We all are used to using GPS now and presume the system is foolproof. The fact is, satellite and radar signals can be "spoofed".
"Spoofed" means GPS and/or radar signals telling the plane's guidance systems it's in one place when in fact it's elsewhere. This might explain the unusual route the plane took early on.
No one yet has asked if a plane's guidance systems can be tricked into thinking it's one place when in fact it's elsewhere. It is theoretically possible.
So is this why authorities are vague on the plane's whereabouts? Are they trying to determine if someone spoofed the plane's location?
Friday, March 21, 2014
Wednesday, March 12, 2014
THEORY: What if flight #MH370 partially collided with another object? #MalaysiaAirlines
I posit this theory as the news is conflicting as to where the one plane wound up, off the coast of Vietnam, as per the oil rig email, or, in the Malacca Strait, as the Malaysian military tracked an hour later.
What if there were TWO PLANES that partially collided, sending them both off course? That would explain how an oil rig employee would see a falling plane in the South China Sea, while the Malaysian military would be tracking another in the Malacca Strait at about the same time.
The trouble with this theory is that no one is reporting another plane missing, at least, not that we know of. We simply can't have two crash sites 1,000 miles apart. This is the only way to explain two sites.
If the 2nd plane is a military plane, it would explain why a 2nd plane isn't being reported.
What if there were TWO PLANES that partially collided, sending them both off course? That would explain how an oil rig employee would see a falling plane in the South China Sea, while the Malaysian military would be tracking another in the Malacca Strait at about the same time.
The trouble with this theory is that no one is reporting another plane missing, at least, not that we know of. We simply can't have two crash sites 1,000 miles apart. This is the only way to explain two sites.
If the 2nd plane is a military plane, it would explain why a 2nd plane isn't being reported.
Tuesday, February 11, 2014
#CommonCore part of the UN agenda
Borrowed from a FB poster (please forgive my plagiarism here):
Gwendolynn Britt
Jan 25 near Bellmore, NY
I wrote this up to share with a friend today. I hope you find it to be useful:
Common Core is a UN power grab. There are 6 areas that stand out to me as bad:
16 CAREER CLUSTERS – by the 8th grade it will be determined which of the 16 Career clusters your child will be enrolled in (they haven’t done this yet, but they are setting it up). The determination as to which cluster they belong to will be made by the following – the child’s test scores, what we need to strengthen the US economy and what will increase our competitiveness worldwide.
These are the clusters - http://www.careervision.org/resources/careerclusters.htmPROPAGANDA – Common Core is LOADED with propaganda: ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause; also : a public action having such an effect.
When you skew the information that is being presented by omitting information and only presenting items that support your cause, this becomes propaganda.
Teaching our children the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights is FINE.
Only teaching the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights without focusing on our Declaration of Independence is BAD
Teaching our children that Che Guevara was a revolutionary is FINE
Omitting the fact that he was a mass murderer is BAD
Teaching our children to be “good citizens” is FINE
Coercing them to sacrifice their individualism in order to be “good citizens” is BAD
For other examples of propaganda/indoctrination, go to: http://youtu.be/rGph7QHzmo8 https://www.facebook.com/groups/631223740256334/ https://www.facebook.com/groups/557214860993007/EXPENSE – The total nationwide cost for 7 years of the Common Core Standards Initiative is $15.8 billion. This includes the cost to states of CCS Testing, Professional Development, Textbooks, and Technology. The taxpayers in each of the 45 states (and D. C.) that have committed to the Common Core Standards Initiative (CCSI) will be left “holding the bag” because our federal government with a national debt of $16 trillion cannot come in and alleviate the cost to the states.
For more information on Common Core Costs go to: http://www.educationviews.org/states-taxpayers-cannot-afford-common-core-standards/ https://www.facebook.com/groups/390497607722303/390498857722178/HIGH STAKES TESTING – Standardized testing has come to dominate our schools and severely compromises a teacher’s ability to do their job. Teachers have been forced to adopt inferior test-oriented teaching practices that take too much time away from classroom activities to accommodate endless practice tests. Where teachers were once able to inspire and motivate students to become passionate creative thinkers, they are now forced to teach scripted, (literally) mind numbing, and fast paced common core material which leaves no room for the teachers to teach to the individual student. They feel like drones, force feeding the kids for hours upon hours of test prep work. These tests do not have any educational value. They are simply used to evaluate teachers, principals, and schools. This one score can mean the end of a career, this results in months upon months of test prepping.
For more information on High Stakes Testing
https://www.facebook.com/groups/Longislandoptout/DATA MINING – Over 400 data points are being collected on our children. Some of them make sense; some of them are incredibly intrusive and have no business being collected. Some of the more offense data points:
religious affiliation
ability grouping
physical characteristics
attendance
bus stop times
allergies
diseases
languages and dialects spoken
number of attempts at a given assignment
delinquent status
non-school activity involvement
meal type
screen name
maternal last name
voting status
marital status
cause of death
For more info on the data points, go to: http://nces.ed.gov/forum/datamodel/eiebrowser/techview.aspx?instance=studentElementarySecondaryMATH – The math has been altered in such a way as to make answers less important and the process/discussion leading up to the answer more important. In this way they can enforce that there are no absolutes. Math is no longer a law, it’s a squishy idea. The math is peppered with propaganda. The parents can’t even help their children with their homework because it’s so convoluted. This makes the parent look foolish in their children’s eyes and the children must rely on the authorities to provide answers.
For more info on CC Math, go to:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/414574295335773/
Gwendolynn Britt
Jan 25 near Bellmore, NY
I wrote this up to share with a friend today. I hope you find it to be useful:
Common Core is a UN power grab. There are 6 areas that stand out to me as bad:
16 CAREER CLUSTERS – by the 8th grade it will be determined which of the 16 Career clusters your child will be enrolled in (they haven’t done this yet, but they are setting it up). The determination as to which cluster they belong to will be made by the following – the child’s test scores, what we need to strengthen the US economy and what will increase our competitiveness worldwide.
These are the clusters - http://www.careervision.org/resources/careerclusters.htmPROPAGANDA – Common Core is LOADED with propaganda: ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause; also : a public action having such an effect.
When you skew the information that is being presented by omitting information and only presenting items that support your cause, this becomes propaganda.
Teaching our children the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights is FINE.
Only teaching the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights without focusing on our Declaration of Independence is BAD
Teaching our children that Che Guevara was a revolutionary is FINE
Omitting the fact that he was a mass murderer is BAD
Teaching our children to be “good citizens” is FINE
Coercing them to sacrifice their individualism in order to be “good citizens” is BAD
For other examples of propaganda/indoctrination, go to: http://youtu.be/rGph7QHzmo8 https://www.facebook.com/groups/631223740256334/ https://www.facebook.com/groups/557214860993007/EXPENSE – The total nationwide cost for 7 years of the Common Core Standards Initiative is $15.8 billion. This includes the cost to states of CCS Testing, Professional Development, Textbooks, and Technology. The taxpayers in each of the 45 states (and D. C.) that have committed to the Common Core Standards Initiative (CCSI) will be left “holding the bag” because our federal government with a national debt of $16 trillion cannot come in and alleviate the cost to the states.
