Gunboards Forums banner
1 - 20 of 23 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
3,069 Posts
They are not stupid at all.

In fact, all other political parties could learn a thing or two from the LEFTIST Dems in regards to PR, political opportunities, self-promotion, and public speaking.

In all other areas the LEFTIST Dems fall short because they are absolutely and completely SELF SERVING.

Any completely self serving politician is a traitor to anything and anyone but the self.

Look at all of the wonderful things that have happened in the house and senate since the last election.

One DOA anti war bill after another and almost nothing for the constituents that they are supposed to represent, except the promise to raise taxes and minimum wage.

If they don't wise up and start doing something worth while soon we can look forward to no balance at all in the house or senate in the not so distant future.

They started on a "Hate Bush at all cost" campaign since the beginning.

This morphed into a "Loose the war and create Vietnam II at all costs" campaign.

They have stuck by it because in some ways it is effective, and it is all they have to work with.

They are willing to do it to the people they are supposed to represent for the sake of furthering their own political agenda.

Everything they have got depends on failure.

Take notice and you will see many changing their game plan over the next year as they realize that the people who vote for them are not happy with the work they have done and will not be voting for them again unless there is a dramatic change in their own self defeating policies.

Some day they may even wise up and realize they are not running against President Bush in the next election.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,069 Posts
At the federal level, they pretty well have to pander to the East Coast and West Coast states that have a high number of electoral votes, with neither of those areas being well known for their common sense politicians.

In the midwest, democrats here tend to be of the type we saw when Truman was President, with our Democrat governor here being a member of both the NRA and Oklahoma Rifle Association, and our state getting a D- (YES!) from the Brady Bunch.
This is a fine demonstration of the difference between a REAL DEMOCRAT and the majority of LEFTISTS.

A real democrat will support the state first and politics second.

A leftist is all politics and self indulgence all of the time.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,069 Posts
Apparently everyone skipped over my post...
Your cut and paste post wasn't worth reading in it's entirety and judging by the length and amount of serious errors in it; you are not worth educating and have nothing to offer to the conversation.

You would be much happier re-posting your cut and paste material where people are happy to read the same old dis-proven crap over and over again

JMHO.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,069 Posts
I am writing with Glenn Beck on TV to my right. Now we are suppose to have armed police in each and every school so as to prevent a terror attack on our children.

Dem's say we need to get out of Iraq so this will stop, and Al Qu. will go away.

Rep's say that we need to stay destroy all the terrorist keeping the fight over there away from the USA (not all Republicans say this look at my Sen from Maine Snow and Collins they are Dems in all but name)

If only it were that simple. Ask why do the people of the world "hate" us so much? Well we don't keep our promises, we have way too much (in thier opinion), we use way too much (ibid), and basicly many are just plain Jealous of what we hard working people anywhere in the world have worked for. It's not just a problem for the USA. Just look at France and England and the problems of the last year or so

Years ago I was taught why a poor peasant who lived in a poor country would choose Communism over Democracy. Having nothing to show for day after day of hard work, it looks great if everyone has equal parts! But here is the catch, they were not told of those who are not happy unless they have more than they do. You have to be blind not to see this attitude in Iraq.

When the US entered Iraq, we told the people there that we would kick out the evil rotten garbage and sit them up with jobs, food, a government and everything else that would be needed for a happy and safe life. But what do they hear from our politicians now, "we need to leave", NOW. Well I guess we haven't been paid yet so why not quite, just like Vietnam, Samolia, and a cast of other places.

Well let us look at things like a Pro Economist might and ask one simple question about the future.....What happens when we leave without finishing the job we started?

1) Oil surges to more than over 125.00 a barrel (that is if we can
get it out of the Persian Gulf

2) Iran takes over the richest part of the world

3) More "illegal immigration" - not farm workers but rather terrorist
as if they are not already "leaking" in

3) 9/11 after 9/11 attacks occur over and over again across our nation
and other locations across the world

4) And never will anyone in the world belief us again in other words it
would be like saying "the checks in the mail"

These are just a few of my rants after little sleep for a few days

thanks
rick

Rick,

I appreciate the way that you wrote your own thoughts and feeling on the subject.
I may not agree with everything you wrote, but you did write it well.

I think that having an armed officer in every school (of sufficient size or need) is a good idea. Not so much because of a possible terrorist attack, but because of the other crazy people who are attracted to schools these days.

There was a good article in this past months American Legion magazine on the state of public school education and the teachers that teach it.

You should look it up and read that article.

As far as communism goes... the peasants never had a choice in the matter.

An angry minority infiltrates the military and government and gathers numbers while trying to further propagate hate and discontent.

That minority finds useful idiots to fight the visible battles (Michael Moore, Cindy Sheehan, Jane Fonda, et. all) all the while working to undermine the political system and process.

In the Russian experience, they used the famine and terrible conditions that followed WWI and offered a change.

Many useful idiots died in post revolution coups leaving the core of the group with all of the power.

In communism and Socialism (the eventual result of Communism) everyone who is not "someone" is poor and lives in a substandard condition where enterprise and property ownership is strongly discouraged.
If you save your money and buy a vehicle or a piece of farm equipment you could loose that piece of equipment at the whim of any local level politician.
You learn to be hungry and you learn to follow the mob without sticking out and being noticed.
We would all be killed and our families too if any of us spoke out about the government, as we often do here.

