“Breathtaking” July 16, 2008
Posted by reformedville in : Government , 3commentsObama ‘Completely Misunderstands the World’
There are many things I did not agree on about the way we managed this war in Iraq, but the one thing I do remember is that it was clearly stated it is better to take it to them than to have them bring it to us. And it has been over there and not on our streets.
We did not secure their borders allowing terrorists to invade Iraq-that is a good thing. Would we rather chase them through caves and tunnels or allow them to come to us, like ants drawn to food at a picnic?
Below are some other video links of the Gaffe Express:
Obama: Iraq Distracting From Other Threats
Obama Backtracks on ‘Undivided Jerusalem’ Ahead of Israel, West Bank Trip
And for good measure- equate law enforcement with terrorism
Obama: Communities ‘Terrorized by ICE Immigration Raids’
Senator Obama isn’t even waiting until he gets into office to complain that we are arresting illegal immigrants on unannounced raids and that they don’t make a fair wage. So much for the rule of law, and the idea that the president is to uphold the laws of the land.
No one cares if you know it is a scam July 16, 2008
Posted by reformedville in : Government , 1 comment so farUltra-Rich Cash in on Global Warming Hoax
By Alan Caruba
Recently I emailed a gentleman who is highly regarded, nationally and internationally, as one of the top strategic, military and economic long-range thinkers of our times. He is the author of several bestselling books about the way globalization is impacting the lives of the Earth’s population.
In addition to having read his books and magazine articles, I occasionally visit his blog to read what he is thinking about currently. I noticed that he was casually referencing “global warming” in a post, so I emailed to let him know that there is no scientific proof or basis for the endless global warming claims. I cited all the usual data that disputes it and I provided the URLs of several websites that could provide him with even more.
His response was quite revealing. “It doesn’t matter one way or the other. All the same fixes are required for sheer pollution reasons on a global scale given population increase and consumption increase. You’re arguing the past.” He would later post that, so far as the data debunking global warming, he was “beyond caring.”
As I interpret this, no matter how utterly false the justifications are for the global warming hoax given by Al Gore, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and others, leading to efforts to replace, slow or deter the use of energy sources such as coal, natural gas and oil, this particular influential intellectual was beyond caring because the world’s population was responsible for pollution and consuming too much of everything.
At this point global warming has made Al Gore a famous and wealthy man. He and the IPCC received a Nobel Peace Prize and Hollywood conferred an Oscar on the “documentary” that advances global warming lies. He now enjoys the lifestyle of the ultra-rich.
The “solutions” offered to stop a non-existent global warming include a Gore suggestion that “pollution” be taxed; that there must be a mandated reduction of all carbon dioxide emissions; the instituting of a bogus cap-and-trade credit system for all utilities, manufacturing, transportation, and other activities; biofuels, greater use of energy alternatives such as wind and solar; and ultimately, limits on how much energy people are permitted to use who drive cars, own homes, or run businesses of all kinds.
In California, for example, proposals and legislation has been put forth to eliminate the inclusion of fireplaces in the construction of new homes and that heat or cooling should be controlled by a central command that will monitor individual energy use and, without concern for the welfare of the individual user, determine the temperature of their living space. This is Big Brother writ large.
The federal government long ago imposed standards on how much mileage a car or truck must have for each gallon of gas consumed and has since mandated that each gallon must include the engine-destroying, energy-poor addition of ethanol. The ethanol mandate has created higher prices for food as corn and wheat supplies diminish.
This is the same government that has already banned the sale of incandescent light bulbs in the coming years. In time, it proposes to eliminate the use of all light bulbs except fluorescent ones that both consume less energy and give less light.
It is the same government contemplating declaring the thriving polar bear population “endangered” for the sole purpose of putting areas off limits that are believed to be rich in new oil reserves, not unlike the prohibition on extracting oil from ANWR.
Iti s the same government that has declared 85% of the nation’s continental shelf off-limits to any exploration, discovery, and extraction of our own oil and natural gas reserves.
Are you beginning to see a pattern here?
When the movers and shakers, the rich and powerful of our time get together in their meetings in Davos or wherever, have they secretly concluded that “pollution” and “consumption” by the Earth’s six billion people can only be reduced by reducing the world’s population? Do they see great profits in forcing us to only drive electric cars and the mandatory adoption of similar “green” technologies?
