Tuesday, December 30, 2008

Does the UFCW really care if Walmart sells Chinese goods?

Popeye used to say "That's all I can stands cuz I can't stands no more!" That's my feeling about the UFCW (United Food and Commercial Workers) Union and their all out war against Walmart. Their concern is allegedly that Walmart sells a lot of goods from Communist China which costs the US people jobs. Well, who isn't for saving American Jobs. Everybody is for it. Right?

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

HUMAN EVENTS Article: Thanksgiving -- A Violation of Church and State?

Thanksgiving -- A Violation of Church and State?
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!
http://www.humanevents.com/

Sunday, October 26, 2008

NewsMax.com Article forwarded by a friend

Please check out the article I read at NewsMax.com:
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/biden_tv_interview/2008/10/26/144216.html?s=al&promo_code=6E34-1

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

Friday, September 19, 2008

Experience? Whose got what.

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?




Honesty in speaking

Yeah, I know. I haven't posted anything in a LONG time. It's down to less than 50 days before the election so it's time to start putting on the pressure. Not that this little blog can exert any but you as a voter can.

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.

Biden Speech:

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

Workplace Religious Freedom Act

We earnestly seek your prayers in advance of Congress’s hearing on the Workplace Religious Freedom Act on February 12. And not only prayers, but we urgently need your letters. Your letters are the ammunition we need in the battle for religious liberty. Too many Sabbath keepers are being fired for no crime other than obeying God. This is our chance to stand up for them. Please use the voice God has entrusted to you to speak up for your brothers and sisters in the faith by sending your letter now.

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

Thank you,
T.O.P.

Monday, January 21, 2008

It's been a while

It's been a while since I've posted here, but with the political season full upon us I think I'll probably be posting more as the race progresses.

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