The power of fear kept Russia together from the revolution through the cold war.


I agree with you 100% in regards to the lack of stability in U.S. international relationships.

I believe this instability exists and has existed because too many of the U.S. decisions are based on the ever changing needs of U.S. Businesses.

(This fact is a big part of Marine Corps history.)

Our country lost it's way during the American Civil War (or war for Southern Independence if you prefer.)

That was the beginning of the end of the Jeffersonian ideal that much of this country was based on.

Powers and Industry won control of our government and future.

Since the post civil war era we have been at war with small countries all over the globe to control trade issues and piracy.

Some of our biggest issues have always been self created.

This remains true today.

Although our government isn't nearly as good or effective as it could be or would have been, it is far better than any other government that I have ever witnessed or experienced.

I believe the reason why is that we have insisted on keeping our original blueprint and set of rules and regulations.

The United States Constitution.

This is the same document that the leftists have been trying to destroy or otherwise make meaningless since the post civil war period.

Legislation and creative use of the Justice System are the favored tools of the leftist.

These tools have not been successful enough or fast enough so now they have assumed dominating control of the public schools.

If they can deliver a one sided education to America's youth and those young people swallow it, they may win in time.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,069 Posts
Here is some fresh cut and paste knowledge for the Dirty one and Mauser boy.
I strongly recommend that you gents read all of it so you are up to date on the actions of the TRAITORS you support.




More Demo-gogue “Retreat and Surrender”

In January 2007, at the end of his second tour in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus was nominated for promotion from Lieutenant General to General. His confirmation made him Commander of Multi-National Force Iraq (MNF-I). The Senate vote recorded no dissenters, and for good reason: Petraeus is the best commander for the job.

Gen. Petraeus is a USMA graduate (1974), and he has an outstanding career record as an infantry officer. His professional and academic-advancement record is also exceptional. He earned the George C. Marshall Award as the top graduate of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College (1983) and later earned master and doctoral degrees from Princeton. Notably, the subject of his doctoral dissertation was, “The American Military and the Lessons of Vietnam.”

I suppose his vita makes him the poster boy for those who Jean-Francois Kerry claims are “stuck in Iraq” because they are too dullard for a “real” job like Kerry’s.

In his eighth months in command of MNF-I, Gen. Petraeus was called to Capital Hill this week (the sixth anniversary of 9/11) to testify before Congress about progress in Iraq. Ahead of that testimony, he said, “I’ve tried to spend the last 33 years going around minefields instead of through them.” Monday and Tuesday, he successfully marched through the most contentious minefield of his career.

Those mines were planted months ago when plans for Gen. Petraeus’s testimony were announced. Democrats, who have bet their 2008 election prospects on failure in Iraq, began a campaign to undermine anything positive Gen. Petraeus might report about Operation Iraqi Freedom, because good news is bad for retreat and surrender Demos.

Here are a few representative comments from Democrat Senators who voted for Petraeus’s confirmation and command of MNF-I made before his testimony:

“[Petraeus has] made a number of statements over the years that have not proved to be factual.” —Sen. Harry Reid

“I expect the ‘Bush report’ to say, ‘The surge is working. Let’s have more of the same’.” —Sen. Dick Durbin

“I was against the war, I continue to be against the war, and I’m going to do everything I possibly can to bring American troops home at the earliest possible time.” —Sen. Ted Kennedy

“President Bush’s war strategy is failing and the top military commander in Iraq is ‘dead flat wrong’ for warning against major changes... The fact of the matter is that American lives remain in jeopardy and... if every single jihadi in the world was killed tomorrow, we’d still have a major, major war on our hands [in Iraq].” —Sen. Joe Biden (And we would be fighting whom?)

“I don’t think General Petraeus has an independent view in that sense... You can be sure we’ll listen to it, but I don’t think he’s an independent evaluator.” —Sen. Dianne Feinstein

“I was against the surge when it was first proposed. And I believe that nothing which Petraeus or Crocker or anyone else coming before the Congress will say next week will in any way undermine the basic problem: There is no military solution.” —Hillary Rodham Clinton

While John Kerry abstained from voting on Petraeus’s nomination, he did get Hillary’s ditto-Demo memo on “military solutions” and declared, “We should not be fooled into this tactical success debate... There is no military solution.”

For his part, Gen. Petraeus sat stoically before Demo-led panels Monday, prior to delivering his remarks, as they questioned his credibility and patriotism. His face and stature did not betray any degree of contempt for the politicos slandering his character. He is a good soldier.

Rep. Tom Lantos began the hearings by declaring that Petraeus would be doing nothing more than reading White House talking points: “We cannot take any of this administration’s assertions about Iraq at face value anymore. The fact remains, gentlemen, that the administration has sent you here today to convince the members of these two committees and the Congress that victory is at hand. With all due respect to you, I must say: I don’t buy it.”

In response to this backhanded nonsense, Gen. Petraeus opened his remarks saying, “At the outset I would like to note that this is my testimony. Although I have briefed my assessment and recommendations to my chain of command, I wrote this testimony myself. It has not been cleared by nor shared with anyone in the Pentagon, the White House or the Congress until it was just handed out.”