Serendipitously, the International Herald Tribune published an article by Andrew Ross Sorkin on March 20 titled, “At island retreat, Branson and friends seek to save a world ‘on fire’.” It was an astonishing revelation as it described a retreat hosted by Richard Branson, “the British magnate” among whose guests was Larry Page of Google, Jimmy Wales of Wikipedia, and Tony Blair, the former British prime minister who is now a senior advisor to J.P. Morgan Chase.
Richard Stromback, the chief executive of Ecology Coatings, “joked that a gathering like this might seem nefarious to some people.” The reporter noted that, “Many executives and financiers, including some in attendance at the retreat, have a lot of money riding on global warming.”
Look nefarious? Yes, it does. Some of the ultra-rich have a stake in the global warming hoax as a means to further enrich themselves.
If that means cloaking their opinion that the world’s population needs to be reduced by appearing concerned for the fate of the planet, than there is no better way of doing that than advancing the goals of the environmental movement.
This is why “strategic thinkers” looked away when the use of DDT was banned worldwide and millions, particularly in Africa, continue to needlessly die from malaria.
This is why “strategic thinkers” looked away when one of the world’s most extraordinary and affordable refrigerants and fire suppression chemicals, Freon, was banned from use worldwide with a bogus claim that “ozone holes” were destroying the atmosphere.
Note, too, that these bans, the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, are instrumentalities of the United Nations. These fraudulent environmental issues benefit the ultra-rich whose financial interests transcend national borders.
Presently China, India, nor any of the nations around the world whose economies are responding to the growth in global trade and the improvement of living standards for their people are going to voluntarily accept such limitations.
China has apparently concluded that, if the tradeoff is air and water pollution, that is acceptable until they reach a point where costly technology can be installed to reduce the pollution. This is already an option that a wealthy nation like the United States has adopted.
Another case in point has been the utter failure of the signatories to the original Kyoto Protocol to limit CO2 emissions and subsequent negotiations to achieve an impossible reduction of carbon dioxide, a gas that constitutes a mere 0.038% of the Earth’s atmosphere.
I am still trying to understand why our government and others around the world are subsidizing “alternative energies” to the tune of billions for wind and solar power when neither is a reliable source of energy and, together, they produce such miniscule amounts of electricity as to be essentially worthless.
But my strategic thinker guru says, “You’re arguing the past.” No. I am arguing the future.
I am arguing about issues such as private property and the right to use it for personal gain and profit, the bedrock foundation of our economy, guaranteed in our Constitution. It is becoming a scare commodity as the U.S. government continues to declare vast areas as U.N. heritage sites, wildlife refuges, national parks, and other excuses to deny their use as sources of timber, coal, natural gas or oil.
I am arguing about the Green Revolution of genetically modified crops that can feed the vast population of the Earth without using more forested land. Despite this, supplies of corn and soy are being depleted for the purpose of burning these food sources as fuel. The nation’s supply of wheat has been depleted as acreage is diverted to grow these crops and the cheaper dollar underwrites increased exports.
What better way to reduce the world’s population than a manmade famine?
I am arguing against plans to merge the United States, Canada and Mexico into a North American Union to facilitate exports from China and Asia.
Meanwhile, the great engine of the world’s economy and the beacon of liberty to the world is being undermined by a fifth column of environmentalists and those who expect to benefit from their agenda.
Alan Caruba writes a weekly column posted on the Internet site of The National Anxiety Center, www.anxietycenter.com. He blogs at http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.
© Alan Caruba, March 2008
Note: both of our Presidential candidates are down with the HUMAN INDUCED global warming scam. Our government does not give a FRA about you, the air, the environment or any of it. It is all about power and cash.
Not a good day to be Joe Wilson (or the MSM) July 8, 2008
Posted by reformedville in : culture, Government , 2commentsI almost have to laugh when I hear the term conspiracy theory anymore.
Saddam’s Nukes
By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Monday, July 07, 2008 4:20 PM PT
WMD: Hear about the 550 metric tons of yellowcake uranium found in Iraq? No? Why should you? It doesn’t fit the media’s neat story line that Saddam Hussein’s Iraq posed no nuclear threat when we invaded in 2003.
Read More: Iraq | Global War On Terror
It’s a little known fact that, after invading Iraq in 2003, the U.S. found massive amounts of uranium yellowcake, the stuff that can be refined into nuclear weapons or nuclear fuel, at a facility in Tuwaitha outside of Baghdad.
