Sunday, August 03, 2014
Saturday, March 27, 2010
This country was founded on freedom. Freedom of speech and freedom of thought freedom of religion freedom of the press and many others as well. one of those freedoms is also our ability to freely elect our representatives in the government. Nobody around the right or the left conservative progressive liberal whatever you want to call oneself if you don't like what your representative did in voting for or against this bill than the best thing you can do is in November is to get off your dead ass and vote. Or maybe get off your butt a little bit earlier and run against them. If you have better ideas if you think you can represent the people of your district or of your state better then please, by all means get up off your dead ass and run for the Senate or run as representative for your congressional district. But do not ever respond in violence because you disagree with their vote. The worst thing you can do for most of these career politicians is vote them out of office, that will actually hurt them worse than if you did some sort of physical violence to them.
So all of you on the far right, for all of you on the far left, write your congressmen write your Sen. to express your displeasure in an appropriate manner but not through violence. Ask if island's and insulting and folder phone calls are fodder for the other side whether you're left or right or middle-of-the-road someone will find a way to utilize your actions and your words against you and against your ideas, and may in the long run inside others to violence.
The Old Prospector
Monday, November 23, 2009
Friday, October 23, 2009
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Medscape: Physicians Are Talking About: The Million ...
This message was sent to: firstname.lastname@example.org
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
I'm old enough to remember the inspiring words of JFK at his inauguration when he boldly stated "And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country. "
What happen to that democratic party? We now have one that states "Ask what your country can do for you not what you can do for your country." They want to government to run everything. Car companies, banks, mortgages, health care and the list goes on. Many want the government to do everything. People don't want to take responsibility for their own actions nor do they want to make their own decisions.
Sorry my liberal friends the government doesn't do anything well. They can't balance a budget. Didn't they do a great job of monitoring Freddy and Fannie? They can't even monitor their own people. Look at folks like Dodd and Frank, Murtha and others these bozo's wouldn't know ethical behavior if it jumped up and bit them on the ass. And their own buddies are the ones doing the investigation of their actions. There should be an independent non-partisan group that investigates and adjudicates ethics violations by all three branches of the government. Yes, all three. If they violate ethics or break the law they should be removed from office and NEVER allowed to hold public office again.
We need to get back to Jack Kennedy's challenge and make it part of the conservative movement and if folks like Teddy Kennedy don't like it. . . Well like teddy we'll cross that bridge when we come to it.
Sunday, February 01, 2009
Now really how hard is it for anyone to figure out. Gee as a journalist do I want to spend any more time at a place like Crawford Texas where I’ve been staying at Motel 6 or Holiday Inn and if McCain wins in the dust and heat of Arizona, or do I want to spend my time in Hawaii relaxing on the beach at Waikiki? OR if God Forbid Sarah Palen was the VP those journalists following her would end up in an Igloo in Alaska everytime they went home instead of near Joe Biden’s home which is a short train ride from their own homes in D.C.
It’s not rocket science why they fell in love with Obama and Biden. 4 years of having to vacation in Arizona and Alaska with McCain and Palen or 4 years of vacationing in Hawaii or all along the east coast with Obama and Biden. McCain and Palen never had a chance after the press spent 8 years camping out in the dust and heat of Crawford Texas on the Bush Ranch and figured out if a Republican won their assignments wouldn’t be any better during presidential vacations.
Saturday, January 31, 2009
From The Washington Times: WILLIAMS: No free-ride Claus
WILLIAMS: No free-ride Claus
chris williams attached this additional message:
Couldn't have said it better myself.
The Washington Times top emailed stories:
'President's announcer' feels excitement
Back taxes cloud Daschle nomination
Official: Gregg leading candidate for Commerce
EVANS: Jimmy Carter's myopia
Constituent gets 'rant' at Obey's office
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
I personally don't have a Dog in this fight. I don't work for walmart. I used to work for Sams club a long time ago but haven't been there for 5 years or so.
I did some checking at Walmart and their competition in our local area. That would be Target and Meijer's. Guess what they both sell a LOT of items made in China as well. How come they aren't being targeted by the UFCW? Any guesses? Yup, you got it. Meijer is a union store. I'm not sure about Target but my guess is they are as well.
So is the UFCW angry about the Chinese goods sold at Walmart? If so why not add Meijer and Target to their advertisements? Maybe it's because they really don't care how many Chinese goods are sold it's which stores are union stores. That is, in my opinion, the bottom line. Based upon my observations of stores where they represent the workers there are just as many Chinese goods being sold.
UFCW, if your going to be intellectually honest and display even a small amount of integrity you might want to also speak out against those stores where you represent the workers who are selling the very same Chinese goods Walmart is selling.
OH if you want to see where the union workers money goes when the UFCW makes it's political donations check out http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000072
The Old Prospector
In Search of the Truth
Thursday, November 27, 2008
by Chuck Norris
Is the government's observance of Thanksgiving a violation of the separation of church and state?