Much to the consternation of Democrats and Leftmedia defeatists, Gen. Petraeus did not suggest the U.S. retreat and surrender, but rather declared, “The military objectives of the surge are, in large measure, being met.”

In fact, since additional forces were committed to Iraq (“The Surge”) in June, and tactical constraints were loosened, the number of “security incidents” has “decreased significantly” in eight of the last 12 weeks; civilian murders have dropped 45 percent and “ethno-sectarian deaths” (Shi’ite vs. Sunni) have dropped 55 percent. For the year, IEDs targeting civilians are down 49 percent, and the U.S. has captured or killed more than 1,000 key al-Qa’ida insurgents and more than 2,500 other al-Qa’ida fighters.

“Additionally,” said Gen. Petraeus, “in what may be the most significant development of the past eight months, the tribal rejection of al-Qa’ida that started in Anbar province and helped produce such significant change there has now spread to a number of other locations as well.”

U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker corroborated Gen. David Petraeus’s testimony and spoke about the significant improvements to Iraq’s economy, noting they “are neither measured in benchmarks nor visible to those far from Baghdad.”

Unfortunately, in 2003, nobody thought it would take longer than five years to fend off attacks from Islamic jihadis while trying to undo generations of Ba’athist tyranny and establish a Republican government in the heart of the Islamic world.

If the OIF campaign continues to improve at this rate, Gen. Petraeus said the 168,000 troops in Iraq now could be reduced to 130,000 troops by mid-2008.

On that note, President George Bush insisted later, “[W]hen we begin to draw down troops from Iraq, it will be from a position of strength and success, not from a position of fear and failure. To do otherwise would embolden our enemies and make it more likely that they would attack us at home.”

Still, Gen. Petraeus’s remarks fell upon deaf ears in Congress.

“Clearly, continuing to pursue the President’s flawed escalation policy until at least July 2008 is not in the national interest of the United States,” protested Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

“There is a big disconnect between the truth of the matter and the reality. I mean, the truth of the matter is that... the administration’s policy and the surge are a failure,” concluded Sen. Joe Biden.

The dizzy Leftcoast House Speaker, Ms. Nancy Pelosi, issued a press release after Petraeus’s testimony with the lead, “Continuing Failed Surge in Iraq Until at Least Next Summer Is Unacceptable.” Pelosi insists, “The facts are self-evident that the progress is not being made... It is time to change the mission of our troops... so that the numbers... can be reduced on a much more aggressive timetable.”

Yeah, like the 2008 election timetable?

Of course, doing the bidding of al-Qa’ida, the Democrat’s Internet lapdog, Moveon.org, paid $65,000 for a full-page ad in Monday’s edition of The New York Times with the caption, “General Petraeus or General Betray Us?” and the subheading, “Cooking the Books for the White House.” What followed was a rant impugning the trustworthiness of OIF’s commanding officer, which is a shot at all uniformed Patriots.

Among the many facts omitted by Moveon in the ad was that The Times gave them a 60 percent discount from the standard rate for full-page ads (likely an FEC violation). According to the New York Post, “If a company sells an ad worth [$181,692] for $65,000, then, that would be an in-kind contribution of [$116,692]. Corporate contributions to PACs are illegal under the campaign-finance laws The Times itself has long championed: ‘Corporations and labor organizations are prohibited from making contributions in connection with federal elections,’ according to the FEC.”

Frankly, I’m surprised The Times charged the pantywaists at Moveon at all, but I suppose it had to look somewhat legitimate.

Downwind from the billowing fumes of these Demo-gogue traitors and their surrogates, one is left to ponder, as I have previously, what has happened to the Democrat Party of Roosevelt and Kennedy—which championed our national security and honored Patriots? It is now infested with hypocritical, nescient, impotent, reprehensible, gutless, half-witted, asinine, obsequious, meretricious, pusillanimous, indolent, imbecilic, pompous, retromingent, ignominious, duplicitous, ungrateful, socialist, sycophantic prevaricators, who flippantly exploit Operation Iraqi Freedom, as political fodder for their next campaign.

If the Democrats force a retreat and surrender from the Iraqi front with Jihadistan, we will have to contend with jihadis on our own soil—again—and return to the Middle East at what then will be a much higher cost of life and resources.

Oh yes, lest we forget, Iran’s resident psychopath, President Mahmud Ahmadi-Nejad, recently said of the Democrats’ plan to retreat, “Soon, we will see a huge power vacuum in the region.”

Iran, handing off nukes to al-Qa’ida or other jihadi proxies, is going to offset that “huge power vacuum” with a huge power detonation somewhere close to home. This is the terminal objective of jihad. Nineteen terrorists killed 2,996 civilians. There are thousands of jihadi terrorists yet to be captured or killed. Do the math.




