show, the Blog Talk Radio Show of Always on Watch and WC. The show is on every Friday at noon, Pacific time, and I'll be on tomorrow, August 8th. See details at Always on Watch's site. We're scheduled to talk about the dangers in blogging and the consequences to Free Speech.
Let me take this opportunity to also mention the wonderful new radio show Always and WC are involved with, along with Cassandra USA, Pamela Geller, and Pastorius. Always' blog has the details. It's on Thursday nights on KFNX Phoenix, and you can listen on line, too.
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
UPDATE: Here's what it appears the Obama people are lying about now....wait till you read THIS addendum to the story below!!
According to Federal Election Commission filings, Barack Obama has received illegal donations from Palestinians living in Gaza, a hotbed of Hamas terrorists.
Obama received more than $24,000 in campaign contributions over a period of two months last fall from three Palestinian brothers from the "Edwan" family in Rafah, Gaza, which is a Hamas stronghold along the border with Egypt. The story was uncovered by Pamela Geller of the Atlas Shrugs blog. (see Federal Election Commission report)
Attorney and conservative commentator Debbie Schlussel notes foreign nationals are barred from making contributions in connection with any election -- federal, state, or local -- and an individual is allowed to give only $2,300 per election to a federal candidate or the candidate's campaign committee.
"The donations are basically through and through illegal -- that's number one. And number two is how the Obama campaign tried to conceal it," Schlussel chides. "They listed the campaign contributions as coming from Rafah, Georgia. They used the 'GA' from Gaza so it makes it look like it's legal; and then for the zip code it says '972,' which is actually the area code to dial over to Gaza," she contends.
The attorney comments that if the Obama campaign is willing to "accept thousands of dollars beyond the legal limit and they're also going to flout [Federal Election Commission] restrictions...that's very indicative of what kind of president [Obama] is going to be."
"They're not going to be worried about the details and they won't mind if they break the law to get to the final result that they want," adds Schlussel. She believes it is a "major news story when a presidential candidate receives money from 'a bastion of Islamic terrorism.' And Schlussel argues that the media is "bending over backwards to help Barack Obama and cover up any negative news about him."
Schlussel says Pamela Geller will likely file a Federal Election Commission complaint against the Obama campaign for violating restrictions and limits on campaign contributions.
We've all seen this video of Palestinians calling America for Obama votes, right? What next? Fund raising in Germany? Wouldn't that make more sense? After all, he's campaigned there.
Z: Man, what a GOOD "GET", Pamela....good for you!
"The term Bradley effect or (less commonly) the Wilder effect refers to an explanation advanced as the possible cause of an alleged phenomenon which has led to inaccurate voter opinion polls in some American political campaigns between a white candidate and a non-white candidate. Specifically, there were instances in which such elections saw the non-white candidate significantly underperform with respect to the results predicted by pre-election polls."
For more on this, click on this link to see this discussed in regard to Obama v Hillary, or click this link, where you can see how this functioned in other elections between Black and White Americans.
Will Americans say they're voting for the Black candidate even if they disagree with his stances just to show they're not racist and then vote differently? What do you think? I think it's sad. WHEN will we get PAST that?UPDATE: Or MAYBE Americans won't vote for Obama because....................THEY'RE TIRED OF HIM! check this out!