Friday, February 29, 2008

"Matchmaker, matchmaker, make me a (Muslim) match..."

Front Page Magazine has an article exposing Islam, like the titles listed below, at least once a day.

Islam's Universal Blasphemy FatwaThe Holy Land's Christian TargetsA Small Victory Over Shari'aJihad and Jew-HatredHorror Under the HijabCAIR's Spin GuideSaudis Give Big to U.S. Colleges to Fund Islamic Studies .......

That’s fine. It’s a conservative site and a lot of people there are amazing patriots of Jewish or Christian faith, and most of the people there see a problem fitting Islam into the American landscape. There's one Muslim at FPM who posts every day, he calls himself Abdullah and he's an American ex Navy vet who fights his good Muslim fight reminding FPM readers that it's a peaceful religion, that CAIR means no harm, that Hamas isn't a terror group. Get the picture? In spite of him, suffice it to say that FPM is a site which highlights a lot more ‘beware of Islam’ articles than it publishes articles that say anything resembling ‘Muslims were only kidding on 9/11’.

Here’s the rub; FPM has only recently started cluttering itself up with pop up ads on articles…their readership has gone down something near 30% lately and they’re hurting for cash, apparently. SO, they’ve got a lot more advertisting now and one ad caught my eye.

FPM has a fairly large ad for a muslim dating service off to the side of some of the articles now…a beautiful, sweet faced woman in headscarf and a quite handsome, kind looking young man with a knit cap. “”, if you’re interested.

Imagine the conversation over at the advertising department of ‘singlemuslim’.

“I know! Let’s advertise at that site that can’t stand muslims…that’s the ticket”

Or might it be

“Look, they seem to hate us, but we have the money and they’ll have to take it, that'll show 'em..” sort of like what the Saudis who just bought the Chelsea Marketplace development in London might have said, or the other huge development they bought in England a month ago, or what Saudis said when they bought into FOX, ..well, we could all go on listing these purchases, right?

Deep pockets to have us in their pockets, huh? I just couldn’t help but see a metaphor here… much will we sell because we need the money and they have it? Any end to it?

Well, heck, maybe there's nothing sinister going on here and this dating sevice just figured we had the perfect demographics at muslim. Maybe it pays? Maybe I’m just reading more into this than I ought, right?


Thursday, February 28, 2008


Would this guy call the enemy "EVIL"? Or is that too harsh a term for terrorists?

Abu Ghraib prison turned soldiers evil by design: researcher
by Glenn Chapman Thu Feb 28, 9:14 PM ET

Here are the 'lowlights' from the article you can read all of if you click on the link above.

MONTEREY, California (AFP) - The very design of Abu Ghraib in Iraq turned good soldiers into evil tormentors that humiliated and brutalized prisoners, a famed social psychologist said Thursday.

Stanford University professor Philip Zimbardo described a "Lucifer effect" as he flashed shocking images of Abu Ghraib horrors for those at an elite Technology, Entertainment and Design conference in California.

"If you give people power without oversight it is a formula for abuse," Zimbardo said to a stunned audience the included famous actors, entrepreneurs and politicians.

"Abu Ghraib abuses went on for three months ... Who was watching the store? Nobody, and it was on purpose."

Zimbardo, wearing a black T-shirt with a picture of a devil flanked by two angels, paced the stage as images of horrors flashed on large screens. He lays out his conclusions in a recently released book titled "The Lucifer Effect."

"There is an infinite capacity to make us behave kind or cruel, or make some of us heroes," Zimbardo said, convinced that environment dictates the outcome far more than people's characters or personalities.

Photos showed naked and hooded prisoners beaten bloody and being made to commit humiliating acts such as human pyramids or simulating homosexual sex. Soldiers posed proudly with battered corpses and nude, injured prisoners.

A "hero" at Abu Ghraib turned out to be a lowly private that called for abuses there to be stopped, according to the professor.

"Heroism is the antidote to evil," Zimbardo said. "Let's focus on justice and peace, which sadly our administration has not been doing."

Z: You know, nobody should be "posing proudly with battered corpses and nude, injured prisoners", but I'm thinking that the "justice and peace" Zimbardo hopes for might not be accorded to our soldiers as they're beheaded, not 'humiliated'. Do we stand a chance when people look at US as the monsters?

Wednesday, February 27, 2008

To another great Conservative.......LEFT COAST CHUCK

A Tribute

Front Page Magazine is where I started getting interested in politics while living in Paris, France. The internet was a great way to stay in touch with America and internet politics most captured my attention. It hadn’t before, I’d always figured we had a great country and would always have a great country. Today, I know we have a great country…….to save.

9/11 happened while I lived in Paris. Over night, I went from pleasantly coasting through Politics 101 to a crash (you should pardon the expression) course in Advanced Politics with a double major in Islamofascism. 9/11 drew me with more interest to FPM and to where I met a lot of great people. This is how I got to know a fellow with the screen name of Left Coast Chuck.

Chuck was a mild mannered gentleman who told me how much he liked my posts and often responded to them, as I did to his. He was a staunch conservative, free market, America-loving, wonderfully sweet man of faith; nothing worn on his sleeve, but you felt it. He had values which echoed those of our forefathers; he was a flag waving, gun totin’ patriot. He and I had a nice cozy situation with another great conservative poster, Lorena Meadows. The three of us hit it off and posted to each other a lot.

Then, one day, Lorena wrote me asking if I’d seen any postings from Chuck and I told her I hadn’t. I reminded her that, months before, he’d said he was very ill. She reminded me then that he’d come back recently, after a week off, saying he’d been taken ill again. So, we worried. But, there was a country to save and there are probably 15 posters I enjoyed and bantered with on a regular basis. Life went on at FPM, but I would occasionally scan the screen names for Left Coast Chuck and wouldn’t see him.

One day, I got this post from the screen name “Left Coast kid”.

“To ZinLA and Lorena Meadows, Left Coast Chuck was my dad, and as you know he has been ill recently. My dad had asked me to tell you if anything were to happen to him, and unfortunately I have to tell you that he has passed away, on Nov. 4. unexpectedly. We were told that he would have up to 2 years left so we were not prepared for this. Forgive me for waiting to notify you, but things have been very difficult with dealing with this through his birthday NOV. 19 and the holidays. He considered you his friends and admired you, and I would like to thank you for all your kindness, and prayers, and friendship you showed him. It meant more than you know! He was a great man, my hero, and I miss him more than words can say. Thank you again, Jamie”

I have an FPM file I’ve kept over the years of kind, crazy, or otherwise meaningful posts I’ve had written to me. There are only about twenty, but they’re important to me. This one certainly is.

We’d never met, never spoken on the telephone, but Chuck couldn’t leave without Lorena and me knowing that he’d not be coming back. A man who was a stranger for all intents and purposes wanted to thank us for our friendship. This man with such great values and such kindness imposed it on his child to tell his closest pals at FPM he was gone and wouldn’t be coming back. He didn’t want us to worry.

I was very fond of Left Coast Chuck. I’ll never forget him. It’s fine to write about politics, get upset about what’s going on, hate the Left, call Islam for what it is, complain, whine and rant and rave; this is fun and keeps the heart pumping. But, it didn’t work for Chuck. And no post I ever get will top his kid Jamie’s. Not because he told us his dad had died, but that his dad had wanted him to tell us goodbye and thanks. He wanted us to know why we wouldn’t hear from him again.

I still post a lot at FPM, and I still think of Left Coast Chuck, and I remind myself that it’s men like him who made this country great and it’s men like him for whom we have to save it. Get busy. For my friend, Mr. Left Coast Chuck.

WILLIAM F. BUCKLEY, May he rest in peace........

William Frank "Bill" Buckley, Jr. (November 24, 1925 - February 27, 2008) was an American author and conservative commentator. He founded the political magazine National Review in 1955, hosted the television show Firing Line from 1966 until 1999, and is a nationally syndicated newspaper columnist. His writing style is famed for its eloquence, wit, and use of uncommon words.

"I am, I fully grant, a phenomenon, but not because of any speed in composition," he wrote in The New York Times Book Review in 1986. "I asked myself the other day, `Who else, on so many issues, has been so right so much of the time?' I couldn't think of anyone."

How would the conservative movement been different had he never lived, never written?
Could it be his death parallels the death of conservatism as we know it? Just thinking......