Quote of the week

“At the outset I would like to note that this is my testimony. Although I have briefed my assessment and recommendations to my chain of command, I wrote this testimony myself. It has not been cleared by, nor shared with, anyone in the Pentagon, the White House or the Congress until it was just handed out. As a bottom line up-front, the military objectives of the surge are in large measure being met.” —General David Petraeus
On cross-examination

“The only hope in this war is to win it, no matter how much frustration, or division in Iraq (and America) and no matter how long it takes. Osama bin Laden knows the alternative. And he is willing to impose it on the entire world if we fail.” —Cal Thomas
Open query

“Our forces are killing lots of al-Qa’ida jihadis, preventing another terrorist attack on U.S. soil, and giving democracy in Iraq a chance—and Democrats say we are ‘losing’ this war. Was that a direct quote from Senate [Leader] Harry Reid, [or] the Osama bin Laden tape released this week? I always get those two confused... If liberals are not traitors, their only fallback argument at this point is that they’re really stupid.” —Ann Coulter
Non-Compos Mentis






GOVERNMENT & POLITICS
From the Left: Clinton’s big Hsu

Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign returned $860,000 in contributions raised by con man Norman Hsu this week. When The Wall Street Journal first reported Hsu’s crooked past and his Clinton connection, the campaign $23,000 to charity—a pittance of the money Hsu truly raised by circumventing federal fundraising laws. However, the Hsu case did not go away as the Clintonistas hoped. Amidst this week’s uproar over Gen. Petraeus’s report and the sixth anniversary of 9/11, they returned to their donors the largest sum of money ever in the history of campaign fundraising. With the help of their accomplices in the Leftmedia, it was a smooth move.

Hsu was running from a 15-year-old arrest warrant in California for grand theft during his successful fundraising stint with the Clintons. He ran again after returning to California supposedly to face the music. The law caught up with him on a Chicago bound Amtrak train, stuck between his bed and the wall in a sleeper cabin littered with prescription medicine bottles; he had written a suicide note before fleeing.

There is enough about this case to entertain everyone. For instance, how did a man who was a fugitive from justice for 15 years become a top donor for the favored presidential candidate? And how did he coerce people to make donations to a candidate that some of them actually loathed?

To answer the first question, Clinton campaign spokesman, Howard Wolfson, said, “Mr. Hsu donated to numerous charities and more than two dozen candidates and committees. Despite conducting a thorough review of public records, our campaign like others were unaware of Mr. Hsu’s decade-plus old warrant. To help ensure against this type of situation in the future, our campaign will also institute vigorous additional vetting procedures on our bundlers, including criminal background checks. In any instances where a source of a bundler’s income is in question, the campaign will take affirmative steps to verify its origin.” We’re so relieved.

More fun with the Clinton campaign

If having to explain away Norman Hsu weren’t bad enough, Hillary Clinton may have to testify in the California Court of Appeals in a lawsuit filed by Hollywood producer Peter Paul. Paul filed a lawsuit against the Clintons and two of their associates claiming that the former President reneged on an agreement to be a rainmaker for Paul’s Internet venture if Paul produced a fundraiser for Hillary’s 2000 Senate campaign. Paul claims to have Mrs. Clinton on videotape agreeing to help plan the August 2000 event.

The Clinton Senate campaign has already paid a $35,000 fine to the FEC for not properly reporting the money raised at that event. Now, if Paul’s videotape holds up in court, Clinton could be in bigger trouble for having a direct hand in the planning. The fundraiser would then be defined as a hard-money donation that is more than a thousand times the legal limit for an individual donation.

In a 2006 written statement submitted to the California court, Clinton maintained that she did not recall having such a conversation with Paul. If she is called upon to testify during this appeal, it will be another historic first. No presidential candidate has ever had to appear in a criminal court during their campaign. Trailblazing, indeed.
In the Executive Branch: AG nomination looming

The word in the swamp is that President Bush will nominate an attorney-general candidate next week. Democrats are calling upon the President to nominate a “nonpartisan,” which really means they want someone who will roll over and allow them to claw through the Justice Department files like mice. President Bush seems to be looking forward to the fight, because his top pick may to be Ted Olson, former solicitor general and the Bush campaign’s top lawyer during the 2000 Florida recount.

Democrats are busy pre-rejecting Olson, with head partisan Harry Reid claiming that Olson is too partisan for the position. On the contrary, Olson may be just the man to take the reins at Justice, which is sorely in need of leadership. Morale is low and no one is minding the store there, which is just how the Demos like it. For months the liberals have claimed that the Justice Department applied the law in a manner that allowed Republicans to gain power across the country. If a weak AG is put in charge of the department, Democrats will continue rummaging through Justice Department files to fuel their witch hunt against Republicans, making up corruption where they can’t find it.
Democrats making up a case

Speaking of making up corruption, House Democrats are investigating the 2006 bribery conviction of former Alabama governor Don Siegelman with the belief that President Bush’s Justice Department had a hand in landing Siegelman in jail for political reasons. Karl Rove’s name has predictably popped up as the boogieman behind the whole mess because of political work he did in Alabama during the 1990s. That’s the best liberals can do at this point.

