Got this sent to me and I thought you know, this sums it up pretty well. Read them all and consider just how silly some of these "talking points" really are, yet this is what many people are willing to accept, all for the sake of "Change"
This is This is why I am voting a straight Democratic ticket:
I'm voting Democrat because I have come to the realization that I'm way too irresponsible to own a gun, and I know that my local police are all I need to protect me from murderers and thieves.
I'm voting Democrat because I love the fact that I can now marry whatever I want. I've decided to marry my horse.
I'm voting Democrat because I believe oil companies' profits of 4% on a gallon of gas are grossly obscene, but the government taxing the same gallon of gas at 15% isn't.
I'm voting Democrat because I believe the government will do a much better job of spending the money I earn than I would.
I'm voting Democrat because freedom of speech is fine as long as nobody is offended by it or it's not being used to support the 2nd Amendment.
I'm voting Democrat because when we pull out of Iraq I trust that the bad guys will stop what they're doing because they now think we're good people.
I'm voting Democrat because I believe that people who can't tell us if it will rain on Friday CAN tell us that the polar ice caps will melt away in ten years if I don't start driving a Prius.
I'm voting Democrat because I'm not really concerned about the slaughter of millions of babies through abortion so long as we keep all death row inmates alive.
I'm voting Democrat because I believe that business should not be allowed to make profits for themselves. They need to break even and give the rest away to the government for redistribution as THEY see fit.
I'm voting Democrat because I believe liberal judges need to rewrite the Constitution every few days to suit some fringe kooks who would NEVER get their agendas past the voters.
I'm voting Democrat because I realize that my head is so firmly planted up the party @#% it's highly unlikely that I'll ever have another point of view, nor ever bother to listen to anyone elses.
Friday, October 31, 2008
The Election & YOUR Vote........
In a perfect world, every vote would be equal, and politicians would be forced to address the concerns of every voter. There would be no red states, no blue states, and no battleground states. But, the sad fact is that we don’t live in a perfect world and in all likelihood your vote won’t matter. The reason for this is that during this “historic” election will be decided by voters in only six or so closely divided “battleground states.”
Now, I am sure that too many of you, that will come as a complete shock. But that is the sad state of election affairs in this day and age. The reason why the majority of states do not matter is because, with the exception of a few, there is what can be called “winner take all” rule.
In a nutshell, this rule awards all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate who receives the most popular votes. Therefore, candidates have no reason to poll, visit or pay any attention to the concerns of those states where they are clearly ahead or hopelessly lost. Michigan is a prime example. According to the McCain camp “The campaign must decide where it can best utilize its limited resources with the goal of winning nationally.”
Of course, voters in 36 of the 50 states never mattered, even before the 2008 presidential election began. The New York Times reported that both major political parties were in agreement that there would be at most 14 battleground states in 2008.
It’s important to know that this "winner take all" rule is not in the U.S. Constitution, but simply state law. Now, the easiest way to fix our broken system is to elect the president by a national popular vote. Under a national popular vote, every person’s vote, in every state, would be equally important, regardless of political party. But to many in the political establishment that would mean actually working for all the people, not just the battleground voters and that is not likely to happen without voters demanding it.
That’s why I think it is so important that voters support the National Popular Vote bill which would guarantee the presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and the District of Columbia). It’s time to reform the current system and do what the general public has long supported, electing the president by a national popular vote.
Now, I am sure that too many of you, that will come as a complete shock. But that is the sad state of election affairs in this day and age. The reason why the majority of states do not matter is because, with the exception of a few, there is what can be called “winner take all” rule.
In a nutshell, this rule awards all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate who receives the most popular votes. Therefore, candidates have no reason to poll, visit or pay any attention to the concerns of those states where they are clearly ahead or hopelessly lost. Michigan is a prime example. According to the McCain camp “The campaign must decide where it can best utilize its limited resources with the goal of winning nationally.”
Of course, voters in 36 of the 50 states never mattered, even before the 2008 presidential election began. The New York Times reported that both major political parties were in agreement that there would be at most 14 battleground states in 2008.
It’s important to know that this "winner take all" rule is not in the U.S. Constitution, but simply state law. Now, the easiest way to fix our broken system is to elect the president by a national popular vote. Under a national popular vote, every person’s vote, in every state, would be equally important, regardless of political party. But to many in the political establishment that would mean actually working for all the people, not just the battleground voters and that is not likely to happen without voters demanding it.
That’s why I think it is so important that voters support the National Popular Vote bill which would guarantee the presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and the District of Columbia). It’s time to reform the current system and do what the general public has long supported, electing the president by a national popular vote.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Children, Behave: why does politics........
Children, Behave; or "Why does politics bring out the adolescent in us?"
October 23rd, 2008 and I have officially had enough.
Today, I got what I would term the usual political email that seems to flood my inbox during this time of season. I guess this was the one that brought down my political house of card stack that had been compiling on the one vacant corner of my desk.
Now, if you have read any of my other entries, you would probably think “hey, this guy is somewhat political, so what is he moaning and groaning about?”
Here it is in a nutshell: YOU’RE ALL ACTING LIKE PEDANTIC TEENAGERS, THAT’S WHAT!!!!!!!!
Boy, what pushed him over the edge…………. Coffee maker break (again)?
No, it was actually just your typical mundane “Bush is a Moron” email. OK, listen and let me explain this once and for all. George W. Bush, 43rd President of the United States, has a Bachelor's degree from Yale University in History as well as a Master of Business Administration degree from Harvard. If anyone wants to find fault with his politics, knock yourselves out. But to sit there and say the man is a Moron is something that frankly I believe does more to discredit your intelligence than his.
So for the record, let us actually set the record straight as to what a Moron is: Moron was originally taken from the Greek word “Moros” which meant "Dull" and was subsequently used by English Psychologist Henry Goddard to describe a person with a mental age located between 8 and 12 on the Binet scale. It was once applied to people with an IQ of 51-70, being superior in one degree to "imbecile" (IQ of 26-50) and superior in two degrees to "idiot" (IQ of 0-25).
I think what bothers me is that these snarky little emails seem to reach down to the depths of what I consider schoolyard childish drivel.
If you prefer a particular candidate fine. That’s your choice and I respect it. I might not agree with you or your political feelings, but I will respect them. That is what I believe makes America the great country that it is. But if your philosphy is summed up in so much political claptrap as “No War For Oil”, “Puck Falin”, “Millionaires for McCain” you probably need to consider that you sound more like the moron that you claim the President is.
I also want to say that if you actually attended a college or university and that's the best you can put together, go back and get a refund for your tuition. They did you a great disservice.
American’s need to rise above these nonsensical diatribes and treat the election with the dignity that it deserves. We are electing the leader of the free world and yet we treat it as if it’s a “yo Mama’s so fat……” slugfest. Sad as it might be, it’s time to grow up kids.
At this point I ask, do any of you know your IQ? You just might want to check it out before you go sending any more “Moronic” emails.
Andrew,
The Angry American (Cranky as well)
October 23rd, 2008 and I have officially had enough.
Today, I got what I would term the usual political email that seems to flood my inbox during this time of season. I guess this was the one that brought down my political house of card stack that had been compiling on the one vacant corner of my desk.
Now, if you have read any of my other entries, you would probably think “hey, this guy is somewhat political, so what is he moaning and groaning about?”
Here it is in a nutshell: YOU’RE ALL ACTING LIKE PEDANTIC TEENAGERS, THAT’S WHAT!!!!!!!!
Boy, what pushed him over the edge…………. Coffee maker break (again)?
No, it was actually just your typical mundane “Bush is a Moron” email. OK, listen and let me explain this once and for all. George W. Bush, 43rd President of the United States, has a Bachelor's degree from Yale University in History as well as a Master of Business Administration degree from Harvard. If anyone wants to find fault with his politics, knock yourselves out. But to sit there and say the man is a Moron is something that frankly I believe does more to discredit your intelligence than his.
So for the record, let us actually set the record straight as to what a Moron is: Moron was originally taken from the Greek word “Moros” which meant "Dull" and was subsequently used by English Psychologist Henry Goddard to describe a person with a mental age located between 8 and 12 on the Binet scale. It was once applied to people with an IQ of 51-70, being superior in one degree to "imbecile" (IQ of 26-50) and superior in two degrees to "idiot" (IQ of 0-25).
I think what bothers me is that these snarky little emails seem to reach down to the depths of what I consider schoolyard childish drivel.
If you prefer a particular candidate fine. That’s your choice and I respect it. I might not agree with you or your political feelings, but I will respect them. That is what I believe makes America the great country that it is. But if your philosphy is summed up in so much political claptrap as “No War For Oil”, “Puck Falin”, “Millionaires for McCain” you probably need to consider that you sound more like the moron that you claim the President is.
I also want to say that if you actually attended a college or university and that's the best you can put together, go back and get a refund for your tuition. They did you a great disservice.
American’s need to rise above these nonsensical diatribes and treat the election with the dignity that it deserves. We are electing the leader of the free world and yet we treat it as if it’s a “yo Mama’s so fat……” slugfest. Sad as it might be, it’s time to grow up kids.
At this point I ask, do any of you know your IQ? You just might want to check it out before you go sending any more “Moronic” emails.
Andrew,
The Angry American (Cranky as well)
Thursday, October 16, 2008
WMD’s, Bush, Iraq War (Part Deux) and Democrats
In this heated election season much is being made about the propriety of the Iraqi War (Part Deux) and the Bush administrations “Lies” over Saddam Hussein and the alleged “WMD’s.”
It seems that people have a visceral reaction and the target of their anger is President Bush. They champion slogans like the “Illegal War”, or “Bush Lied” or one of my favorites “Weapons of Mass Distortion.”
