Dana Mathewson
Here’s an explanation of how he did it, from the Wall Street Journal. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124640687950076679.html
“Mr. Franken now goes to the Senate having effectively stolen an election. If the GOP hopes to avoid repeats, it should learn from Minnesota that modern elections don’t end when voters cast their ballots. They only end after the lawyers count them.”
Meanwhile, Minnesota is royally screwed!
Yes, I know we are supposed to be nutcases for continuing to doubt that Bam was born in Hawaii as he says.
How, then, to explain all of the material contained here? http://www.redpills.org/?p=4230
Timothy Birdnow
(Yes, the title is a pun.)
My brother e-mailed me the latest by Ann Coulter in Human Events, and a point she made-and the point I made-are worth repeating.
Ann is discussing would-be SCOTUS Justice Sotomayor, and her patently discriminatory (and anonymous) opinion in the Ricci v. DeStefano case. In this case, the city of New Haven, Connecticut, tossed out the results (and promotions) of a fireman`s (I purposely use the older “sexist” term) promotion exam because blacks did not perform as well as white and latino candidates and thus were not eligible for immediate promotion. This case is very similar to one that has recently been amicably concluded here in St. Louis that I wrote about at the American Thinker a while back. In the St. Louis case, black racist firechief Sherman George refused to accept the results of said “biased” test even after a court of law found it fair-and after he was ordered by Mayor Francis Slay to promote the candidates. George was eventually removed from his appointed office, and is now suing the city and mayor for discrimination.
At any rate, the case-and arguments-are pretty much the same; liberals are angry that written tests have somehow prevented blacks from achieving in the manner they wish. Now, this assertion alone is horrendously racist, because it presupposes that black firemen aren`t the intellectual equals of whites or latinos (or asians). I have always said that liberals are the great projectors-putting their own beliefs and biases onto others, and this case proves the rule as it is somehow unfair that this particular batch of black candidates did not do as well, so it must mean blacks should not have to take written tests. The dirty little secret is that liberals believe blacks are intellectually inferior, and that is why they have to be sheltered from this sort of “racism”.
But there is another point that should be made in this instance; Ann made the following point about the SCOTUS decision:
“Based on her lifetime of experience working as a firefighter, (Justice Ruth Bader) Ginsburg said: “Relying heavily on written tests to select fire officers is a questionable practice, to say the least.” Liberals prefer a more objective test, such as race.”
I made this point on the Human Events discussion board:
“Aren`t those written tests there to assist women? If this were left to a series of purely physical firefighting tests, the stronger men would generally prevail; written tests were instituted, I have little doubt, to help advance women in the profession.
What a tangled web we weave when equality of outcome is our objective.”
And truly they are. When I was a young man I worked in a grocery store, and one morning a meatcutter slipped on some water on the floor and fell, cracking his leg like a chicken bone; wicked compound fracture, with bone sticking out from the skin. Two paramedics arrived on the scene-one male and one female. The female was not a big, strapping woman but a fairly dainty little girl, and she was not strong enough to lift the broke-legged meatman. She was unable to help lift him onto the stretcher, so they ended up rolling him (causing him great pain) onto it and then she was unable to lift her end. After several abortive attempts she finally managed to hoisted her portion of the meatman (the end with the broke leg, which was lighter) into the air only to DROP the poor man to the floor! (The sound of his scream could be heard for miles.) Everyone present was furious that EMS sent someone clearly not capable of doing the job to perform so serious a task; it was obvious that she was there purely on the basis of affirmative action. Doubtless she passed a written exam, which gave her the job she was incapable of doing.
That`s true in many other fields; my brother tells the story of his days teaching on navy ships where female mechanics had to have grunts assigned to carry their 100 lb toolboxes. It`s also well known that female military recruits get “dumbed down” training requirements (such as performing fewer chin-ups and other exercises).