While serving as Governor, Siegelman took $500,000 from HealthSouth CEO Richard Scrushy in exchange for a seat on the state hospital board. The money went toward paying off a debt the Siegelman campaign owed to a state lottery. The liberal position is that Siegelman merely exchanged a favor, something that all politicians do to a certain extent. Seigelman’s actions may be common, but they were also illegal. That is why he is serving a 99-month prison sentence, not because he is a Democrat unlucky enough to be in the same state at the same time as Karl Rove.
On the Hill: Sen. Hagel announces retirement

One week after John Warner announced he would not seek reelection to the U.S. Senate in 2008, Nebraska “Republican” Chuck Hagel said that he will not seek reelection next year, nor will he run for President (were we holding our breath?). Hagel has been so adamantly against Bush administration policy, it’s easy to forget that he is actually a GOP Senator. He has been a longtime vocal opponent to America’s involvement in Iraq and was one of the first Republicans to call for Attorney General Alberto Gonzales’s resignation. Unfortunately for Republicans, this means yet another congressional seat to defend in 2008, but all in all, losing Hagel won’t be so bad.
In the Senate: Pork and bridges

The Senate took up H.R. 3074, the Transportation/HUD Appropriations Act, passing that bill Wednesday by an 88-7 margin. The measure ladles out $106 billion, including over $2.5 billion in earmarks and $1 billion for bridge repair and replacement. Mixed in with the pork is $200 million for nonprofits and other groups that offer counseling and information to aid homeowners with sub-prime mortgages in avoiding foreclosure.

President Bush has threatened to veto the bill for overspending—but he’s pulled back from other such pledges recently. Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) has been fighting the good fight against earmarks, though deterring his esteemed colleagues from spending your money to ingratiate themselves back home is a tall order. Coburn’s amendment to strip out all the pork from the transportation bill and transfer that money to fixing bridges went down to defeat, 14-82. South Carolina GOP Sen. Jim DeMint’s proposal to waive Davis-Bacon wage mandates for repairing structurally deficient bridges was also voted down, 37-56.
New & notable legislation

Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) introduced the Charlie Norwood CLEAR Act (H.R. 3494), which would allow state law-enforcement authorities to assist in enforcing federal immigration laws with greater ease.

Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-NC) introduced H.Res. 641, marking the 220th anniversary of the signing of the U.S. Constitution on Monday, 17 September.

The Senate approved last week Tom Coburn’s amendment to withhold all appropriations to the UN “until the secretary of state certifies that the United Nations [and subsidiaries] is fully and publicly transparent about all of its spending, including procurement purposes.” The U.S. currently sends about $5.3 billion per year to the UN.
Around the nation: Back-door gun control in CA

Gun-control advocates claimed victory in California as a “microstamping” bill passed the state’s assembly. The measure, known as the “Crime Gun Identification Act” (AB 1471), would require all new models of semiautomatic pistols sold in California after 2010 to be microscopically engraved with an identification number, which would be transferred onto the cartridge casing when fired. The Brady Campaign calls it an “important new tool in solving gun crimes” and Brady Campaign President Paul Helmke claimed it would “help cut off an important source of crime guns...by reducing the illegal flow of handguns into the black market.” Pro-Second Amendment groups countered that the bill would become a de facto gun ban by drastically increasing the cost of buying a new pistol. “Many manufacturers will choose to abandon the California market rather than incur substantial costs associated with complying with microstamping legislation,” argued Lawrence Keane of the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

Other flaws with the bill are that the technology is unproven and comes from a single source and it fails to address the possibility of stolen microstamped weapons implicating innocent persons.

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has not announced whether he will sign the bill, but a similar bill failed in the assembly last year.


Striking another blow against Democrats’ best hope for victory in state elections—namely, rampant election fraud—U.S. District Judge Harold Murphy tossed out a lawsuit aimed at preventing Georgia from enforcing a statute requiring a valid photo ID to vote. The sham lawsuit claimed that elderly and poor voters were being unfairly discriminated against because they were the ones least likely to have such an ID. Sure... except of course, that they all do. Noting the claimants’ failure to produce even one “victim” unable to get a photo ID, Judge Murphy also commented, “Plaintiffs are hard-pressed to show that voters in Georgia, in general, are not aware of the photo ID requirement.”

Discontent with similar judicial epiphanies deriving from voter fraud, leftists have resorted to their next best tactic: labeling Republicans racists—how innovative. (Yawn.) The Demos’ propaganda machine churned out crowds chanting slave songs, wielding shackles and invoking images of resurgent Jim Crow laws. Responding to these histrionics, NPR correspondent Juan Williams—no stranger to liberalism—offered this to the would-be deprived: “I think you could say to people, ‘Go and get a legitimate ID.’ I don’t think that’s too much to ask.” We don’t think so, either.






NATIONAL SECURITY
Immigration front: San-ctuary Francisco

San Francisco has been a sanctuary city for illegal aliens since its board of supervisors proclaimed so in 1989. Mayor Gavin Newsome has also joined the fray, prohibiting city employees (that would include police) from inquiring about immigration status or cooperating with federal immigration efforts in any way. Now, city Supervisor Tom Ammiano wants to issue city ID cards to help further protect illegals from the long arm of the law (not exactly the legitimate ID required for voters in Georgia). Ammiano worries, for example, that illegal aliens who are victims of a crime or witness a crime (not to mention those who commit crime) don’t come forward for fear of being deported for not having proper identification.

