 |
|
 |

 |
conservatism
l555l | |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
If you watched the big game last night, you surely enjoyed this ad. The best part has to be this article I'm linking to. The environmentalist quoted in here is simply...nuts. "The more I've thought about it, though, the more [that] interpretation just doesn't quite fit," he goes on to say. "The thrill at the end, when they guy gets to accelerate away from the crowd, turns on satisfying the green police -- not rejecting or circumventing them, but satisfying their strict standards. The authority of the green police is taken for granted, never questioned. If you're looking to appeal to mooks who think the green police are full of it and have no authority, moral or otherwise, why would you make a commercial like that?"
But alas, it is only a matter of time... http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2010/02/08/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry6186859.shtml
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |


 |
conservatism
dyne_score | |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
I know the gay marriage issue has been argued over and over endlessly in this community and others, but I do have to pose a serious question. Leftists and those who support the homosexual agenda have often responded with comments such as "It doesn't matter what you think - gay marriage is inevitable. You'll have to legalize it eventually!". Unfortunately, as much as I hate to admit it, I think this might actually be an accurate assessment. For example, just the other day Barack Obama talked about removing the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, and I have to wonder, what's next? Eventually will Americans be forced to accept gay marriages because it's "equal"? It's already a reality in Canada, Spain and other parts of Europe. Is it just a matter of time? If so, what must conservatives do in order to counter this continual, aggressive threat?
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |


 |
conservatism
melvin_udall | |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
16 second video. Obama telling us that "no matter what you've heard" you get to keep your doctor: Throughout the year he said it in every speech, demonizing, mocking, attacking the right for daring to say otherwise. All the "Liberals"/"progressives" demonized, mocked and attacked right along with him, either faithful useful idiots or willful participants in the lie. Obama's Stunning Admission I adjusted the quote to reflect his pauses. "For example... uh... for example we said from the start that ... uh.. that uh... oh... it was going to be important uh for us to be consistent in... saying to people if you can have your i-i-if you want to keep the health insurance you got, you can keep it, that you're not going to have anybody getting in between you and your doctor in your decision making. And I think that some of the provisions that... got snuck in uh might have violated that pledge." Behind a cut is the video of it. Note his body language along with the quote. ( Read more... )I've seen and heard adolescents do a better job of weaseling out of a lie. Intelligent people should find this insulting. But let's pretend it's the truth for a moment, that he wasn't lying the entire time because he doesn't care what's in it as long as a bill further empowering his radical ideology passes. WHO snuck it in? WHAT did they sneak in that he objects to? WHEN did they sneak it in? WHY didn't he know it? A constitutional law professor such as Obama shouldn't have trouble with the language. Why isn't he outraged that he's made to look a liar? Why isn't he naming names and holding the sneaks accountable? WHEN did he supposedly discover this assertion he's made for a year was completely untrue? Was it on the 29th, when he admitted it? Or did he know it but continue to make the claim he knew to be false? What did he know and when did he know it, now that the truth is out? You can bet the "THERE IS NO LIBERAL!" media won't be asking any of these obvious questions of this perpetual liar. The truth is he was lying to pass the legislation, because he will do literally anything in the name of his ideology. It was important " in saying to people". They knew it was a lie, but had all agreed on the collective message, and then spread the word. This wasn't a minor lie. This was a Big Lie, pure propaganda. For a year. Now we get to see who are the true ideologues or sheep, as opposed to those who will reasonably condemn him for this. Please note this for future arguments you attempt in good faith. Those who excuse or distract from this will likely dutifully follow anything he and his might do. If they'll defend this or mock those condemning it they'll say anything to you in the future to protect Obama and the progressive agenda.
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |


 |
conservatism
schpydurx | |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
Today, the President unveiled his budget. As part of his plan to cut Defense spending to pay for his social programs that don't work, Obama killed three birds with one stone: cutting Defense spending, cutting NASA spending (one could say that is redundant, but strictly speaking NASA isn't direct Defense) and punishing Congressman Parker Griffith for switching parties. Of course, Griffith himself can't be taken to the woodshed, but his district sure can. Congressional Candidate Les Philip calls the 2011 NASA Budget Cuts Un-American:We are staring down the barrel of a very scary scenario here in the Tennessee Valley as the current administration is poised to propose ending manned space flight with the cancellation of the Constellation project. This would be a grave mistake to end both the Ares I and Ares V programs with so much of the research and testing already completed.
At a time when Washington is focused on job creation it is unfathomable to me to cut thousands of jobs in Alabama, Florida, Texas and other parts of the country. This decision would leave all of the vital research being done on the International Space Station to be supported by Russian launches. Not only is that un-American. It is unacceptable.
The Tennessee Valley deserves a representative in Washington D.C. that has worked in Research Park and understands the ins and outs of the lifeblood of the heart of the fifth district. There are over 7,000 jobs at stake at the Marshall Space Flight Center and as your Congressman, I would align myself with the other members that have a vested interest in the space program to make sure and protect NASA. ( Alabama Gubernatorial Candidate Ron Sparks (D) Has Weak Response )( Congressman Parker Griffith's (R-Huntsville) Statement Doesn't Even Mention NASA )Oddly enough, the silent party in this foray is Congressional candidate [ The Quotable] Morris Brooks, Attorney at Law. Why, even Mayor Tommy Battle had the gumption and audacity to write the President of the United States and beg that his city not be punished for Griffith's deeds: ( Mayor Tommy Battle writes the President a Letter )Tags: obama Current Music: Marc Streitenfeld - American Gangster
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |


 |
conservatism
l555l | |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/football/ncaa/01/29/obama.bcs.ap/index.html?xid=si_ncaafIt looks like Obama may be looking into anti-trust parts with the BCS. For those who don't know, college football doesn't actually have a champion each year. Instead, a machine and a bunch of judges guess which two teams could potentially be the best, and then make them play. Many people like and defend this, and I think it is beyond silly, but it is their choice. Well, maybe. It looks like Obama's administration may be pushing to review the late season as well. Good thing nothing else is going on, right? To be fair, the pin prick behind this issue is Orrin Hatch, who thinks this is a matter of government importance, and is Republican. While Universities may spend tons of government dollars, it does not seem their sports should be under this control. (Speaking of money, college football is dripping with it, except for the players. If Obama wanted to go after an injustice in the system, he would look at the $ issue)... I know Presidents have massive groups of people who do these things, but his desire to regulate constantly just smells like over-reach. Will the championship game, after a playoff, one day carry his name?
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |





 |
conservatism
melvin_udall | |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
Well, the Empty Suit in Chief has been taking blow after blow of late. After the humiliating loss in Massachusetts two days after his rallying visit his keepers evidently thought it was a good idea to get him back to doing the only thing he's good at, campaigning. (For those who haven't noticed I believe his last press conference was in June, when he said "The Cambridge Police acted stupidly". That incident apparently prompted Team Teleprompter to avoid future such dangers). For this they whisked him off to Ohio for a BS staged townhall. I won't pretend I read this. The man is a serial liar. Anyone who has followed what he said during the campaign and over the last year who credits him with being truthful is embarrassing themselves. But I heard the quote to follow and thought I'd take a quick glance at the speech, then have a little quick fun with it. "I want you -- want you to understand, this is not about me. (Applause.) This is not about me. This is about you. This is not about me; this is about you."Really? Are you sure? His speech with a slight adjustment for emphasis is after the cut. Nothing was changed, just highlighted. I skipped the rehearsed questions and propaganda segment that followed. This is, after all, just for laughs. I'm sure our Liberal residents will start pouring over Republican speeches for comparison or just screech, "BUT BUSH." Relax. It's just a quick, funny visual. ______ ( Read more... )
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |







 |
conservatism
melvin_udall | |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
Exclusive: President Obama Says Voter Anger, Frustration Key to Republican Victory in Massachusetts SenateWell, okay so far... "'Here's my assessment of not just the vote in Massachusetts, but the mood around the country: the same thing that swept Scott Brown into office swept me into office,'" the president said in an exclusive interview with ABC News' George Stephanopoulos. "'People are angry and they are frustrated. Not just because of what's happened in the last year or two years, but what's happened over the last eight years.'"Holy moly... ... Um... so let me get this straight... conservative Republican Scott Brown was elected to a seat previously held by an ultra Liberal in an ultra Liberal state as a negative reaction to... George W Bush? We are through the Looking Glass, people. That kind of narcissism and delusion is not curable. I have to believe if "journalist" Stephanopoulos wasn't in on the planning session for this ludicrous spin with his buddies Rahm, Begala and Carville, in the morning conference call he might have done a spit-take in response to that lunacy. It would appear the handlers of the Empty Suit in Chief have reined him in at least for the short term regarding the radical agenda. "Here's one thing I know and I just want to make sure that this is off the table: The Senate certainly shouldn't try to jam anything through until Scott Brown is seated"Even the wording, obviously borrowed from critics, makes it clear Team Teleprompter, Soros, SEIU and the rest of his controllers have told him he has to ease off the throttle for the time being. But don't go thinking he lapsed into sanity or honesty. This is clearly nothing more than a feint. In fact, if you take a good look at what he said it's a bit disturbing. He didn't say they wouldn't "jam anything through." He said they should wait to jam something through until after Brown is present. Apparently we will all still get jammed eventually. ( Read more... )
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |

 |
conservatism
merig00 | |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
Miss Klass, a model for Marks & Spencer and a former singer with the pop group Hear'Say, was in her kitchen in the early hours of Friday when she saw two teenagers behaving suspiciously in her garden. The youths approached the kitchen window, before attempting to break into her garden shed, prompting Miss Klass to wave a kitchen knife to scare them away.
Miss Klass, 31, who was alone in her house in Potters Bar, Herts, with her two-year-old daughter, Ava, called the police. When they arrived at her house they informed her that she should not have used a knife to scare off the youths because carrying an "offensive weapon" – even in her own home – was illegal.
via Telegraph.co.uk I think this is a good article to use the next time some liberal brings up Europe as an example in argument against 2nd amendment
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |


 |
conservatism
langostino | |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
So I tried, in comments on the last post about this topic, to point out that immunity for INTERPOL is really nothing to worry about. There are a lot of misconceptions about what INTERPOL is and what it does, and about its history, which is probably why the story took the legs it did. David Kopel over at The Volokh Conspiracy has a really excellent primer on the immunity issues, their history, and their practical ramifications. One excerpt, emphasis mine: Now vulnerable to US lawsuits, Interpol asked the Reagan administration to grant it IOIA protection. The Reagan administration at the time was beginning to vastly amplify the US relationship with Interpol. The consequences, over the long term, were a substantial increase in US contributions to Interpol, the US displacing France as the most influential nation within Interpol, and Interpol taking a major interest in counter-terrorism. Given the Reagan determination to work more with Interpol, it is not surprising that the administration granted Interpol’s request for IOIA immunity from civil lawsuits.
At the advice of the Department of Justice, the Reagan Executive Order did not grant complete IOIA immunities, because they were unnecessary. Interpol had no office in the US, and therefore had no need for IOIA’s protections of international organization property and files. The Obama Order simply recognizes changed circumstances; now that Interpol has a small US office, it is appropriate that Interpol have the standard immunities for international organization offices. And, just to head this off in advance, The Volokh Conspiracy is a right-leaning libertarian blog written by law professors. They care, and have criticised both the Bush and Obama Administrations for authoritarian tendencies. So Kopel's nonchalance on this matter speaks volumes, at least to me.
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |

 |
conservatism
paraffinman | |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/14/health.care.negotiations/index.html?hpt=SbinSo it seems as though a back room deal between the Democrats and Union leaders has exempted union members from having to pay the 'Cadillac' health plan tax (technically not until 2018, but I'd be shocked if this didn't get renewed then). It's not terribly suprising that things ended this way, in that it was decided to have the nebulous "someone else" pay for it rather than defined groups as in the House plan (increasing income taxes is bad for senate re-elecitons) or (taxing union members is bad for house re-elections). However, I question the Constitutionality of waiving a tax for a group of people because they belong to a specific group, in this case unions. Anyone have any legal rationale for this? Also of note: The changes will reduce the $150 billion expected to be raised over 10 years by about $60 billion, he said.I wonder where we are going to get the other $60 billion from. Afterall, this plan isn't going to "raise the deficit by one dime"! And: A CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll released Thursday found much stronger support for the financing plan in the House bill, which would impose a 5.4 percent income tax surcharge on incomes higher than $500,000 for individuals or $1 million for couples. The survey found 61 percent of the public favors the House provision, while the Senate bill drew 29 percent support.Hmm, politicians doing what will help them get re-elected rather than what the people want. How shocking! Tags: health care Current Mood: exasperated
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |

 |
conservatism
l555l | |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Food dictators, the future... http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20100113/ARTICLE/1131065/-1/NEWSSITEMAPHi s story offers a peek inside the challenges of reversing a trend doctors say has become a greater threat to public health than cigarettes.
While one should not push, going in the other extreme is just silly. We're moving quickly towards an America where you can't make choices anymore. The government will handle it. Sickening, really. At home, his family eats organic food, shops at farm stands, and eschews processed sugars. He calls ahead when the school hosts events to see whether junk food will be involved, and sends his children with healthy snacks instead. Three times a year they eat something that Rosenthal says "resembles a cake," made with natural ingredients. He waters down their juice -- it is mostly water by the time he is done -- to stop their taste buds from craving sugar.Any bets on his kids becoming teenagers and finally eating at McDonalds? First, they came after drugs, and built a drug war. Then, they came after smoking. Now, they're coming after sugar. I can't wait to see Coca Cola hauled in front of congress and sued for billions, which will of course mean the government is in the business of keeping this things going, because of tax revenues...
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |


 |
conservatism
typewriterking | |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
That more progressive alternative to the SF Chronicle, BeyondChron.org, hails the arrival of the new head of the community organizing hydra: The Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE), a new statewide grassroots activist group, opened its doors this week in the wake of California ACORN's inability to function. ACCE’s creation, and the process of developing a new organization in California, ensures that working families will continue to have a powerful voice in Sacramento, dashing the hopes of Fox News and other right-wing media who hoped to weaken grassroots power by de-funding ACORN. I guess I've been viewing the wrong media, as I could have sworn it was the democrat-controlled congress, headed by SF representative Nancy Pelosi, that de-funded ACORN. Anyway, this one doesn't fall far from the tree:
A number of former California ACORN staff are now working for ACCE, but the new organization has installed a series of strict financial and oversight controls whose absence long plagued ACORN nationally. Now, how's that for doublespeak? The tone of that first paragraph I excerpted suggests he believes the 'right-wing media' smeared the 'grassroots power' illegitimately, but the next excerpt concedes vaguely that there were problems. Dude, different ACORN offices across the country thought they were aiding and abetting the trafficking of underage sex slaves. That's kind of a bad thing, possibly in the opinions of a majority. You know. Even feminists might not feel empowered by being sex slaves. It wasn't "questionable accounting practices," as he asserts later. That's analogous to vaguely saying Jeffrey Dahmer's real crime was straying from a vegan diet. Pimping out kids is wrong, m'kay? Now, so long as we're a republic, political activism is legitimate, including movements for left-wing change, but (despite being ridiculed in this community for asserting it in 2008*), ACORN is/was a clear criminal enterprise. Not everyone in the organization deserves the stigma that goes with what the national entity did, but it seems like on one "on that side" is repentant or even willing to acknowledge what it was. * ( endnote ) Current Mood: apathetic
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |



|
|
 |