Now, I`m not saying that there aren`t women who are quite capable, but these are fewer than men applying for similar positions. But America has decided that we must have “gender equity” and so written exams have been used as a tool to give these weaker women a leg up. The problem is, a physical job requires physical abilities. That`s not to say that there aren`t mental abilities required as well for many of these positions; it`s just to say that a physical job could well be tested by a physical exam. See how the person responds intellectually under the pressures of a test case. The written exams were encouraged by the left to hide certain failures of aptitude.
But now their protection for one class is impinging on their protections of another. This is a great place for NOW and the PUMAs; they should have come out strongly for these tests, since their particular oxen are being gored (and, boy, are a lot of those women in NOW oxen! Perhaps that is why they aren`t concerned about the physical tests?) But race seems to trump gender these days, so now the girls are out and racial minorities get the legal upper hand. Too bad for the left that the Supreme Court didn`t play ball (but that will change over time as they consolidate their power.)
I have a startling idea! Why not let the fire departments decide who is qualified for promotions? Amazing, isn`t it! Just think; those who actually witness the performance of the candidates making the decisions on who should be put in charge! Why, it boggles the mind! Perhaps the best man (or woman) should actually be given the job based on their ability. Truly a revolutionary idea!
Everyone in modern society complains about things not working; healthcare is broken, the mortgage system is a mess, high prices, etc. Well, what do we expect? Liberals have so twisted our society that we have become a pack of tails with dogs attached, merrily wagging in the breeze. Why should we be surprised that things do not work; logic and merit have been disposed of in favor of some nebulous concept of “fairness” which bears little resemblence to any sort of fairness any normal person would recognize since this requires that the “fairee” rise at the expense of another. How is reverse discrimination fair? For that matter, how is “leveling the playing field” fair even if it does not require reverse discrimination? Discriminating FOR someone is ultimately as bad-both for the individual and society-as discriminating against them.
The knowledge that you achieved not of your own efforts and worth but because of your protected status chafes. This fear is in the back of the mind of every affirmative action beneficiary; that they may not have been good enough but were put forward by the good graces of the patrician white liberals who acted as their benefactors. Affirmative action steals the sense of accomplishment, steals pride. Judge Sotomayor once said something very similar, but her answer is to push forward with more affirmative action. Strange; any reasonable person should want to succeed of their own accord. This knoledge turns success into dust in the mouth, and the affirmative action beneficiary winds up unhappy and dissatisfied.
And society gets second best as the best are passed over in favor of those favored.
Every one gets the tail end when we discriminate-either way.
Wil Wirtanen
Parsing the Health Reform Arguments
Some of the shibboleths we’ve heard in recent weeks don’t make much sense.
By GEORGE NEWMAN
The health-care debate continues. We have now heard from nearly all the politicians, experts and interested parties: doctors, drug makers, hospitals, insurance companies, even constitutional lawyers (though not, significantly, from trial lawyers, who know full well “change” is not coming to their practices). Here is how one humble economist sees some of the main arguments, which I have paraphrased below:
- “The American people overwhelmingly favor reform.”
If you ask whether people would be happier if somebody else paid their medical bills, they generally say yes. But surveys on consumers’ satisfaction with their quality of care show overwhelming support for the continuation of the present arrangement. The best proof of this is the belated recognition by the proponents of health-care reform that they need to promise people that they can keep what they have now.
- “The cost of health care rises two to three times as fast as inflation.”
That’s like comparing the price of hamburger 30 years ago with the price of filet mignon today and calling the difference inflation. Or the price of a 19-inch, black-and-white TV 30 years ago with the price of a 50-inch HDTV today. The improvements in medical care are even more dramatic, leading to longer life, less pain, fewer exploratory surgeries and miracle drugs. Of course the research, the equipment and the training that produce these improvements don’t come cheap.
- “Health care represents a rising proportion of our income.”