Tuesday, February 26, 2008

Priorities, priorities.................and the winner IS........

By Mr.Bob Shank
February 26, 3008
(thanks to my dear friend, Ron)

Talk about relief. Now that we've got the big story behind us, we can get down to the day-to-day minutia of life. I mean, with the massive decisions behind us, the diminutive details calling for our attention. The cliffhanger tension has approached medication necessity; frankly, I don't know how emotionally fragile people have been able to function as the attention of the most powerful nation in the modern era has had life on-hold awaiting the counting of the ballots and the naming of the winners...
Forget Barack and Hillary; that's a school yard scuffle. The real deal was settled last night - at the Kodak Theatre. The nod went to "No Country for Old Men" (doesn't bode well for John McCain). The boys' and girls' divisions were swept by Daniel Day-Lewis (I thought hyphenated last names were for women who didn't want to give up their identity when they got married?) from "There Will Be Blood" (I guess the 2008 Democratic National Convention documentary will be "There Will Be Blood II") and Marion Cotillard from "La Vie en Rose" (the French should accept our olive branch; best actress for a film with English subtitles).
At the Academy Awards - the 80th Annual - the Super Delegates were all over the house. Everybody has an opinion, but only members of "The Academy" get to vote. It isn't helter-skelter; there are more rules governing the awards process than Paris Hilton's attorney studied for his bar exam. The folks who left with one of those little statues convinced somebody that they deserved their moment in the lights.
Funny, though: Sunday night's drama had two parts. The first part was outside the Kodak Theatre, on what's called "The Red Carpet." In the hour leading up to the 5:00 PST kickoff, the A-Listers strutted their stuff from the curb to the door. Dresses, hair and escorts all strove for the "look," and the catty commentators gave their expert opinions on who had it (the look) and who didn't. Instant mortification: wear the same designer gown sported by another A-Lister. The unpardonable sin...
Once inside, once the cameras were rolling and Jon Stewart seized control, all of the pomp of the Carpet had no more circumstance. From that point forward, life - for everyone inside - was all about the results, tucked inside 24 envelopes that had been "audited by the firm of Price Waterhouse Coopers." Nail biting was unavoidable during the three hour spectacle, the centerpiece of The Day the Earth Stood Still.
One thing's for sure: Hollywood may fall in-and-out of love with America (so many stars seem to rethink whether they plan to live here or not, based on the presidential election outcomes every four years), but they're always in love with themselves. On Oscar night, attendance at the gala is mandatory: anyone who is somebody - or, is dating a somebody, or wants to someday be a somebody - will either be "in the house," or at one of the after parties. No excuses offered, or accepted. Failure to Appear carries a mandatory sentence of one year on an infomercial with Chuck Norris or Kirstie Alley.
Actors and Actresses, Directors and Producers: they may say that they live for the box office results, but it's more often their investors - the folks with the money at risk - who sweat that financial measurement. The real artist types tolerate the sounds of the cash register, but their hearts are really in the words that follow the opening of those envelopes. "And the Oscar for Actor in a Leading Role/Actress in a Leading Role/etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. goes to..."
At least they know what they're working toward. I wonder how many Christians are coming onto the set of life every day looking past their Box Office (the pay window at work) and their Red Carpet (the snitty comments they get from the world around them about how they look, who they're with, what they're wearing) to their upcoming Awards Ceremony: "For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive what is due him for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad."(2 Corinthians 5:10)
That's a ceremony worth living for. Oscars come and go, elections are unrelenting, and the red carpet is bloodstained from the wounds of insensitive people. The recognition of the God who is our only audience that matters is waiting for us, just through that door...

Sunday, February 24, 2008

I'll be taking that picture of Mr. Obama down soon...'s hard to go to your own blog and see that SMILE.

but, for now..............I wish I'd written that!

A Paid Political Announcement


My fellow Hyphenated-Americans:

As your future president I want to thank my supporters, for their ... well, their support.I do thank you for your mindless support of me, despite my nearly complete lack of legislative achievement, my pastor's cordial relations with Louis Farrakhan and Libyan dictator Mohmar Kadaffi, or my voting record as the most liberal congressman in either house, while I present myself as some sort of Bi-partisan Agent of Change and your new Messiah.I also appreciate my supporters claim that my youthful drug use and criminal behavior somehow qualifies me for the presidency after eight years of telling everyone within earshot that Bush's youthful drinking disqualified him. Your hypocrisy is a shining beacon of hope over a sea of political shameless posturing.I would like also to thank the Kennedys for coming out in support of me. There's a lot of glamour behind the Kennedy name, even though JFK started the Vietnam War, his brother Robert illegally wiretapped Martin Luther King Jr. and Teddy is a drunk who once killed a young woman with whom he was having an illicit affair ...... and I'm not going anywhere near the cousins either literally or figuratively.I want to thank Oprah Winfrey too for her unstinting support. Her love of vacuous, sweet-sounding platitudes will be the force that propels me to the White House.Americans should vote for me, not because of my lack of experience or achievement, but because I make people feel good. Voting for me causes some white folk to feel relieved of their imaginary racist guilt.I say things that sound earnest and meaningful, but don't really mean anything, because Americans are tired of things that have meaning. If things have meaning, then that means you have to think about them.Americans are tired of thinking. It's time to shut down the brain, and open up the heart. So when you go to vote in the primaries, remember don't think, just do.And do it for me .....

Thank you.

Barack Obama

Saturday, February 23, 2008

"I pledge allegiance to the flag..........while I'm in the Senate.." WHAT???

From this article:

by Nedra Pickler

Here's my favorite part of Nedra's opine-ion:

"Obama already is the subject of a shadowy smear campaign based on the Internet that falsely suggests he's a Muslim intent on destroying the United States. Obama is a Christian and has been fighting the e-mail hoax, which also claims he doesn't put his hand over his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance, and he's been trying to correct the misinformation.

"Whenever I'm in the United States Senate, I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America," Obama frequently tells voters.

Z: Are we facing an even SLICKER willy? We lived through "I did not have sex with that woman" and now Obama DOES say the pledge...that is, when he's "in the United States Senate". Great, Obama. Just GREAT. And, otherwise......................?

Friday, February 22, 2008

file this under: BITE MEEEEEEEE

La Raza (The Race) Calls for Speech Restriction

The National Council of La Raza (NCLR) is a leading organization in the fight for open borders, non-enforcement of immigration laws, and rights for illegal aliens. NCLR styles itself as a "civil rights" organization, but its name La Raza (The Race) suggests its real purpose. The black civil rights movement affirmed the importance of citizenship and the rule of law. NCLR undermines both, with the consequence of increasing clout of La Raza at the expense of other groups.

Recently, due to the defeat of amnesty and its other goals, the NCLR has stridently attacked immigration reformers as purveyors of "hate speech." Leading the charge is the organization's president, Janet Murguia. "Ms. Murguia," reported News York Times blogger Ariel Alexovich (2/1/08) "[argues] that hate speech should not be tolerated, even if such censorship were a violation of First Amendment rights. Said Murguia herself, "Everybody knows there is a line that can be crossed when it comes to free speech. And when free speech transforms to hate speech, we've got to cross that line."

In pursuit of her objectives, Murguia said she would call on the management of CNN to restrict the commentary of Lou Dobbs and Glenn Beck on illegal immigration. Both men are credited with raising public opposition to the illegal alien amnesty bill last summer.

Comment: "Hate speech" is a term intolerant people often use to discredit and silence speech that they hate. Ms. Murguia and people like her don't like free speech because their self-seeking agendas are difficult to justify.

Defend the free speech of Dobbs and Beck by contacting CNN and expressing support for their commentary.
Via Mail:CNNOne CNN CenterBox 105366Atlanta, GA 30303-5366
Via Phone: (404) 827-1500
Via e-mail:

Z: and, by the way, while you're on with CNN, tell them it's not usually quite 'support' you feel for them? thanks! *Thanks to my friend, Dick, for alerting me to this.

HEY EUROPE? Listen up, please.........

I've been wanting to tell you something for a while:

France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Belgium, England, Hungary, Finland, Poland, Austria, Switzerland, Denmark, …..etc., I’m getting a bit tired of the insults and name calling and the incredibly patronizing suggestion that some of you should pick our president for us.