This past week, a Newsweek/Washington Post editorial labeled presidential Thanksgiving Day proclamations as "cracks in the wall of separation." The author explained, "The problem with these proclamations, it seems to me, is that they pave the way for public acceptance of gross violations of the constitutional separation of church and state." What?!
Forget for a moment that nearly every president since George Washington (and the Continental Congress before him) has given Judeo-Christian proclamations for Thanksgiving (except between 1816 and 1861) and also has declared other national days of fasting and prayer. Secularists, such as the author of the editorial, get almost giddy every time they highlight that Thomas Jefferson rejected the notion of proclaiming Thanksgiving spirituals and prayers. But the truth is Jefferson was far from the modern-day secularist they make him out to be.
Sure, Jefferson was adamant (as we all should be) that there should be no federal subscription to any one form of religious sectarianism. That is largely what the First Amendment is all about -- establishing the free exercise of religion and restricting sectarian supremacy in government, as well as government intrusion in churches.
But secularists make two grave mistakes when it comes to Jefferson and the First Amendment. First, they misconstrue his understanding of separation. Second, they overlook how Jefferson himself endorsed and intermingled religion and politics, even during his two terms as president. Let me explain, as I believe it is a timely reminder, given that we are experiencing a new round of battles in our Christmas culture war, too.
The phrase "separation of church and state" actually comes from a letter Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1802 to the Danbury Baptists. He told them that no particular Christian denomination was going to have a monopoly in government. His words, "a wall of separation between Church & State," were not written to remove all religious practice from government or civic settings, but to prohibit the domination and even legislation of religious sectarianism.
Proof that Jefferson was not trying to rid government of religious (specifically Christian) influence comes from the fact that he endorsed the use of government buildings for church meetings and services, signed a treaty with the Kaskaskia Indians that allotted federal money to support the building of a Catholic church and to pay the salaries of the church's priests, and repeatedly renewed legislation that gave land to the United Brethren to help their missionary activities among the American Indians.
Some might be completely surprised to discover that just two days after Jefferson wrote his famous letter citing the "wall of separation between Church & State," he attended church in the place where he always had as president: the U.S. Capitol. The very seat of our nation's government was used for sacred purposes. As the Library of Congress' Web site notes, "It is no exaggeration to say that on Sundays in Washington during the administrations of Thomas Jefferson (1801-1809) and of James Madison (1809-1817) the state became the church." Does that sound like someone who was trying to create an impenetrable wall of separation between church and state?
Let's face the present Thanksgiving facts. President Bush likely will give the last explicit Judeo-Christian Thanksgiving proclamation that Americans will hear for the next four to eight years, as President-elect Obama likely will coddle a form of godliness in his Thanksgiving addresses (if he indeed gives them) that appeases the masses with a deity that fits every politically correct dress.
But I'm an optimist. And because so much attention is being given right now by the media and the president-elect himself regarding his parallels to and lessons learned from President Abraham Lincoln, I recommend Obama heed Lincoln's Thanksgiving wisdom. Don't mince or water down the God of the Pilgrims, as is being done in public schools across this land through the retelling of the first Thanksgiving.
Obama doesn't even need a speechwriter for Thanksgiving 2009. He simply can recite Lincoln's Thanksgiving Day Proclamation, in which Lincoln thanked the Almighty for America's bountiful blessings and providential care despite enduring a war and grave economic hardships. The content seems divinely timed for even such a wintry season as our own:
"No human counsel hath devised, nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the most high God, who while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy. … I do, therefore, invite my fellow citizens … to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November next as a day of thanksgiving and praise to our beneficent Father, who dwelleth in the heavens. And I recommend to them that, while offering up the ascriptions justly due to him for such singular deliverances and blessings, they do also, with humble penitence for our national perverseness and disobedience, commend to his tender care all those who have become widows, orphans, mourners or sufferers in the lamentable civil strife in which we are unavoidably engaged and fervently implore the interposition of the almighty hand to heal the wounds of the nation and to restore it, as soon as may be consistent with the divine purposes, to the full enjoyment of peace, harmony, tranquility and union."
Whatever your religious persuasion, don't hesitate this Thanksgiving to bow your head, give thanks to God, and follow Lincoln's advice. And when you do, don't forget to say a prayer for our troops and their families. While they serve us so we can serve our Thanksgiving feasts safely, the least we can do is serve them a little honor and remembrance.
Read more articles like this at HUMAN EVENTS ONLINE!