In recent weeks, the U.S. secretly has helped the Iraqi government ship it all to Canada, where it was bought by a Canadian company for further processing into nuclear fuel — thus keeping it from potential use by terrorists or unsavory regimes in the region.
This has been virtually ignored by the mainstream media. Yet, as the AP reported, this marks a “significant step toward closing the books on Saddam’s nuclear legacy.”
Seems to us this should be big news.
After all, much of the early opposition to the war in Iraq involved claims that President Bush “lied” about weapons of mass destruction and that Saddam posed little if any nuclear threat to the U.S.
This more or less proves Saddam in 2003 had a program on hold for building WMD and that he planned to boot it up again soon.
This is clear, since Saddam acquired most of his uranium before 1991, but still had it in 2003, when invading U.S. troops found the stuff. (The International Atomic Energy Agency seems to have known about the yellowcake in the 1990s, but did nothing to force Saddam to get rid of it. It’s duplicating its error today with Iran and North Korea).
That means Saddam held onto it for more than a decade. Why? He hoped to wait out U.N. sanctions on Iraq and start his WMD program anew. This would seem to vindicate Bush’s decision to invade.
The American Thinker Web site reported four years ago on the scary math behind Saddam’s uranium hoard: 500 tons of yellowcake, once refined, could make 142 nuclear weapons.
But yellowcake wasn’t all they found at Tuwaitha. According to the AP, the military also discovered “four devices for controlled radiation exposure . . . that could potentially be used in a weapon.”
By the way, this should put to rest the canard peddled by the American left and by former Ambassador Joseph Wilson that “Bush lied” about Iraq seeking yellowcake from the African country of Niger.
Given what we know, including comments by officials in Niger’s government, Iraq did make overtures to buy uranium. And it’s quite possible all or part of the 550 tons came from there.
What’s more, if Bush hadn’t acted, we might today see a nuclear Iraq, an Iran on the way to having a weapon, Libya with an expanded nuclear program, and Syria — with its close ties to Saddam — on the way to having a nuke.
Of equal concern is why the media ignored this good news coming from Iraq. It seems to be of a piece with how they’ve treated other recent positive developments in Iraq (see editorial below).
We ask again — why aren’t you seeing and hearing more about this? The reason is simple: The mainstream media find it inconveniently contradicts the story they have been telling you for years.
*******************************************************
Derek Webb’s New Video
http://youtube.com/watch?v=1p00ASxejlE
The Abortion President July 7, 2008
Posted by reformedville in : culture, Government , add a comment
Christian group launches new effort in their campaign to educate American voters on the radical and extremist abortion policies of Senator Obama. (More)
Obama denies protection for infants of botched abortions
Jim Brown - OneNewsNow - 7/7/2008 6:00:00 AM var addthis_pub = ‘onenewsnow’;
A pro-life activist in Illinois says Barack Obama has repeatedly mischaracterized his opposition to the Illinois Born Alive Infants Protection Act while he was a state senator.
The Federal Born Alive Infants Protection Act was signed into law in 2002 after receiving unanimous support from the U.S. Senate. The measure that forces hospitals to give medical care to abortion survivors — if warranted — even received the backing of liberal senators Ted Kennedy (D-Massachusetts ), Barbara Boxer (D-California), and Hillary Clinton (D-New York).
Obama now says he did not support the Illinois measure because it “lacked the Federal language clarifying the act would not be used to undermine Roe vs. Wade.”
Story continues below …
Do you find inconsistency in Barack Obama’s professed Christian faith
and his support for abortion on demand?
Pro-life blogger Jill Stanek recently wrote a column for WorldNetDaily.com titled “Obama’s biggest lie about supporting infanticide.” She points out Obama actively opposed the Born Alive Infants Protection Act for three years in the Illinois senate.
“He voted against it. He was the sole senator speaking against it on the [Illinois] senate floor [for] two years. And the third year, he held the bill from being considered altogether in committee and killed the bill,” Stanek contends.
She says Obama’s explanation for opposing the Illinois bill does not pass the straight-face test because, as a committee chairman, he blocked the measure’s sponsor from adding the federal language protecting Roe vs. Wade. That federal provision says the bill does not deny or add rights to the species Homo sapiens before birth.
Stanek fought to stop “live-birth abortion” after holding a live aborted baby at a Chicago-area hospital where she worked as a registered nurse.