According to the Government Accountability Office, 55,322 criminal aliens incarcerated in 2003 had been arrested a total of 459,614 times. If they had only had proper ID, perhaps they wouldn’t have turned to a life of crime—at least in the upside-down world of San Francisco.

Meanwhile, also in the city by the bay, U.S. District Court Judge Maxine Chesney ruled that the Department of Homeland Security couldn’t send “no match” letters to employers when an employee’s Social Security number doesn’t match Social Security Administration records. As Investor’s Business Daily muses, “We don’t see how proving you are who you say you are—something we all do on a routine basis—poses a hardship for citizens or legal residents. Nor do we see how giving IDs out like candy to illegal aliens makes us safer or benefits society.”





secure Our Borders
Profiles of valor: Marine Corps Res. Sgt. Hunter

Marine Corps Reserve Sergeant Jeff Hunter has twice faced death to save injured comrades. In May 2005, insurgents ambushed then-Corporal Hunter’s platoon as it embarked on a dawn assault in Haditha. When Hunter’s squad leader entered a nearby house to stop the insurgents who were attacking from within, he was shot in the chest. Seeing his fallen leader, Hunter rushed into the house under shield of his own M16, reached his squad leader, and, positioning his own body between the injured Marine and the enemy, carried his comrade out of the house. Hunter then led his troops in successfully clearing the house of insurgents, killing one and capturing three.

Two months later, in a long and intense battle, insurgents shot one of Hunter’s Marines. After shooting the two insurgents from the shelter of a low wall, Hunter attempted to rescue the fallen Marine. Heavy gunfire, however, stopped his two attempts. Hunter then sprinted directly through the line of fire to an M1A1 tank located across the street. He used the tank to fire upon and neutralize the enemy’s position, and his platoon was able to reach and recover the mortally wounded Marine.

For his valor, Sgt. Hunter was awarded the Silver Star. Although Hunter claims of his actions, “I honestly don’t believe I did anything all that heroic,” America believes differently.





Homeland Security front: Cargo inspection

Port security has long been a hotly debated homeland-security topic. The latest tiff over the issue involves exactly who should be inspecting incoming cargo on passenger planes. Currently, airlines are handling screening with Transportation Security Administration (TSA) oversight. Some congressional Democrats, however, no doubt posturing as national-security hawks, are pushing for government workers to inspect the cargo—and we all know how much better government workers do things than those in the private sector. Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS), chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, opined, “We are convinced that responsibility for this should remain that of the government and not be pushed out to some other individual.”

The TSA argues that current law simply requires that government standards be met, regardless of who is doing the meeting. To wit, TSA’s administrator, Kip Hawley, said, “The clear intention of the legislation is to make sure packages that get onto passenger aircraft have to be physically inspected at some level. How can we do it in an operationally effective way so we don’t kill the industry or require massive increases in TSA resources? How do we do it in a way to add security to the existing freight process rather than force the freight process to conform to our security process?” An important quandary, to be sure. We’re not in any way claiming that current cargo inspections are perfectly thorough, 100-percent adequate or failsafe. We are saying that we don’t trust Democrats to establish the methods to be used.





BUSINESS & ECONOMY
Income Redistribution: Hillary to the rescue

On the campaign trail, Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-Havana) promised that, if elected president, she would save Social Security. Thank goodness we have Democrats to “save” Social Security after every election. The catch to Hillary’s plan, though, is that she will not cut benefits, raise the retirement age or privatize. Absent those three good solutions, the only one left is the incredibly bad and irresponsible one: a massive tax hike, the prescription of every Democrat.

When looking at the staggering obligations of Social Security, it’s hard to imagine that a tax hike will fix anything. According to The Washington Times, “In present dollars, Social Security’s projected unfunded obligations over a 75-year horizon are $4.7 trillion. Considering that the U.S. Treasury must find $2 trillion to redeem the bonds presently in the Social Security trust funds, the total unfunded obligation is actually $2 trillion higher than this for a total of $6.7 trillion. Over an infinite horizon, Social Security’s present-dollar unfunded obligation is projected to be $15.6 trillion.” That’s a whole heap of confiscated income for younger Americans.

Oh yeah, and then there’s Medicare. The Times notes, “For Part A alone, the 75-year unfunded liability is $11.6 trillion.”

Raise the ire of the Angry Left with these quality products bearing our most popular slogan! Annoy a Liberal with T-shirts, mugs, golf balls, magnets, stickers and more!
Gaming the uninsured statistics

We’ve all heard it: 47 million uninsured Americans, or nearly one in six of us. Obviously, the only solution to such a disease is socialized medicine.

However, before making such a huge change maybe we ought to take a look at the facts. For these purposes, we will pretend that 47 million is an accurate number, not just an inflation-adjusted one derived from an ancient, flawed study. Do you ever hear that, within four months, 45 percent of that 47 million (20 million) will have insurance? What about the fact that 17 million of the uninsured can afford insurance (i.e., they remain uninsured by choice)? Or that more than nine million are not even citizens?