For more information on Common Core Costs go to: http://www.educationviews.org/states-taxpayers-cannot-afford-common-core-standards/ https://www.facebook.com/groups/390497607722303/390498857722178/HIGH STAKES TESTING – Standardized testing has come to dominate our schools and severely compromises a teacher’s ability to do their job. Teachers have been forced to adopt inferior test-oriented teaching practices that take too much time away from classroom activities to accommodate endless practice tests. Where teachers were once able to inspire and motivate students to become passionate creative thinkers, they are now forced to teach scripted, (literally) mind numbing, and fast paced common core material which leaves no room for the teachers to teach to the individual student. They feel like drones, force feeding the kids for hours upon hours of test prep work. These tests do not have any educational value. They are simply used to evaluate teachers, principals, and schools. This one score can mean the end of a career, this results in months upon months of test prepping.
For more information on High Stakes Testing
https://www.facebook.com/groups/Longislandoptout/DATA MINING – Over 400 data points are being collected on our children. Some of them make sense; some of them are incredibly intrusive and have no business being collected. Some of the more offense data points:
religious affiliation
ability grouping
physical characteristics
attendance
bus stop times
allergies
diseases
languages and dialects spoken
number of attempts at a given assignment
delinquent status
non-school activity involvement
meal type
screen name
maternal last name
voting status
marital status
cause of death
For more info on the data points, go to: http://nces.ed.gov/forum/datamodel/eiebrowser/techview.aspx?instance=studentElementarySecondaryMATH – The math has been altered in such a way as to make answers less important and the process/discussion leading up to the answer more important. In this way they can enforce that there are no absolutes. Math is no longer a law, it’s a squishy idea. The math is peppered with propaganda. The parents can’t even help their children with their homework because it’s so convoluted. This makes the parent look foolish in their children’s eyes and the children must rely on the authorities to provide answers.
For more info on CC Math, go to:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/414574295335773/
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
Did Hollywood setup Obama to lose?
Let's take a short trip down memory lane:
Firstly, some months ago, Matt Damon, Hollywood hotshot and former big time Obama supporter, has harsh words for Barack. Well documented now.
Secondly, Joe Biden, in an apparent foot-in-mouth incident, starts rambling about liking the concept of gay marriage to the media. At first, it seemed ill-timed. But in hindsight, it now appears that Biden is really more of a special-interest bullhorn for the White House. Hollywood tells Biden "Jump!" Biden says "How High?"
Thirdly, Jon Lovitz. His criticism of Obama was very recent, last month in fact. It was clear he was unhappy with the politics of the rich "not paying their fair share". This is why I ask the question.
There's only one thing Hollywood loves more than gay marriage, and that's MONEY. $15 million to Democrats may seem like a lot to us, but if they dislike Obama as much as I believe they do, the $15 million is a small price to pay for getting a wealth redistributor like Obama to shoot his own foot.
Some Hollywood personalities were very open to discussing the issue of gay marriage on twitter with conservatives, almost too eager. The timing around the North Carolina election was simply too coincidental.
If you have another take on it I'd like to hear it. Please post a reply. Thank you
Firstly, some months ago, Matt Damon, Hollywood hotshot and former big time Obama supporter, has harsh words for Barack. Well documented now.
Secondly, Joe Biden, in an apparent foot-in-mouth incident, starts rambling about liking the concept of gay marriage to the media. At first, it seemed ill-timed. But in hindsight, it now appears that Biden is really more of a special-interest bullhorn for the White House. Hollywood tells Biden "Jump!" Biden says "How High?"
Thirdly, Jon Lovitz. His criticism of Obama was very recent, last month in fact. It was clear he was unhappy with the politics of the rich "not paying their fair share". This is why I ask the question.
There's only one thing Hollywood loves more than gay marriage, and that's MONEY. $15 million to Democrats may seem like a lot to us, but if they dislike Obama as much as I believe they do, the $15 million is a small price to pay for getting a wealth redistributor like Obama to shoot his own foot.
Some Hollywood personalities were very open to discussing the issue of gay marriage on twitter with conservatives, almost too eager. The timing around the North Carolina election was simply too coincidental.
If you have another take on it I'd like to hear it. Please post a reply. Thank you
Saturday, April 21, 2012
Like Ted Nugent needs another reason to rant!
McMillan Fiberglass Stocks, McMillan Firearms Manufacturing, McMillan Group International have been collectively banking with Bank of America for 12 years. Today Mr. Ray Fox, Senior Vice President, Market Manager, Business Banking, Global Commercial Banking came to my office. He scheduled the meeting as an “account analysis” meeting in order to evaluate the two lines of credit we have with them. He spent 5 minutes talking about how McMillan has changed in the last 5 years and have become more of a firearms manufacturer than a supplier of accessories.
At this point I interrupted him and asked “Can I possible save you some time so that you don’t waste your breath? What you are going to tell me is that because we are in the firearms manufacturing business you no longer what my business.”
“That is correct” he says.
I replied “That is okay, we will move our accounts as soon as possible. We can find a 2nd Amendment friendly bank that will be glad to have our business. You won’t mind if I tell the NRA, SCI and everyone one I know that BofA is not firearms industry friendly?”
“You have to do what you must” he said.
“So you are telling me this is a politically motivated decision, is that right?”
Mr Fox confirmed that it was. At which point I told him that the meeting was over and there was nothing let for him to say.
I think it is import for all Americans who believe in and support our 2nd amendment right to keep and bear arms should know when a business does not support these rights. What you do with that knowledge is up to you. When I don’t agree with a business’ political position I can not in good conscience support them. We will soon no longer be accepting Bank of America credit cards as payment for our products.
Kelly D McMillan
Director of Operations
McMillan Group International, LLC
623-582-9635
www.mcmillanusa.com
At this point I interrupted him and asked “Can I possible save you some time so that you don’t waste your breath? What you are going to tell me is that because we are in the firearms manufacturing business you no longer what my business.”
“That is correct” he says.
I replied “That is okay, we will move our accounts as soon as possible. We can find a 2nd Amendment friendly bank that will be glad to have our business. You won’t mind if I tell the NRA, SCI and everyone one I know that BofA is not firearms industry friendly?”
“You have to do what you must” he said.
“So you are telling me this is a politically motivated decision, is that right?”
Mr Fox confirmed that it was. At which point I told him that the meeting was over and there was nothing let for him to say.
I think it is import for all Americans who believe in and support our 2nd amendment right to keep and bear arms should know when a business does not support these rights. What you do with that knowledge is up to you. When I don’t agree with a business’ political position I can not in good conscience support them. We will soon no longer be accepting Bank of America credit cards as payment for our products.
Kelly D McMillan
Director of Operations
McMillan Group International, LLC
623-582-9635
www.mcmillanusa.com
Friday, April 06, 2012
For the fiscally secure social conservative, #Romney vs. Obama breeds apathy for the GOP
Yes. I am a Santorum supporter. I will probably vote Romney if I must. It's not my 1st item of priority though. If the absentee ballot gets lost in the mail, I'm not going to call the elections office to find out where it is.
Why am I facing elective apathy? Because my House & Senate GOP choices don't look promising either. There's not that much to look forward to come November in my district.
It would seem to me the GOP wants us to sit this election out. Obama is spiking the economy in select places, knowing that Romney will look more like a lateral move rather than a fundamental return to our values. You know, where Democrats have done the real damage.
You crusties at the top of the GOP, you keep pandering to liberal voters. I'm sure you believe you're far more clever than Obama, Biden, Pelosi, Reid, Clinton, Dean, Emanuel, etc. at getting liberal voters. They've only been at it for 2 generations, but you're so much better at it...
Why am I facing elective apathy? Because my House & Senate GOP choices don't look promising either. There's not that much to look forward to come November in my district.