But to look at Bush as he is the one solely responsible for this is simply not morally honest. Let me take you back to the year 1998. For those of you who don’t recall, this was the 2nd year of Clinton’s 2nd term.
Here are a few comments and the identity of those making the comments:
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." --President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." --Madeline Albright, Secretary of State, Feb 18, 1998
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." --Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."Letter to President Clinton, signed by: -- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." --Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
Now I bring this up not to support President Bush or the war, but to show in plain black and white the level of dishonesty politicians can and have risen to. If Bush lied, what did Clinton, Pelosi & Kerry do?
It seems lately that the war is the political cause “du jour” and the democrats are fond of portraying McCain as a Bush Holdover and someone who would continue this “wrong war.”
But is it a wrong war and were there never any WMD’s?
I guess the answer is what do you know about WMD’s and what Saddam Hussein said & did in the past. Let me give you a little foundational information:
(Disclaimer) – This is foundational information and is not mean to be the start all / end all. If you want to learn the complete cause and effects of WMD’s and have the stomach for it knock your socks off!!
Simply put a weapon of mass destruction (WMD) is a one which can kill or seriously injury large numbers of humans, cause severe damage to structures (man-made and natural) or the biosystem in general. The term covers several weapon types, including nuclear, biological, chemical (NBC), and radiological weapons. When you think of WMD’s this is what should come to mind.
Now what are some examples? Let’s get rid of the first two right away: Nuclear & Radiological. Why you ask? Because those are easy. Think explosions with some really nasty ramifications and you have the gist of them. (Please See Disclaimer)
Now to the ones that will definitely NOT give you the warm and fuzzies. Biological and Chemical weapons. When I think of WMD’s these are the two that keep me tossing and turning at night and replace counting sheep with little grim reapers.
Biological Weapons – These are odorless, tasteless and invisible to the human eye. The lists of these types include: Anthrax, Botulism, Plague, Smallpox, Viral hemorrhagic fevers [e.g., Ebola].
Chemical Weapons – These include: Biotoxins, Blister Agents/Vesicants, Blood Agents, Caustics (Acids), Choking/Lung/Pulmonary Agents, Nerve Agents, & Vomiting Agents.
I don’t want to be overly stress the “nastiness” of these items, so I won’t do a line by line analysis on everyone. I’ll take three:
Viral Hemorrhagic Fever - Viral hemorrhagic fever is the collective name given to the diseases caused by a group of viruses such as Ebola virus and Marburg virus.
Symptoms of the disease include fever, headache, joint and muscle pain, vomiting, bloody diarrhea, abdominal pain, sore throat, rash and chest pain may occur. The disease may also affect internal organs and the ability of blood to clot. When the blood fails to clot, the patient may bleed into internal organs and from body openings. The mortality rates are 50-80% for Ebola virus hemorrhagic fever and 30% for Marburg virus hemorrhagic fever. Understand this, death by hemorrhagic fever is GRUESOME.
It has been alleged that that the former Soviet Union experimented extensively with use of Ebola as a biological weapon. Given the current flexing of Russia’s muscle, I’d keep this in the forefront of my mind.
Anthrax – Anthrax is an acute infectious disease caused by the spore-forming bacterium Bacillus anthracis. Because anthrax is considered to be a potential agent for use in biological warfare, all active duty military personnel who might be involved in conflict are vaccinated. There are three ways of exposure to Anthrax.
Cutaneous: Most (about 95%) anthrax infections occur when the bacterium enters a cut or abrasion on the skin, such as when handling contaminated objects. Skin infection begins as a raised itchy bump that resembles an insect bite but within 1-2 days develops into a vesicle and then a painless ulcer, usually 1-3 cm in diameter, with a characteristic black necrotic (dying) area in the center. Lymph glands in the adjacent area may swell. About 20% of untreated cases of cutaneous anthrax will result in death.
Inhalation: Initial symptoms may resemble a common cold. After several days, the symptoms may progress to severe breathing problems and shock. Inhalation anthrax is usually fatal.
Intestinal: The intestinal disease form of anthrax may follow the consumption of contaminated meat and is characterized by an acute inflammation of the intestinal tract. Initial signs of nausea, loss of appetite, vomiting, fever are followed by abdominal pain, vomiting of blood, and severe diarrhea. Intestinal anthrax results in death in 25% to 60% of cases.
VX Nerve Agent - VX is the most toxic nerve agent ever synthesized for which activity has been independently confirmed.
Symptoms of skin exposure include: Eye pain, Drooling and excessive sweating, Chest tightness, Rapid breathing, Diarrhea, Increased urination, Confusion, Drowsiness, Weakness, Headache, Nausea, vomiting, and/or abdominal pain, Slow or fast heart rate, Abnormally low or high blood pressure, Loss of consciousness, Convulsions, Paralysis & Respiratory failure possibly leading to death
The lethal dose for humans is estimated to be about 10 milligrams through skin contact. Think about that for a moment, 10mg. Amounts small enough to fit on a pin head can prove fatal in less than two minutes.
I say this because people seem to be unaware of just how little of this stuff it takes to kill.
9/11 finally brought terrorism to the forefront of people’s thoughts. Sadly it seems that with each passing day that appreciation for our safety diminishes in leaps and bounds. People would rather not think about because honestly it is just too damn scary.
But a result of 9/11 was a lot more training for the nations first responders and what that training produced was an understanding of just how vulnerable we actually are. I remember an instructor explaining that if we responded to a scene where we observed numerous victims and certain conditions that basically we [the first responders] were walking dead men and the best we could do was too alert those enroute to stay back until properly suited. That was and still is our life.
At the same time they began running “drills” in which they would create a scenario that officers would respond to and see what resulted. I recall one in which patrol officers were directed to an average size van in the parking lot of a sports facility. Upon observing the contents, which while small in stature appeared quite nefarious, they requested the response of specialized units.
The responding units took the necessary precautions and sealed off the area. They then began relaying information back for a “threat assessment” and evacuation protocols. The experts agreed that the threat level was extremely high. But what happened next physically shocked everyone. When asked how far they should evacuate they were off-handedly told Baltimore……….. Which was 200 miles away. In other words, when this thing goes off your already dead.
I say this because people seem to be unaware of just how little of this stuff it takes to kill. People want to think that they are safe. Like the Ostrich who buries his head in the sand at the first sign of danger, people believe ignorance is safety. They don’t want to look at the mini-van next to them and realize that at detonation they would simply be “vaporized.”
People want to believe that there simply were no WMD’s and therefore they are safe. Really, and just how many mini-vans can you hide in a country comprising an area of 437,072 sq km or roughly twice the size of Idaho?
There is no question that Saddam Hussein HAD weapons of mass destruction. During his reign of several decades, he was well known for his use of chemical weapons in the 1980s against his own citizens as well as in the Iran–Iraq War. Following the 1991 Gulf War he also engaged in a decade long confrontation with the United Nations and its weapons inspectors. The United Nations located and destroyed large quantities of Iraqi WMD throughout the early 1990s, with varying degrees of cooperation. Throughout this period of time, and afterwards, Saddam Hussein attempted to bully cajole, impede, confront, lie and anything else he could do to muddy the inspecting waters. In view of such adversarial actions, how could anyone take him at his word?
The real question is where they are now. There is an ancient Arab proverb that says: The enemy of my enemy is my friend. So while Saddam Hussein might have had warm fuzzy feeling for some of his fellow Arab neighbors, he certainly had no love for us and neither did they. Therefore they became his friends in the battle against the great Satan by virtue of their common foe. Where are the WMD’s: Syria, Lebanon, Iran,……? Take your pick.
Understand this though; Iraq did have an active WMD program. They informed the UN as much and related “approximate” numbers produced: over 3,000 tons of mustard gas, 250 tons of tabun, and 800 tons of sarin. Iraq began to produce VX nerve gas in 1985. Iraq admitted to having produced VX but claimed only token amounts of 3-4 while the UN estimated it could have produced over 200 tons. Iraq denied ever having weaponized VX. Yet UNSCOM found evidence of VX contamination on fragments of missile warheads. Iraq never provided an adequate explanation for this evidence, insisting instead that weaponization never occurred. Consider this, a ton equals two thousand pounds. Even Iraq’s claim of 3-4 tons of VX equals eight-thousand pounds of nerve agent.
Consider for a moment that you had a child whom you confront over an allegation that the child has used drugs. The child lies and accuses the accuser of lying. You ask to search his room and he consents. You find some drugs and he then admits to having some, but no more. You begin to look through the rest of the room and he changes his mind about the search and he kicks you out of the room. After some time he announces no more drugs exist and that he “threw them away”. You ask for proof but he cannot offer anything, just his word. He invites you back to the room, with the proviso that you will be able to search where he takes you. If you want to search any place else you must notify him in advance………. Do you see how utterly ridiculous this sounds? You wouldn’t stand for it with your child, but some people seem to be ok accepting this from a maniacal psychopath who has a history of possessing biological weapons.
My friends, to quote the military tactician Carl von Clausewitz, "The best defense is a good offense.” You might not believe in the propriety of the Iraq war but the bottom line is that this country must understand that we are a target and act appropriately. The battle against terrorism will either be fought there, or fought here, but it will be fought. Understand that 9/11 was not the first attack, but only the latest in a long list. In the twenty years prior to 9/11 there were 18 foreign terrorist attacks aimed at the United States both here and abroad.
Oct. 2000 - A terrorist bomb damages the destroyer USS Cole in the port of Aden,
Aug. 1998 - Terrorist destroy U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
June 1998 - Rocket-propelled grenades explode near the U.S. embassy in Beirut.
June 1996 - A bomb explodes outside a U.S. air force installation in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia.