No? When you add up all the numbers, dump out the duplicates and subtract the misinformation, fewer than nine million of our citizens go involuntarily without insurance—a troubling number, but no reason to panic. In health care, as in every other area of human endeavor, a freedom-based market approach works best to produce desired services at the lowest prices (unlike every socialized-medicine approach in history). On the other hand, if we do turn to the market, citizens would not be beholden to Congress for more crumbs. No, better to keep the problem big, so it is worthy of their lordships’ attention, and there is enough money and power available to bother grabbing.
Manufacturing stronger than media thinks

The demagogues and populists on the campaign trail are once again striking fear in the hearts of Americans by pointing out the great dangers of freedom—free trade, that is. We’re regularly told that, due to foreign competition, American manufacturing is dwindling and corporate outsourcing is destroying our labor market at home. These claims may please the unions and they may help cram protectionist trade laws through Congress, but they have the one weakness of being patently false. A mere glance at the data from 2006 shows that the manufacturing industry is doing as well as ever, achieving record output, sales and profits. Even the feared trade deficit is misleading, as over 55 percent of our imports were industrial components intended for American producers. The world economy is growing and that means increasing demands for American goods—or it does if we can keep the demagogues in Congress from creating greater barriers to trade.

If industry is doing fine, why all the fear? The fretting is due to the fact that manufacturing employment has declined over the past several years. But when manufacturing output is increasing to record-setting and world-leading levels, a decline in employment indicates that productivity has been increasing (more output per worker makes fewer workers required to produce the same total output). This often results in workers shifting employment from one sector of the economy to another as has happened as demand increases in the technology and service industries. This big-picture view often infuriates those individuals who have lost jobs—and we hear from them. We don’t take losing a job lightly, or flippantly cast it aside, but just as the buggy repairmen were unemployed by the invention of the automobile, our current economy raises living standards and creates wealth for everyone. Capitalism is, after all, a system of “creative destruction.”




CULTURE
Frontiers of Junk Science: Computer models

A new report indicates that global warming may be bad for your health. Physicians worry that anticipated rises in earth’s temperature are likely to be associated with increased heart problems. According to Dr. Karin Schenck-Gustafsson of Sweden’s Karolinska Institute, “If it really is a few degrees warmer in the next 50 years, we could definitely have more cardiovascular disease.” The reason? Experts liken the hardening of the heart’s arteries to the formation of rust on an automobile. As Dr. Gordon Tomaselli, chief of cardiology at Johns Hopkins University, explains, “Rust develops much more quickly at warm temperatures.”

In addition to the doom and gloom predictions of human impact, the global-warming caravan is also concerned with the polar-bear population, as scientists forecast that by 2050, 42 percent of the Artic sea ice necessary for polar-bear survival will have melted. All they need as proof is this picture. Worse still, some scientists believe conditions are worsening more quickly than their computer models indicate.

Translation: Computer models may be wrong.

For a culture that worships at the altar of evolution, why the focused interest in interfering in the evolution of the polar-bear population? Wouldn’t this belie the very foundation of evolutionary survival? After all, if polar bears can’t survive, mustn’t that be evolutionary fate?
Indeed, global-warming groupies have a dilemma on their hands, but they have no time for that now. They are too busy fixing their computers to match their predictions and of course, computers are not the only things that predict future climate. The Old Farmer’s Almanac for 2008 predicts the hottest year in a century next year because, well, years that end in “8” have strange weather.




From the Leftjudiciary: Freedom from crosses

Last week the Ninth “Circus” Court was again operating in judicial-tyranny mode, refusing to obey laws enacted by Congress—all in order to dismember a veterans’ memorial incorporating a small cross. The property in question is California’s Mojave Desert Memorial that includes a small white cross as a monument to World War I veterans. It has stood for over three-quarters of a century. In 2004, Congress passed a law transferring five acres of federal land containing the memorial to private ownership to prevent precisely this type of anti-religious, anti-freedom judicial despotism. Yet the court still seems hell-bent on its mission of Judeo-Christian cleansing, demanding that the property must remain in federal-government ownership—for the sole purpose, it seems, of cutting down the cross and preventing veterans from honoring their comrades’ sacrifice as they and the veterans’ families choose.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,069 Posts
There is a simple reason why I didn't come up with an argument to anything you posted, Mouser boy.

Everything you posted was fictitious or half-truth crap.

Everything I posted has really happened.

Simple enough for you?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,069 Posts
Because I don't tie my allegiance to a particular party, but towards the Constitution and traditional Conservative American values. Remember, the Democratic party used to be considered "conservative".

Yes, there very well maybe democrats who are traitors. But that doesn't mean you should generalize someone because of the letter next to their name, whether it would be D or R. Bush is a Republican but his actions are not in step with the traditional views and actions of the Republican party.
You are at a constant loss of credibility.

Not only because all of your opinions and views of history require the full benefit of hindsight with a dash of rewriting history and an extra helping of taking it out of context to make it palatable, but because you write and likely think like a schizophrenic.

I suspect that may be because you are trying hard to make people believe that you believe in things you have already displayed that you clearly do not believe in.

You go from posting angry socialist crap to trying to pretend you care about "Constitutional or conservative values".

This is nothing more than written double talk.



Perhaps as you have posted; "You are just letting your blind faith in a broken ideology lead you to conclusions that are incorrect."
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,069 Posts
You need to read your own posts to answer your own questions.