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Please check out the article I read at NewsMax.com:
So much for freedom of speech from the Obama Camp. My feeling, if you can't stand the questions, get out of the race. Enjoy
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Friday, September 19, 2008
I was watching the news today and it struck me again , Obama supporters, who are whining about governor Palen's so called lack of experience and only a "heartbeat away" of being president if something should happen to senator McCain, are supporting a man with no real resume to be a chief executive. When I heard it for the second or third time from different individuals throughout one morning I started to laugh. Why, you might ask. The republicans are accused of placing an unqualified person a heartbeat away from the presidency and if you look at the facts, the democrats are trying to place an unqualified person in the White House. Not a heartbeat away but actually in the White House as president. Can anyone explain to me what Senator Obama's qualifications are for being president other than the fact that he's good looking, he's young, and he can make speeches very well as long as he has a teleprompter. Oh yes, I forgot, he was a "community organizer" whatever that is.
The qualifications that I've heard so far are one, he was a community organizer, two, he held a senate seat in the state of Illinois for a very short time and three he is the junior senator from the state of Illinois has been in office for less than two years. So which of these three things that he is an qualifies him to be president? No one has shown me where Senator Obama since he has been in the US Senate has initiated any type of legislation. Yes he did push some things through in the Illinois Senate, but no one has been able to show me so far any legislation that Senator Obama has authored that has reached across party lines. Nor has he worked hand in hand with republicans and independents to form any type of coalition or bi-partisan group to work and any type of legislation. If you want to look at his leadership in the senate, he is the chairman of a senate committee that has never met since he became the chairman. Obama has demonstrated no leadership in any of his endeavors. As a "community organizer he associated with Reverend Wright and William Ayers around, following their lead and their advice and how to advance politically. So in total Senator Obama has been a legislator for approximately 10 years and has the most liberal voting record in the United States Senate and has never reached a crossed party lines for any reason. Prior to that as stated before, he was a "community organizer". He has no years of executive experience.
Now let's look at Sarah Palen's experience. In 1992 She was elected as a member of the town council (legislative experience) and again in 1996. As a council member she worked to do what was best for the people of her city. She then ran for and was elected mayor (executive experience) in 1996 and was very successful again doing what was right rather than what was expedient or politically correct to do. She took the lead in reducing wasteful spending. She was elected a second time by a wider margin and continued her work on reforms. Term limits stopped her from running for a third term as mayor.
Between the time she left her job a mayor ,she took on a corrupt members of her own party and they were forced to retire after an investigation found they were guilty. In 1996 Sarah then took on the incumbent governor beat him in the primary and she went on to win a race for governor in her home state of Alaska. While in office over the last two years she has continually cut wasteful spending, reached across party lines to again do what was right for the people of Alaska rather than what was politically correct for her party. Her popularity with the voters has ranged from 82-93%. Sarah Palen has ten years of executive experience between her time as a Mayor and her time as governor of Alaska. She has experience of being a legislator by being a member of her town council.
While she may not have a lot of stamps on her passport it simply means she hasn't been touring Europe and Asia on the taxpayers tab like many members of congress. She's stayed at work doing her job governing a city and a state. Submitting and managing budgets. Working as commander in chief of the Alaska National Guard. There is a lot more that I've left out. You can find it by simply looking it up on the Internet like I did.
So all in all if you compare the two candidates to the one who wants to be president from the democratic party has no executive experience, no experience in reaching across the aisle to work with members of the other parties to get things done, he has no experience in writing legislation, he has no experience in fighting corruption, and he has done nothing during his time in either Illinois or in the US Senate to introduce change to anything. Yet the democratic party believes that he is qualified to be president. Sarah Palen on the other hand who is running for the office of vice-president as the second person on a ticket with a very experienced a leader at the top, has experience as a chief executive for both the city and the state fighting for change and making changes. She has experience as a legislator being a member of her town council introducing change. She has experience in reaching across the aisles to gain the support of members of the other parties to do what is right for the people. She has cut spending in her state. And she has taken on big government corruption and she won.
You tell me which one of these two is qualified to be president of the United States, the democrat who wants to be president with no executive experience and no bi-partisan legislation bearing his name, or the republican with 10 years of executive experience, legislative experience, has been an agent for change throughout her political and public career who wants to be vice president and a heartbeat away from being the president?
I see a lot of rhetoric about how John McCain picked an unqualified individual for his running mate. Well, lets look at Obama's running mate. We saw a clip of Sarah quoting President Lincoln before her church. Now it was edited out but when you look at the whole thing in context it's clear what she was doing. Now lets look at Joe Biden. The excerpt below is from The Nuts and Bolts of College Writing. their website is http://nutsandbolts.washcoll.edu/plagiarism.html
Scientists and scholars build on the ideas and research of others. Such collaboration, as Isaac Newton observed, is part of the common culture of science. But originality is just as important in science, as reflected in the harsh academic code of publish or perish. Thus scientists and academics of all stripes are sticklers about drawing a clear line between what is original in one's work, and what is not. And since academics are the watchdogs and graders of student writing, it is critically important for students to learn what plagiarism is and why it's so dangerous.