Nov. 1995 - A car-bomb in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia kills American military and civilian advisers. February 1993 - A bomb in a van explodes in the parking garage at the World Trade Center
Dec. 1988 - A bomb destroys Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland.
April 1986 - An explosion damages a TWA flight as it prepares to land in Athens, Greece.
April 1986 - A bomb destroys a discotheque in West Berlin directed at US Military personnel.
December 1985 - Ssuicide attacks against U.S. and Israeli check-in desks at airports.
October 1985 - Palestinian terrorists hijack the cruise liner Achille Lauro
August 1985 - A car bomb at a U.S. military base in Frankfurt, Germany
June 1985 - A TWA airliner is hijacked over the Mediterranean,
June 1985 - El Salvador, machine gun attack at an outdoor café, killing four U.S. Marines
April 1985 - A bomb explodes in a restaurant near a U.S. air base in Madrid, Spain,
November 1984 - A bomb attack on the U.S. embassy in Bogota,
October 1983 - A suicide car bomb attack against the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut
April 1983 - A suicide car bombing against the U.S. embassy in Beirut
That list doesn’t even count the Iranian Hostage Crisis where 52 U.S. diplomats were held hostage for 444 days from November 4, 1979 to January 20, 1981. Those who don’t remember that should understand that the current President of Iran, Ahmadinejad, was an active particpant in that.
We cannot simply sit by idly and hope the terrorists, and nations who support them, will change their point of view. I believe that diplomacy should be exercised in situations until you reach the point where it fails. But when you reach that point diplomats & politicians must move aside and allow the soldier to act.
Failed diplomacy and squeamish politicians are more a cause for the current situation than anything else. You cannot wage a war with a leashed military. You cannot prevent war by appeasing maniacal dictators. The enemy has seen no resolve on the part of the American people or their politicians. They have seen that the American’s at home have no stomach for war and will simply wait till we pull our troops out. All that will happen is that we will send the message to them loud and clear that we will not defend ourselves. Singing Kumbaya and holding hands around a campfire is no defense against terrorism. Mark my words, if we do not put the terrorist world on notice that we can and will defend ourselves we will face car bombs and suicide bombers on our streets.
Don’t believe that will ever happen? On 9/10 who could have possibly envisioned what would ever happen that next fateful day?
You ask where the WMD’s are and my answer is I don’t know. But I do know that Iraq produced them, admitted they produced them and now someone has them. Right now the best we can hope for is to make whoever that is terrified of ever using them against us.
Andrew,
The Angry American
It seems that people have a visceral reaction and the target of their anger is President Bush. They champion slogans like the “Illegal War”, or “Bush Lied” or one of my favorites “Weapons of Mass Distortion.”
But to look at Bush as he is the one solely responsible for this is simply not morally honest. Let me take you back to the year 1998. For those of you who don’t recall, this was the 2nd year of Clinton’s 2nd term.
Here are a few comments and the identity of those making the comments:
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." --President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." --Madeline Albright, Secretary of State, Feb 18, 1998
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." --Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."Letter to President Clinton, signed by: -- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." --Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
Now I bring this up not to support President Bush or the war, but to show in plain black and white the level of dishonesty politicians can and have risen to. If Bush lied, what did Clinton, Pelosi & Kerry do?
It seems lately that the war is the political cause “du jour” and the democrats are fond of portraying McCain as a Bush Holdover and someone who would continue this “wrong war.”
But is it a wrong war and were there never any WMD’s?
I guess the answer is what do you know about WMD’s and what Saddam Hussein said & did in the past. Let me give you a little foundational information:
(Disclaimer) – This is foundational information and is not mean to be the start all / end all. If you want to learn the complete cause and effects of WMD’s and have the stomach for it knock your socks off!!
Simply put a weapon of mass destruction (WMD) is a one which can kill or seriously injury large numbers of humans, cause severe damage to structures (man-made and natural) or the biosystem in general. The term covers several weapon types, including nuclear, biological, chemical (NBC), and radiological weapons. When you think of WMD’s this is what should come to mind.
Now what are some examples? Let’s get rid of the first two right away: Nuclear & Radiological. Why you ask? Because those are easy. Think explosions with some really nasty ramifications and you have the gist of them. (Please See Disclaimer)
Now to the ones that will definitely NOT give you the warm and fuzzies. Biological and Chemical weapons. When I think of WMD’s these are the two that keep me tossing and turning at night and replace counting sheep with little grim reapers.
Biological Weapons – These are odorless, tasteless and invisible to the human eye. The lists of these types include: Anthrax, Botulism, Plague, Smallpox, Viral hemorrhagic fevers [e.g., Ebola].
Chemical Weapons – These include: Biotoxins, Blister Agents/Vesicants, Blood Agents, Caustics (Acids), Choking/Lung/Pulmonary Agents, Nerve Agents, & Vomiting Agents.
I don’t want to be overly stress the “nastiness” of these items, so I won’t do a line by line analysis on everyone. I’ll take three:
Viral Hemorrhagic Fever - Viral hemorrhagic fever is the collective name given to the diseases caused by a group of viruses such as Ebola virus and Marburg virus.
Symptoms of the disease include fever, headache, joint and muscle pain, vomiting, bloody diarrhea, abdominal pain, sore throat, rash and chest pain may occur. The disease may also affect internal organs and the ability of blood to clot. When the blood fails to clot, the patient may bleed into internal organs and from body openings. The mortality rates are 50-80% for Ebola virus hemorrhagic fever and 30% for Marburg virus hemorrhagic fever. Understand this, death by hemorrhagic fever is GRUESOME.
It has been alleged that that the former Soviet Union experimented extensively with use of Ebola as a biological weapon. Given the current flexing of Russia’s muscle, I’d keep this in the forefront of my mind.
Anthrax – Anthrax is an acute infectious disease caused by the spore-forming bacterium Bacillus anthracis. Because anthrax is considered to be a potential agent for use in biological warfare, all active duty military personnel who might be involved in conflict are vaccinated. There are three ways of exposure to Anthrax.
Cutaneous: Most (about 95%) anthrax infections occur when the bacterium enters a cut or abrasion on the skin, such as when handling contaminated objects. Skin infection begins as a raised itchy bump that resembles an insect bite but within 1-2 days develops into a vesicle and then a painless ulcer, usually 1-3 cm in diameter, with a characteristic black necrotic (dying) area in the center. Lymph glands in the adjacent area may swell. About 20% of untreated cases of cutaneous anthrax will result in death.
Inhalation: Initial symptoms may resemble a common cold. After several days, the symptoms may progress to severe breathing problems and shock. Inhalation anthrax is usually fatal.
Intestinal: The intestinal disease form of anthrax may follow the consumption of contaminated meat and is characterized by an acute inflammation of the intestinal tract. Initial signs of nausea, loss of appetite, vomiting, fever are followed by abdominal pain, vomiting of blood, and severe diarrhea. Intestinal anthrax results in death in 25% to 60% of cases.
VX Nerve Agent - VX is the most toxic nerve agent ever synthesized for which activity has been independently confirmed.
Symptoms of skin exposure include: Eye pain, Drooling and excessive sweating, Chest tightness, Rapid breathing, Diarrhea, Increased urination, Confusion, Drowsiness, Weakness, Headache, Nausea, vomiting, and/or abdominal pain, Slow or fast heart rate, Abnormally low or high blood pressure, Loss of consciousness, Convulsions, Paralysis & Respiratory failure possibly leading to death
The lethal dose for humans is estimated to be about 10 milligrams through skin contact. Think about that for a moment, 10mg. Amounts small enough to fit on a pin head can prove fatal in less than two minutes.
I say this because people seem to be unaware of just how little of this stuff it takes to kill.
9/11 finally brought terrorism to the forefront of people’s thoughts. Sadly it seems that with each passing day that appreciation for our safety diminishes in leaps and bounds. People would rather not think about because honestly it is just too damn scary.
But a result of 9/11 was a lot more training for the nations first responders and what that training produced was an understanding of just how vulnerable we actually are. I remember an instructor explaining that if we responded to a scene where we observed numerous victims and certain conditions that basically we [the first responders] were walking dead men and the best we could do was too alert those enroute to stay back until properly suited. That was and still is our life.
At the same time they began running “drills” in which they would create a scenario that officers would respond to and see what resulted. I recall one in which patrol officers were directed to an average size van in the parking lot of a sports facility. Upon observing the contents, which while small in stature appeared quite nefarious, they requested the response of specialized units.
The responding units took the necessary precautions and sealed off the area. They then began relaying information back for a “threat assessment” and evacuation protocols. The experts agreed that the threat level was extremely high. But what happened next physically shocked everyone. When asked how far they should evacuate they were off-handedly told Baltimore……….. Which was 200 miles away. In other words, when this thing goes off your already dead.
I say this because people seem to be unaware of just how little of this stuff it takes to kill. People want to think that they are safe. Like the Ostrich who buries his head in the sand at the first sign of danger, people believe ignorance is safety. They don’t want to look at the mini-van next to them and realize that at detonation they would simply be “vaporized.”
People want to believe that there simply were no WMD’s and therefore they are safe. Really, and just how many mini-vans can you hide in a country comprising an area of 437,072 sq km or roughly twice the size of Idaho?
There is no question that Saddam Hussein HAD weapons of mass destruction. During his reign of several decades, he was well known for his use of chemical weapons in the 1980s against his own citizens as well as in the Iran–Iraq War. Following the 1991 Gulf War he also engaged in a decade long confrontation with the United Nations and its weapons inspectors. The United Nations located and destroyed large quantities of Iraqi WMD throughout the early 1990s, with varying degrees of cooperation. Throughout this period of time, and afterwards, Saddam Hussein attempted to bully cajole, impede, confront, lie and anything else he could do to muddy the inspecting waters. In view of such adversarial actions, how could anyone take him at his word?
