Support your troops
Not rated PG
Thursday, November 09, 2006
UN forces not patrolling after dark in Lebanon because it's dangerous.
Hizbullah terrorists are free to roam at night without fear of being identified by the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), according to a report by the German paper Der Spiegel.
Spanish UNIFIL official Richard Ortax admitted to the paper that no patrols are carried out at night “because of the danger involved.” UNIFIL commanders said their function is to "observe changes in the behavior of the local population."
One junior officer told Der Spiegel he was glad that his battalion had only left its camp once. "It's absurd," he said. "We landed here and set up our tent city, but since then we've only left the camp to drive around and to make sure that we're seen."
The United Nations itself has admitted that Syria was still successfully smuggling arms to the Hizbullah, which neither UNIFIL nor the Lebanese army plan to stop.
story......
Dutch Award Damages to Members of Islamic Terror Group
Only the probability of Democrats taking over Congress can compare with the horror of Dutch dhimmitude.
A court in Rotterdam has awarded €72,000 ($91,881) to members of an Islamic terrorist group called Hofstadgroep who had been acquitted after being arrested on terrorism charges. This is more than what would normally be granted for the time that was spent in remand custody. Damages were also rewarded for lost income.
The court was well aware that the acquitted terrorists maintain close ties to Hofstadgroep. Remember when Theo Van Gogh was murdered and then his corpse mutilated in broad daylight on an Amsterdam street for making a movie Muslims didn't like? The killer, Mohammed Bouyeri, was a member of Hofstadgroep.
Tip of the hat to moonbattery.
One less Dem voter in Chicago
Chicago anti-war activist burn himself alive to protest Iraq war
Chicago peace activist & musician, Malachi Ritscher, burned himself alive Friday morning on the Kennedy Expressway, apparently in protest of the Iraq war.
Police found a homemade sign near his body which said "Thou Shalt Not Kill."
story....
Newt knows Nancy
The Democrats now control the House of Representatives and San Francisco Democrat Nancy Pelosi is set to become speaker, one of the most powerful constitutional offices in the United States. Do you really know Nancy Pelosi? Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich does.
He has warned that a Democratic victory will turn the House over to "the San Francisco values of would-be Speaker Nancy Pelosi." Just how dangerous, then, is the House minority leader from California to those who hold to traditional conservative values? Pelosi is one of the most liberal members of the House, receiving a 95 percent "liberal quotient" from the Americans for Democratic Action based on her support for the liberal position in key votes.
She voted against cutting taxes by $70 million, against renewing the Patriot Act, against reducing the death tax, against drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and against making it a crime to desecrate the U.S. flag. She supports gay marriage, and backed legislation allowing overseas military facilities to provide abortions for women in the military and military dependents.
The new speaker also backed a measure calling for a timetable for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, supported a bill requiring a 72-hour background check for persons buying weapons at gun shows — and opposed a bill strengthening the enforcement of immigration laws.
Pelosi's Hypocrisy
But a look behind the scenes exposes Pelosi as a Democratic leader who passionately fights for liberal policies, yet goes to great lengths to avoid applying those policies in her personal life. Best-selling author Peter Schweizer's book "Do As I Say (Not As I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy" first revealed the glaring contradictions between Pelosi and other prominent liberals' public stances and their real-life behavior. [Check out our free offer for this book. Go Here Now.]
Pelosi claims to be a staunch union supporter, and, along with her husband, has received the Cesar Chavez award from the United Farm Workers Union, notes Schweizer. Unions are, in her words, "fighting for America's working families" and battling "the union-busting, family-hurting" Bush administration. But Schweizer uncovered that a $25 million Northern California vineyard the Pelosis own is a non-union shop!
Pelosi's hypocrisy doesn't stop there. The congresswoman is the top recipient among members of Congress in campaign contributions from labor unions, and has received more money from the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees International Union than any other member of Congress in the last several election cycles. But in addition to the wine business, the Pelosis own a large stake in the exclusive Auberge du Soleil hotel in Rutherford, Calif. The hotel has more than 250 employees; but once again, Schweizer found, it is strictly a non-union shop.