Plagiarism can have catastrophic consequences for one's career as a student and even later on in life—and the higher one's ambition takes one, the higher the stakes. In 1987, for instance, Senator Joe Biden, who was seeking the Democratic presidential nomination, was accused of plagiarizing passages in speeches and interviews from the oratory of a British politician, Neil Kinnock. Here are some of the passages in question:
Kinnock Original :
Why am I the first Kinnock in a thousand generations to be able to get to university? Why is Glenys the first woman in her family in a thousand generations to be able to get to university?
Was it because our predecessors were thick? Does anybody really think that they didn't get what we had because they didn't have the talent or the strength or the endurance or the commitment? Of course not. It was because there was no platform upon which they could stand.
I started thinking as I was coming over here, why is it that Joe Biden is the first in his family ever to go to a university? Why is it that my wife who is sitting out there in the audience is the first in her family to ever go to college?
Is it because our fathers and mothers were not bright? . . . No, it's not because they weren't as smart. It's not because they didn't work as hard. It's because they didn't have a platform upon which to stand . . .It turned out Biden had also borrowed passages from old campaign speeches by Robert Kennedy and had inflated his academic record. But oratory has a long tradition of borrowing and even "heavy lifting," as speechwriters call it, so Biden stayed alive in the presidential race. The last straw, however, came when it turned out that twenty years earlier Biden had received a failing grade in a law school course for plagiarizing a legal article (he'd given a single footnote while lifting five full pages from the article). Biden said he'd been unaware of the appropriate standards for legal briefs, but the public was unimpressed. His campaign collapsed and he withdrew from the race.The lesson: be afraid of plagiarism. It creates paper-trail timebombs that can destroy a career you've spent decades building—especially today, when teachers routinely keep copies of papers and the Internet makes it a snap to compare texts and locate sources
Doesn't sound like Sen. Biden was being very honest now does it? If my students did the same thing they would suffer the consequences including failure of the paper/speech, failure of the class and academic probation unless it was anything other than a first offense. If it is the second offense they are removed from school. Sen Biden apparently has done this more than once.
I'll post more about "Qualifications" or the lack there of by others in the race. And a little about being "patriotic" by paying more taxes.
Keep searching for the truth. As the poster in Fox Mulder's office said "The truth is out there"
Monday, February 11, 2008
Click on the attached link and find out how you can help secure the religious rights of you and your friends in the workplace. This is vitally important. The constitution of the United States guarantees freedom of Religion it's about time the workplace realized people of faith (any faith) have rights that must be observed without fear of being punished, hindered in promotion or fired for their beliefs. This bill will go a long way in securing those rights we should already have.
For more information and a link to your representatives in the Senate and House of Representatives http://www.religiousliberty.info/blog/?p=65
Monday, January 21, 2008
Today is the Dr Martin Luther King Jr. Day. I remember the civil rights movement of the 60's and Dr. King's marches and speeches. He was a great man with a great vision. He believed people should not be judged by the color of their skin or the country of origin. It's too bad today many don't remember what he and those pioneers were working toward. Today I heard on the news there are protests against the monument being built in his honor. The main thrust of the protest is the man who has been commissioned to do the statue of Dr. King. He is Chinese. The protests range from the artist should not be from China because of that country's human rights abuses, to the artist should be an American to the artist should be black/African-American.
I wondered what would Dr. King think of this protest. My guess is he would be outraged. He wanted all men to be judged on their abilities not on skin color or national origin. He believed all men are created equal. Something many American's have forgotten.
Does it really matter if the artist is from China or Taiwan or Brazil or Kenya or Mississippi? What should matter is how good is the artist and is the work going to be a credit to Dr. King's memory. It's too bad we allow our own petty differences and prejudices to get in the way of common sense and in this case getting in the way of Dr. King's real vision and legacy.
The other sad commentary on today's "Holiday" is it for many has just become another three day weekend. For many it's just another paid day off nothing more. Kind of like veteran's day and labor day two other holidays that have lost their meaning as well.
On another front. It's been 10 years since the Monica Lewinsky episode of American History. It doesn't seem that long ago but I guess it was. I heard one radio talk show mention it and one local news show. You would think that something as important in our nations history as an impeachment and a new way we are looking looking at and receiving our news each day would rate a little more notice.
The Drudge report started it all. Since then more and more people look to the internet for their news than they do from the 6 o'clock evening news. It was a turning point in how we look at the news. It was historical because it was only the second time in history there was a vote to decide if the president would be impeached. It all started 10 years ago today.
For all you Patriot and Giant's fans congratulations on your teams making it to Superbowl XLII. I look forward to an outstanding game. It will probably have fewer low blows, hard hits and sacks than the Democratic and Republican Primaries.
Enjoy both games.
The Old Prospector
Sunday, April 08, 2007
If you wonder what it's like to be exposed to chlorine gas like that used in Iraq recently, check out this link.