We have Liberals* over here bemoaning the fact that you don’t “like us”. Sorry, but not all of us do feel that way. We like to be liked, but not as much as we did.
Those days are over, especially after your treatment of us since this war we’re waging for ourselves…and you…in Iraq, to keep the world a safer place. Sorry you don’t “like us” for that.

For those of you who are willing to hear the truth, please pay close attention to why I think so many of you have a low opinion of this country. You don’t “like us” because of who’s telling you about us:

The biggest English language newspaper you read there is the International Herald Tribune. Do you know it is now wholly owned by the New York Times? Do you know that the New York Times is a very liberal (far more left than your definition for liberal) newspaper in America? Or do you believe it when you hear it’s the newspaper “of record” here? It is not. It is a large newspaper with some well known writers, famous because of the city it’s in. That’s it.

The New York Times might not say it’s against our country, but the evidence is pretty clear; newspapers which champion their country don’t call administrations names, don’t reveal top secret information, don’t celebrate our enemies, and don’t undermine wars we’re still fighting. The New York Times does. The New York Times, to some of us, hates America.

You read the product of that hate. And you think that must be what all Americans think. You couldn’t be farther from the truth. Most of us don’t want an “all Conservative” paper; we just want one which tells the truth, at least on the first six pages. We like opinion sections to be edgy but we want the truth on the front pages. You have that there, congratulations, but we do not. Don’t confuse the two situations. What you see on our front pages is mostly not an unbiased truth.

Did you know that your big name journalists are paid the big bucks to come to America to give you the news here but, instead, in many cases, translate, word for word, the articles in the New York Times and other liberal newspapers? Yes, we see it every day in your more famous foreign papers on the internet; my husband and I. My husband laughs as he sees that the big German papers are carrying more and more articles translated by Germans from American authors. Do not think these are opinions of Germans coming here and reporting what they see. No, these are mostly disgruntled liberal American opinions you are getting. You’d be ill advised to base your information on these. No wonder you don’t like us. The liberal papers themselves don’t like us.

CNN International is about the only American television news you will get. Most Americans don’t know that what you see in Europe is different and even more liberally biased than our CNN here. Yes, what you see every day and night is American news through the filter of liberals. And you base your attitudes about us on that. Why would you “like us”?! They don’t like us, either.

Our celebrities might excite you and you might think all Americans think like they do when they come to your countries and insult us and our government. You’re wrong. Some of us have stopped going to movies in which those who hate America star. We still like their acting; we just can’t see spending money on their films, supporting them so they can fly back to Europe first class and do another round of America bashing.

You might not “like us”, but at least consider what I’m saying, consider the source of your dislike. While you’re busy hating America, remember which way the immigration is going, too…I haven’t any friends migrating to Sweden lately, nobody’s fighting to get into Hungary or England, either. Especially England.

As England slips into an Islamic abyss of minarets, shish kebab and calls for Sharia Law, keep laughing at America as she tries to prevent that from happening to us…and YOU. Does that make sense?

Listen to the Conservative media, read the internet. I don’t ask you to believe everything Conservatives are saying, I only ask you to consider two sides to every question. We don’t think monolithically here any more than you do in your countries, believe it or not.

I’ll say goodbye now, auf Wiedersehen, au revoir, ciao, etc. Stop believing all the bad you hear about America and we promise we won’t believe all the wild stuff we hear about you! By the way, there is plenty of good coming from Iraq…have YOU heard it??

*I use the term “liberal” for Europeans in the way Americans use the term. Please, Europe, substitute the term for “Left” as I know the “liberal” there is more centrist than we define it here.

ADDENDUM: I was just sent the following email...(Thanks, Pat).. Any more questions, Europe?

Media Ignore Saddam's WMD Intent

Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:33 AMBy: Ronald Kessler

When FBI agent George Piro recently described debriefing Saddam Hussein for seven months after his capture, he disclosed that the Iraqi dictator admitted his intention to re-start his weapons of mass destruction program within a year.
That plan included developing nuclear weapons capability, according to Saddam.
The revelation should have hit Page One of every newspaper.
It would have further justified President Bush’s decision to invade Iraq, a key issue in the coming presidential election. But many in the mainstream media could not bear to hear that Bush may have done something right.
When Piro’s interview came out in my book, "The Terrorist Watch: Inside the Desperate Race to Stop the Next Attack," NBC Nightly News, Fox News, and Newsmax ran the news of Saddam’s admission, but few newspapers published a story. CNN ran a story on the debriefing of Saddam but made no mention of Saddam’s plans to resume his weapons of mass destruction program, including developing nuclear capability. Instead, CNN said that what Saddam told Piro “throws more cold water on the justification for war” because Saddam admitted he was bluffing about having weapons of mass destruction.
Two and a half months later, "60 Minutes" ran the first television interview with Piro. The interview buried the reference to Saddam’s WMD and nuclear plans, as did the press release on the CBS Web site. Likewise, an AP story on the interview mentioned Saddam’s plans in the 11th paragraph. Only four U.S. newspapers ran a story referring to Saddam’s WMD and nuclear plans.
The Washington Post ran a 542-word story on the interview leaving out any mention of Saddam’s avowed intentions. The New York Times ran no story at all.
Today, we have press censorship similar to what existed in the old Soviet Union, except the censors are journalists themselves, and it’s in reverse: News favorable to the government is suppressed.

I rest my case. z

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

Need a Laugh? 2nd of the weekly jokes on geeeeZ!

OKAY....a nice, short little joke to make up for the VERY long piece below which is VERY worth reading!


One Sunday morning, the pastor noticed little Alex standing in the foyer of the church staring up at a large plaque. It was covered with names with small American flags mounted on either side of it. The seven year old had been staring at the plaque for some time, so the pastor walked up, stood beside the little boy, and said quietly, "Good morning Alex". "Good morning Pastor," he replied, still focused on the plaque. "Pastor, what is this?" he asked. The pastor said, "Well, son, it's a memorial to all the young men and women who died in the service." Soberly, they just stood together, staring at the large plaque. Finally, little Alex's voice, barely audible and trembling with fear, asked, "Which service, the 8:30 or the 10:45?

OH, MR. GORE???? UH, YOO HOO... AL???

(oh, this does make Z happy...SO happy)

Here is an eye-opening article by Christopher Monckton, who shares the Nobel Peace Prize with Al Gore on global warming. I imagine it is quite unlike anything else you have read lately, and quite credible (though incredible, as you read it!) given his impeccable credentials.

His article suggests there should be an attitude change on the subject. His comments and data most certainly deserve airtime. I’m equally certain that the mainstream media will prevent dissemination of this information with their last breath.
Dishonest political tampering with the science on global warming

Jakarta PostIndonesia
Christopher Monckton5 December 2007

As a contributor to the IPCC's 2007 report, I share the Nobel Peace Prize with Al Gore. Yet I and many of my peers in the British House of Lords - through our hereditary element the most independent-minded of lawmakers - profoundly disagree on fundamental scientific grounds with both the IPCC and my co-laureate's alarmist movie An Inconvenient Truth, which won this year's Oscar for Best Sci-Fi Comedy Horror.

Two detailed investigations by Committees of the House confirm that the IPCC has deliberately, persistently and prodigiously exaggerated not only the effect of greenhouse gases on temperature but also the environmental consequences of warmer weather. My contribution to the 2007 report illustrates the scientific problem. The report's first table of figures - inserted by the IPCC's bureaucrats after the scientists had finalized the draft, and without their consent - listed four contributions to sea-level rise.

The bureaucrats had multiplied the effect of melting ice from the Greenland and West Antarctic Ice Sheets by 10.

The result of this dishonest political tampering with the science was that the sum of the four items in the offending table was more than twice the IPCC's published total. Until I wrote to point out the error, no one had noticed. The IPCC, on receiving my letter, quietly corrected, moved and relabeled the erroneous table, posting the new version on the internet and earning me my Nobel prize. The shore-dwellers of Bali need not fear for their homes.