That’s not only true but perfectly natural. Quality health care is a discretionary, income-elastic expense — i.e. the richer a society, the larger the proportion of income that is spent on it. (Poor societies have to spend income gains on food and other necessities.) Consider the alternatives. Would we feel better about ourselves if we skimped on our family’s health care and spent the money on liquor, gambling, night clubs or a third television set?
- “Shifting funds from health care to education would make for a better society.”
These two services have a lot in common, including steadily rising cost. What is curious is that this rise in education costs is deemed by the liberal establishment smart and farsighted while the rise in health-care costs is a curse to be stopped at any cost. What is curiouser still is that in education, where they always advocate more “investment,” past increases have gone hand-in-hand with demonstrably deteriorating outcomes. The rising cost in health care has been accompanied by clearly superior results. Thus we would shift dollars from where they do a lot of good to an area where they don’t.
- “Forty-five million people in the U.S. are uninsured.”
Even if this were true (many dispute it) should we risk destroying a system that works for the vast majority to help 15% of our population?
- “The cost of treating the 45 million uninsured is shifted to the rest of us.”
So on Monday, Wednesday and Friday we are harangued about the 45 million people lacking medical care, and on Tuesday and Thursday we are told we already pay for that care. Left-wing reformers think that if they split the two arguments we are too stupid to notice the contradiction. Furthermore, if cost shifting is bad, wait for the Mother of all Cost Shifting when suppliers have to overcharge the private plans to compensate for the depressed prices forced on them by the public plan.
- “A universal plan will reduce the cost of health care.”
Think a moment. Suppose you are in an apple market with 100 buyers and 100 sellers every day and apples sell for $1 a pound. Suddenly one day 120 buyers show up. Will the price of the apples go up or down?
- “U.S. companies are at a disadvantage against foreign competitors who don’t have to pay their employees’ health insurance.”
This would be true if the funds for health care in those countries fell from the sky. As it is, employees in those countries pay for their health care in much higher income taxes, sales or value-added taxes, gasoline taxes (think $8 a gallon at the pump) and in many other ways, effectively reducing their take-home pay and living standards. And isn’t it odd that the same people who want to lift this burden from businesses that provide health benefits also (again, on alternate days) want to impose this burden on the other firms that do not offer this benefit. What about the international competitiveness of these companies?
- “If you like your current plan you can keep it.”
In other words, you can keep your current plan if it (and the company offering it) is still around. This is not a trivial qualification. Proponents have clearly learned from the HillaryCare debacle in the 1990s that radical transformation does not sell. What we have instead is what came to be dubbed “salami tactics” in postwar Eastern Europe where Communist leaders took away freedoms one at a time to minimize resistance and obscure the ultimate goal. If nothing else, a century of vain attempts to break the Post Office monopoly should teach us how welcoming Congress is to competition to one of its high-cost, inefficient wards.
- “Congress will be strictly neutral between the public and private plans.”
Nonsense. Congress has a hundred ways to help its creation hide costs, from squeezing suppliers to hidden subsidies (think Amtrak). And it has even more ways to bankrupt private plans. One way is to mandate ever more exotic and expensive coverage (think hair transplants or sex-change operations). Another is by limiting and averaging premiums and outlawing advertising. And if all else fails Congress can always resort to tax audits and public harassment of executives — all in the name of “leveling the playing field.” Then, in the end, the triumphal announcement: “The private system has failed.”
- “Decisions will still be made by doctors and patients and the system won’t be politicized.”
Fat chance. Funding conflicts between mental health and gynecology will be based on which pressure group offers the richer bribe or appears more politically correct. The closing (or opening) of a hospital will be based not on need but which subcommittee chairman’s district the hospital is in. Imagine the centralization of all medical research in the country in the brand new Robert Byrd Medical Center in Morgantown, W.Va. You get the idea.
- “We need a public plan to keep the private plans honest.”