If it's all too technical for you. The bottom line is the chlorine gas causes your lungs to fill with fluid and the individual drowns in their own fluids.
The Old Prospector
This article from the Washington Post clearly demonstrates what many of us have been saying for a long time, that if available terrorist will use weapons of mass destruction.
If these groups are willing to use chlorine gas to kill soldiers and civilians on two separate occasions in Iraq what makes people here in the US so hesitant to believe these terrorists will do it again over there and here in the US?
By the way, why hasn't this been front page news here? Nothing on the retro media (those who are trying to go back to their power of the late 60's and early 70's) and nothing on the cable news agencies. Why, well maybe because it validates what the military and the executive branch of the government has been telling us and worst of all, it would prove President Bush is right and the media certainly can't have that now can they?
What we as citizens tolerate will happen. If we tolerate selective news reporting for political purposes then we have nobody to blame but ourselves when news like this is purposely ignored.
Thursday, November 23, 2006
Monday, November 20, 2006
NOW, the dems won the midterm election and when you check the following link you'll find out what is one of the first things out of Charlie Rangle's mouth. We need to reinstate the draft! We tolerated Charlie and the other Dems tellin lies back in 04. Now is the time we need to confront folks like Rep. Rangle with their '04 rhetoric. Bush won, no draft, Dems win they want a draft. Please remember this iin 08 when the dems tell you sosomething about the republicans you can bet it what they are going to do.
This reminds me of the Goldwater Johnson election. Everything Goldwater said he would do and johnson said he wouldn't do. Johnson ended up doing. Folks like charlie rangle will say what every they believe will get them the most votes and get their liberal base motivated then after the election they do what they originally planned. Remember Charlie Rangle next election.
I spent time in the military during both the time of the draft during Vietnam and during the all volunteer force. Trust me, the all volunteer force is the way to go.
Saturday, November 04, 2006
Thursday, November 02, 2006
But did Kerry really apologize for his remarks. Lets take a look. Here is what he said: "I sincerely regret that my words were misinterpreted to wrongly imply anything negative about those in uniform, and I personally apologize to any service member, family member, or American who was offended,"
If you break it down he is NOT apologizing for what he said. He is apologizing for what people like you and I THOUGHT he said. It is aparently our fault that we "misinterpreted" his words. I know I didn't "misinterpret" what he said and I'm sure you didn't either.
We need an apology from Sen. Kerry where he takes responsibility for what he said not apolgizing for our "misinterpreted" version. He needs to just come out and say. "I'm sorry for what I said." Not I'm sorry your too stupid to understand what I meant to say.
As far as I'm concerned Mr Kerry has not apologized and still owes one to all of the men and women who have served and are serving their country in the military.
Apologize for real Mr Kerry. We're not going to tolerate your lawyer's parsing of words. Apologize!
Wednesday, November 01, 2006
Where is the press outrage about this beheading? We've tolerated our press complaining about the treatment the terrorist prisoners have allegedly received at GTMO and a few terrorist prisoners humiliated by their military guards at AbuGrab prison. Why aren't they outraged by this torture? Maybe it's because the victim is a Christian?
It's time our press started doing their job, report the news. Don't filter it, don't editorialize, just report what's happening without bias or spin. I'm sorry to say we've toerlated them doing this for so long they will probably never change unless we refuse to tolerate their behavior.
Our troops in Iraq are sending John Kerry a message. Please enjoy this photo taken today by our brave soldiers in Iraq! Feel free to email this your friends and family.
How long do we tolerate liberals bad mouthing our military men and women? Sen. Kerry has been doing it since the 70's and still is not really held accountable. His buddies like Hillary and others have called on him to apologize but not because they disagree with him but because of the political repercussions they are feeling.
I spent 30 years with military men and women. I have served with them and supervised them. Let me telly you, they are very bright, well educated, hard working dedicated professionals. They can get a job anywhere. I personally know many who have turned down jobs that paid more than what they were making in the military and they turned the jobs down flat. They are there because they want to be not because, as the senator believes, they have no other choice.
Telly ya what, I have taught military members and civilians, I'll take the military member every single time.
Monday, October 09, 2006
We've tolerated the media imposing their views on the news and what news we receive. We see it daily in the war on terror. Zell Miller wrote a great article on what would have happened at Iwo Jima if it were covered by today's activist media. This was written a while ago but brought to my attention again when I was reviewing all my old bookmarks. It got my juices flowing again.
I Vietnam we started allowing the media to do more than just report the news. They have evolved into activists for their own personal political agenda. That's not what they are supposed to do. Yes they still have the same rights as everyone else but they need to remember their job is to report the news not interpret it. If they want to interpret the news that's what editorials are for. Their job is Who, what, when, where, why, how, that's it. They can give their personal views of the news on an op-ed page not on the nightly news.