The real question is where they are now. There is an ancient Arab proverb that says: The enemy of my enemy is my friend. So while Saddam Hussein might have had warm fuzzy feeling for some of his fellow Arab neighbors, he certainly had no love for us and neither did they. Therefore they became his friends in the battle against the great Satan by virtue of their common foe. Where are the WMD’s: Syria, Lebanon, Iran,……? Take your pick.
Understand this though; Iraq did have an active WMD program. They informed the UN as much and related “approximate” numbers produced: over 3,000 tons of mustard gas, 250 tons of tabun, and 800 tons of sarin. Iraq began to produce VX nerve gas in 1985. Iraq admitted to having produced VX but claimed only token amounts of 3-4 while the UN estimated it could have produced over 200 tons. Iraq denied ever having weaponized VX. Yet UNSCOM found evidence of VX contamination on fragments of missile warheads. Iraq never provided an adequate explanation for this evidence, insisting instead that weaponization never occurred. Consider this, a ton equals two thousand pounds. Even Iraq’s claim of 3-4 tons of VX equals eight-thousand pounds of nerve agent.
Consider for a moment that you had a child whom you confront over an allegation that the child has used drugs. The child lies and accuses the accuser of lying. You ask to search his room and he consents. You find some drugs and he then admits to having some, but no more. You begin to look through the rest of the room and he changes his mind about the search and he kicks you out of the room. After some time he announces no more drugs exist and that he “threw them away”. You ask for proof but he cannot offer anything, just his word. He invites you back to the room, with the proviso that you will be able to search where he takes you. If you want to search any place else you must notify him in advance………. Do you see how utterly ridiculous this sounds? You wouldn’t stand for it with your child, but some people seem to be ok accepting this from a maniacal psychopath who has a history of possessing biological weapons.
My friends, to quote the military tactician Carl von Clausewitz, "The best defense is a good offense.” You might not believe in the propriety of the Iraq war but the bottom line is that this country must understand that we are a target and act appropriately. The battle against terrorism will either be fought there, or fought here, but it will be fought. Understand that 9/11 was not the first attack, but only the latest in a long list. In the twenty years prior to 9/11 there were 18 foreign terrorist attacks aimed at the United States both here and abroad.
Oct. 2000 - A terrorist bomb damages the destroyer USS Cole in the port of Aden,
Aug. 1998 - Terrorist destroy U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
June 1998 - Rocket-propelled grenades explode near the U.S. embassy in Beirut.
June 1996 - A bomb explodes outside a U.S. air force installation in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia.
Nov. 1995 - A car-bomb in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia kills American military and civilian advisers. February 1993 - A bomb in a van explodes in the parking garage at the World Trade Center
Dec. 1988 - A bomb destroys Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland.
April 1986 - An explosion damages a TWA flight as it prepares to land in Athens, Greece.
April 1986 - A bomb destroys a discotheque in West Berlin directed at US Military personnel.
December 1985 - Ssuicide attacks against U.S. and Israeli check-in desks at airports.
October 1985 - Palestinian terrorists hijack the cruise liner Achille Lauro
August 1985 - A car bomb at a U.S. military base in Frankfurt, Germany
June 1985 - A TWA airliner is hijacked over the Mediterranean,
June 1985 - El Salvador, machine gun attack at an outdoor café, killing four U.S. Marines
April 1985 - A bomb explodes in a restaurant near a U.S. air base in Madrid, Spain,
November 1984 - A bomb attack on the U.S. embassy in Bogota,
October 1983 - A suicide car bomb attack against the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut
April 1983 - A suicide car bombing against the U.S. embassy in Beirut
That list doesn’t even count the Iranian Hostage Crisis where 52 U.S. diplomats were held hostage for 444 days from November 4, 1979 to January 20, 1981. Those who don’t remember that should understand that the current President of Iran, Ahmadinejad, was an active particpant in that.
We cannot simply sit by idly and hope the terrorists, and nations who support them, will change their point of view. I believe that diplomacy should be exercised in situations until you reach the point where it fails. But when you reach that point diplomats & politicians must move aside and allow the soldier to act.
Failed diplomacy and squeamish politicians are more a cause for the current situation than anything else. You cannot wage a war with a leashed military. You cannot prevent war by appeasing maniacal dictators. The enemy has seen no resolve on the part of the American people or their politicians. They have seen that the American’s at home have no stomach for war and will simply wait till we pull our troops out. All that will happen is that we will send the message to them loud and clear that we will not defend ourselves. Singing Kumbaya and holding hands around a campfire is no defense against terrorism. Mark my words, if we do not put the terrorist world on notice that we can and will defend ourselves we will face car bombs and suicide bombers on our streets.
Don’t believe that will ever happen? On 9/10 who could have possibly envisioned what would ever happen that next fateful day?
You ask where the WMD’s are and my answer is I don’t know. But I do know that Iraq produced them, admitted they produced them and now someone has them. Right now the best we can hope for is to make whoever that is terrified of ever using them against us.
Andrew,
The Angry American
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
The 7% Solution & the 95% Illusion
In the Sherlock Holmes novel, The Seven Per Cent Solution, Holmes informs Dr. Watson of his belief that Professor James Moriarty is a "Napoleon of Crime". The book presents this opinion as nothing more than the cocaine induced delusions of Holmes' mind. Those who have been in law enforcement or the medical profession often encounter people like this, who “see” and “hear” things that are in fact not real but the by-product of the narcotic influence over their otherwise normal brain functions.
I say this first, because I am getting the same impression regarding the 95% tax cuts being promised. It sounds good; it makes sense, but is it real or just a “Financial Cocaine” induced delusion?
You have heard the statement played ad nauseum if you have turned on a TV News report anytime in the last several months. “"Here is what I can tell the American people: 95 percent of you will get a tax cut.” Please understand this, he is saying "American People or Workers", Not TAXPAYERS.
During this period of financial upheaval, where every day seems like we are on a never ending roller-coaster ride, these words are like a salve to our broken and bleeding pocket-books and wallets. But does this “cream” help us, or is it masking an even greater ailment lurking around the corner?
Consider this, the part of Obama's tax plan that results in widespread tax cuts is a tax credit for workers, intended to offset payroll taxes. That’s right; you’re going to get a credit, because those businesses that comprise that 5% are going to see their taxes raised.
Now, the other problem with this statement is how is it possible to cut 95 percent of Americans' taxes when 40 percent of Americans don't pay any income tax? So, when they say 95% are going to get tax refunds, understand that SOMEONE is going to be paying for those 40% who do not contribute in the first place. You, who actual pay taxes, are going to get a tax credit while those who don't pay taxes are going to get the same tax credit. I don't care how you try and spin this, it is a HAND-OUT !!!!
I want everyone to think of this in a simple way. You have three kids and one “vacation piggy-bank.” One of your kids is in his teens and works every day after school and gets a paycheck, the second child does chores at home and gets an allowance, and the third child does nothing. I use this analogy, because most people can relate to this. At the end of the week the working child contributes 50% of his wages to the piggy bank. The second child contributes 15% of his allowance and the third, well nothing.
At the end of the year, Mom breaks open the bank and everyone goes on vacation. Do you understand who paid the most? Do you understand who paid the least? Do you understand that they are all sharing the same benefits? Can anyone understand why the first child might not work as hard next year? If that child does not work as hard, what kind of vacation will the family have?
People you need to understand this. We live in a capitalist society. That’s not a bad word. It means that we all have the potential to do as good or as bad as we choose. It is about responsibility to ones self and not a reliance on handouts. We have welfare, which allows those “TEMPORARILY” down on their luck to weather the storms in their lives until they get back on their feet. This country has lost sight of the temporary aspect and we are now living with generations of “entitlement babies” who believe that the government is mandated to pay them. The problem is WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT. Your money, in the form of taxes, is what pays these scam artists.
And now the promise, even if you don’t pay taxes, you’re going to benefit. Again, people….. You are going to pay. When that 50% kid decides to move out, who do you think is going to make up the difference in the vacation piggy-bank down the road? Thats right, Child #2 !!
This country is printing and spending money like it is going out of style. Truth is it might be. We are approaching the time when our currency might go out of style because it is not worth the paper it is printed on. The government cannot operate without money and since our politicians have it good in DC and no reason to give up their day job, they are going to find the money. When the 5% are not cutting it anymore, they are going to turn to the “95%”, but 40% aren’t paying anyway, so guess who that lives Joe & Jane Six-Pack.
The other day Obama was in Ohio and got begged for a series of hard questions from a Plumber. Not a Fortune 500 Investor, not a Corporate Exec, a plumber. One of the “Forgotten People.” Here is a text of the exchange:
"Your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isn't it?" the plumber asked, complaining that he was being taxed "more and more for fulfilling the American dream."
"It's not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they've got a chance for success too," Obama responded. "My attitude is that if the economy's good for folks from the bottom up, it's gonna be good for everybody ... I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."
“Spread the Wealth Around”………. My friends that is Socialism.
Socialists mainly share the belief that Capitalism unfairly concentrates power and wealth into a small section of society who controls capital, and creates an unequal society. All socialists advocate the creation of an egalitarian society, in which wealth and power are distributed more evenly. The problem is, when you spread that wealth you remove the impetus to continue working from those people and by extension the businesses they run, that thrive on the idea of capitalism. The belief that “when I work hard I reap the benefits of my labor.” If you remove that reward, you remove the reason to work hard. When you do that those business close, and all those “spread the wealth” people have less wealth to spread. Your politicians will not suffer that same problem, trust me they are all “financial secure”.