The IPCC now says the combined contribution of the two great ice-sheets to sea-level rise will be less than seven centimeters after 100 years, not seven meters imminently, and that the Greenland ice sheet (which thickened by 50 cm between 1995 and 2005) might only melt after several millennia, probably by natural causes, just as it last did 850,000 years ago. Gore, mendaciously assisted by the IPCC bureaucracy, had exaggerated a hundredfold. Recently a High Court judge in the UK listed nine of the 35 major scientific errors in Gore's movie, saying they must be corrected before innocent schoolchildren can be exposed to the movie. Gore's exaggeration of sea-level rise was one. Others being peddled at the Bali conference are that man-made "global warming" threatens polar bears and coral reefs, caused Hurricane Katrina, shrank Lake Chad, expanded the actually-shrinking Sahara, etc.

At the very heart of the IPCC's calculations lurks an error more serious than any of these. The IPCC says: "The CO2 radiative forcing increased by 20 percent during the last 10 years (1995-2005)." Radiative forcing quantifies increases in radiant energy in the atmosphere, and hence in temperature. The atmospheric concentration of CO2 in 1995 was 360 parts per million. In 2005 it was just 5percent higher, at 378 ppm. But each additional molecule of CO2 in the air causes a smaller radiant-energy increase than its predecessor.

So the true increase in radiative forcing was 1 percent, not 20 percent. The IPCC has exaggerated the CO2 effect 20-fold. Why so large and crucial an exaggeration? Answer: the IPCC has repealed the fundamental physicalthe Stefan-Boltzmann equation - that converts radiant energy to temperature.

Without this equation, no meaningful calculation of the effect of radiance on temperature can be done. Yet the 1,600 pages of the IPCC's 2007 report do not mention it once. The IPCC knows of the equation, of course. But it is inconvenient. It imposes a strict (and very low) limit on how much greenhouse gases can increase temperature. At the Earth's surface, you can add as much greenhouse gas as you like (the "surface forcing"), and the temperature will scarcely respond. That is why all of the IPCC's computer models predict that 10km above Bali, in the tropical upper troposphere, temperature should be rising two or three times as fast as it does at the surface. Without that tropical upper-troposphere "hot-spot", the Stefan-Boltzmann law ensures that surface temperature cannot change much.

For half a century we have been measuring the temperature in the upper atmosphere - and it has been changing no faster than at the surface. The IPCC knows this, too. So it merely declares that its computer predictions are right and the real-world measurements are wrong.

Next time you hear some scientifically-illiterate bureaucrat say, "The science is settled", remember this vital failure of real-world observations to confirm the IPCC's computer predictions. The IPCC's entire case is built on a guess that the absent hot-spot might exist. Even if the Gore/IPCC exaggerations were true, which they are not, the economic cost of trying to mitigate climate change by trying to cut our emissions through carbon trading and other costly market interferences would far outweigh any possible climatic benefit.

The international community has galloped lemming-like over the cliff twice before. Twenty years ago the UN decided not to regard AIDS as a fatal infection. Carriers of the disease were not identified and isolated. Result: 25 million deaths in poor countries. Thirty-five years ago the world decided to ban DDT, the only effective agent against malaria. Result: 40 million deaths in poor countries. The World Health Organization lifted the DDT ban on Sept. 15 last year. It now recommends the use of DDT to control malaria. Dr. Arata Kochi of the WHO said that politics could no longer be allowed to stand in the way of the science and the data. Amen to that.

If we take the heroically stupid decisions now on the table at Bali, it will once again be the world's poorest people who will die unheeded in their tens of millions, this time for lack of the heat and light and power and medical attention which we in the West have long been fortunate enough to take for granted. If we deny them the fossil-fuelled growth we have enjoyed, they will remain poor and, paradoxically, their populations will continue to increase, making the world's carbon footprint very much larger in the long run. As they die, and as global temperature continues to fail to rise in accordance with the IPCC's laughably-exaggerated predictions, the self-congratulatory rhetoric that is the hallmark of the now-useless, costly, corrupt UN will again be near-unanimously parroted by lazy, unthinking politicians and journalists who ought to have done their duty by the poor but are now - for the third time in three decades - failing to speak up for those who are about to die.

My fellow-participants, there is no climate crisis. The correct policy response to a non-problem is to have the courage to do nothing. Take courage! Do nothing, and save the world's poor from yet another careless, UN-driven slaughter. Dr Monckton is a former adviser to UK prime minister Margaret Thatcher and is presenter of the 90-minute climate movie Apocalypse? NO! This article was published in the Jakatra Post on 05 December 2007. (SEE ABOVE)

Z: RAISE YOUR HAND IF ANY OF THE MEDIA WILL CARRY THIS STORY. IF THEY DO NOT, AND IF YOU DO NOT CARRY A COPY OF THIS REPORT IN YOUR WALLET TO SHOW THEM, YOUR AL GORE-FAN FRIENDS WILL STILL NOT BELIEVE YOU, YOU HATEFUL, CONSERVATIVE, ENVIRONMENT WRECKING, NON THINKING MORON, YOU. wait....this has been out since December 7th....where is the media?If you are highly interested in this subject, the above 'address' will be eye-opening, too.

Monday, February 18, 2008

It's gonna take a LOT OF ICE CREAM.........

Ben & Jerry's founders endorse Obama
By LISA RATHKE, Associated Press Writer Mon Feb 18, 7:12 PM ET

BURLINGTON, Vt. - The founders of Ben & Jerry's endorsed Barack Obama on Monday, and lent his Vermont campaign two "ObamaMobiles" that will tour the state and give away scoops of "Cherries for Change" ice cream.

"If there was ever a need for real change, and if there ever was a candidate to inspire us and make that happen, it's now," said Ben Cohen.

Added Jerry Greenfield: "Barack is showing that when you lead with your values and follow what you have inside that good things will happen."

Echoing Obama, Greenfield said he and Cohen succeeded when they opened their ice cream shop 30 years ago in Burlington by doing things differently, instead of copying the "tired ways" of doing business.

"What we saw is that when you want real change it's not a marketing slogan. You have to do things differently. And that is not going to be done by someone who's been involved in the system for years and years," Greenfield said. "It needs to come from inside and Barack Obama has it."

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and his wife joined the ice cream duo to announce their radio campaign backing the Illinois senator.

Cohen initially supported John Edwards, who dropped out of the race earlier this month.
Rob Hill, director of the Vermonters for Obama campaign, said he looked forward to getting behind the wheel of one of the two ObamaMobiles — retrofitted Honda Elements.

Z: If there was one thing I could say about Obama, it would be that he IS only a marketing slogan. "the AUDACITY OF HOPE!" "CHANGE" "DARE TO HOPE" Anybody telling us what all this is going to COST?

How do we win in November when companies are making ICE CREAMS in honor of this guy? what's NEXT? Now THAT is 'audacity'..................

Is it JUST MEEE? or............

Check out what I reddened in this article.....ya think???????

Obama, Edwards Meet in N.C.; No Nod Yet

Feb 18 12:05 AM US/EasternBy NEDRA PICKLERAssociated Press Writer

CHICAGO (AP) - Barack Obama sneaked down to North Carolina Sunday and met with former rival John Edwards, who has yet to make an endorsement in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination.
Officials at North Carolina television station WTVD said they have video taken from a helicopter of Obama leaving Edwards' home in Chapel Hill. A producer said the station was "tipped off" about the meeting, but said the source was confidential.
The Obama campaign confirmed the meeting. Although reporters normally travel everywhere with Obama, he left them behind to fly down in secret from his hometown.
"Senator Obama visited this morning with John and Elizabeth Edwards at their home in Chapel Hill to discuss the state of the campaign and the pressing issues facing American families," said Obama spokesman Bill Burton. He wouldn't comment on the possibility of an endorsement.
In an interview Sunday night with WITI-TV in Milwaukee, Obama said, "The meeting with John, we just wanted to talk about how we can move the party in a direction that focuses on middle-class issues—relieving poverty, reducing the influence of special interests in Washington."
People close to the Edwardses, speaking privately, say they have been torn about whom to support. The former North Carolina senator is concerned that Obama may not be ready for the presidency and that his health care plan is inferior. But Edwards was highly critical of Clinton—her policies, her ties to special interests and her character—during his campaign, making it more difficult to support her now.
The couple has been impressed with Clinton, who has more effectively courted them since the 2004 vice presidential nominee dropped out, people who talk to the Edwardses say. Obama has been less attentive, they say, and some of those close to the Edwardses have been annoyed that Obama has continued to ridicule him for once saying his biggest weakness is that he has a powerful response to seeing pain in others.
Still, since Edwards has left the race, Obama often praises him in public. This week he told Wisconsin voters that Edwards will "be a major voice in the Democratic party for years to come, and I want him involved and partnering with me in moving this country forward."
None of the other former Democratic presidential candidates—Chris Dodd, Joe Biden, Bill Richardson or Dennis Kucinich—have endorsed Obama or Clinton, reflecting the party's split over who would be the best president.