It would seem to me the GOP wants us to sit this election out. Obama is spiking the economy in select places, knowing that Romney will look more like a lateral move rather than a fundamental return to our values. You know, where Democrats have done the real damage.
You crusties at the top of the GOP, you keep pandering to liberal voters. I'm sure you believe you're far more clever than Obama, Biden, Pelosi, Reid, Clinton, Dean, Emanuel, etc. at getting liberal voters. They've only been at it for 2 generations, but you're so much better at it...
Thursday, March 15, 2012
WH energy "agenda" coming back to bite them
Obama's running around today trying to cover his own rear end on his no-energy policy. I know Rush likes to talk about the polls & Obama's reaction to them, but there's much more going on here.
For the last two years, Obama's been trying to get Congress to lift the tax break for the little oil investor, the "you-and-me" investor. He likes to call it a "subsidy", but it's nothing of the sort. This was always part of his "comprehensive" energy plan (sarcasm), it would separate oil companies from investors, thus forcing us into liberal "green" scams. Here's a good link from The Right Scoop on it:
http://www.therightscoop.com/wh-cutting-oil-subsidies-about-fairness-not-about-gas-prices/
Many of Obama's financial supporters are basically green energy scammers that are seeing their investment go up in smoke. The pressure on the White House from former donors must be incredible, even Senate Democrats refused Obama.
Obama is being stubborn. He doesn't want to anger his donor base, so instead he's trying to find a way to deflect blame to Republicans.
Good luck with that, Mr. Obama. America knows the truth about you.
For the last two years, Obama's been trying to get Congress to lift the tax break for the little oil investor, the "you-and-me" investor. He likes to call it a "subsidy", but it's nothing of the sort. This was always part of his "comprehensive" energy plan (sarcasm), it would separate oil companies from investors, thus forcing us into liberal "green" scams. Here's a good link from The Right Scoop on it:
http://www.therightscoop.com/wh-cutting-oil-subsidies-about-fairness-not-about-gas-prices/
Many of Obama's financial supporters are basically green energy scammers that are seeing their investment go up in smoke. The pressure on the White House from former donors must be incredible, even Senate Democrats refused Obama.
Obama is being stubborn. He doesn't want to anger his donor base, so instead he's trying to find a way to deflect blame to Republicans.
Good luck with that, Mr. Obama. America knows the truth about you.
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Delegate count - the skinny #TeamSantorum
Romney Frontloaded Friendly States
Romney supporters on the Republican National Committee manipulated the calendar to front-load several of the states that were favorable towards him. That was beneficial to his early lead in the delegate count, however it is problematic for him as the race continues and moves towards less friendly states. This is one of the reasons that they have been emphasizing their fuzzy delegate math after Super Tuesday.
Race Moves towards Santorum's Strength
The race for the nomination will soon start to move towards primaries and caucuses that are more favorable terrain for Rick Santorum. More importantly, the race will eventually move from primaries and caucuses that are often beauty contests to real county and state convention contests where actual delegates to the national convention are elected.
Anyone who knows anything about state conventions knows that the most conservative candidate has a big advantage over a moderate candidate. In many cases, this advantage is overwhelming.
Romney's Delegate Problem
Romney has a delegate problem in that he will have a very hard time getting his moderate supporters elected as delegates in these convention systems. This was evident in Iowa this weekend where the Romney operation collapsed, and Santorum and Paul gained delegates.
The Real Calendar
The Real Calendar (TRC) officially kicked off this weekend in Iowa where activists gathered to begin the process of electing national convention delegates. It is clear to anyone who understands this process that a moderate candidate like Mitt Romney is going to have a difficult time winning as many delegates to the national convention in an Iowa County and State Convention system as the media calculated based on the Open Caucus system that took place in January. This system will play out in state after state, and although there will be hiccups in certain states, on average Rick Santorum will gain far more delegates than Mitt Romney through this delegate election process.
The Real Count
The count largely depends on how you calculate the delegates in states such as Iowa that have not yet elected their National Convention Delegates. For example, the RNC currently gives Santorum 0 delegates for Iowa, the media gives him 7. We believe he will end up with more than 7 delegates as the process plays out. We also believe that Romney will receive less.
Most of the publicly available delegate counts are fundamentally flawed because none of them have taken into account that conservative grassroots activists at county and state conventions will elect more Santorum delegates than a primary or even caucus beauty contest in the same respective state would allocate. Therefore, the Real Counts are far better than the projected counts and will continue to improve as the National Convention approaches and states elect their actual convention delegates. The Santorum campaign will keep a tally called the Real Count moving forward. It will be based on the results of both the Real Calendar and the Traditional Calendar.
Romney supporters on the Republican National Committee manipulated the calendar to front-load several of the states that were favorable towards him. That was beneficial to his early lead in the delegate count, however it is problematic for him as the race continues and moves towards less friendly states. This is one of the reasons that they have been emphasizing their fuzzy delegate math after Super Tuesday.
Race Moves towards Santorum's Strength
The race for the nomination will soon start to move towards primaries and caucuses that are more favorable terrain for Rick Santorum. More importantly, the race will eventually move from primaries and caucuses that are often beauty contests to real county and state convention contests where actual delegates to the national convention are elected.
Anyone who knows anything about state conventions knows that the most conservative candidate has a big advantage over a moderate candidate. In many cases, this advantage is overwhelming.
Romney's Delegate Problem
Romney has a delegate problem in that he will have a very hard time getting his moderate supporters elected as delegates in these convention systems. This was evident in Iowa this weekend where the Romney operation collapsed, and Santorum and Paul gained delegates.
The Real Calendar
The Real Calendar (TRC) officially kicked off this weekend in Iowa where activists gathered to begin the process of electing national convention delegates. It is clear to anyone who understands this process that a moderate candidate like Mitt Romney is going to have a difficult time winning as many delegates to the national convention in an Iowa County and State Convention system as the media calculated based on the Open Caucus system that took place in January. This system will play out in state after state, and although there will be hiccups in certain states, on average Rick Santorum will gain far more delegates than Mitt Romney through this delegate election process.
The Real Count
The count largely depends on how you calculate the delegates in states such as Iowa that have not yet elected their National Convention Delegates. For example, the RNC currently gives Santorum 0 delegates for Iowa, the media gives him 7. We believe he will end up with more than 7 delegates as the process plays out. We also believe that Romney will receive less.
Most of the publicly available delegate counts are fundamentally flawed because none of them have taken into account that conservative grassroots activists at county and state conventions will elect more Santorum delegates than a primary or even caucus beauty contest in the same respective state would allocate. Therefore, the Real Counts are far better than the projected counts and will continue to improve as the National Convention approaches and states elect their actual convention delegates. The Santorum campaign will keep a tally called the Real Count moving forward. It will be based on the results of both the Real Calendar and the Traditional Calendar.
Monday, January 09, 2012
A treatise on the views (and concerns) of the Social Conservative
I often get the question regarding the sanctity of life, and marriage, "well why do you want to impose your views on others?" This post is written to explain some of these false premises that are often peddled by the left, and how "impose" is a gross misapplication of the definition. While no expert, I think I understand enough of what Rick Santorum is seeking, and you will hopefully see why he has the clearest vision and is the best choice for the country.
Here is the situation we have going on today in America. 1st of all, let's tackle the "Life" vs "Choice" arguments:
"Roe v. Wade" was decided by 7 of 9 Supreme Court Justices. The presumption here is that this case settled the woman i.e. "female" right to choose to terminate her pregnancy i.e. "life". Let's explore this in a bit more detail.