“Barack Obama is now saying that, had that provision been in the Illinois bill he would have voted for it, which is absolutely false – because in 2003, the senate sponsor tried to add that provision and Barack Obama, as the chairman of the committee where the bill was being held, disallowed him from adding that provision, disallowed me from testifying, disallowed the committee from even voting on it. So, it sat in committee for 22 months,” Stanek explains.
She reveals it was not until Obama left the Illinois Senate that the Illinois Born Alive Infants Protection Act passed in August of 2005.
Who is going to pay the piper? June 20, 2008
Posted by reformedville in : Government , add a commentThe Democrats have controlled both houses of the Congress since January 2007 and we have seen the economy take a nosedive in that same time period. The price of fuel has doubled, the subprime mortgage crisis hit with key democratic leaders such as Chris Dodd getting sweatheart deals and Congress keeps introducing more legislation that will drive up energy costs, while doing everything it can to keep us dependant on foreign oil.
Americans are also looking at the fact there have been no further terror attacks on the United States homeland since 9/11/01 and Al-Queda is fading into relative obscurity. No, we have not gotten Bin Laden, but we have crippled the organization . The man is only as strong as the organization.
I hope the reaction is not to either hold the democrats harmless or think that the republicans are going to save the day. Until we realize that the current situation in Washington is so messed up nothing short of a entire house cleaning is going to send the message to Congress we are not going to take their antics any longer. If Americans would vote anti-incumbant for four election cycles we would have Congress’s mindset turned back to representing the people and have the political parties attention that we are tired of the poor choices they continue to give us to select from.
| Confidence in Congress at record low By: David Paul Kuhn June 20, 2008 02:05 PM EST |
|
| Only 12 percent of Americans now have confidence in Congress, the lowest percentage in the 35 years that the Gallup Poll has tracked the number.Americans now view Congress less favorably any of the 14 other American institutions tracked by Gallup, including big business, newspapers and health maintenance organizations.
Even as President Bush’s approval rating languishes at a record low, more than twice as many Americans have confidence in the presidency — 26 percent — than have confidence in Congress. The Democrats have controlled both houses of the Congress since January 2007. It remains to be seen whether the Democratic Party brand will find itself chained to the poor public view of the legislative branch. A recent analysis of ABC News-Washington Post polls found that in April the Democrats held a 24-point lead over President Bush as “the stronger leadership force in Washington.” Today, it’s a tie. While Americans have long viewed their local representative more favorably than Congress as a whole, the public’s current view of Congress is exceptionally poor. Today’s 19 percent approval rating (a different measure than “confidence”) ties the record low of August 2007 and March 1992. Friday’s survey showed an across-the-board disapproval of Washington, with only 32 percent of Americans expressing confidence in the Supreme Court. The sense of malaise extends beyond the capital — Americans show less confidence than in 2004 in all 15 of the American institutions tracked by Gallup. That includes schools, organized labor and the military (which about 7 in 10 Americans show confidence in; it receives the highest percentage of the 15 institutions). Only banks and the criminal justice system have seen as precipitous a decline as the three branches of the federal government. |
|
| © 2008 Capitol News Company, LLC | |
Money fuels global warming alarmism June 18, 2008
Posted by reformedville in : culture, Government , 1 comment so far
Steve from Mezzanineview |
Are Christians subject to different political standards ? June 18, 2008
Posted by reformedville in : culture, Government, Theology , add a commentShould Christians give politicians the benefit of the doubt when it comes to their truthfulness or should they test the veracity of their statements?
Are Christians subject to different standards than others when supporting a particular candidate?
Why or why not?
True? June 18, 2008
Posted by reformedville in : culture, Government , add a comment
I found this video last week entitled True.Now I am always skeptical when I see a political advertisement entitled True, thinking of the relative nature the truth is presented in. Especially, when ex post facto explanation is required. So the question is, was it true then? If so , is it still true? |
Change in the air June 18, 2008
Posted by reformedville in : Government , add a commentBe careful what you ask for, they are ready to deliver
The Democratic leadership is beginning to define “change” and what they hope Amerika will look like if they are elected. So what does change look like?
Well for starters, Marxist Christopher Dodd believes the government should regulate the profits businesses make.
Listen to Senator Chris Dodd, a former candidate for POTUS: video
Government Can Mandate What Profit is ‘Fair’ for Business
The word for the day is SELL & DIVEST in American regulated firms!