So, what do you think they're REALLY talking about?

Reading, Writing, and..........GLOBAL WARMING??

Bill would require California's science curriculum to cover climate change

By Paul Rogers
Article Launched: 02/15/2008 01:42:53 AM PST

Reading, writing and . . . global warming?
A Silicon Valley lawmaker is gaining momentum with a bill that would require "climate change" to be among the science topics that all California public school students are taught.

The measure, by state Sen. Joe Simitian, D-Palo Alto, also would mandate that future science textbooks approved for California public schools include climate change.

"You can't have a science curriculum that is relevant and current if it doesn't deal with the science behind climate change," Simitian said. "This is a phenomenon of global importance and our kids ought to understand the science behind that phenomenon."

The state Senate approved the bill, SB 908, Jan. 30 by a 26-13 vote. It heads now to the state Assembly. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has taken numerous actions to reduce global warming, but he has yet to weigh in on Simitian's bill. Other Republicans in the Capitol, however, are not happy about the proposal.

Some say the science on global warming isn't clear, while others worry the bill would inject environmental propaganda into classrooms.............continued at

So, what do you all think? State Sen. SIMITIAN is monkeying around with the curriculum. You guys agree?

Sunday, February 17, 2008

The scoop from a German.....

Integration, assimilation, or what?

and WHY??? by a very good friend of Z's

An issue on the minds of many people in Europe and, I might add, in the United States, was brought to a head by the Turkish Minister President Erdogan recently in a speech in Cologne, Germany when he said: “Assimilation is a crime against humanity”. This created outrage not only in Germany, but in all of Europe.

The banners were in Turkish, the flags were Turkish, the speech was in Turkish, and the listeners were Turkish or of Turkish descent, and this anti-assimilation comment was made in a city in which there just might be a huge mosque competing soon in the skyline with the famous “K├Âlner Dom”, the majestic and venerated cathedral which has dominated the skyline of Cologne for centuries. For the head of a foreign government to hold an assembly in a large stadium on foreign ground and advise his countrymen on how to handle their presence in that country takes guts. But it also relies on the goodwill of the government of that foreign country. This is only possible in countries where Freedom of Speech is protected, like in Germany, or in the United States, for that matter.

Erdogan is a smart man. In his speech, he also recommended that the Turks learn German and take advantage of the job market in Germany. That got him brownie points, particularly with the left, and cleverly muffled his assimilation point. However, the word “advantage” to Erdogan clearly means: Take as much as you can get from the job market or from the generous social system – but do not develop any allegiance to any other country than Turkey.

Sound familiar? Mexican Presidents have shown the same audacity as Erdogan. They even consider part of the U.S. their own territory and come, that belief largely unchallenged, to the US, holding rallies with Mexicans appearing with flags and other regalia, telling their countrymen, legally or illegally in the country, what they should demand from the U.S. government, and making public their request as if they need to give advice to the US government on how to treat the Mexicans who live in their country.

So, what’s happening in Europe and what can be expected in America’s future on issues of integration and Islam have eerie similarities. The difference, however, is that the Turkish problem alone in Germany envelopes both integration and Islam issues, while the problem in the U.S. is divided; an integration issue mainly of Mexicans in the country, and the growing Islam problem.

When Erdogan vilifies assimilation, what he really means is they should not adapt to the German culture or “do as Germans do”. This obviously results in the creation of a “parallel society”, one with a “little Istanbul” in each major city, creating “ghetto” type of situations where Islamic habits such as the killing of a sibling as commanded by the head of the family take place. These people do not respect the rights of the German people and they are supported by their “Head of State”, Erdogan (not Merkel!) who actually addresses them as if they still lived in Istanbul and not in Germany. The consequence is that the Turks behave as if they have the right to do what they do, and that they do not have to answer to anybody about it. This is why many young Turks are physically attacking and hurting Germans if they dare make remarks to them, like “please don’t smoke here in the subway” (where smoking is forbidden). These young Turks seem to feel empowered by young criminals from other countries who, lately, have been joining them in terrorizing the German population.

As we look into the current situation, the past should be considered : (a) Some of the Turks have lived in Germany since the 60’s, when Germany invited “guest workers” in who were supposed to stay for a limited period of time. Most of them never left, considering how good the social system is in Germany. (b) Many of the Turkish people living in Germany are law abiding people, have well assimilated into German society, and are even in the Parliament. (c) Germany did not have a major problem with the Turks living in the country until relatively recently, and the problems have risen to a different level just recently, since 9/11.

And what are the politicians and people of Germany doing about this? They’re acting just as you’d think they would in any other country. The left is pandering to the Turks. Some high ranking official even suggest that Germany should introduce Turkish as the second language in school. The left insists Germany must try to understand the Turks in the country, it must do more to integrate them and Germans should even adapt the thoughts and actions of these Turks. And, of course, according to the leftist ‘experts’, the German school system, by having such high educational standards, is not helping the foreign pupils (in other words: they should lower the standards so that they can learn).

And the conservative reaction to all of this? It can be summarized as follows: Whoever lives in Germany must adapt to the German constitution and German social life. People who are not willing to do that have no business being in the country. That doesn’t mean the Turks should not be able to maintain their culture, but not in the public square. The penalties for youth criminality should be increased, and the young criminals should be deported. In addition, deportation of illegal immigrants should be increased, and the borders to the EU should be tightened to reduce the influx.

The difference in reaction between the left and right couldn’t be more clear. You can draw your own conclusions as to the similarities with the situation in the U.S.

Since 9/11, Germany has drastically broadened its ability to fight terrorists. However, the left is still pandering and asks for negotiations while the conservatives request more stringent measures in view of increasing threats, (e.g. the potential suitcase bombers last year who got caught in time because of improved surveillance methods) .

Multiculturism has proven to be an illusion. Germany and many other European countries are currently dealing with the aftermath of having been too liberal with Islam and immigration and trying to turn the tide, hoping that it is not too late. Is it too much to hope that the lessons learned in Germany, Holland, Denmark and other countries will be heard across the ocean, here in America, a wake up call? It is clear to me which political orientation is on the right side of the issues. Let’s make sure that the U.S. listens and learns from these lessons.

Saturday, February 16, 2008


Do you feel McCain would do better with a LESS conservative VP running mate, or a MORE conservative VP running mate?

I'm really interested to see what you all think....Z

Friday, February 15, 2008

GOD BLESS THE ANGRY WHITE MAN (I wish I'd written this)

From THE ASPEN TIMES WEEKLY February 15, 2008 by Gary Hubbell
Aspen Times Weekly Opinion "In election 2008, don't forget Angry White Man"
(thanks to Jim McNeil for bringing this to my attention)

There is a great amount of interest in this year’s presidential elections, as everybody seems to recognize that our next president has to be a lot better than George Bush. The Democrats are riding high with two groundbreaking candidates — a woman and an African-American — while the conservative Republicans are in a quandary about their party’s nod to a quasi-liberal maverick, John McCain.

Each candidate is carefully pandering to a smorgasbord of special-interest groups, ranging from gay, lesbian and transgender people to children of illegal immigrants to working mothers to evangelical Christians.

There is one group no one has recognized, and it is the group that will decide the election: the Angry White Man. The Angry White Man comes from all economic backgrounds, from dirt-poor to filthy rich. He represents all geographic areas in America, from urban sophisticate to rural redneck, deep South to mountain West, left Coast to Eastern Seaboard.

His common traits are that he isn’t looking for anything from anyone — just the promise to be able to make his own way on a level playing field. In many cases, he is an independent businessman and employs several people. He pays more than his share of taxes and works hard.

The victimhood syndrome buzzwords — “disenfranchised,” “marginalized” and “voiceless” — don’t resonate with him. “Press ‘one’ for English” is a curse-word to him. He’s used to picking up the tab, whether it’s the company Christmas party, three sets of braces, three college educations or a beautiful wedding.