The Pelosis are also partners in a restaurant chain called Piatti, which has 900 employees. "But a union card is not required to work there bussing tables, washing dishes, serving guests, or preparing food," Schweizer wrote in NewsMax Magazine. "As with Auberge du Soleil, at Piatti the Pelosis' commitment to organized labor ends at the front door." Pelosi has also demonstrated hypocrisy on the environment. "With us," she proclaims, "the environment is not an issue — it's an ethic. It's a value." That's what she says.
Schweizer exposed what she does: One of her largest investments is a private partnership called Lions Gate Limited, which operates the CordeValle Golf Club and Resort in San Martin, Calif. To get a permit to build the facility, the partners promised to build a "public course" providing considerable access to non-members, and to abide by several environmental requirements to ensure that there would be minimal ecological damage. But after the facility opened, the county's Planning Commission found that the golf course was in fact private — and the club had "ignored" many of its permit requirements concerning the environment! "The reality is that liberals like to preach in moral platitudes," says Schweizer.
"But when it comes to applying those same standards to themselves, liberals are found to be shockingly guilty of hypocrisy."
He has warned that a Democratic victory will turn the House over to "the San Francisco values of would-be Speaker Nancy Pelosi." Just how dangerous, then, is the House minority leader from California to those who hold to traditional conservative values? Pelosi is one of the most liberal members of the House, receiving a 95 percent "liberal quotient" from the Americans for Democratic Action based on her support for the liberal position in key votes.
She voted against cutting taxes by $70 million, against renewing the Patriot Act, against reducing the death tax, against drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and against making it a crime to desecrate the U.S. flag. She supports gay marriage, and backed legislation allowing overseas military facilities to provide abortions for women in the military and military dependents.
The new speaker also backed a measure calling for a timetable for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, supported a bill requiring a 72-hour background check for persons buying weapons at gun shows — and opposed a bill strengthening the enforcement of immigration laws.
Pelosi's Hypocrisy
But a look behind the scenes exposes Pelosi as a Democratic leader who passionately fights for liberal policies, yet goes to great lengths to avoid applying those policies in her personal life. Best-selling author Peter Schweizer's book "Do As I Say (Not As I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy" first revealed the glaring contradictions between Pelosi and other prominent liberals' public stances and their real-life behavior. [Check out our free offer for this book. Go Here Now.]
Pelosi claims to be a staunch union supporter, and, along with her husband, has received the Cesar Chavez award from the United Farm Workers Union, notes Schweizer. Unions are, in her words, "fighting for America's working families" and battling "the union-busting, family-hurting" Bush administration. But Schweizer uncovered that a $25 million Northern California vineyard the Pelosis own is a non-union shop!
Pelosi's hypocrisy doesn't stop there. The congresswoman is the top recipient among members of Congress in campaign contributions from labor unions, and has received more money from the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees International Union than any other member of Congress in the last several election cycles. But in addition to the wine business, the Pelosis own a large stake in the exclusive Auberge du Soleil hotel in Rutherford, Calif. The hotel has more than 250 employees; but once again, Schweizer found, it is strictly a non-union shop.
The Pelosis are also partners in a restaurant chain called Piatti, which has 900 employees. "But a union card is not required to work there bussing tables, washing dishes, serving guests, or preparing food," Schweizer wrote in NewsMax Magazine. "As with Auberge du Soleil, at Piatti the Pelosis' commitment to organized labor ends at the front door." Pelosi has also demonstrated hypocrisy on the environment. "With us," she proclaims, "the environment is not an issue — it's an ethic. It's a value." That's what she says.
Schweizer exposed what she does: One of her largest investments is a private partnership called Lions Gate Limited, which operates the CordeValle Golf Club and Resort in San Martin, Calif. To get a permit to build the facility, the partners promised to build a "public course" providing considerable access to non-members, and to abide by several environmental requirements to ensure that there would be minimal ecological damage. But after the facility opened, the county's Planning Commission found that the golf course was in fact private — and the club had "ignored" many of its permit requirements concerning the environment! "The reality is that liberals like to preach in moral platitudes," says Schweizer.
"But when it comes to applying those same standards to themselves, liberals are found to be shockingly guilty of hypocrisy."