Dodd believes it is both the governments right and its responsibility to make sure businesses dont make enough money to make you want to invest in them.
When asked if he thought all businesses needed to be regulated, Senator Dodd said,
“In fact it’s been done that way in the past and particularly when you’re trying to get some relief for people out here when the economy is in a tailspin. We’re about to go into a recession here. This is really causing a tremendous dislocation, not only here, but around the world.”
The economy is in a tailspin after American have had their earnings devalued 80.00 a week per worker due to the raise in minimum wage and now employers are not hiring people at 7.50 an hour they would have at 5.50 an hour because a 7.50 a hour employee cost 10.00 an hour to employ with all the ancillary costs. Many younger workers are going to be unemployed as a result of Congress madating what wages must be paid.
Congress can’t run itself, has stolen our pensions, and now wants to tell business how to operate? These guys need sent home, all of them!
Time for a tea party.
Calculated manipulation June 17, 2008
Posted by reformedville in : culture, Government , add a commentI have watched the primaries with sheer amazement, even try to lend some advice to those caught up in a trance to stop and think about what they are doing, as those of us with any memory (from our own memory bank, not what the media tells us to remember and what to disregard). These video links go to prove a fact that the majority of people make their decision based on a entralling speech and are gullable sheep. “D the facts, we want change!”
I have heard comment after comment about hillbillies, rednecks and the evangelicals (people who cared enough about the political process to participate without prodding) and those old people. I have heard how factory workers who are white and don’t have a college education just aren’t with it enough to make a good decision and keep pulling the progressive movement off track. I have heard people whine about how the man is trying to keep Obama down.
Instead of launching into a rant, at least today (and I can leave that up to you to fire away with yours!) I think David over at The Political Junction nails it dead on.
Intellectuals, Zombies and the Stupid
“Historically, about one-half of the eligible voters have never bothered to show up at the polls. Evidently this segment of society has never related the success or failure of the economy to their lives.
Maybe the nation should be thankful. Anyone unable to see the relationship between voting and protecting the nation’s self-interests doesn’t have a clue about the consequences of bad government policy. So it is just as well that they have stayed home for generations upon generations.
But the times are a changing!
The current presidential campaign is trumpeted by the press as opening the eyes of millions of these people to the power of voting. Based on the poll numbers, quoted ad nauseam by the media, little, if any, of this enthusiasm is based on political knowledge.
These are the country’s dumbest voters. They are sleep walkers who head to the polls to vote for candidates because of their gender and/or ethnicity. They are joined and encouraged by the intellectuals who want to demonstrate their racial tolerance, and the zombies who automatically vote Democratic.
The vast majority of these Americans, if aware, would protest against any bill that brought the cost of gasoline to $8 a gallon, or doubled the cost of heating and cooling their homes, or tripled the cost of groceries.
They would come unglued if the US Congress promised the United Nations .75% of the US Gross National Product ($845 billion annually) for worldwide charitable causes, and knew America’s poor would never see a penny of this money.
So what if the Democrats want to protect the environment by confiscating the money used to grow the economy? They don’t see the personal relevance. And how could they?
They are blinded by the color of Senator Obama’s skin. That’s enough information for them. And they heard he’s about change. So what if he has no international experience, is pro-terrorist, an economic neophyte, and has demonstrated common sense shallower than the morning dew. No one is perfect.
These voters are in an ethnic trance. They don’t know that Obama introduced the bill (The Global Poverty ACT, S.2433) which automatically deeds nearly 1% of the US’s wealth to those conniving thieves running the UN.
They don’t know he supports the bill pending in Congress that will drive energy prices through the roof to “save the planet.” They don’t know that scientists are uncertain about the root cause of global warming.
They don’t know Obama plans on ransacking the retirement accounts of Americans by doubling the capital gains tax. They probably don’t know what an earmark is, or for that matter, the government’s source of revenue.
They don’t know that Obama supports the Boxer-Warner-Lieberman bill pending in Congress that will cost $6 trillion to reduce global warming 1%. They don’t know China and India’s growth could offset this expenditure.
They don’t know Obama will open the borders and encourage millions of illegal aliens to take their jobs. They don’t know he has promised to gut the US missile defense network. They just know he is black.
Senator Obama’s success confirms that most intellectuals lack common sense, and that political zombies and the stupid are the gravest threat our democracy faces.” (The Political Junction)
Now watch these two videos:
Gullible sheep.