He believes the Constitution is to be interpreted literally, not as a “living document” open to the whims and vagaries of a panel of judges who have never worked an honest day in their lives.

The Angry White Man owns firearms, and he’s willing to pick up a gun to defend his home and his country. He is willing to lay down his life to defend the freedom and safety of others, and the thought of killing someone who needs killing really doesn’t bother him.

The Angry White Man is not a metrosexual, a homosexual or a victim. Nobody like him drowned in Hurricane Katrina — he got his people together and got the hell out, then went back in to rescue those too helpless and stupid to help themselves, often as a police officer, a National Guard soldier or a volunteer firefighter.

His last name and religion don’t matter. His background might be Italian, English, Polish, German, Slavic, Irish, or Russian, and he might have Cherokee, Mexican, or Puerto Rican mixed in, but he considers himself a white American.

He’s a man’s man, the kind of guy who likes to play poker, watch football, hunt white-tailed deer, call turkeys, play golf, spend a few bucks at a strip club once in a blue moon, change his own oil and build things. He coaches baseball, soccer and football teams and doesn’t ask for a penny. He’s the kind of guy who can put an addition on his house with a couple of friends, drill an oil well, weld a new bumper for his truck, design a factory and publish books. He can fill a train with 100,000 tons of coal and get it to the power plant on time so that you keep the lights on and never know what it took to flip that light switch.

Women either love him or hate him, but they know he’s a man, not a dishrag. If they’re looking for someone to walk all over, they’ve got the wrong guy. He stands up straight, opens doors for women and says “Yes, sir” and “No, ma’am.”

He might be a Republican and he might be a Democrat; he might be a Libertarian or a Green. He knows that his wife is more emotional than rational, and he guides the family in a rational manner.

He’s not a racist, but he is annoyed and disappointed when people of certain backgrounds exhibit behavior that typifies the worst stereotypes of their race. He’s willing to give everybody a fair chance if they work hard, play by the rules and learn English.

Most important, the Angry White Man is pissed off. When his job site becomes flooded with illegal workers who don’t pay taxes and his wages drop like a stone, he gets righteously angry. When his job gets shipped overseas, and he has to speak to some incomprehensible idiot in India for tech support, he simmers. When Al Sharpton comes on TV, leading some rally for reparations for slavery or some such nonsense, he bites his tongue and he remembers. When a child gets charged with carrying a concealed weapon for mistakenly bringing a penknife to school, he takes note of who the local idiots are in education and law enforcement.

He also votes, and the Angry White Man loathes Hillary Clinton. Her voice reminds him of a shovel scraping a rock. He recoils at the mere sight of her on television. Her very image disgusts him, and he cannot fathom why anyone would want her as their leader. It’s not that she is a woman. It’s that she is who she is. It’s the liberal victim groups she panders to, the “poor me” attitude that she represents, her inability to give a straight answer to an honest question, his tax dollars that she wants to give to people who refuse to do anything for themselves.

There are many millions of Angry White Men. Four million Angry White Men are members of the National Rifle Association, and all of them will vote against Hillary Clinton, just as the great majority of them voted for George Bush.

He hopes that she will be the Democratic nominee for president in 2008, and he will make sure that she gets beaten like a drum.

Thursday, February 14, 2008

Well, here's a VERY interesting "TWIST" of Rush's....

This is FASCINATING.....McCain can't come looking for Rush's support because "it would look like pandering now...........he needs to be who he is................"

hmmmm This is a new approach. I like it. I think? VERY interesting. Gotta figure this one out; anybody got any ideas about the psychology behind this...or just the plain POLITICAL POSTURING? VERY interesting. What do YOU think?

Rush goes on to say he doesn't "have to tout" McCain, but he will "certainly" be critical of Obama. Is it Mr. Beamish (for president, what a time to pull out of the race!) who calls him Obamanation?..........perfect.

So, it's "let's not slam OUR guy, like him or not, but REALLY put the pressure on the Dem"

Think that'll fill 3 hours of radio time a day?

Wednesday, February 13, 2008


Senate votes to ban waterboarding
By PAMELA HESS, Associated Press Writer 2 hours, 9 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - Congress on Wednesday moved to prohibit the CIA from using waterboarding and other harsh interrogation methods on terror suspects, despite President Bush's threat to veto any measure that limits the agency's interrogation techniques.

The prohibition was contained in a bill authorizing intelligence activities for the current year, which the Senate approved on a 51-45 vote. It would restrict the CIA to the 19 interrogation techniques outlined in the Army field manual. That manual prohibits waterboarding, a method that makes an interrogation subject feel he is drowning.
The House had approved the measure in December. Wednesday's Senate vote set up a confrontation with the White House, where Bush has promised to veto any bill that restricts CIA questioning.
Arguing for such restrictions, Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., said the use of harsh tactics would boomerang on the United States.
"Retaliation is the way of the world. What we do to others, they will do to us — but worse," Rockefeller said. "This debate is about more than legality. It is also about morality, the way we see ourselves ... and what we represent to the world."


Need a LAUGH?

We can ALL use a laugh!

One sunny day in 2008, an old man approached the White House from
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 Hillary Clinton."

The Marine replied, "Sir, Mrs. Clinton is not the President and
doesn't reside here." 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 Hillary Clinton".

The Marine again told the man, "Sir, as I said yesterday, Mrs.
Clinton is not the 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 Hillary Clinton."

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 Mrs. Clinton. I've told you already several times that Mrs. Clinton is not the President and doesn't reside here. Don't you understand?"

The old man answered, “Oh, I understand you fine, I just love hearing your answer!"

The Marine snapped to attention, saluted, and said, "See you tomorrow.”


How Long Do We Have?

About the time our original 13 states adopted their new constitution, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years prior: "A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government.

A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.

From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship." "The average age of the worlds greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:

1. From bondage to spiritual faith;

2. From spiritual faith to great courage;

3. From courage to liberty;

4. From liberty to abundance;

5. From abundance to complacency;

6. From complacency to apathy;

7. From apathy to dependence;

8. From dependence back into bondage " ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning the 2000 Presidential election:

1. Population of counties won by: Gore: 127 million; Bush: 143 million;

2. Square miles of land won by: Gore: 580,000; Bush: 2,427,000;

3. States won by: Gore: 19 Bush: 29

4. Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Gore: 13.2 Bush: 2.1

Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Bush won was mostly the land owned by the tax-paying citizens of this great country. Gore's territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements living off government welfare." Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency & apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some 40 percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase. Pass this along to help everyone realize just how much is at stake, knowing that apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.

As most of you who've seen this before know, I did NOT write this....just posted it. But, I sure do think it's an eye opener.

Think our eyes WILL be open?

I was listening to some talk radio in the car....problem after problem/immorality after immorality, case after case of the most unbelievable idiocies we can imagine going on in America........Obama warning that we shouldn't "use 9/11 to scare folks" when, really, I'm thinking we might want to be a bit more scared of the 'folks' who DID 9/11 than those who're trying to prevent the next one? But, then, yesterday, he voted for the Chris Dodd bill about eavesdropping...gotta sue those phone companies! So, maybe there are politicians who do want to keep us vulnerable. "From apathy to UTTER and TOTAL stupidity!"

Monday, February 11, 2008


OKAY, about a good story to dovetail this Marines Story and the UPDATE: who cares if it's true? works for me! (thanks, Joe!)

A United States Marine was attending some college courses between assignments. He had completed missions in Iraq and Afghanistan .
One of the courses had a professor who was an avowed atheist and a member of the ACLU. One day the professor shocked the class when he came in. He looked to the ceiling and flatly stated, "God, if you are real, then I want you to knock me off this platform. I'll give you exactly 15 min.' The lecture room fell silent. You could hear a pin drop. Ten minutes went by and the professor proclaimed, 'Here I am God. I'm still waiting.'
It got down to the last couple of minutes when the Marine got out of his chair, went up to the professor, and cold-cocked him; knocking him off the platform. The professor was out cold. The Marine went back to his seat and sat ther! e, sile ntly. The other students were shocked and stunned and sat there looking on in silence. The professor eventually came to, noticeably shaken, looked at the Marine and asked, 'What the heck is the matter with you? Why did you do that?' The Marine calmly replied, 'God was too busy today protecting America 's soldiers who are protecting your right to say stupid stuff and act like an idiot. So, He sent me.'