Activist journalists of today would have cost us WWII just as they cost us Vietnam. They are as bad as activist judges in the courts. One tries to change things by manipulating public opinion the other tries to change society to their "ideal" by legislating from the bench.
Neither is doing their job. Reporters should report the news as it occurs not as they want it to have occurred. Judges should interpret the laws as written not as they would like it to be.
We've tolerated both and now we are suffering the consequences.
Sunday, October 08, 2006
Medical studies are done in a different method and Dr. Crichton suggested in his book and to congress in 2005 a better way to do these enironmental and all scientific studies. See his testimony before the US Senate at his website http://www.crichton-official.com/speeches/index.html
The suggestion in his book is simply that scientists not know who is funding their research and that they turn the data over to a third party who will analyze it and write the report.
This makes sense to me. We have tolerated those with particular agenda either for or against global cooling, global warming, the plight of the snail darter etc to not only fund but do the reasearch and then analze their own data and come up with the answer they wanted to start with. It's not really science.
We've tolerated it for way too long. Global warming is man's fault, at least that's what we've been told but if that is true, why is the temperature on Mars, Jupiter and the other planets going up at the same speed our planet is? Yeah, I know I've harped on this before. But if we had real disinterested scientific collection and analysis of the data maybe the answers would be significantly different.
We should not tolerate either end of the political spectrum to determine what is scientifically accurate and what is not. I don't mean to imply that all scientists are intellectually dishonest and out for the money but like with so much of this world today many do fall into that catagory. A double blind scientific study, as Dr. Crichton recommends in his book and alludes to in his testimony to the senate, is the only way to come up with data and analysis that we can really trust. We've tolerated money and politics determining the outcome of scientific studies for long enough and now we have data and studies that we cannot trust to make an unbiased decision. We tolerated this and it happened. Now we need to find a better way. The truth is out there if we will only search for it.
Friday, September 29, 2006
Bad news again for the Greenies. Why have we tolerated their misinformation for so long? The truth is out there but you really have to dig for it. State of Fear:by Michael Crichton does a great job of exposing the Global warming environmental crowd throughout the book with verifiable references. His conclusions at the end of the book and references are great Now we have NASA and the California Institute of Technology's Jet Propulsion Laboratory saying the science shows it may not be man's fault. We've tolerated the lies of the radical environmentalists like Al "I invented the internet" Gore for long enough and we are paying the price. It's time to stop tolerating their lies and actually looking at the REAL data.
Saturday, September 23, 2006
Larry Elder's column is steel on target except its not just blacks that need to know the true history of the Democratic Party everyone does.
We have tolerated the Jessie Jackson's and Al Sharpton's telling everyone how the republican party is only for whites men, that republicans are racist and the only ones who care about any other race or gender is the democratic party. So now their lies have become the truth for many americans. It's time we stopped tolerating lies from men like these and look at the real truth. Maybe it's not too late. I pray it's not too late.
Thank you Larry Elder this is a great article. Loved your book as well.
Thursday, September 21, 2006
Could not have put it better myself.
Larry is steel on target with this article and as usual the NY and LA Times are not (as usual).
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
Why do we in the west and the rest of the world tolerate this type of behavior? Muslim leaders throughout the world can say whatever they want about Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, or any other belief and nothing happens. However if anyone says anything against Islam or Muhammad, Muslims riot, burn churches etc.
We have been and are tolerating this barbaric behavior. If we continue to tolerate these activities then they will only get worse. The civilized countries of the world need to stand up and let the radical Islamic world know "We're mad as hell and we're not going to take it any more!" and for a change actually mean what we say and back it up with actions. If the radical Islamic extremists want respect then they need to treat the rest of the world and the rest of the world's religions with respect.
If it is expected that we tolerate Muslim leaders to call for the end of Israel and the extermination of all Jews or the execution of the Pope or anyone else who speaks against Islam then they must tolerate some criticism of their faith.
We must not continue to tolerate the Muslim extremists continuation of this barbaric behavior without them realizing there are consequences for their words and actions.
It's time for the UN to get of their collective asses to actually stand up to these intolerant clerics and actually do something for a change. The UN action in these matters is as worthless as a mother who knows her child is torturing and killing the neighborhood cats and scolds him by saying " Now now little Johnny that really isn't very nice. You shouldn't do that anymore. Why don't you come inside and have a cookie." The UN tolerates this abominable behavior with rhetoric while the Muslim extremists just thumb their nose at the rest of the world and go on doing as they damn well please.
We as human beings and the leaders of the world have tolerated this and continue to tolerate this behavior. What has happened? It's only become worse. The longer we tolerate it the worse it will become because "What you tolerate, will happen"
The Old Prospector
Sunday, August 20, 2006
"The next time you hear a Member of Congress speak about so-called "comprehensive immigration reform," remember the story of Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean.