What those politicians will due, is take you from the socialist dream to a communist state where the government will continue to dole out continually diminishing sources of revenue.
Socialism is the intermediate system between capitalism and communism, when the government is in the process of changing the means of ownership from privatism, to collective ownership.
There are people who say it “can’t” happen, yet history tells us time and again when it has. I’m asking the question: Why Can’t it Happen? - "It's not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they've got a chance for success too,…."
“Spreading the Wealth” is not giving some a “chance for success” it is fulfilling one of the basic tenets of Socialism where those are don’t have are simply “given” it without ever earning it.
Here is what I know from my 44 years:
I worked my tail off for everything I have.
I took a pay-cut to get a job that had healthcare
I paid my way through college
I sacrificed when times where tough so that I could pay my obligations
I bought houses and cars I could AFFORD not ones I WANTED
And now I am being told that the responsible choices and hard work I engaged in which lead to my “success” are not as important as simply GIVING that “success” to those less fortunate who have never worked for them.
“... I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."
So you answer me this: “What lessons do I teach my kids about hard work, when Obama says he is going to make the playing field level and spread the wealth around for everybody?”
WHY IS THIS SO DIFFICULT TO GRASP…………………
All I can say is: MAY GOD HAVE MERCY ON US ALL
Andrew,
The Angry American
I say this first, because I am getting the same impression regarding the 95% tax cuts being promised. It sounds good; it makes sense, but is it real or just a “Financial Cocaine” induced delusion?
You have heard the statement played ad nauseum if you have turned on a TV News report anytime in the last several months. “"Here is what I can tell the American people: 95 percent of you will get a tax cut.” Please understand this, he is saying "American People or Workers", Not TAXPAYERS.
During this period of financial upheaval, where every day seems like we are on a never ending roller-coaster ride, these words are like a salve to our broken and bleeding pocket-books and wallets. But does this “cream” help us, or is it masking an even greater ailment lurking around the corner?
Consider this, the part of Obama's tax plan that results in widespread tax cuts is a tax credit for workers, intended to offset payroll taxes. That’s right; you’re going to get a credit, because those businesses that comprise that 5% are going to see their taxes raised.
Now, the other problem with this statement is how is it possible to cut 95 percent of Americans' taxes when 40 percent of Americans don't pay any income tax? So, when they say 95% are going to get tax refunds, understand that SOMEONE is going to be paying for those 40% who do not contribute in the first place. You, who actual pay taxes, are going to get a tax credit while those who don't pay taxes are going to get the same tax credit. I don't care how you try and spin this, it is a HAND-OUT !!!!
I want everyone to think of this in a simple way. You have three kids and one “vacation piggy-bank.” One of your kids is in his teens and works every day after school and gets a paycheck, the second child does chores at home and gets an allowance, and the third child does nothing. I use this analogy, because most people can relate to this. At the end of the week the working child contributes 50% of his wages to the piggy bank. The second child contributes 15% of his allowance and the third, well nothing.
At the end of the year, Mom breaks open the bank and everyone goes on vacation. Do you understand who paid the most? Do you understand who paid the least? Do you understand that they are all sharing the same benefits? Can anyone understand why the first child might not work as hard next year? If that child does not work as hard, what kind of vacation will the family have?
People you need to understand this. We live in a capitalist society. That’s not a bad word. It means that we all have the potential to do as good or as bad as we choose. It is about responsibility to ones self and not a reliance on handouts. We have welfare, which allows those “TEMPORARILY” down on their luck to weather the storms in their lives until they get back on their feet. This country has lost sight of the temporary aspect and we are now living with generations of “entitlement babies” who believe that the government is mandated to pay them. The problem is WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT. Your money, in the form of taxes, is what pays these scam artists.
And now the promise, even if you don’t pay taxes, you’re going to benefit. Again, people….. You are going to pay. When that 50% kid decides to move out, who do you think is going to make up the difference in the vacation piggy-bank down the road? Thats right, Child #2 !!
This country is printing and spending money like it is going out of style. Truth is it might be. We are approaching the time when our currency might go out of style because it is not worth the paper it is printed on. The government cannot operate without money and since our politicians have it good in DC and no reason to give up their day job, they are going to find the money. When the 5% are not cutting it anymore, they are going to turn to the “95%”, but 40% aren’t paying anyway, so guess who that lives Joe & Jane Six-Pack.
The other day Obama was in Ohio and got begged for a series of hard questions from a Plumber. Not a Fortune 500 Investor, not a Corporate Exec, a plumber. One of the “Forgotten People.” Here is a text of the exchange:
"Your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isn't it?" the plumber asked, complaining that he was being taxed "more and more for fulfilling the American dream."
"It's not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they've got a chance for success too," Obama responded. "My attitude is that if the economy's good for folks from the bottom up, it's gonna be good for everybody ... I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."
“Spread the Wealth Around”………. My friends that is Socialism.
Socialists mainly share the belief that Capitalism unfairly concentrates power and wealth into a small section of society who controls capital, and creates an unequal society. All socialists advocate the creation of an egalitarian society, in which wealth and power are distributed more evenly. The problem is, when you spread that wealth you remove the impetus to continue working from those people and by extension the businesses they run, that thrive on the idea of capitalism. The belief that “when I work hard I reap the benefits of my labor.” If you remove that reward, you remove the reason to work hard. When you do that those business close, and all those “spread the wealth” people have less wealth to spread. Your politicians will not suffer that same problem, trust me they are all “financial secure”.
What those politicians will due, is take you from the socialist dream to a communist state where the government will continue to dole out continually diminishing sources of revenue.
Socialism is the intermediate system between capitalism and communism, when the government is in the process of changing the means of ownership from privatism, to collective ownership.
There are people who say it “can’t” happen, yet history tells us time and again when it has. I’m asking the question: Why Can’t it Happen? - "It's not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they've got a chance for success too,…."
“Spreading the Wealth” is not giving some a “chance for success” it is fulfilling one of the basic tenets of Socialism where those are don’t have are simply “given” it without ever earning it.
Here is what I know from my 44 years:
I worked my tail off for everything I have.
I took a pay-cut to get a job that had healthcare
I paid my way through college
I sacrificed when times where tough so that I could pay my obligations
I bought houses and cars I could AFFORD not ones I WANTED
And now I am being told that the responsible choices and hard work I engaged in which lead to my “success” are not as important as simply GIVING that “success” to those less fortunate who have never worked for them.
“... I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."
So you answer me this: “What lessons do I teach my kids about hard work, when Obama says he is going to make the playing field level and spread the wealth around for everybody?”
WHY IS THIS SO DIFFICULT TO GRASP…………………
All I can say is: MAY GOD HAVE MERCY ON US ALL
Andrew,
The Angry American
Friday, October 10, 2008
Understanding the Stock Market
I believe this was from an Irish Newspaper article. It is probably one of the easiest methods of explaining the stock market. Enjoy !!!
Once upon a time in a village, a man appeared and announced to the villagers that he would buy monkeys for $10 each. The villagers, seeing that there were many monkeys around, went out to the forest, and started catching them.
The man bought thousands at $10, but as supply started to diminish, the villagers stopped their efforts. At this point the man announced that he would now buy them at $20 each. This renewed the efforts of the villagers, and they started catching monkeys again.
Soon the supply diminished even further so people started going back to their farms.Then the offer increased to $25 each, whereupon the supply of monkeys became so limited that it was an effort to even see a monkey, let alone catch it!The man now announced that he would buy monkeys at $50 each!
However, he had to go to the city on some business so his assistant would now buy on his behalf for him.
In the absence of the man, the assistant told the villagers, 'Look at all these monkeys in the big cage that the man has collected. I will sell them to you at $35 each and when the man returns from the city, you can sell them to him for $50 each.'
So the villagers rounded up all their savings and bought all the monkeys. They never saw the man nor his assistant again, but there were monkeys everywhere!
And now you have a better understanding of how the stock market works.
Once upon a time in a village, a man appeared and announced to the villagers that he would buy monkeys for $10 each. The villagers, seeing that there were many monkeys around, went out to the forest, and started catching them.
The man bought thousands at $10, but as supply started to diminish, the villagers stopped their efforts. At this point the man announced that he would now buy them at $20 each. This renewed the efforts of the villagers, and they started catching monkeys again.
Soon the supply diminished even further so people started going back to their farms.Then the offer increased to $25 each, whereupon the supply of monkeys became so limited that it was an effort to even see a monkey, let alone catch it!The man now announced that he would buy monkeys at $50 each!
However, he had to go to the city on some business so his assistant would now buy on his behalf for him.
In the absence of the man, the assistant told the villagers, 'Look at all these monkeys in the big cage that the man has collected. I will sell them to you at $35 each and when the man returns from the city, you can sell them to him for $50 each.'
So the villagers rounded up all their savings and bought all the monkeys. They never saw the man nor his assistant again, but there were monkeys everywhere!
And now you have a better understanding of how the stock market works.
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Want to go to a SPA ?
I'm beginning to think that the ATAA Blog needs an award. Something befitting the enormous "Cajones" we see swinging so prevalently in these "Winds of Fall".
We have come to expect "pork barrel spending" and all sorts of wonderful exotic "learning junkets" that our esteemed politicians engage in. But this, oh this is a classic..... Your money, hard at work people!!!
Days after AIG received $85 BILLION in loans from the government (a.k.a. US) to save their proverbial "asses", Executives went to the St. Regis Monarch Beach, a coastal location just south of Los Angeles. It really is a nice place, looks very relaxing. The Tuscan-inspired resort is described as "............Situated high on a bluff overlooking the majestic Pacific Ocean, stands a landmark resort of legendary proportions."
Legendary is a good word here.