UPDATE: I had no idea MoveAmericaForward got involved....but they seem to have got their knickers in a perfectly understandable and laudable twist, too, so you might want to check the report; z

To all of our friends and supporters at Move America Forward:
On Friday afternoon we will be publishing a comprehensive report on what happened in Berkeley, California on Tuesday - when thousands of you joined together to tell the Berkeley City Council that we would not tolerate their attacks against our military men and women.
You'll be able to find the report on our website:

This is REAL! I JUST SPOKE TO THIS GUY on his cell phone driving from LA to Berkeley and he confirmed THIS IS REAL! Mr. Brian Dennard has had 8000 emails at his business and 1000 personal emails and about 900 calls in the last few DAYS, folks! (that would include ME, I couldn't believe he answered the phone when I called to confirm this is true...I figured I'd be lucky if I got his secretary). Mr. Dennard (I call him Brian now and I think he calls me 'that whacky woman from LA who also got my cell number!') said "In the last few days, I have spoken to the finest people you could ever want to meet over this letter I wrote".
(That would NOT be me, that would be MARINES! God Bless them all! ) Here's the scoop:

Berkeley to Marine Corps: You're Not Welcome
BERKELEY, Calif. Local officials in this liberal city say it's time for the U.S. Marines to move out.The City Council has voted to tell the Marines their downtown recruiting station is not welcome and "if recruiters choose to stay, they do so as uninvited and unwelcome guests."The measure passed this week by a vote of 8-1.,2933,327347,00.html

Now check this out, here is a letter a businessman wrote to the Mayor of Berkeley.
Is this a great country or what?

Dear Mayor Bates,
In that you and your city have chosen to gravely insult the brave men and women, who have indeed bought you that right with their blood, I am informing you that my company will no longer do business with any of our current suppliers located in the Berkeley, California metro area.
In that my company is in international resort real estate development, and do business with and am associated with, developers and investors worldwide, I am informing all of my contacts, associates and patrons that we will no longer do any business of any sort with anyone living in the Berkeley area.
In that we/MDG Resorts are currently building a state of the art mega-yacht marina, all of the suppliers of Marina equipment, all owners of Yachts , all suppliers of Yacht materials & supplies, all yacht brokers and all tangential yacht business purveyors will likewise be informed that we will not do any business whatsoever with anyone from the Berkeley area.
Likewise all suppliers of building materials, both interior and exterior, currently associated with any of our several resort developments (Brisamar 300+ villas and 200+ condos: Porto Hussong, 500+ condos, 180 slip mega-yacht marina) both of which I might add have international recognition by virtue of glowing reports in Robb Report, Wall Street Journal, Yacht World, Forbes.
I will likewise inform all of our investors, most of whom are very wealthy yacht owners, casino owners, high net worth international businessmen, of our decision to essentially boycott all products and providers located in, or associated with in any way whatsoever, Berkeley, Ca.
Trust me when I say that having been in the real estate development business for over 35 years, our list of contacts and associates is long and very, very impressive. We, and I personally, are going to recomend that they ALL along with us boycott your city, its purveyors, suppliers, and businesses and CHARITIES of every kind.
You have every right to choose to take the obnoxious anti-military stance you have taken, and as stated, that right was bought for you with the blood of better men than you.
I too have every right to do all that I can to insure that your city suffers consequences arising from that obnoxious, sickening stance.
Brian G Dennard

I'm telling you, I think this guy's going to get phone calls ALLLLLL the way from Los Angeles to Berkeley, which is about a 7 hour drive! What a guy!


THIS IS HOW WE'LL INFLUENCE MR. McCAIN SHOULD HE BECOME OUR PRESIDENT. PEOPLE POWER !! (I'd say "Power to the People!" but Hillary already stole that......shiver)

MR. BEAMISH makes a "Crank" case......

Mr. Beamish, from The Crank Files, gets it so right on his blog that I had to share it here: (his blog address is blogrolled, too, check it out, it has good music, too);

Secretary of State........................Mr. John Bolton

Attorney General........................Mr. Rudy Giuliani

Secretary of Education...............Mr. Alan Keyes

Secretary of Defense...................Mr. Duncan Hunter

Supreme Court Justice...............Mr. Fred Thompson

Even I would smile at the polls on November 8 as I cast my vote for (gasp!) John McCain if he promised the guys above would be matched with the jobs above. Read Clarence Thomas's autobiography to see just how awful ANY even remotely conservative applicant to the Supreme Court might be treated these days. But, at least we have a conservative side of the media these days to make sure the terrible Biden/Metzenbaum treatment of Justice Thomas doesn't happen QUITE so easily and undercover as it did then. Imagine the hearings of Bolton for Secretary of State? You think this country could survive them?!

I would also like to make a suggestion of Elmer's Brother as.....Secretary of the Navy
Some of you know the reasons. Those of you who don't, he's just the guy. Start campaigning!

Thursday, February 7, 2008

Just had a REALLY terrible me out here.......

I took the post about how awful McCain is off the blog today. Had to.

I have to focus. Right after being slightly sick, that is. I have to suck it up, try to smile, and hope McCain was only kidding on so many of his positions over the years….because now he needs to beat Hillary or Obama. And we ….well, we……, we…….need to…….we need……………to help………………….him. ouch.

My apologies to my talented friend, Priscilla, who had written the anti-McCain piece. To her credit, she is the one who emailed me today saying “You may want to pull my article off your blog. As much as I've enjoyed the geez! spotlight, don't you think we have to get on board the McCain train?”

So, it’s gone from geeZ! I can do that, other small bloggers can do that, nobody will notice, but here’s the problem, the huge problem I foresee; What about Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity, Rush, Michelle Malkin? What about Ann Coulter, who went so far as to say she’d campaign for HILLARY if McCain was nominated?

What now, Conservatives? WHERE do we go from here?

I’ll tell you where THE LEFT goes! If they have bat brains (do they?), they are going through hours and hours of talk radio show audio as I type this and they’re recording slam after slam of McCain, WITH THE REASONS Conservatives don’t like him! Oh, yes, there’s all kinds of stuff there, well documented! The airwaves were rich with that for the last few months.

When McCain finally gets the official RNC nod (and let’s face it, it’s their nod, not ours! THEY and the media..left and right…got rid of Thompson, Romney, Tancredo, etc., not US)…after he’s the nominee, guess what the Left will go to. The Tape. Hours of it.

How’s Ann Coulter going to write articles before November 8 about her candidate, McCain? Impossible. What’s Laura Ingraham going to tell her listeners? “Hold your nose like his mother said, and vote McCain!”? There’s a rousing endorsement, huh? or could she say "Yes, I KNOW I said that then, but that was then………oh, he still feels that way? Oh. Uh..” How can she do that and still have a shred of dignity? "I can't stand the bum..VOTE FOR HIM!" How will all these people maintain a modicum of believability? And how can Conservatives win an election without them?

We don’t need my little blog, but WE NEED THEM! Right?

Or, maybe lefties hate us SO much they’ll vote for the guy we can’t stand just to tick us off? Think they hate us more than they want Hillary or Obama in there? No, they hate us a lot, but not this much. I don’t think so, anyway.

Priscilla wrote that ‘we have to get on board the McCain train”. She’s right, but I’m thinking that train’s going to be driven by Keith Olbermann and others, right into a brick wall. Of course, if Olbermann’s on it, I’d start to feel a little bit better. After the crash.

You tell ME. How are Conservatives going to hide their disdain for the guy they’re now touting with all that evidence Hillary and Obama's people have? WOW. Some fancy footwork required here. Help me out, what do you think? IS there a chance? Please tell me I'm missing something...............z

Wednesday, February 6, 2008


Contributed by FPM Mike, who humbles me with his mind. (and he has great taste in music, too)

Did she make you cry?

Make you break down?

Shatter your illusions of love?

Is it over now, do you know how,

to pickup the pieces and go home? -Fleetwood Mac

I did my duty yesterday. As any conservative who really "gets" conservatism did, I voted for Romney. Some of the rest of you screwed the pooch. The conservative base was split between Mitt Romney and the Republican version of "slick Willie", Mike Huckabee. McCain has won by default. I can't change it, nether can you. So now its time to consider the stakes. I'm a numbers cruncher by temperament.