The 1,500 or so private plans don’t produce enough competition? Making it 1,501 will do the trick? But then why stop there? Eating is even more important than health care, so shouldn’t we have government-run supermarkets “to keep the private ones honest”? After all, supermarkets clearly put profits ahead of feeding people. And we can’t run around naked, so we should have government-run clothing stores to keep the private ones honest. And shelter is just as important, so we should start public housing to keep private builders honest. Oops, we already have that. And that is exactly the point. Think of everything you know about public housing, the image the term conjures up in your mind. If you like public housing you will love public health care.
Mr. Newman is an economist and retired business executive.
Two excellent pieces at CCNET:
REAL CLIMATE’S MININFORMATION
Climate Science, 30 June 2009
Roger Pielke Sr.
Real Climate posted a weblog on June 21 2009 titled “A warning from Copenhagen”
Real Climate writes
“So what does it say? Our regular readers will hardly be surprised by the key findings from physical climate science, most of which we have already discussed here. Some aspects of climate change are progressing faster than was expected a few years ago - such as rising sea levels, the increase of heat stored in the ocean and the shrinking Arctic sea ice. “The updated estimates of the future global mean sea level rise are about double the IPCC projections from 2007?, says the new report. And it points out that any warming caused will be virtually irreversible for at least a thousand years - because of the long residence time of CO2 in the atmosphere.”
First, what is “physical climate science”? How is this different from “climate science”. In the past, this terminology has been used when authors ignore the biological components of the climate system.
More importantly, however, the author of the weblog makes the statement that the following climate metrics “are progressing faster than was expected a few years ago”
1. “rising sea levels”
NOT TRUE; e.g. see the University of Colorado at Boulder Sea Level Change analysis.
Sea level has actually flattened since 2006.
2. “the increase of heat stored in the ocean”
NOT TRUE; see Update On A Comparison Of Upper Ocean Heat Content Changes With The GISS Model Predictions.
Their has been no statistically significant warming of the upper ocean since 2003.
3. “shrinking Arctic sea ice”
NOT TRUE; see the Northern Hemisphere Sea Ice Anomaly from the University of Illinois Cyrosphere Today website.
Since 2008, the anomalies have actually decreased.
These climate metrics might again start following the predictions of the models. However, until and unless they do, the authors of the Copenhagen Congress Synthesis Report and the author of the Real Climate weblog are erroneously communicating the reality of the how the climate system is actually behaving.
Media and policymakers who blindly accept these claims are either naive or are deliberately slanting the science to promote their particular advocacy position.
###################################
OCEAN TEMPERATURES: THE NEW FRONTIER OF CLIMATE ALARMISM
The Fielding-Wong meeting spawned a brief email debate between climate heavyweights. The alarmist started it by patronizing Fielding’s independent scientists, but it seems that when you call the bluff of a government funded alarmist scientist and put a direct question you don’t get a direct reply — only evasion and arrogance.
Typical alarmist-skeptic exchange, but this one is now public for all to
see. Read all about it at
BTW, climate alarmism is a paper tiger — there is no evidence:
There has been a change in direction by the alarmists, as shown by their new “Synthesis Report”:
They have abandoned air temperatures as a measure of global temperature, for obvious reasons, and switched to ocean temperatures.
They claim that ocean temperatures are rising and rising fast. This is rubbish, but it will take time to inform the public and politicians that it is rubbish. With the US climate bill and Copenhagen coming up, they only need to make the public believe their schtick for a few months.
All the public education we did with air temperatures starts all over again with ocean temperatures:
1. Ocean temperatures can only be adequately measured by the Argo buoy network. Argo buoys duck dive down to 700m, recording temperatures, then come up and radio back the results. There are 3,000 of them floating around all the world’s oceans.
2. The Argos buoys have only been operational since the end of 2003. Since then they show a slight cooling:
3. Josh Willis, who runs the Argos buoy program, said in March 2008: “There has been a very slight cooling, but not anything really significant”:
4. The Argo network initially showed definite cooling, but were recalibrated in 2007. After recalibration they showed slight warming, but now show slight cooling.