Since "Roe v. Wade", technology gave us a deep understanding of what pregnancy i.e. "life" is defined as. We now know that upon the moment of conception, we essentially have an entirely new individual (person?) with its own unique DNA.
Great! Now let's ask them how they feel about whether they want to be aborted or not. (See how this is no longer as simple an understanding as it used to be?) if this new individual is a female, doesn't this essentially contradict the ruling? Where is her "right to choose"?
DEFINITION 1: "PERSONS"
The Constitution uses the term "persons" to define each of us. When the Constitution was written, there was a primitive understanding of pregnancy and all of its various complexities. Certainly, we must assume, had our forefathers known, the incredible level of detail that comes with conception, they would have expanded the definition of "persons" so it would not be left to the COURTS TO DECIDE, i.e. "Roe v Wade".
We are committing gross negligence to our country's future generations here, not to mention the spirit of the Constitution, by leaving this incredibly complex issue to SCOTUS who themselves are as archaic as the forefather's understanding of conception!
Rick Santorum is sounding the alarm bells with this issue. If we allow the Courts to decide when we're defined as a "person" upon conception, then we're also allowing the Courts to decide when we are a "person" upon near death too!
I think we can all agree that's not what we want. Rick Santorum isn't necessarily saying "Roe v Wade" was wrong. He's saying based upon new understanding of conception, IT'S OUTDATED, and we need to have a National Forum and discussion to debate, at what point does the Constitution define us as a "person"? This needs standardization by the Constitution, not tyrannical Kangaroo Courts making grossly inconsistent rulings.
DEFINITION 2: "MARRIAGE"
This one is trickier, but I'll do my very best to explain it.
Simply put, the purpose of marriage thru the ages (time immemorial) has been to bear & raise children, aka "nuclear family". Whether you are a religious person or not, no one can argue that we're designed to be connected as one man, one woman. This is also known to be described as NATURAL LAW. Any other relationship is social experimentation and therefore non-natural.
Marriage is not just a contractual relationship between people so good hair trial lawyers like John Edwards can swoop in like vultures to suck us dry upon divorce. To the majority of Americans, it's a form of religious expression that should be recognized under the 1st Amendment. In traditional Judeo-Christian upbringing, marriage brings with it sacred responsibilities that far and away exceed the minimalist file-clerk-at-the-county-seat window view. Attempting to redefine marriage is a form of hostility, marginalization towards Judeo-Christian beliefs for the sake of satisfying political opponents.
There is a very easy alternative solution for this. Allow Civil Unions at the State level. If your State wants to recognize Civil Unions, by all means, pay the County Clerk $60, take your union certificate and be sure you know a good divorce attorney (never let it be said I'm not pro-Union!)
Moving on...
As Rick Santorum has pointed out, using a Brookings Institute (a liberal think tank!) study as a reference, the overwhelmingly, statistically-evidenced best opportunity for success a child has is being part of a nuclear family. We must encourage parents to get married (or stay married). Orphans should be placed w/ married couples as much as is allowable.
Now of course the next question is "why not let gays adopt?" in my personal view, every American child deserves the best opportunity to be nurtured for success. The child deserves a natural upbringing, not a social experiment.
Before you bludgeon me with labels, you have to understand that our Country needs to have a National Forum of discussion on this too. Do we have a Federal level responsibility to insure a minimum opportunity of success for each child or not? Do we allow States to decide the minimum level of parentless child placement?
Can gay couples achieve such an upbringing with a high rate of success over long historical periods? If not, should we require the couple have a strong mentor of the opposite sex actively involved in the child's life to insure this occur? Do we address an item like this at the Federal level, or do we let the States handle it? I don't have those answers, what I have is more questions.
This is why we need legal framework. It's not an imposition, the idea is quite the opposite, to prevent rogue Judicial verdicts & rulings from taking a child's best available opportunity for achieving their own success. Leaving the Courts to decide this is a Dereliction of our Patriotic Duty!
DEFINITION 3: PARENTAL RIGHTS
While many of us have been delving into how much we can avoid upsetting our liberal friends, those of us that have avoided this are seeing a disturbing trend at the local & state levels. Parental rights are being destroyed at alarming rate, mostly in our court system. Case Law for parents is now just a form of Governmental intimidation & fear. If your kid is fat, the State can take him/her from you. This is tyrannical in every sense of the word. Good parents shouldn't have to be afraid of feeding their children a diet not approved by the DCS Gestapo, or worse, the WH imposed diet.
The Court system is deciding "parental rights" in America right now. We need to resolve this at the Federal level as well. Parental Rights needs to be a universally accepted concept, not wild suppositions by incompetent Courts at the local level that keep adding to the "Case Law" meme. Federal Law or Constitutional Amendment needs to provide framework so State/Local Governments don't exceed their authority on parental rights, lest we continue ruining the lives of American children that need reliable parental nurturing, not Judicial neglect and tyranny.
Future generations are depending on us, so we can depend on them. It is they who will eventually care for our needs as we grow older. Keep neglecting them, butchering them, abusing them, and they won't be around for us when we need them most. God Bless America!
Here is the situation we have going on today in America. 1st of all, let's tackle the "Life" vs "Choice" arguments:
"Roe v. Wade" was decided by 7 of 9 Supreme Court Justices. The presumption here is that this case settled the woman i.e. "female" right to choose to terminate her pregnancy i.e. "life". Let's explore this in a bit more detail.
Since "Roe v. Wade", technology gave us a deep understanding of what pregnancy i.e. "life" is defined as. We now know that upon the moment of conception, we essentially have an entirely new individual (person?) with its own unique DNA.
Great! Now let's ask them how they feel about whether they want to be aborted or not. (See how this is no longer as simple an understanding as it used to be?) if this new individual is a female, doesn't this essentially contradict the ruling? Where is her "right to choose"?
DEFINITION 1: "PERSONS"
The Constitution uses the term "persons" to define each of us. When the Constitution was written, there was a primitive understanding of pregnancy and all of its various complexities. Certainly, we must assume, had our forefathers known, the incredible level of detail that comes with conception, they would have expanded the definition of "persons" so it would not be left to the COURTS TO DECIDE, i.e. "Roe v Wade".
We are committing gross negligence to our country's future generations here, not to mention the spirit of the Constitution, by leaving this incredibly complex issue to SCOTUS who themselves are as archaic as the forefather's understanding of conception!
Rick Santorum is sounding the alarm bells with this issue. If we allow the Courts to decide when we're defined as a "person" upon conception, then we're also allowing the Courts to decide when we are a "person" upon near death too!
I think we can all agree that's not what we want. Rick Santorum isn't necessarily saying "Roe v Wade" was wrong. He's saying based upon new understanding of conception, IT'S OUTDATED, and we need to have a National Forum and discussion to debate, at what point does the Constitution define us as a "person"? This needs standardization by the Constitution, not tyrannical Kangaroo Courts making grossly inconsistent rulings.
DEFINITION 2: "MARRIAGE"
This one is trickier, but I'll do my very best to explain it.
Simply put, the purpose of marriage thru the ages (time immemorial) has been to bear & raise children, aka "nuclear family". Whether you are a religious person or not, no one can argue that we're designed to be connected as one man, one woman. This is also known to be described as NATURAL LAW. Any other relationship is social experimentation and therefore non-natural.