Ramos and Compean are U.S. Border Patrol agents who are facing 20 years in prison for attempting to apprehend an illegal alien -- who was also smuggling drugs -- at the border.
Hard to believe, but it's true! Consider this account of the incident from the Internet magazine WorldNetDaily.com:
"When Border Patrol Agent Ignacio Ramos pulled the trigger last February, all he knew was that his partner was lying on the ground behind him -- bloodied from a struggle with a fleeing suspect -- shots had been fired and now, it appeared, the drug smuggler he was pursuing had turned toward him with what looked to be a gun in his hand... "Ramos, 37, is an eight-year veteran of the U.S. Naval Reserve and a former nominee for Border Patrol Agent of the Year. "On February 17, he responded to a request for back up from agent Jose Alonso Compean, 28, who noticed a suspicious van near the levee road along the Rio Grande River near the Texas town of Fabens, about 40 miles east of El Paso... "Behind the wheel of the van was an illegal alien, Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila of Mexico. Unknown to the growing number of Border Patrol agents converging on Fabens, Aldrete-Davila's van was carrying 800 pounds of marijuana. "Unable to outrun Ramos and the third agent, Aldrete-Davila stopped the van on the levee, jumped out and started running toward the river. When he reached the other side of the levee, he was met by Compean who had anticipated the smuggler's attempt to get back to Mexico. "'We both yelled out for him to stop, but he wouldn't stop, and he just kept running,' Ramos told California's Inland Valley Daily Bulletin. Aldrete-Davila crossed a canal. "'At some point during the time where I'm crossing the canal, I hear shots being fired,' Ramos said. 'Later, I see Compean on the ground, but I keep running after the smuggler.' "At that point, Ramos said, Aldrete-Davila turned toward him, pointing what looked like a gun. "'I shot,' Ramos said. 'But I didn't think he was hit, because he kept running into the brush and then disappeared into it. Later, we all watched as he jumped into a van waiting for him. He seemed fine. It didn't look like he had been hit at all.'"
But that wasn't the end of the story! Two weeks later, a Border Patrol Agent received a call from the drug smuggler's mother-in-law in Mexico who claimed that Ramos had actually shot the drug smuggler in the buttocks.
And our own government filed charges against Ramos and Compean for violating the civil rights of this illegal aliens and felon.
In the words of U.S. Assistant District Attorney Debra Kanof, "The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled it is a violation of someone's Fourth Amendment rights to shoot them in the back while fleeing if you don't know who they are and/or if you don't know they have a weapon."
That's not all. Not only did our government give immunity to this drug smuggler to obtain his testimony at the trial, but this illegal alien and drug smuggler is now suing Ramos for $5 million dollars.
Send my 30 personalized Blast Fax messages to President Bush and the leadership of the House and Senate.
Our elected leaders will return to Washington D.C. shortly and it is vitally important that they know that you have not lost your resolve. Tell them that the American people want secure borders first and foremost and that any legislation that grants a path to citizenship for those who have flouted our laws and come to the United States illegally is off the table.
Please accept my contribution to send these Blast Faxes and support the vital work of the people at CFIF who have a heart for this great country and so honestly want to serve me.
You may be asking yourself, what does Ramos and Compean's sad tale have to do with so-called "comprehensive immigration reform?"
The answer is EVERYTHING!
Simply put, such a travesty of justice could only occur in an environment of ambiguity -- and that is exactly what "comprehensive immigration reform" -- as the Senate calls it -- creates.
The lack of a strong, no-nonsense immigration policy sends those who flout our laws the wrong message.
Ambiguous laws and immigration policies effectively tell the would-be illegal alien and those whose job it is to enforce our immigration laws that the United States has no resolve when it comes to securing our borders.
Perhaps Andy Ramirez of the nonprofit group Friends of the Border Patrol said it best when commenting on the Ramos-Compean story:
"This drug smuggler has fully contributed to the destruction of two brave agents and their families and has sent a very loud message to the other Border Patrol agents: If you confront a smuggler, this is what will happen to you."
If we -- as a nation -- are really serious about fixing the problem of illegal immigration, we MUST send a clear and unmistakable message that America's borders are indeed secure and that crossing those borders illegally will not be tolerated -- PERIOD!
You cannot speak of tough enforcement and programs that give amnesty and pathways to citizenship in the same breath. It's ridiculous beyond reason. But that's exactly what our politicians in Washington want to do!
And that's why we MUST continue to send our own message to our elected leaders. The American people want secure borders and tough enforcement, AND NO AMNESTY -- END OF SENTENCE!"
This is outrageous. We cannot tolerate this behavior by our government against one of our distinguished law enforcement officials. If we do, it will happen again.
Israel learned what you tolerate will happen. For years they tolerated the UN not enforcing the ban on weapons and failure to remove Hezbollah from Lebanon and they saw that it is happening again. So when they found Syria and Iran attempting to rearm Hezbollah with more arms, they attempted to stop the arms transfer. What happens? Lebanon and UN get in their face saying this is a violation of the cease fire. Sorry but I disagree. It is enforcement of 1701.