It's undeniable that Democrats will pick up large gains in both the House and Senate. In fact, the Dems will probably have the 60 seats in the Senate they need to thwart a Republican filibuster and can can pass their "reforms" unimpeded. So what does that mean? It means that the only thing in between some of the worst legislation in modern times and socialist doom is the President's veto pen. And that means John McCain. So now we have to join McCain's mother in holding our noses and support McCain in a BIG WAY. The only alternative is Hillary or Obama rubber stamping so many Democrat bills it will make your conservative eyes run with tears. I don't like McCain anymore than the rest of you. But reality is what it is.

The American Conservative Union rates all legislators (Rep & Dem) voting records on a scale of 0-100 in their support of conservative ideals. It's an excellent barometer of legislative support of conservative values. McCain has a lifetime voting record of 83, which is not all that shabby. Many Republicans do much worse. True, McCain isn't Barry Goldwater. But he's not quite as bad as portrayed lately either. And he's all we have between the Democrat Mongol Hordes in Congress and us. Them's the facts. So do your duty, keep a stiff upper lip and do what you have to do to keep Hillary and Obama out of office. That is all.

Dismissed. Mike........ (Thanks,'s an honor to have you here at geeZ! Z)

Allow Z to add a quote which sums up that "I won't vote for McCain...let Hillary or Obama win!" mantra we're hearing from Conservatives:

"To avoid situations in which you might make a mistake may be the biggest mistake of all" *Peter McWilliams.

"Don't stop thinking about tomorrow..........."

*Libertarian and romantic poet who wrote the wonderful "Come be with me and be my life.." some of us swoon over. Mr. McWilliams, a soldier in the war for medical marijuana died of AIDS at the age of 50 in Los Angeles, California in 2000.

Sunday, February 3, 2008

BY POPULAR DEMAND!! (of Elmer's Bro, that is!!)'s the sequel to my story of Church in Paris that first Sunday after 9/11... for those of you who've been biting your fingernails wondering "WHAT HAPPENED??"! (quit laughing, everyone....humor this budding author!)

please read the start of it below if you haven't been following!! (it'll make MUCH more sense that way!) When we left off....................I'd seen a man in that crowded church HIDE something under his arm... Was it ...a BOMB??????.............wouldn't YOU have worried?

Were they checking the men outside, too, on their way in? Yes, they’d checked my purse, but barely, but they hadn’t checked my husband’s pockets or under his jacket. There had been only two policemen strolling outside, and only one person inside checking handbags. Had they checked under that man’s raincoat?

It was getting close to communion time and my husband, who’d given his seat next to me to a very old woman with a cane, was one of those blocking the exit! I stood up, walked over to him and whispered “let’s go” and kept walking towards the door. Should I say something about that man with the coat and the bag? Should I create a commotion? Surely, it was nothing. This was church, a place of worship. Wasn’t this the one place I should trust? Wasn’t that the message I should have received from church over the last years, that most of us are good, to trust our fellow man? Maybe the man had a friend there and was giving him a new book, that thing under his arm? But, what if I was wrong? Would I be responsible if that wasn’t a book? Would I be able to live with myself, if I lived? How could I sit there? Was this just my normal, paranoid self overreacting because of the vulnerability we’ve all begun to feel since Tuesday?

I was sad to leave as I walked out early with my husband. I wanted to sing that last song “O beautiful for spacious skies”, but felt concerned. And responsible. Happily, and reassuringly, the man who’d checked my bag was still there at the front door. “There’s a man inside with a bag with something in it underneath his raincoat, are you checking the men’s things, too?” “Yes,” he smiled. I couldn’t help thinking that he thought I was a nut case. But it didn’t matter. I was relieved. We went back in. I’d decided by then that, even if he hadn’t really checked, I had to go back in. I had to sing the song.

Miraculously, in that crowd, my one space on the bench was still there. My husband and the others continued to block the exit, but the service would soon be over. Communion was finishing. And then the singing started. We all stood up. Around me, voices cracked as they sang the words and people dug for Kleenex in their purses or pockets. The old lady who’d sat next to me suddenly started crying so hard her shoulders shook and I put my arm around this stranger and left it there till the singing was over. At one point, I, too, was almost overcome…”America, America, God shed his grace on thee, and crown thy good with brotherhood, from sea to shining sea.” Judging from the strength of those voices, it seemed that everyone had looked forward to singing that hymn. The church shook with the sound of the organ and all of our voices lifted to the highest rafters from which banners from each of the different United States hung down. The recessional of choristers and priests and bishops and choir boys passed me, the Spanish girl, the sobbing elderly lady, and I walked out the front door. We’d made it. The man really did have a book under his jacket for a friend. I really did have to learn to trust again. And I got to sing the song with hundreds of Americans, French, Spanish, British, Germans and who knows who else? It didn’t matter, really. We were suddenly all Americans.


Saturday, February 2, 2008

What is the FairTax? here are some details........whether or not you agree, hate it, love's worth understanding! Here is a primer:

It is a 23% consumption tax that replaces the need for filing with the IRS under a 6700 page tax code that even the IRS employees misinterpret or miscalculate 25% of the time. (That is to say they are off plus or minus in calculating the returns every year.)
Filing with the IRS costs Americans and American companies literally billions of dollars every year both in actual costs to accountants etc, and through time lost from productivity. The IRS can freeze your bank account, take your home, and even imprison you if there are miscalculations in your filing. The assumption is that you intend to defraud. They can do all of these things without ever having proved their case against you. The IRS costs American taxpayers $10 billion dollars a year to maintain! Don't we have better uses for that money?
This consumption tax takes into account the embedded payroll and social security taxes that consumers already pay when they purchase items at the store. Corporations do not 'pay' these taxes; they pass them on to the consumer. Since the Fair Tax removes payroll taxes and social security taxes and export taxes from the corporations, and since we live in a capitalist economy where companies are constantly competing for market share, inevitably some or most of these companies will give these savings back to the consumer in the form of reduced prices. Therefore, the 23% consumption tax will not necessarily translate into increased prices. These tax breaks for corporations will also give them more money to reinvest in current business operations but also to create new companies. They will be better able to compete overseas on pricing, and they will likely find it more profitable to bring some of those jobs that have gone offshore back to the US. It will also encourage foreign investment here in the US.
No more payroll tax or social security, medicare, or FICA taxes will come out of the consumers paychecks. They will have the full benefit of their pay every month. Ron Paul said in one of the debates that if you subsidize something, you get more of it. And that's true. It is also true that if you penalize something, you will get less of it. The payroll (income) tax penalizes productivity…do we want less productivity?
No more capital gains tax. People will no longer be penalized for saving or for growing their capital by investing their money. Money currently sitting in offshore accounts (roughly $12 trillion) to protect it from the IRS can be brought home and reinvested here in the US, bringing security and strength to the dollar and money for investment.
No more inheritance tax. The money you work hard to build and leave behind for your family will not be 'retaxed' as 'new income' by the federal government.
The Fair Tax maintains the current tax free poverty rates of the federal government. Prebates, based on number in household rather than income, alleviate the tax burden on the basic necessities of life for every person with a Social Security Number or a Tax I D Number. There are several credit card companies who have suggested they would be willing to pay for the opportunity to run such a plan. A family of four qualifies for a prebate of $506.00 per/month or $26,400.00 annually; the current federal poverty level. ONLY persons with valid SSN's and TIDN's would qualify for these cards and prebates.
Which brings up the next great advantage of the Fair Tax which is that illegals, prostitutes, drug dealers, even tourists, all of whom only burden our infrastructure from police to prisons to schools to hospitals to firefighters to roads etc will now be forced to participate in funding them as well. There is no possible tax evasion because every first time purchase is taxed. And, those who do not qualify for the prebate will feel the pinch, perhaps removing the temptation to remain in the US illegally.
Under the Fair Tax, the wealthy who buy more and more expensive things still pay more, and the poor are protected. The Fair Tax is the result of ten years of study by top economists and tax accounants. They did not set about to 'prove' the Fair Tax legislation, but rather they set about to find the most reasonable manner in which to fund the government with the money it needs to operate. The result of the ten year study is the Fair Tax.

submitted by Norwegian Wood..thanks for the information!