When the smoke cleared, they racked up a tab of almost half a million dollars ($443,344 to be exact) and guess who got the bill !!!!
I guess in today's economic market, that total wasn't so bad. I just wish they had sent us taxpayers a postcard so we would know they were having a good time. But I guess at $.27 X 200,000,000.00 I don't think we could have afforded it.
Since we are bailing out everyone and their brother lately, can WE claim this on our tax return ?
Here are the line item amounts for this little R&R session:
$147,302 for banquets
$139,375 on rooms
$23,380 for spa services
$6,939 for golf
$5,016 at the Stonehill Tavern
$3,065 for in-room dining and the lobby lounge
$2,949 for gratuities
$1,901 at the Monarch Bayclub
$1,488 at the resort’s Vogue Salon
The best part is they are asking now for $37.8 billion.
Legendary..................
BREAKING NEWS: 10/09/08 Washington D.C. - Evoking its emergency powers to combat financial market stress, the Federal Reserve on Wednesday said it was lending $37.8 billion in additional cash troubled American International Group Inc.
As of last week, AIG had already used $60 billion of the original $85 billion.
Ask and ye shall receive........... pack your bags kids, next stop a week of Aqua-Aerobics in Venice,...... Italy
Andrew,
The Angry American
We have come to expect "pork barrel spending" and all sorts of wonderful exotic "learning junkets" that our esteemed politicians engage in. But this, oh this is a classic..... Your money, hard at work people!!!
Days after AIG received $85 BILLION in loans from the government (a.k.a. US) to save their proverbial "asses", Executives went to the St. Regis Monarch Beach, a coastal location just south of Los Angeles. It really is a nice place, looks very relaxing. The Tuscan-inspired resort is described as "............Situated high on a bluff overlooking the majestic Pacific Ocean, stands a landmark resort of legendary proportions."
Legendary is a good word here.
When the smoke cleared, they racked up a tab of almost half a million dollars ($443,344 to be exact) and guess who got the bill !!!!
I guess in today's economic market, that total wasn't so bad. I just wish they had sent us taxpayers a postcard so we would know they were having a good time. But I guess at $.27 X 200,000,000.00 I don't think we could have afforded it.
Since we are bailing out everyone and their brother lately, can WE claim this on our tax return ?
Here are the line item amounts for this little R&R session:
$147,302 for banquets
$139,375 on rooms
$23,380 for spa services
$6,939 for golf
$5,016 at the Stonehill Tavern
$3,065 for in-room dining and the lobby lounge
$2,949 for gratuities
$1,901 at the Monarch Bayclub
$1,488 at the resort’s Vogue Salon
The best part is they are asking now for $37.8 billion.
Legendary..................
BREAKING NEWS: 10/09/08 Washington D.C. - Evoking its emergency powers to combat financial market stress, the Federal Reserve on Wednesday said it was lending $37.8 billion in additional cash troubled American International Group Inc.
As of last week, AIG had already used $60 billion of the original $85 billion.
Ask and ye shall receive........... pack your bags kids, next stop a week of Aqua-Aerobics in Venice,...... Italy
Andrew,
The Angry American
Monday, October 6, 2008
Obama Youth - Scary
Is it just me, or does this scare any of you just a little bit?
The Obama Youth
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvMI_3CCCfM
The Obama Junior Fraternity
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSvBCBnulLs
The last time the world saw this type of political oriented activity by the national youth, they were called “Hitler Jugend.”
And then you have a new poll from Readers Digest:
Global Poll Finds Obama Preferred in All Countries But U.S.
Barack Obama's proclamation last July to being a "citizen of the world" was affirmed Monday as a new poll -- taken before the August conventions -- showed that in 16 out of 17 countries surveyed he was the overwhelming choice to be the next president of the United States.
The poll also found that, counter to Obama's claims that America's reputation abroad is taking a beating, half of the 16 countries surveyed offered strong "pro-American" sentiments.
Andrew,
The Angry American
The Obama Youth
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvMI_3CCCfM
The Obama Junior Fraternity
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSvBCBnulLs
The last time the world saw this type of political oriented activity by the national youth, they were called “Hitler Jugend.”
And then you have a new poll from Readers Digest:
Global Poll Finds Obama Preferred in All Countries But U.S.
Barack Obama's proclamation last July to being a "citizen of the world" was affirmed Monday as a new poll -- taken before the August conventions -- showed that in 16 out of 17 countries surveyed he was the overwhelming choice to be the next president of the United States.
The poll also found that, counter to Obama's claims that America's reputation abroad is taking a beating, half of the 16 countries surveyed offered strong "pro-American" sentiments.
Andrew,
The Angry American
Democrat or Republican
I thought I would post this for everyone to see. It had originally gone out as an email because two people close to me actually asked me "who" I was voting for. I thought with all the "anti-Dem / anti-Rep" emails floating around that it was a great question and deserved an honest answer. If you plan on praising one candidate while lambasting another you should stand for something and go on the record. So take this for what it is worth, my choice & my name, and not some anonymous diatribe.
First let me say that I'm voting for John McCain. Although I will preface that statement with this note: it is not because I truly believe him to be the best candidate, sadly I think he is the lesser of the two evils. I respect him for his service to this country and I am humbled by what he endured. To his patriotism there is no question. The man is a hero, but I am not blinded by that.
I do disagree with John McCain on many issues:
1. McCain - Feingold (Finance Reform)
2. McCain - Kennedy (Immigration)
3. McCain - Lieberman (2nd Amendment)
And that's not even touching on: McCain - Kerry, McCain - Edwards, McCain - Bayh. As a matter of fact, I've often felt that he is sometimes a better Democrat, than most Democrats are. Let's face it, compared to McCain, Obama has not done much. A reporter once remarked "[McCain] has become the most hyphenated name in Washington."
But if that's not enough to scare the crap out of me, along comes the alternative with a quote like this:
"You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them,... And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." Barack Obama, April 2008.
Hmmmm let's see Senator, maybe the antipathy and anti-immigration sentiment is based on all of us folks watching the government (that would be you folks) once again failing to do your job. Perhaps people are just sick and tired of watching people, who in many instances aren't even supposed to be here, playing the system and collecting money & benefits. While politicians sit back in their plush offices in D.C. slapping each others back on a job well done protecting those poor wretches. I certainly understand where the money that pays for all this comes from. By the way, I'm also a Christian, I own guns, live in the mid-west and have a deep aversion to anyone who believes that something is owed to them without having to do any thing to earn it. I guess that makes me one of the "Bitter" people in your eyes.
Why I will not vote for Barack Obama.
1st - I do not believe Obama has the credentials to be President. We are supposed to believe that he is an agent of change. Someone who is outside the realm of politics as usual. That he will be a "leader who takes on the hard issues" even when it means telling people what they don't want to hear. Yet as a Illinois State Senator (1997-2004), he chose neither to vote for or against some sensitive bills. As a matter of fact, he voted nearly 130 times “present,” which allowed him to avoid taking a stand. I'm sorry, you can't have your cake and eat it too. Or as a Professor of Political Studies in Illinois commented “If you are worried about your next election, the "present" vote gives you political cover.”
2nd - Nothing Obama is saying is new. It is the same "talking points" that everyone else has been spewing forth. There hasn't been an original idea in Washington in decades. Don't tell me what you are going to do "for me", tell me who is going to pay the bill. It's like those damn tax rebate checks. You want to jump start the economy, reach into your own damn wallet and send me some money.
3rd - Gun Control. In this case it is deeds my friend, not words. Obama says he has "never favored an all-out ban on handguns." Yet his record supporting state legislation says something different. Ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns. Ban assault weapons. Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons. Increase state restrictions on the purchase and possession of firearms. Mandatory waiting periods and background checks. He say's "I have no intention of taking away folks' guns." Yet he supported the D.C. Gun ban. He voted for a bill in the Illinois senate that allowed retired law enforcement officers to carry concealed weapons. Yet he was the most consistent anti-gun candidate when it came to enforcing and expanding gun control laws for average citizens. I guess when you are battling against your (Republican) opponent to win the endorsement of the Fraternal Order of Police you make exceptions to your position. But it begs the question "what else is he willing to make exceptions on to get votes?"
This is the deal breaker for me. I have been shooting and a gun owner for 25 years. I have never misplaced a gun, shot anyone accidentally, nor been involved in a drive-by. My idea of gun control is a proper sight picture coupled with trigger control. I will be damned if I am going to allow someone to dictate to me what I can and cannot have, simply because they do not believe in it. I don't tell you what to drive, where to eat, who to like or dislike or where you can live. I'm an adult & I don't need a keeper. Don't try to argue with me about protecting me from crime. I lived & worked in that fantasy world for the better part of my adult life. Go to every urban area where there are major gun problems and you will find that guns are already banned up the wazoo. News flash, your gun bans don't work because criminals don't care about breaking the law. I live my life by the old adage made famous by President Theodore Roosevelt: "Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far."
4th - Attacking the Great Beast (Oil Companies). Tell me and the American people why you (or Democrats in General for that matter) have such an aversion to "big oil." Is it because it is politically expedient to do so right now? George W. is in Oil so I guess I already know the answer. Politicians love to point out how Exxon / Mobil made Forty Billion dollars in profit in 2007. What they are less inclined to tell you is that they also paid Thirty Billion dollars in taxes.
My curiosity stems from the fact that when you look at "profit / revenue" there are some other companies that make a much nicer target, like say GE, McDonalds, Disney, or how about good old Microsoft. All of these firms make more profit off the dollar than Exxon. As a matter of fact Microsoft has a gross profit margin double that of Exxon. But what about this food for thought: Taxes (that's you Government folks again) on gas account for about 20% of the price, which about double the profit oil companies make. I don't buy into all the hype. I will admit it does appeal to me on an emotional level when I am gassing up my car, but I'm not buying this argument. Confused, good take an aspirin. As a collective group pharmaceutical companies make double the profits oil companies make.