Marriage is not just a contractual relationship between people so good hair trial lawyers like John Edwards can swoop in like vultures to suck us dry upon divorce. To the majority of Americans, it's a form of religious expression that should be recognized under the 1st Amendment. In traditional Judeo-Christian upbringing, marriage brings with it sacred responsibilities that far and away exceed the minimalist file-clerk-at-the-county-seat window view. Attempting to redefine marriage is a form of hostility, marginalization towards Judeo-Christian beliefs for the sake of satisfying political opponents.
There is a very easy alternative solution for this. Allow Civil Unions at the State level. If your State wants to recognize Civil Unions, by all means, pay the County Clerk $60, take your union certificate and be sure you know a good divorce attorney (never let it be said I'm not pro-Union!)
Moving on...
As Rick Santorum has pointed out, using a Brookings Institute (a liberal think tank!) study as a reference, the overwhelmingly, statistically-evidenced best opportunity for success a child has is being part of a nuclear family. We must encourage parents to get married (or stay married). Orphans should be placed w/ married couples as much as is allowable.
Now of course the next question is "why not let gays adopt?" in my personal view, every American child deserves the best opportunity to be nurtured for success. The child deserves a natural upbringing, not a social experiment.
Before you bludgeon me with labels, you have to understand that our Country needs to have a National Forum of discussion on this too. Do we have a Federal level responsibility to insure a minimum opportunity of success for each child or not? Do we allow States to decide the minimum level of parentless child placement?
Can gay couples achieve such an upbringing with a high rate of success over long historical periods? If not, should we require the couple have a strong mentor of the opposite sex actively involved in the child's life to insure this occur? Do we address an item like this at the Federal level, or do we let the States handle it? I don't have those answers, what I have is more questions.
This is why we need legal framework. It's not an imposition, the idea is quite the opposite, to prevent rogue Judicial verdicts & rulings from taking a child's best available opportunity for achieving their own success. Leaving the Courts to decide this is a Dereliction of our Patriotic Duty!
DEFINITION 3: PARENTAL RIGHTS
While many of us have been delving into how much we can avoid upsetting our liberal friends, those of us that have avoided this are seeing a disturbing trend at the local & state levels. Parental rights are being destroyed at alarming rate, mostly in our court system. Case Law for parents is now just a form of Governmental intimidation & fear. If your kid is fat, the State can take him/her from you. This is tyrannical in every sense of the word. Good parents shouldn't have to be afraid of feeding their children a diet not approved by the DCS Gestapo, or worse, the WH imposed diet.
The Court system is deciding "parental rights" in America right now. We need to resolve this at the Federal level as well. Parental Rights needs to be a universally accepted concept, not wild suppositions by incompetent Courts at the local level that keep adding to the "Case Law" meme. Federal Law or Constitutional Amendment needs to provide framework so State/Local Governments don't exceed their authority on parental rights, lest we continue ruining the lives of American children that need reliable parental nurturing, not Judicial neglect and tyranny.
Future generations are depending on us, so we can depend on them. It is they who will eventually care for our needs as we grow older. Keep neglecting them, butchering them, abusing them, and they won't be around for us when we need them most. God Bless America!
Monday, November 21, 2011
Tony Stewart just pulled off a Babe Ruth. Or was it a Joe Namath? #NASCAR
If you watched the entire Chase like I did, and you're a bit of a prognosticator like I am, you would've likely predicted, as I did, that Carl Edwards was going to win the NASCAR Sprint Cup Chase title.
And you'd have been wrong.
When Tony Stewart said "Carl Edwards better not sleep the next 3 weeks", he threw down the gauntlet, the rarest of challenges, the one that everyone knows are impossible to follow thru with.
Or are they?
This is the stuff of legend. I didn't think team 14 had the moxie to do it. They didn't race all that well in the regular season, the past would eventually catch up to them, right?
This is what made Babe Ruth a name cemented in history. I watched enough NFL films to know about Joe Namath and his infamous guarantee. Yes, I saw the ESPN special on the 1980 U.S. Olympic Hockey team, the one that had no chance against the menacing expert Russians.
What Tony Stewart did this Chase was all that, and much more. Winning 5 Chase races? Most of the better drivers struggle for just 1 in the regular season! Winning a tiebreaker? That's doing it by a hair on your chinny chin-chin.
This is historic, will not likely ever happen again.
And you'd have been wrong.
When Tony Stewart said "Carl Edwards better not sleep the next 3 weeks", he threw down the gauntlet, the rarest of challenges, the one that everyone knows are impossible to follow thru with.
Or are they?
This is the stuff of legend. I didn't think team 14 had the moxie to do it. They didn't race all that well in the regular season, the past would eventually catch up to them, right?
This is what made Babe Ruth a name cemented in history. I watched enough NFL films to know about Joe Namath and his infamous guarantee. Yes, I saw the ESPN special on the 1980 U.S. Olympic Hockey team, the one that had no chance against the menacing expert Russians.
What Tony Stewart did this Chase was all that, and much more. Winning 5 Chase races? Most of the better drivers struggle for just 1 in the regular season! Winning a tiebreaker? That's doing it by a hair on your chinny chin-chin.
This is historic, will not likely ever happen again.
Thursday, May 05, 2011
Is the Osama Bin Laden strike just the latest example of Cloward-Piven?
I was listening to Rush go over all the various media reactions to Obama's appearance at Ground Zero. Rush made some great points along the way. The media is covering up for Obama, and in doing so, has to praise President Bush in the process.
Then he brought up Alan Dershowitz: It's not important who was killed [in Abottabad] but HOW they were killed." Note the emphasis on "How". Dershowitz was clearly outlining an argument for potential criminal wrongdoing by the Administration or the Military. As Rush continued to point out, 9/11 interviews and investigations are still going on. This is something the radical left feeds on, lives for.
What was going on before Bin Laden, before Trump? LIBYA. Dennis Kucinich & Vice President Joe Biden were asked by the media about Obama's strike on Gahdafi being Constitutional. They promptly responded that Striking another nation which is not an immediate threat to the United States, without Congressional approval, is an impeachable offense. Furthermore, a well-known Attorney in Republican circles has drafted articles of Impeachment based on this very item and submitted them to Congress recently.
So now I wonder, was this just another one of Obama's attempts to overwhelm the Justice system, Cloward-Piven style? He's keeping the far left busy with outrage and a burning desire to put someone's head on a platter with all this War Obama's commiting.
This attack overwhelms the system with investigations, interviews and interrogations. I doubt the left will have enough time to sort out all the wrongs committed by this White House before 2012.
Then he brought up Alan Dershowitz: It's not important who was killed [in Abottabad] but HOW they were killed." Note the emphasis on "How". Dershowitz was clearly outlining an argument for potential criminal wrongdoing by the Administration or the Military. As Rush continued to point out, 9/11 interviews and investigations are still going on. This is something the radical left feeds on, lives for.
What was going on before Bin Laden, before Trump? LIBYA. Dennis Kucinich & Vice President Joe Biden were asked by the media about Obama's strike on Gahdafi being Constitutional. They promptly responded that Striking another nation which is not an immediate threat to the United States, without Congressional approval, is an impeachable offense. Furthermore, a well-known Attorney in Republican circles has drafted articles of Impeachment based on this very item and submitted them to Congress recently.
So now I wonder, was this just another one of Obama's attempts to overwhelm the Justice system, Cloward-Piven style? He's keeping the far left busy with outrage and a burning desire to put someone's head on a platter with all this War Obama's commiting.