-----------------------------------
What Pelosi has stood for:
Squishing the skulls of half-born babies and vacuuming out their brains.
Keeping taxes high.
Squishing the skulls of half-born babies and vacuuming out their brains.
Keeping taxes high.
What Pelosi has stood against:
Parental notification of minors who want to abort their babies.
The death penalty for anyone other than babies.
Welfare reform.
Permitting prayer in school.
Allowing the Ten Commandments to be displayed on public property.
School vouchers.
Raising the child tax credit.
Reducing our dependence on Muslims and maniacs like Hugo Chavez by drilling in ANWR.
Free trade.
The B-2 bomber.
Missile defense.
There isn't much that the Queen of Obstruction doesn't try to block. She was even opposed to the foolishly extravagant $400-billion Medicare prescription drug bill, if only because she preferred one that cost twice as much. The odds of any constructive legislation getting through a Congress controlled by Pelousy are nil — despite nimble action being required on the part of the government to protect the country from terrorism, secure our energy supply, and stem the Mexican invasion before it leads to disaster.
Wednesday, November 08, 2006
Gore / Kucinich in '08
Taken from the DailyKos .
A Match Made in Heaven? (and not a chance in Hell to win !)
Al Gore and Dennis "Bulldog" (snicker) Kucinich are two warriors with the stones to face Global Warming. We have ten years to manifest drastic change or we can kiss the Earth goodbye - these men GET IT! Gore and Kucinich are not members of the club - they are visionaries with the courage to lead in our greatest challenge.
Kinda makes you want to puke.
Democratic agenda - investigate, investigate, investigate
I have a hunch that not much will get done in the next couple of years.
Halliburton, the CIA and big tobacco companies are among the early targets identified by top Democratic staff to ABC News as likely targets for investigation once the Democrats take control of the House at the beginning of next year.
Defense contractors, including Halliburton, the intelligence rationale for the war in Iraq and CIA secret prisons are what one staffer called "uninvestigated scandals."
Here's a look at who's in line to take over the most powerful committee chairmanships and the investigations they are likely to pursue:
Here's a look at who's in line to take over the most powerful committee chairmanships and the investigations they are likely to pursue:
The staffers say Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), now expected to become speaker, has told top Democratic donors there is a "100-hour agenda" she wants to push through -- taking on the minimum wage, drug and energy prices and corruption.
Rush Limbaugh: Why Republicans Lost
I heard this on Rush this morning, and had to agree with him.....
Republicans lost control of the House, and perhaps the Senate, because they abandoned their conservative principles and in the end stood for nothing, Rush Limbaugh said today.
In his Wednesday broadcast, America’s top talker said that until Republicans begin asking themselves what’s wrong with themselves they are never going to fix their problems.
When things go wrong, Rush said, "you must look inward and ask first, ‘What did we do wrong? What could we have done better? What mistakes did we make?”
Commenting that although Republicans lost, "Conservatism did not lose, Republicanism lost last night. Republicanism, being a political party first, rather than an ideological movement, is what lost last night.”
The Democrats, he said "beat something last night with nothing. They advanced no agenda other than their usual anti-war position. They had no contract — they really never did get specific. Their message was one of ‘vote for us; the other guys have been in power too long.’”
Rush further admonished, "There was no dominating conservative message that came from the [Republican] top and filtered down throughout in this campaign.”
He added that if there was conservatism in the campaign, it was on the Democratic side: "There were conservative Democrats running for office in the House of Representatives and in a couple of Senate races won by Democrats yesterday.” He cited James Webb as an example.
story...
Republicans lost control of the House, and perhaps the Senate, because they abandoned their conservative principles and in the end stood for nothing, Rush Limbaugh said today.
In his Wednesday broadcast, America’s top talker said that until Republicans begin asking themselves what’s wrong with themselves they are never going to fix their problems.
When things go wrong, Rush said, "you must look inward and ask first, ‘What did we do wrong? What could we have done better? What mistakes did we make?”
Commenting that although Republicans lost, "Conservatism did not lose, Republicanism lost last night. Republicanism, being a political party first, rather than an ideological movement, is what lost last night.”