5. The Argo data shows that the AGW hypothesis is wrong, because temperatures are definitely not rising as fast as predicted by AGW:
6. Before the Argo network we used bathythermographs (XBTs) to measure ocean temperatures. Those records are inadequate both for depth and geographical coverage:
Cheers
David Evans
Steve Rankin forwards this:
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1/
FEMA martial law exercise with foreign troops
June 7th, 2009
0A
FEMA Web Page Shows Martial Law Exercise With Foreign Troops
Set for July 2009
http://targetfreedom.typepad.com/targetfreedom/2009/06/femawebpagemartiallawforeigntroops.html
http://www.fema.gov/media/fact_sheets/nle09.shtm
The above is a link to FEMA.GOV website page tha t details the upcoming nationwide training exercise in July 2009. This is directly cut and pasted the full text below from the site.
This is very alarming. This IS NOT an exercise for FEMA to practice disaster relief. This page states very clearly that this exercise will “focus exclusively on terrorism prevention and protection, as opposed to incident response and recovery”.
AND THEY ARE BRINGING FOREIGN TROOPS INTO OUR TOWNS AND CITIES TO TRAIN TO POLICE US. As stated in FEMA website, “This year the United States welcomes the participation of Australia, Canada, Mexico and the United Kingdom in NLE 09.”
Imagine, armed Mexican troops protecting us from “terrorism” in the United States! Don’t you feel safer already? ¿Dónde están sus documentos?
Rumors of foreign troops on our soil have been circulated for a long time. BUT this is not a rumor. It is a blatant fact as stated by FEMA on their government website. THIS IS AN INVASION.
We are told that this is just a training exercise. Should we believe that? Foreign troops in the Southwest sounds inc redibly similar to what we learned, back in the 1980’s, from undercover FBI agent Larry Grathwohl:
Watch the videos that are here:
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/election/480
http://targetfreedom.typepad.com/targetfreedom/2009/04/plot-to-kill-capitalists.html
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/5742
Undercover FBI agent Larry Grathwohl told us of people whom he described in this way:
“They felt that this counter-revolution could best be guarded against by creating and establishing re-education centers in the Southwest, where we would take all of the people who needed to be re-educated into the new way of thinking and teach them how things were going to be. I asked, well what is going to happen to those people that we can’t re-educate that are die-hard capitalists? The reply was that they would have to be eliminated. When I pursued this further they estimated that they wo uld have to eliminate 25 million people in these re-education centers. When I say eliminate, I mean kill … 25 million people.
I want you to imagine sitting in a room with 25 people, most of which have graduate degrees from Columbia and other well-known educational centers, and hear them figuring out the logistics for the elimination of 25 million people. And they were dead serious.”
During Katrina the federal government went in and disarmed everyone, even law abiding citizens. Recently, Tennessee passed into law a bill that states that Tennessee residents undoubtedly have the right to keep and possess their firearms during martial rule. Why did they feel the need to do this? And what does it mean when our government is running martial law drills on a nationwide scale?
http://www.fema.gov/media/fact_sheets/nle09.shtm
National Level Exercise 2009 (NLE 09)
National Level Exercise 2009 (NLE 09) is scheduled for July 27 through July 31, 2009. NLE 09 will be the first major exercise conducted by the United States government that will focus exclusively on terrorism prevention and protection, as opposed to incident response and recovery.
=0 D
NLE 09 is designated as a Tier I Nationa l Level Exercise. Tier I exercises (formerly known as the Top Officials exercise series or TOPOFF) are conducted annually in accordance with the National Exercise Program (NEP), which serves as the nation’s overarching exercise program for planning, organizing, conducting and evaluating national level exercises. The NEP was established to provide the U.S. government, at all levels, exercise opportunities to prepare for catastrophic crises ranging from terrorism to natural disasters.