Then get back to me later by PM with an apology for wasting my time.

While you are at it you can return to this forum and appoligise for wasting everyone else's time with your poorly researched and moronic blurbs.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,069 Posts
You need to read your own posts to answer your own questions.

Then get back to me later by PM with an apology for wasting my time.

While you are at it you can return to this forum and appoligise for wasting everyone else's time with your poorly researched and moronic blurbs.

I have better things to do than entertain an ignorant and hopeless little Chimp like you.
You continue to repeat the same few words and phrases you have repeated since the beginning.

You are not debating anyone.

You are not even remotely qualified to debate with anyone here.

The only variation you show is the weak insults you try to hurl at those who disagree with you.

Then you accuse others of being brain washed?

Try reading your own crap and see how completely ridiculous you are.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,069 Posts
You are at a constant loss of credibility.

Not only because all of your opinions and views of history require the full benefit of hindsight with a dash of rewriting history and an extra helping of taking it out of context to make it palatable, but because you write and likely think like a schizophrenic.

I suspect that may be because you are trying hard to make people believe that you believe in things you have already displayed that you clearly do not believe in.

You go from posting angry socialist crap to trying to pretend you care about "Constitutional or conservative values".

This is nothing more than written double talk.

Perhaps as you have posted; "You are just letting your blind faith in a broken ideology lead you to conclusions that are incorrect."

Repeat for emphasis.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,069 Posts
Read Ann Coulter's book "Treason" and you will conclude, as i, they are traitorous.

And maybe a little stoopid.
Read some of the half baked schemes our leftists cook up and advocate for, judge them with common sense.

When these fools talk about appeasing radical museums, read what the radicals have to say.

When they talk about "common sense gun legislation" always ask for their definition of common sense. If they can not provide one let their past experiences show you their definition.

When they vote against their values "for principle" know that they have no values or real principals.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,069 Posts
Yet just like you, they endorse the welfare-warfare state. So there really isn't much difference between you and your democrat friends.
I think you are "projecting" here.

This is one of your typical low functioning douche bag ploys to distract us from the fact that you don't have a clue, a real opinion, or a purpose in life.

I learn more about you from the questions you refuse to answer and dance around.

Red boot laces or white Mouser BOY, which is it?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,069 Posts
Clyde wrote " Oh my, weasely anne is back. What is happening in West Mill Creek, do you suppose?"

Wes wrote " FYI I am a new small business owner..."

I hear Wes has begun a pyramid scheme home party plan selling bio-diesel powered sex toys to pre-operative transexuals.

Nice business plan, dude.
I heard that Wes is M.B.'s Meth Amphetamine supplier.

(what would any out of work skin head be without his constipational right to "tweak out".)

It my be nothing more than a SWAG here, but judging by the amount of clutter in our latest Wes post, he may be dipping into his own supply.

Too bad.

It is not like all of those years of marijuana and electric kool-aid didn't do enough damage to an already fragile mind.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,069 Posts
That would proably beat fencing stolen paint metal flakes from the Dearborne plant though, wouldn't it, hmmmmmmmmm?
Are you saying that you fence stolen goods and would prefer to be in Wes Gun's manufacturing controlled substances business?

If so, I am sure he has room for you at his place of business.

(If you can get into the basement without his parents noticing.)
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,069 Posts
Sounds like a poorly researched SWAG with intent to provide false information rolled into it.

You may need to do some research and submit a prompt apology.

I look forward to your apology, but somehow doubt you are man enough to do it.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,069 Posts
I heard that Wes is M.B.'s Meth Amphetamine supplier.

(what would any out of work skin head be without his constipational right to "tweak out".)

It my be nothing more than a SWAG here, but judging by the amount of clutter in our latest Wes post, he may be dipping into his own supply.

Too bad.

It is not like all of those years of marijuana and electric Kool-Aid didn't do enough damage to an already fragile mind.
...Just picking up on where I left off after troll jousting.

(and wondering who has two user identities)
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,069 Posts
ret_marine2003 wrote "and wondering who has two user identities"

Would it be a violation if the troll was bipolar, and off his meds?

Yes, unless a board member is a licensed therapist, social worker, or practicing Doctor of Psychology and is willing to provide a detailed diagnosis according to procedures specified in DSM-IV-TR and submit a complete genogram for the group to ponder over. LOL

Or... you could go to King Lou and request leniency for the sake of the trolls innate entertainment value.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,069 Posts
Sounds like a poorly researched SWAG with intent to provide false information rolled into it.

You may need to do some research and submit a prompt apology.

I look forward to your apology, but somehow doubt you are man enough to do it.
You are a liar and a fraud Monticello,

You owe me an apology that you are clearly not man enough to deliver.

I sent you a PM yesterday.

Did you read it, or are you going to continue to free associate and guess your way through your own lies?

BTW: Those flakes (manufactured in 1994) are BASF not PPG.

When I buy surplus I get a written description that sometimes differs from the product I receive.

Feel free to do your research and submit your apology.

...or feel free to make it up as you go like you have been so that you can help us illustrate how "the big lie" leftist plan works.

I have all of the information and facts at my disposal.

You have your fertile imagination and winning personality.
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top