Here is what Fox News said "Lebanon threatened to halt deployment of its soldiers in the south of the country, and Prime Minister Fuad Siniora denounced Israel's operation as a "flagrant violation" of the cease-fire. U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan discussed the operation by phone with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, and later called it a "violation by the Israeli side of the cessation of hostilities as laid out in Security Council Resolution 1701." U.N. Middle East envoy Terje Roed-Larsen said in Beirut that reports on the Israeli strike indicated it constituted a violation of the U.N. Security Council resolution that established a truce early last week after more than a month of fighting. Israel said the raid did not violate the cease-fire, and Washington appeared to agree with that claim. An Israeli army spokesman said the goal of the operation was achieved in full, and that the military would continue to prevent Hezbollah from getting weapons shipments from Iran and Syria. The operation exposed the first major dispute over implementation of Resolution 1701, which helped end fighting in Lebanon earlier last week. Concerned that the cease-fire will enable Hezbollah to rearm, Israel is demanding that the Lebanese army and international peacekeepers enforce the arms embargo against the militia called for by the cease-fire resolution. "
Big deal they Lebanese may not deploy their forces. They didn't do any good before the war broke out what makes anyone think they will do anything to stop Hezbollah now? This UN farce, no I didn't spell it wrong farce is exactly what I meant, will be worthless at best as so many other UN peacekeeping forces have been over the years. France has already stated that they are not going to disarm Hezbollah. Well then what good is this force?
"Israel will not tolerate Hezbollah exploiting the cease-fire to rearm, and to re-equip with strategic weapons from Iran and Syria. Then we're back to square one," Mr. Regev said.
Israel learned what you tolerate will happen and they "will not tolerate Hezbollah exploiting the cease-fire"
At least someone learned something. Too bad we here in the US didn't. We have tolerated antisemetic actions by the UN, failure to enforce it's own resolutions, and pure corruption by the UN and yet we still go to them thinking they will actually do something. We have larned NOTHING. We tolerate the UN's failures and guess what, they happen again and again and again. When will the US wake up and not tolerate the behavior and failure of the UN?
Monday, July 31, 2006
Of all the people in the world I thought I would not agree with it is Alan Dershowitz, but for a change I must agree with him regarding the UN and their stance in the War between Hezbollah/Hamas and Israel in His article in the Patriot Post under "Culture".
For too long we in the United States and much of the "civilized" world have tolerated the UN's anti-semetic attitudes and their ineffectiveness when it comes to anything other than whining about everything the US or Israel does. Allen gets it right in this article. Who have tolerated the UN's enticements and Anti-American, pro-terrorist activities. And guess what it's happened. The UN's hostility and prejudice toward Israel shows up on nearly every vote and almost every word from Kofi Annan's mouth. He blames them for all of the unrest in Gaza and Lebanon. His accusation that Israel targeted the UN "force" in Lebanon is ridiculous.
Secretery General Annan ignores the fact that one of the Canadian soldiers assigned to the UN force killed in the bombing, told his superiors, via email, that the terrorist were firing rockets 3 meters from their position. Not the "hundreds" of meters reported by the UN envoy in the area who wasn't even there.
Israel has done everything they can to reduce or eliminate "collateral" damage by warning civilians well in advance to leave the area. Hezbollah on the other hand fires unguided missiles coated with buckshot designed to maximize casualties among civilians.
Who does Kofi and the usual suspects side with? Hezbollah! No big surprise. We have tolerated this is the past and it is happening so now it's coming up again to bite both Israel and the US in the butt.
It's time stop tolerating this behavior by the UN, we take matters again in our own hands and solve the problem even if that offends the Kofi and the other half of the problem in Lebanon.
I'm not even going to get into the fact that this UN force has been there for years and had done NOTHING and aren't even allowed to carry arms, yet the UN has spent $100,000,000 per year. Another UN boondoggle that has done nothing to secure the peace while costing us (and the rest of the UN members) over the years litterly billions of dollars.
What we tolerated, happened. We need to stop tolerating this poor behavior and poor judgment on the part of the UN.
Friday, July 28, 2006
One of the things we as americans have tolerated over the years have been these frivolous lawsuits that are filed by lawyers costing business and ultimately us the customer a hell of a lot of money. We tolerated it and it happend. However, the people of California got tired of it and passed proposition 64 which made the lawyers actually produce an individual who has been harmed. 17200 lawsuit were on file. That was supposed to kill those lawsuits and now the California Supreme court has agreed with the people and stopped all those lawsuits until they lawyer can actually find someone who was harmed.
Thank you California Supreme Court. The people of California stopped tolerating these law suits and hopefull now they are stopped. Proving what whe don't tolerate doesn't happen!