This attack overwhelms the system with investigations, interviews and interrogations. I doubt the left will have enough time to sort out all the wrongs committed by this White House before 2012.
Wednesday, May 04, 2011
It's not about Muslim sensitivities, it's about #oil silly!
Both political sides of the airwaves are discussing all the minutiae of the Osama death. Did Hillary order it? Was it really a 16 hour decision? Did Panetta actually say waterboarding did the trick? How much did Pakistan avoid telling us? Blah blah blah...
One item of particular interest is this death picture release. The White House is making all kinds of hay about "Muslim sensitivities". Let me tell you, this White House could care less about offending anyone. They do it all the time. Now, all of a sudden they're concerned about Muslim feelings? If you were so concerned about Muslim feelings, then why'd you strike him in the 1st place? He's a Muslim hero is he not?
Then it hit me. The Bin Laden family isn't known for being Muslim superstars. They're known for one thing and one thing only: OIL. The Obama administration has made it clear that terror is not a threat in their minds. Saying you're not striking him as a Muslim means there was another reason entirely.
On the political homefront, Obama gets to prevent LIBERAL sensitivities from being hurt, by treating wealthy oil barons as scourge, and keeping his call for green initiatives intact.
This goes to another template that liberals have held about the Bush era that explains liberal reasoning. The Bush era was always an illegitimate Presidency to liberals. Why? Because Gore got the popular vote. Everything that happened during the Bush years needs to be treated with disdain, including a solid foundation for the War on Terror. This attack goes against the Bush doctrine. What does this mean with respect to Osama? Well, before the Bush era, the "Bin Laden" name was known for OIL OIL OIL not Islam! To Obama, all Bin Ladens are the same!
The White House message is CRYSTAL CLEAR: Get the barrel price down, or we'll violate your sovereignty too!
Also of note is all the noise being made by Donald Trump. "Birth Certificate! China! OPEC!" Let's go down Trump's list shall we?
1) Birth Certificate. CHECK!
2) OPEC. CHECK!
3) China. WORKING ON IT!
Here we go. What does Obama do about China? Taiwan? Tibet? Tariffs? Whatever choice Obama makes will be predicated on how it will boost his poll numbers. What do you think that will be? Please feel free to comment.
Let me add another caveat to this situation. Panetta said "We have a TREASURE TROVE of information" from Osama's computers. This is a veiled threat to the Saudi royal family. How much did you know about Osama's actions and whereabouts? This scenario is playing out very interesting indeed.
One item of particular interest is this death picture release. The White House is making all kinds of hay about "Muslim sensitivities". Let me tell you, this White House could care less about offending anyone. They do it all the time. Now, all of a sudden they're concerned about Muslim feelings? If you were so concerned about Muslim feelings, then why'd you strike him in the 1st place? He's a Muslim hero is he not?
Then it hit me. The Bin Laden family isn't known for being Muslim superstars. They're known for one thing and one thing only: OIL. The Obama administration has made it clear that terror is not a threat in their minds. Saying you're not striking him as a Muslim means there was another reason entirely.
On the political homefront, Obama gets to prevent LIBERAL sensitivities from being hurt, by treating wealthy oil barons as scourge, and keeping his call for green initiatives intact.
This goes to another template that liberals have held about the Bush era that explains liberal reasoning. The Bush era was always an illegitimate Presidency to liberals. Why? Because Gore got the popular vote. Everything that happened during the Bush years needs to be treated with disdain, including a solid foundation for the War on Terror. This attack goes against the Bush doctrine. What does this mean with respect to Osama? Well, before the Bush era, the "Bin Laden" name was known for OIL OIL OIL not Islam! To Obama, all Bin Ladens are the same!
The White House message is CRYSTAL CLEAR: Get the barrel price down, or we'll violate your sovereignty too!
Also of note is all the noise being made by Donald Trump. "Birth Certificate! China! OPEC!" Let's go down Trump's list shall we?
1) Birth Certificate. CHECK!
2) OPEC. CHECK!
3) China. WORKING ON IT!
Here we go. What does Obama do about China? Taiwan? Tibet? Tariffs? Whatever choice Obama makes will be predicated on how it will boost his poll numbers. What do you think that will be? Please feel free to comment.
Let me add another caveat to this situation. Panetta said "We have a TREASURE TROVE of information" from Osama's computers. This is a veiled threat to the Saudi royal family. How much did you know about Osama's actions and whereabouts? This scenario is playing out very interesting indeed.
Monday, May 02, 2011
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
What the birth certificate tells us about Barack Hussein #Obama
The birth certificate proves something very important about our so-called President. I know many pundits on the right (as well as the left) see the whole issue and scoff at it. For a long time I angered at them too, as Obama continued to ignore the rest of us with the issue of his birth. I'm going to explain, in more detail, why it is important that conservatives address the issue of his birth certificate.
The request for the birth certificate from some of us so-called "birthers" was never about him being Kenyan, Canadian, Hawaiian, Communist, Keynesian, or even about transparency. It was about his CHARACTER plain and simple. He wanted to lead our nation in a time of War. He wanted to lead our nation in a time of economic turbulence. The least he could do was calm the electorate waters by releasing it so we could trust him, just as we release our information upon request to any Government official with sufficient authority.
In the midst of all our turmoil, then-candidate Obama chose a path that was petty and bitter, He ignored & ridiculed those of us that requested from him some of the most basic information about any of us. Why hide it? You want to be President? Be open, honest, and humble about it, maybe I would vote for you. Personally, I disdained McCain. I'm not saying I would've voted for Obama, but I might not have voted for McCain given that Obama was forthright with me.
The release of the birth certificate at this moment in time expands on Barack Hussein Obama's behavior during the "Beer Summit". Let us recall how quick Obama was to judge the police wrongly, and how he never, NEVER accepted that he did anything wrong. He offered up racism AND elitism towards the "poor white cop" with a beer at the White House, Obama's way of responding to wrongly judging the officer who DID HIS JOB, responsibly I might add. It is thug-like behavior.
The birth certificate further evidences Obama's obvious elitism towards the rest of us "little people". Obama views us all as little more than serfs that don't deserve even a simple gesture of goodwill by allowing us to see his birth information. In his mind, only a wealthy Democrat contributor can even bother him to pick up the phone and call his minions to do the "work" of making the long form public. Remember the middle finger at the campaign rally? Or how about the way he used his dying grandmother for political gain? Ah, the many examples of Obama bitterness, let me count the ways...
What makes the birth certificate issue all the more tragic about Barack Obama, the man, is that he dwells on insignificant pissing contests with others that he sees as his social level of adversary. He is a pitiful soul! In this case, with Donald Trump, who has been harping on the lack of Obama's birth certificate for 3 or so weeks now, Obama did not release the document for our benefit. He sees Donald Trump as the "rich guy" that is the enemy Obama champions as the evil of the world his entire adult life, and seeks to humiliate Trump by fish hooking us (more elitism by Obama) with the birth certificate: See peasants? Donald Trump is wrong. I am worthy!
Obama did something here that validated all his critics. I actually think it would've been better for him to keep the birth cert under lock and key. This isn't just "Here it is, now go away" like Obama wants it to be. This has a Nixon-Watergate tone to it. Obama engaged in obstruction and if Watergate is any indication, there will be calls for Obama to resign. Remember that what forced Nixon's resignation was the fact that he held on to the circumstances of the Watergate hotel break-in until the pressure of impeachment became apparent and inevitable.