The Democrats, he said "beat something last night with nothing. They advanced no agenda other than their usual anti-war position. They had no contract — they really never did get specific. Their message was one of ‘vote for us; the other guys have been in power too long.’”
Rush further admonished, "There was no dominating conservative message that came from the [Republican] top and filtered down throughout in this campaign.”
He added that if there was conservatism in the campaign, it was on the Democratic side: "There were conservative Democrats running for office in the House of Representatives and in a couple of Senate races won by Democrats yesterday.” He cited James Webb as an example.
story...
This Election might be Good for GOP in 2008
A column by Charles Krauthammer spells it out. They can no longer sit back and whine and complain about how bad things are going. They now have to join in the government in a very hard situation in Iraq and elsewhere. If things don’t go well, they will share in the blame, whereas had the Republicans maintained the House and the Senate they would be the fall guys for every calamity or misadventure between now and then.
story.....
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
Way to go, Minnesota
Keith Ellison, The Wahhabist Choice For Congress
Ellison was not only a member of Louis Farrakhan's rabidly anti-Semitic Nation of Islam, friendly with people who murdered policemen and those who have been engaged in domestic terrorism but he is the choice of the Saudi Wahhabist lobby in his run for Congress and has actively courted groups with Islamist sympathies, with ties to organizations like Hamas and those who believe that the U.S. Constitution should be replaced with Sharia law.
The one word which is glaringly absent from Ellison's campaign website is "terrorism."
This should not be surprising since Keith X is being financed and endorsed by a group which aids and abets it; the Council on American Islamic Relations [CAIR], a Saudi funded front group for Hamas which Middle East scholar Daniel Pipes has characterized as "'moderate' friends of terror."
Under the heading "Crime and Safety" Ellison states that, "I have been to too many funerals of young people to be anything but a strong supporter of law enforcement, but I also believe it must be balanced by other factors."
Perhaps by "balance" Ellison was referring to his call for the release of Sara Jane Olsen aka Sister Soliah, a member of the urban guerrilla Symbionese Liberation Army [the group which kidnapped Patty Hearst] who had pled guilty to placing bombs underneath two LAPD police cars .
Or maybe it's Ellison's support of cop killers Assata Shakur and Mumia Abu-Jamal?
Is Ellison's committment to "balance" the root of his agreement with Nation of Islam bigot Joanne Jackson's statement that Jews are, "the most racist white people" or his work with gang-leader Sharif Willis who murdered Minneapolis Police Officer Jerry Haaf?
complete story......
Monday, November 06, 2006
No More Tantrums/ Simple Math
Every voter should watch this video and realize that if the dems have their way, we'll cut and run (just like Vietnam) and give the terrorists a victory.
Sunday, November 05, 2006
Evolution of teaching math
This was given to me as a joke, but as I was reading it, I realized that it was both true and sad.
Math 1950-2006
Last week I purchased a burger at Burger King for $1.58. The counter girl took my $2 and I was digging for my change when I pulled 8 cents from my pocket and gave it to her. She stood there, holding the nickel and 3 pennies, while looking at the screen on her register. I sensed her discomfort and tried to tell her to just give me two quarters, but she hailed the manager for help. While he tried to explain the transaction to her, she stood there and cried.
Why do I tell you this?
Because of the evolution in teaching math since the 1950s:
1. Teaching Math In 1950
A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is 4/5 of the price. What is his profit?
2. Teaching Math In 1960
A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is 4/5 of the price, or $80. What is his profit?
3. Teaching Math In 1970
A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $80. Did he make a profit?
4. Teaching Math In 1980
A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $80 and his profit is $20. Your assignment: Underline the number 20.
5. Teaching Math In 1990
A logger cuts down a beautiful forest because he is selfish and inconsiderate and cares nothing for the habitat of animals or the preservation of our woodlands. He does this so he can make a profit of $20. What do you think of this way of making a living? Topic for class participation after answering the question: How did the birds and squirrels feel as the logger cut down their homes? ( There are no wrong answers.)
6. Teaching Math In 2006
Un hachero vende una carretada de maderapara $100. El costo de la producciones es $80. Cuanto dinero ha hecho?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