By the way, it might not concern some wealthy Senator, but I rely on a pension and personal investments to allow me to "live" day to day. I wonder if they ever considered what impact their "tax the wealthy" schemes will have on the markets. I have little "hope", "trust", "faith" or whatever other "catch phrase" they are using today to believe they won't make more of mess with Social Security than they already have. I've paid into that little "Political Trust Fund" for well over twenty years. Yet each year that I get closer to being able to collect it, it keeps dropping further and further. To me, SS is little more than a government sponsored scam at this point. I keep paying into something that loses me money! Here's a news flash my friends, that fund you keep pumping money into is Twelve Trillion Dollars in debt. I "Hope" that by the time I reach the age to collect it, God Willing, I "Trust" that I should be able to purchase enough cat food for the month. But to tell you the truth I don't have much "Faith."
5th - Right, Wrong or Indifferent I do tend to judge people by the quality and character of their "friends" and the people they associate with. This list is not a "positive" endorsement of the mans character, but rather an indictment. Do a search on any and formulate your own opinions.
Bill Ayers (Weatherman Underground / Explosives) - Terrorist Group - This ones near and dear to NYPD & Capitol Police Cops.
Bernadine Dohrn (Students for a Democratic Society / SDS) - Terrorist Group
Mike Klonsky (Students for a Democratic Society / SDS) & (Communist Party USA Chairman (Marxist-Leninist)
Frank Marshall Davis (Communist Party USA (Marxist-Leninist)
Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright (and I mean Rev. in the loosest of terms)
Father Michael Pfleger (disgraced Chicago Catholic priest)
Tony Rezko (Chicago Political Insider) - Convicted of 16 felony corruption counts including fraud, money laundering and abetting bribery.
Khalid Al-Mansour - Anti White / Christian Racist (petitioned on behalf of Obama for admission to Harvard)
Trinity United Church of Christ (see Rev. Jeremiah Wright) - 2007 awarded Louis Farrakhan it's Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter Award and said of him "truly epitomized greatness."
Obama spends more time distancing, and disassociating, himself from his friends and their statements: "(I decry) racism and anti-Semitism in every form." But have you noticed that he only does it AFTER the facts surface. Are we to believe that a man who wants to be elected President of the United States of America has these lapses in judgment?
6th - Global Upheaval. Let's face it, we live in a very uncertain world these days. The Middle East isn't very pretty, Russia is taking a trip down military memory lane, China seems to be preparing to consume everything in it's path and that Daffy Duck loving psychopath in North Korea is not giving me the warm fuzzies. Obama says he was "anti-War" from the very beginning, even when he was an Illinois State Senator. Is anyone shocked by this? As a state senator he represented one of the most liberal districts in the state of Illinois. It encompasses Chicago's lake front, Hyde Park, the University of Chicago & African American neighborhoods in the southern half of the district. What choice did he have but to be anti-war? That's not being a "strong leader willing to take a stand on hard issues", that's just being politically expedient. Yet, when he did get elected to the US Senate, where was his political cajones? What has he actually done to show his anti-war stance. Not said, done. At least John Kerry stood by his position.
I personally do not believe that in this day and age Barack Obama has the experience, or the backbone, to lead this country. Back in May he made the comment that Iran was a "tiny" nation that didn't pose a threat. In the sake of full disclosure he further said "They don't pose a serious threat to us the way the Soviet Union posed a threat to us. You know, Iran, they spend one-100th of what we spend on the military. If Iran ever tried to pose a serious threat to us, they wouldn't stand a chance." Yes, I do know Iran. They are a state sponsor of terrorist groups who have led attacks on our soldiers. I also remember that in 1979 this "tiny" nation took our Embassy hostage and held 52 Americans from November 4, 1979 to January 20, 1981. I also remember who was the US President then, and I am pretty sure that some of the former hostages remember who the Iranian President is now. Small world. By the way, when Congress voted to identify the Iranian Revolutionary Guards as a terror group, not only was Obama conveniently absent from the vote, but he subsequently attacked his political opponents for voting to designate the Guards as a terror group. Obama stated that it was just "justification for attacking Iran."
So Mr. Obama does not see the threat posed by a terrorist nation. OK, what does he think of our allies? Back in 2007 in a speech he said "It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al-Qaeda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will." OK, wait a second. This is the anti-War candidate saying he would take independent military action within the borders of a sovereign (nuclear) nation that happens to also be our ally? Are you serious? Please, someone spin this for me. Are there more politically expedient terrorist groups to target? al-Qaeda is more "badder" than Hamas? Hezbollah ?
Oh and who chided him on that statement, none other than his new best friend forever VP Candidate Joe Biden and the new Democratic darling Hillary Clinton. "BO"'s response: "I find it amusing, that those who helped to authorize and engineer the biggest foreign policy disaster in our generation are now criticizing me for making sure that we are on the right battlefield and not the wrong battlefield in the war against terrorism." Ouch, Love hurts.
Here is what I do know. Iran is an oil wealthy nation seeking Nuclear weapons and with a serious (genocidal) dislike for the United States and their own neighbor Israel. The same Israel who happen to be our only true ally in the region. How does Barack view Israel. Well, it's not really clear. He seems to "protect" himself with non controversial votes which seem to allude towards a positive attitude, but what about his friends & acquaintances? Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright, the teachings of the Trinity United Church of Christ, Louis Farrakhan, George Sorros (Obama Fund Raiser). All vehemently anti-Israel. Have you asked yourself who are some of Obama's Foreign Policy Advisors? Zbigniew Brzezinski, Robert Malley, Tony Lake, Ivo Daalder, Scott Lasensky. By and large mostly Carter and Clinton people with a decidely pro-Arab, and in some cases, strong anti-Israel viewpoint. Does this make any of you feel good?
No I'm sorry "Tax the Rich", "Health Care for All" and "End the Illegal War" aren't cutting it for me. I want real answers to real questions and not just the normal political sound bites to make you look insightful without ever answering anything. That doesn't instill "Change We Can Believe In" to me, but it certainly does reek of "Politics As Usual Chump".
Do not be led blindly into the future. I have said this before and I will say it again. Politicians are elected by the people. We are their employers and if we send them to Washington without holding them accountable then we get what we deserve. It is not about looks, nor sound bites, nor empty promises. If that were the case we would elect (TV Pitchman) Billy May's as President and cry away our tears with a Sham-Wow.
Decide for yourself who best fits your needs. But if I wanted to be scammed, I have four kids that will happily provide that service to me and NOT raise my taxes.
Personally, I want a President like Theodore Roosevelt. "The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else."
By the way, does anyone know who was the original champion of Universal Health Care & national Health Insurance ? Yeah, TR. 100 years ago and they are still promising us what they can't deliver.
Andrew
The Angry American
First let me say that I'm voting for John McCain. Although I will preface that statement with this note: it is not because I truly believe him to be the best candidate, sadly I think he is the lesser of the two evils. I respect him for his service to this country and I am humbled by what he endured. To his patriotism there is no question. The man is a hero, but I am not blinded by that.
I do disagree with John McCain on many issues:
1. McCain - Feingold (Finance Reform)
2. McCain - Kennedy (Immigration)
3. McCain - Lieberman (2nd Amendment)
And that's not even touching on: McCain - Kerry, McCain - Edwards, McCain - Bayh. As a matter of fact, I've often felt that he is sometimes a better Democrat, than most Democrats are. Let's face it, compared to McCain, Obama has not done much. A reporter once remarked "[McCain] has become the most hyphenated name in Washington."
But if that's not enough to scare the crap out of me, along comes the alternative with a quote like this:
"You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them,... And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." Barack Obama, April 2008.
Hmmmm let's see Senator, maybe the antipathy and anti-immigration sentiment is based on all of us folks watching the government (that would be you folks) once again failing to do your job. Perhaps people are just sick and tired of watching people, who in many instances aren't even supposed to be here, playing the system and collecting money & benefits. While politicians sit back in their plush offices in D.C. slapping each others back on a job well done protecting those poor wretches. I certainly understand where the money that pays for all this comes from. By the way, I'm also a Christian, I own guns, live in the mid-west and have a deep aversion to anyone who believes that something is owed to them without having to do any thing to earn it. I guess that makes me one of the "Bitter" people in your eyes.
Why I will not vote for Barack Obama.
1st - I do not believe Obama has the credentials to be President. We are supposed to believe that he is an agent of change. Someone who is outside the realm of politics as usual. That he will be a "leader who takes on the hard issues" even when it means telling people what they don't want to hear. Yet as a Illinois State Senator (1997-2004), he chose neither to vote for or against some sensitive bills. As a matter of fact, he voted nearly 130 times “present,” which allowed him to avoid taking a stand. I'm sorry, you can't have your cake and eat it too. Or as a Professor of Political Studies in Illinois commented “If you are worried about your next election, the "present" vote gives you political cover.”
2nd - Nothing Obama is saying is new. It is the same "talking points" that everyone else has been spewing forth. There hasn't been an original idea in Washington in decades. Don't tell me what you are going to do "for me", tell me who is going to pay the bill. It's like those damn tax rebate checks. You want to jump start the economy, reach into your own damn wallet and send me some money.