Barack Hussein Obama, the man, has not, nor ever will be, fit for office. He is a walking, living, breathing calamity, and the recent release of the long form birth certificate is more proof of that.
The request for the birth certificate from some of us so-called "birthers" was never about him being Kenyan, Canadian, Hawaiian, Communist, Keynesian, or even about transparency. It was about his CHARACTER plain and simple. He wanted to lead our nation in a time of War. He wanted to lead our nation in a time of economic turbulence. The least he could do was calm the electorate waters by releasing it so we could trust him, just as we release our information upon request to any Government official with sufficient authority.
In the midst of all our turmoil, then-candidate Obama chose a path that was petty and bitter, He ignored & ridiculed those of us that requested from him some of the most basic information about any of us. Why hide it? You want to be President? Be open, honest, and humble about it, maybe I would vote for you. Personally, I disdained McCain. I'm not saying I would've voted for Obama, but I might not have voted for McCain given that Obama was forthright with me.
The release of the birth certificate at this moment in time expands on Barack Hussein Obama's behavior during the "Beer Summit". Let us recall how quick Obama was to judge the police wrongly, and how he never, NEVER accepted that he did anything wrong. He offered up racism AND elitism towards the "poor white cop" with a beer at the White House, Obama's way of responding to wrongly judging the officer who DID HIS JOB, responsibly I might add. It is thug-like behavior.
The birth certificate further evidences Obama's obvious elitism towards the rest of us "little people". Obama views us all as little more than serfs that don't deserve even a simple gesture of goodwill by allowing us to see his birth information. In his mind, only a wealthy Democrat contributor can even bother him to pick up the phone and call his minions to do the "work" of making the long form public. Remember the middle finger at the campaign rally? Or how about the way he used his dying grandmother for political gain? Ah, the many examples of Obama bitterness, let me count the ways...
What makes the birth certificate issue all the more tragic about Barack Obama, the man, is that he dwells on insignificant pissing contests with others that he sees as his social level of adversary. He is a pitiful soul! In this case, with Donald Trump, who has been harping on the lack of Obama's birth certificate for 3 or so weeks now, Obama did not release the document for our benefit. He sees Donald Trump as the "rich guy" that is the enemy Obama champions as the evil of the world his entire adult life, and seeks to humiliate Trump by fish hooking us (more elitism by Obama) with the birth certificate: See peasants? Donald Trump is wrong. I am worthy!
Obama did something here that validated all his critics. I actually think it would've been better for him to keep the birth cert under lock and key. This isn't just "Here it is, now go away" like Obama wants it to be. This has a Nixon-Watergate tone to it. Obama engaged in obstruction and if Watergate is any indication, there will be calls for Obama to resign. Remember that what forced Nixon's resignation was the fact that he held on to the circumstances of the Watergate hotel break-in until the pressure of impeachment became apparent and inevitable.
Barack Hussein Obama, the man, has not, nor ever will be, fit for office. He is a walking, living, breathing calamity, and the recent release of the long form birth certificate is more proof of that.
Saturday, March 12, 2011
Media & flawed perceptions resulting from interviews with so-called "experts"
I know, I know. We could write an entire encyclopaedia on all the awful bias the media spills on on us every day. We have to spend hours sifting thru reports that are full of crap, just to get to the 15 seconds of facts that are really the only things that matter. They have to constantly infuse their own spin on the news, to satisfy whatever hysteria they're feeling at the moment. This one, however, is quite serious.
Yes, of course, I'm fully aware that a major disaster is quite likely in the event the Japan Reactors melt. Barring all this, one has to keep in mind that ALL energy sources worthy of use come with their own level of danger. Nuclear power is clean, safe, & limitless ... when it's properly contained. That very characteristic comes with an equal disadvantage: The danger of nuclear poisoning.
I just saw FOX News do an interview with Bill Nye, "The Science Guy", so FOX could report his comments on the Nuclear situation going on in Japan. Mr. Nye was classified as a "Mechanical Engineer". Now, while I'm certain Mr. Nye has extensive fundamental knowledge on how to design a cooling system for a majority of mechanical applications, I would like to know, when was the last time Mr. Nye certified a set of plans for a cooling system design on a nuclear reactor? Better yet, when was the last time Mr. Nye certified a set of plans on ANY mechanical design project? Where are his Nuclear credentials?
FOX didn't bother giving us his most recent resume. The last time I saw "The Science Guy", he was too busy pitching GLOBAL WARMING as a valid scientific theory. That right there told me Mr. Nye "The Science Guy" is nothing more than another TV everyone-love-me hack. He is absolutely clueless as to how to aid in nuclear containment, so his automatic response was "too many variables to use nuclear technology". That's not engineering Mr. Nye, that's giving up before you try. Are you an ENGINEER or a NOT? Don't use your engineering credentials if YOU DON'T ACTIVELY PRACTICE IT.
This is irresponsible, to say the least. "Fairless & Imbalanced" is what I think of FOX, and interviews like this prove that FOX openly accepts TV hackery to gain viewers. Not worth the bandwidth they absorb. Stick to radio & trusted news Internet sites, where facts & truth prevail.
Yes, of course, I'm fully aware that a major disaster is quite likely in the event the Japan Reactors melt. Barring all this, one has to keep in mind that ALL energy sources worthy of use come with their own level of danger. Nuclear power is clean, safe, & limitless ... when it's properly contained. That very characteristic comes with an equal disadvantage: The danger of nuclear poisoning.
I just saw FOX News do an interview with Bill Nye, "The Science Guy", so FOX could report his comments on the Nuclear situation going on in Japan. Mr. Nye was classified as a "Mechanical Engineer". Now, while I'm certain Mr. Nye has extensive fundamental knowledge on how to design a cooling system for a majority of mechanical applications, I would like to know, when was the last time Mr. Nye certified a set of plans for a cooling system design on a nuclear reactor? Better yet, when was the last time Mr. Nye certified a set of plans on ANY mechanical design project? Where are his Nuclear credentials?
FOX didn't bother giving us his most recent resume. The last time I saw "The Science Guy", he was too busy pitching GLOBAL WARMING as a valid scientific theory. That right there told me Mr. Nye "The Science Guy" is nothing more than another TV everyone-love-me hack. He is absolutely clueless as to how to aid in nuclear containment, so his automatic response was "too many variables to use nuclear technology". That's not engineering Mr. Nye, that's giving up before you try. Are you an ENGINEER or a NOT? Don't use your engineering credentials if YOU DON'T ACTIVELY PRACTICE IT.
This is irresponsible, to say the least. "Fairless & Imbalanced" is what I think of FOX, and interviews like this prove that FOX openly accepts TV hackery to gain viewers. Not worth the bandwidth they absorb. Stick to radio & trusted news Internet sites, where facts & truth prevail.
Wednesday, March 09, 2011
Big Brother is targeting Smartphones
Have you heard any of the latest news clips on radio or TV regarding smartphone usage? The goody-too-shoes media is starting to report this, heavily I might add.
The latest report was some "expert" saying that "cellphones" (effing morons; they don't even know the proper name of the offending device) shouldn't be used "at dinner, bank tellers, at church, and PUBLIC BATHROOMS!"
Since when did the media care that we use our smartphones at church? The media is anti-Christian as part of their agenda, one would think they would be targeting the church for preventing attendees from using them, recommending lawyers for lawsuits even.
Woah! How criminal! I can't use my phone for my duty while I do my doody. How effing jealous are these liberals? Now they want a toilet police to monitor your smartphone usage on the can?