NLE 09 is a White House directed, Congressionally- mandated exercise that includes the participation of all appropriate federal department and agency senior officials, their deputies, staff and key operational elements. In addition, broad regional participation of state, tribal, local, and private sector is anticipated. This year the United States welcomes the participation of Australia, Canada, Mexico and the United Kingdom in NLE 09.
EXERCISE FOCUS
NLE 09 will focus on intelligence and information sharing among intelligence and law enforcement communities, and between international, federal, regional, state, tribal, local and private sector participants.
The NLE 09 scenario will begin in the aftermath of a notional terrorist event outside of the United States, and exercise play will center on preventing subsequent efforts by the terrorists to enter the United States and carry out additional attacks. This s cenario enables participating senior officials to focus on issues related to preventing terrorist events domestically and protecting U.S. critical infrastructure.
NLE 09 will allow terrorism prevention efforts to proceed to a logical end (successful or not), with no requirement for response or recovery activities.
NLE 09 will be an operations-based exercise to include: activities taking place at command posts, emergency operation centers, intelligence centers and potential field locations to include federal headquarters facilities in the Washington D.C. area, and in federal, regional, state, tribal, local and private sector facilities in FEMA Region VI, which includes=2 0the states of Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Texas.
EXERCISE OBJECTIVES
Through a comprehensive evaluation process, the exercise will assess prevention and protection capabilities both nationally and regionally. Although NLE 09 is still in the planning stages, the exercise is currently designed to validate the following capabilities:
Intelligence/Information Sharing and Dissemination
Counter-Terrorism Investigation and Law Enforcement
Air, Border and Maritime Security
Critical Infrastructure Protection
Public and Private Sector Alert/Notification and Security Advisories
International Coordination
VALIDATING THE HOMELAND SECURITY SYSTEM
Exercises such as NLE 09 are an important component of national preparedness, helping to build an integrated federal, state, tribal, loca l and private sector capability to prevent terrorist attacks, and rapidly and effectively respond to, and recover from, any terrorist attack or major disaster that occurs.
The full-scale exercise offers agencies and jurisdictions a way to test their plans and skills in a real-time, realistic environment and to gain the in-depth knowledge that only experience can provide. Participants will exercise prevention and information sharing functions that are critical to preventing terrorist attacks. Lessons learned from the exercise will provide valuable insights to guide future planning for securing the nation against terrorist attacks, disasters, and other emergencies.
For more information about NLE 09, contact the FEMA News Desk: 202-646-4600.
FEMA leads and supports the nation in a risk-based, comprehensive emergency management system of preparedness, protection, response, recovery, and mitigation, to reduce the loss of life and property and protect the nation from all hazards including natural disasters, acts of terrorism and other man-made disasters.
==============
Who does FEMA say those terrorists are? Watch them for yourself!
They say that Christians, founding fathers and homeschoolers are terrorists.
http://targetfreedom.typepad.com/targetfreedom/2009/03/fedsslanderchristiansandpatriots.html
Sit in on an actual FEMA Gestapo training class:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XC1fk_EO3 c
(Click the rectangle in the lower right to go to full screen)
http://www.24hourforums.com/view_topic.php?id=25587&forum_id=109&jump_to=252929
http://tinyurl.com/bj3qey
=========
http://southerncrown.blogspot.com/
http://freecitizenblog.wordpress.com/
Dana Mathewson forwards this brilliant idea:
DONT FORGET ABOUT NEXT SATURDAY!
Don’t forget to mark
your calendars.
As you may already know,
it is a sin for a Muslim male
to see any woman other than his
wife naked.
He must commit suicide if he does.
So next Saturday at 4 PM Eastern
Time, all American women are asked
to walk out of their house
completely naked to help weed out any neighborhood terrorists. Circling
your block for one hour is recommended
for this anti-terrorist effort.