3rd - Gun Control. In this case it is deeds my friend, not words. Obama says he has "never favored an all-out ban on handguns." Yet his record supporting state legislation says something different. Ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns. Ban assault weapons. Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons. Increase state restrictions on the purchase and possession of firearms. Mandatory waiting periods and background checks. He say's "I have no intention of taking away folks' guns." Yet he supported the D.C. Gun ban. He voted for a bill in the Illinois senate that allowed retired law enforcement officers to carry concealed weapons. Yet he was the most consistent anti-gun candidate when it came to enforcing and expanding gun control laws for average citizens. I guess when you are battling against your (Republican) opponent to win the endorsement of the Fraternal Order of Police you make exceptions to your position. But it begs the question "what else is he willing to make exceptions on to get votes?"
This is the deal breaker for me. I have been shooting and a gun owner for 25 years. I have never misplaced a gun, shot anyone accidentally, nor been involved in a drive-by. My idea of gun control is a proper sight picture coupled with trigger control. I will be damned if I am going to allow someone to dictate to me what I can and cannot have, simply because they do not believe in it. I don't tell you what to drive, where to eat, who to like or dislike or where you can live. I'm an adult & I don't need a keeper. Don't try to argue with me about protecting me from crime. I lived & worked in that fantasy world for the better part of my adult life. Go to every urban area where there are major gun problems and you will find that guns are already banned up the wazoo. News flash, your gun bans don't work because criminals don't care about breaking the law. I live my life by the old adage made famous by President Theodore Roosevelt: "Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far."
4th - Attacking the Great Beast (Oil Companies). Tell me and the American people why you (or Democrats in General for that matter) have such an aversion to "big oil." Is it because it is politically expedient to do so right now? George W. is in Oil so I guess I already know the answer. Politicians love to point out how Exxon / Mobil made Forty Billion dollars in profit in 2007. What they are less inclined to tell you is that they also paid Thirty Billion dollars in taxes.
My curiosity stems from the fact that when you look at "profit / revenue" there are some other companies that make a much nicer target, like say GE, McDonalds, Disney, or how about good old Microsoft. All of these firms make more profit off the dollar than Exxon. As a matter of fact Microsoft has a gross profit margin double that of Exxon. But what about this food for thought: Taxes (that's you Government folks again) on gas account for about 20% of the price, which about double the profit oil companies make. I don't buy into all the hype. I will admit it does appeal to me on an emotional level when I am gassing up my car, but I'm not buying this argument. Confused, good take an aspirin. As a collective group pharmaceutical companies make double the profits oil companies make.
By the way, it might not concern some wealthy Senator, but I rely on a pension and personal investments to allow me to "live" day to day. I wonder if they ever considered what impact their "tax the wealthy" schemes will have on the markets. I have little "hope", "trust", "faith" or whatever other "catch phrase" they are using today to believe they won't make more of mess with Social Security than they already have. I've paid into that little "Political Trust Fund" for well over twenty years. Yet each year that I get closer to being able to collect it, it keeps dropping further and further. To me, SS is little more than a government sponsored scam at this point. I keep paying into something that loses me money! Here's a news flash my friends, that fund you keep pumping money into is Twelve Trillion Dollars in debt. I "Hope" that by the time I reach the age to collect it, God Willing, I "Trust" that I should be able to purchase enough cat food for the month. But to tell you the truth I don't have much "Faith."
5th - Right, Wrong or Indifferent I do tend to judge people by the quality and character of their "friends" and the people they associate with. This list is not a "positive" endorsement of the mans character, but rather an indictment. Do a search on any and formulate your own opinions.
Bill Ayers (Weatherman Underground / Explosives) - Terrorist Group - This ones near and dear to NYPD & Capitol Police Cops.
Bernadine Dohrn (Students for a Democratic Society / SDS) - Terrorist Group
Mike Klonsky (Students for a Democratic Society / SDS) & (Communist Party USA Chairman (Marxist-Leninist)
Frank Marshall Davis (Communist Party USA (Marxist-Leninist)
Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright (and I mean Rev. in the loosest of terms)
Father Michael Pfleger (disgraced Chicago Catholic priest)
Tony Rezko (Chicago Political Insider) - Convicted of 16 felony corruption counts including fraud, money laundering and abetting bribery.
Khalid Al-Mansour - Anti White / Christian Racist (petitioned on behalf of Obama for admission to Harvard)
Trinity United Church of Christ (see Rev. Jeremiah Wright) - 2007 awarded Louis Farrakhan it's Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter Award and said of him "truly epitomized greatness."
Obama spends more time distancing, and disassociating, himself from his friends and their statements: "(I decry) racism and anti-Semitism in every form." But have you noticed that he only does it AFTER the facts surface. Are we to believe that a man who wants to be elected President of the United States of America has these lapses in judgment?
6th - Global Upheaval. Let's face it, we live in a very uncertain world these days. The Middle East isn't very pretty, Russia is taking a trip down military memory lane, China seems to be preparing to consume everything in it's path and that Daffy Duck loving psychopath in North Korea is not giving me the warm fuzzies. Obama says he was "anti-War" from the very beginning, even when he was an Illinois State Senator. Is anyone shocked by this? As a state senator he represented one of the most liberal districts in the state of Illinois. It encompasses Chicago's lake front, Hyde Park, the University of Chicago & African American neighborhoods in the southern half of the district. What choice did he have but to be anti-war? That's not being a "strong leader willing to take a stand on hard issues", that's just being politically expedient. Yet, when he did get elected to the US Senate, where was his political cajones? What has he actually done to show his anti-war stance. Not said, done. At least John Kerry stood by his position.
I personally do not believe that in this day and age Barack Obama has the experience, or the backbone, to lead this country. Back in May he made the comment that Iran was a "tiny" nation that didn't pose a threat. In the sake of full disclosure he further said "They don't pose a serious threat to us the way the Soviet Union posed a threat to us. You know, Iran, they spend one-100th of what we spend on the military. If Iran ever tried to pose a serious threat to us, they wouldn't stand a chance." Yes, I do know Iran. They are a state sponsor of terrorist groups who have led attacks on our soldiers. I also remember that in 1979 this "tiny" nation took our Embassy hostage and held 52 Americans from November 4, 1979 to January 20, 1981. I also remember who was the US President then, and I am pretty sure that some of the former hostages remember who the Iranian President is now. Small world. By the way, when Congress voted to identify the Iranian Revolutionary Guards as a terror group, not only was Obama conveniently absent from the vote, but he subsequently attacked his political opponents for voting to designate the Guards as a terror group. Obama stated that it was just "justification for attacking Iran."
So Mr. Obama does not see the threat posed by a terrorist nation. OK, what does he think of our allies? Back in 2007 in a speech he said "It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al-Qaeda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will." OK, wait a second. This is the anti-War candidate saying he would take independent military action within the borders of a sovereign (nuclear) nation that happens to also be our ally? Are you serious? Please, someone spin this for me. Are there more politically expedient terrorist groups to target? al-Qaeda is more "badder" than Hamas? Hezbollah ?
Oh and who chided him on that statement, none other than his new best friend forever VP Candidate Joe Biden and the new Democratic darling Hillary Clinton. "BO"'s response: "I find it amusing, that those who helped to authorize and engineer the biggest foreign policy disaster in our generation are now criticizing me for making sure that we are on the right battlefield and not the wrong battlefield in the war against terrorism." Ouch, Love hurts.
Here is what I do know. Iran is an oil wealthy nation seeking Nuclear weapons and with a serious (genocidal) dislike for the United States and their own neighbor Israel. The same Israel who happen to be our only true ally in the region. How does Barack view Israel. Well, it's not really clear. He seems to "protect" himself with non controversial votes which seem to allude towards a positive attitude, but what about his friends & acquaintances? Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright, the teachings of the Trinity United Church of Christ, Louis Farrakhan, George Sorros (Obama Fund Raiser). All vehemently anti-Israel. Have you asked yourself who are some of Obama's Foreign Policy Advisors? Zbigniew Brzezinski, Robert Malley, Tony Lake, Ivo Daalder, Scott Lasensky. By and large mostly Carter and Clinton people with a decidely pro-Arab, and in some cases, strong anti-Israel viewpoint. Does this make any of you feel good?
No I'm sorry "Tax the Rich", "Health Care for All" and "End the Illegal War" aren't cutting it for me. I want real answers to real questions and not just the normal political sound bites to make you look insightful without ever answering anything. That doesn't instill "Change We Can Believe In" to me, but it certainly does reek of "Politics As Usual Chump".
Do not be led blindly into the future. I have said this before and I will say it again. Politicians are elected by the people. We are their employers and if we send them to Washington without holding them accountable then we get what we deserve. It is not about looks, nor sound bites, nor empty promises. If that were the case we would elect (TV Pitchman) Billy May's as President and cry away our tears with a Sham-Wow.
Decide for yourself who best fits your needs. But if I wanted to be scammed, I have four kids that will happily provide that service to me and NOT raise my taxes.
Personally, I want a President like Theodore Roosevelt. "The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else."
By the way, does anyone know who was the original champion of Universal Health Care & national Health Insurance ? Yeah, TR. 100 years ago and they are still promising us what they can't deliver.
Andrew
The Angry American
Saturday, October 4, 2008
What is a Hero?
I figured I would start October out with a respite from the political nonsense that seems to be so prevalent in our country right now.
Coming from New York City, I lived through a lot of police bashing. Every civilian has an opinion of what you should be doing, and when you should be doing it. We got a little relief after 9/11 when everyone was shell shocked. But it never lasts.
There is a great video on YouTube which shows a guy getting a chance to be a "Cop for a Day" in Baltimore. Very Funny Stuff.
But in all seriousness, the photo below shows exactly what it means to be a cop. A Cop in Regina, Canada approaches a High School where there is a hostage situation as students are seen fleeing. That's what it means to be a cop. As others run for safety, you run into harms way. (Thanks to Gregor in Austria for sharing the photo)
General George S. Patton said it best: “Courage is fear holding on a minute longer.”
Andrew
The Angry American
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)