All patriotic men are to position themselves
in lawn chairs in front of their house to prove they are not Muslims, & to demonstrate they think it’s okay to see nude women other than their wives, & to show support for all American women. Since Islam
also does not approve of alcohol, a cold
6-pack at your side is further
proof of your anti-Muslim sentiment. The American gov’t appreciates your
efforts to root out terrorists & applauds
your participation in
this anti-terrorist activity.
God bless America!
It is your patriotic duty to pass this on.
If you don’t send this to at least 5 people
you’re a terrorist-sympathizing,
lily-livered coward & are in the position of posing as a national threat.
Jack Kemp (not the late politician)
A few years back, I wrote a piece at American Thinker called “Proof that there are stupid Jews.” http://www.americanthinker.com/comments.php?comments_id=5937 It was about the ACLU, with the help of the Jewish War Veterans, protesting a cross put up in a federally owned park in La Jolla, California. In that piece, I remarked that fools at the Jewish War Veterans could find the ACLU using virtually the identical logic used against the cross placement to file court papers to remove the National Historical Site designation of the Touro Synagogue in Rhode Island, the nation’s oldest and a place where George Washington once spoke. I called their project “a harvest of bitter fruit.”
I’ve seen pictures of the Touro Synagogue and it has no exterior religious symbols but surely has them inside. Today my local Queens County newspaper has a story and photo of the Rego Park Jewish Center being nominated for the National Registry of Historic Buildings. Accompanying is a photo of their building, a place I’ve walked by many times, with its’ large exterior Star of David - a religious symbol - etched in stone over the doors.
So I am wondering a few things.
Will the ACLU demand that a building with this religious symbol not be designated as a national historical site because it isn’t a “separation of church and state?” If the ACLU files such a suit, will the Jewish War Veterans join the lawsuit? Is the ACLU doesn’t protest this designation for the Rego Park Jewish Center, is there any idiot at the Jewish War Veterans who realizes that such selective outrage breeds resentment against their fellow Jews (like me)?
Months after I wrote the original article, I found the ACLU had joined a lawsuit in Ohio to stop the barring of protesters within 300 yards of a military funeral. That means, if the suit were successful, that antimilitary protesters could show up at the funerals of these very same Jewish War Veterans, see the men with Jewish skullcaps in attendance, and curse not only the deceased’s military service but also their Jewishness. Only a liberal asshole could believe that bitter protesters would not curse their religion or that “merely” cursing their military service would somehow be appropriate at a funeral service.
These veterans who joined the first lawsuit above most probably voted for Obama by a large percentage. I believe that they are now starting to wake up to how poorly considered are their sentiments.
Dana Mathewson
My, my! It appears that John Edwards (remember him?) and his mistress Rielle Hunter made a video tape.
FTA: “Hunter had been hired by the Edwards campaign to videotape the candidate’s movements, but this one is said to have shown him taking positions that weren’t on his official platform.”
This courtesy of Jack Kemp, the undead non-politician:
http://spectator.org/blog/2009/06/29/acorn-rent-a-mob-thugs-to-hara
Opening Part of the Story:
ACORN Rent-A-Mob Thugs to Harass Lenders in 14 Cities Tuesday
By Matthew Vadum on 6.29.09 @ 11:05PM
ACORN, which played a starring role in creating the subprime mortgage crisis, plans to add insult to injury by harassing lenders across the nation with protests tomorrow in an effort to coerce them into supporting President Obama’s Making Home Affordable foreclosure-avoidance program.
Austin King, director of ACORN Financial Justice, sent out a press release today advising of the demonstrations that are planned as part of its “Homewrecker 4″ campaign. The four financial companies targeted are Goldman Sachs, HomEq Servicing, American Home Mortgage, and OneWest. Read the whole document here.
ACORN plans to hit Dallas, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, St. Louis, New York City, Wilmington (Del.), Columbus (Ohio), Houston, Little Rock, Boston, Los Angeles, Miami, San Francisco, and Seattle.
Powered by WordPress