Let's tell it like it is. The media is PANICKED that we can very easily bypass THEM by texting or tweeting what we hear & know to each other. How dare we tell each other things without media input? We might give each other advice the media would otherwise be giving us!
Hey media ninnies, shut the f*ck up! You don't like me tweeting on my tush? KISS MY ASS!!!!
The latest report was some "expert" saying that "cellphones" (effing morons; they don't even know the proper name of the offending device) shouldn't be used "at dinner, bank tellers, at church, and PUBLIC BATHROOMS!"
Since when did the media care that we use our smartphones at church? The media is anti-Christian as part of their agenda, one would think they would be targeting the church for preventing attendees from using them, recommending lawyers for lawsuits even.
Woah! How criminal! I can't use my phone for my duty while I do my doody. How effing jealous are these liberals? Now they want a toilet police to monitor your smartphone usage on the can?
Let's tell it like it is. The media is PANICKED that we can very easily bypass THEM by texting or tweeting what we hear & know to each other. How dare we tell each other things without media input? We might give each other advice the media would otherwise be giving us!
Hey media ninnies, shut the f*ck up! You don't like me tweeting on my tush? KISS MY ASS!!!!
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Don't buy into the oil "crisis" just yet...
I'm not buying all this OIL OH MY GOSH CHICKEN LITTLE IS FALLING OUT OF THE SKY bit just yet. Oil prices above $100 a barrel? Really? You mean to tell me we've consumed that much more oil in the past year & a half? Let's consider some recent history regarding oil & the prices that are being set for it.
First of all, back in 2008, oil speculators drove the price up to about $150 a barrel, for reasons a financial layman such as myself still have yet to fully understand. What I do recall is that the economy went into the tank, leaving no room for gasoline (pun intended).
What was the result? America began naturally to scale back, and SUBSTANTIALLY I might add. Oil investors & producers were being being left with oil GLUTS. In other words, there were plenty of available barrels of oil WITH NO ONE TO BUY THEM.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out what happens to a commodity that loses demand when market forces take over. Oil dropped to almost $30 a barrel in the next several months. America chose to pass on high oil prices in large quantities.
Let's keep in mind, prior to all of this, prior to the start of the Iraq & Afgahn wars, European corporatists invested in oil were profiting on the backs of oppressed Iraqis for $11 A BARREL. How was this possible? Syria was funneling black market oil from countries like Iraq for people like Soros to then turn around & sell for almost 4 times their price! European corporatists were a bit pissed off when we invaded Iraq, to say the least. This must be payback.
Back to the present. America's oil consumption HAS NOT INCREASED SUBSTANTIALLY since the $30 a barrel price drop. The world, in fact, is going thru one recession after another, just like we are.And how did OPEC react? "We're going to DROP oil production to offset reduced consumption." Oil gluts ARE STILL OCCURRING TODAY.
Reduced oil production means reduced workforce, and reduced work hours. THAT'S what's contributing to the unrest in the Middle East. America is nowhere near consumption levels of 4 or more years ago, and combined with recent inflation of basic goods (Thanks Geithner & QE2), has caused hunger & poverty of epic proportions. Foreign oil barons are willing to let production suffer to offset losses attributed to recession & the Iraq war.
We're experiencing an oil price "shell game". The fact is we're all at the mercy of foreign oil corporatists (and a virtually non-existent shelf-life), that want to keep the barrel of oil at a exorbitantly above-market price. They have stored oil that they refuse to sell for less than a determined price, are willing to put employment for oil production out to pasture to do so. "Quantitative easing" only contributes to the idea of accepting oil at a $150+ a barrel price range as the norm. We're being punished for defending the innocent in Iraq, not just by our own liberals, but by oil fascists abroad.
We need to keep our wits about us. This is a game we can win, this is still America. Get Obama out and send the oil fascists with him.
First of all, back in 2008, oil speculators drove the price up to about $150 a barrel, for reasons a financial layman such as myself still have yet to fully understand. What I do recall is that the economy went into the tank, leaving no room for gasoline (pun intended).
What was the result? America began naturally to scale back, and SUBSTANTIALLY I might add. Oil investors & producers were being being left with oil GLUTS. In other words, there were plenty of available barrels of oil WITH NO ONE TO BUY THEM.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out what happens to a commodity that loses demand when market forces take over. Oil dropped to almost $30 a barrel in the next several months. America chose to pass on high oil prices in large quantities.
Let's keep in mind, prior to all of this, prior to the start of the Iraq & Afgahn wars, European corporatists invested in oil were profiting on the backs of oppressed Iraqis for $11 A BARREL. How was this possible? Syria was funneling black market oil from countries like Iraq for people like Soros to then turn around & sell for almost 4 times their price! European corporatists were a bit pissed off when we invaded Iraq, to say the least. This must be payback.
Back to the present. America's oil consumption HAS NOT INCREASED SUBSTANTIALLY since the $30 a barrel price drop. The world, in fact, is going thru one recession after another, just like we are.And how did OPEC react? "We're going to DROP oil production to offset reduced consumption." Oil gluts ARE STILL OCCURRING TODAY.
Reduced oil production means reduced workforce, and reduced work hours. THAT'S what's contributing to the unrest in the Middle East. America is nowhere near consumption levels of 4 or more years ago, and combined with recent inflation of basic goods (Thanks Geithner & QE2), has caused hunger & poverty of epic proportions. Foreign oil barons are willing to let production suffer to offset losses attributed to recession & the Iraq war.
We're experiencing an oil price "shell game". The fact is we're all at the mercy of foreign oil corporatists (and a virtually non-existent shelf-life), that want to keep the barrel of oil at a exorbitantly above-market price. They have stored oil that they refuse to sell for less than a determined price, are willing to put employment for oil production out to pasture to do so. "Quantitative easing" only contributes to the idea of accepting oil at a $150+ a barrel price range as the norm. We're being punished for defending the innocent in Iraq, not just by our own liberals, but by oil fascists abroad.
We need to keep our wits about us. This is a game we can win, this is still America. Get Obama out and send the oil fascists with him.
Friday, February 11, 2011
CPAC got what it deserved ... and then some
The new and improved CPAC gave way to a whole lot of entertainment, not unlike a circus show that strolled into town.
What do I mean? Well, 1st off, let's take for example how they recklessly snubbed their longtime religious support by allowing groups such as GOProud entry. While I'm not any-phobic, the idea that a group is formed based on what is, for all intents and purposes, a non-natural behavior, is incompatible with authentic conservatism, and has no true foundation.
Also, the Ron Paul-ers ruined the evening. They couldn't wait to jeer & mock Donald Rumsfeld &, by default, Dick Cheney, making for a mockery of the entire event. It got to the point that longtime Hillary Clinton supporter Donald Trump (& maybe liberal mole) had to tell the Paul-ers their candidate is "unelectable". It seems appropriate that Trump's somewhat clownish character on TV was appropriate for this year's CPAC.
Add to the fact that they scheduled, and I think intentionally, their event directly opposite NASCAR media day. I know some will say "why does that matter?" It matters because while CPAC is entertaining anti-family groups such as GOProud, they are snubbing REAL FAMILIES that want to spend time doing something wholesome with their children, CPAC need not apply.
Why did this happen? Ignorance. I'm watching many conservatives make the same mistakes that brought us a Democrat majority & an Obama victory. You can't snub traditional support to try to "big tent" yourself with fringe political groups like the Ron Paul-ers, GOProud & the pro-aborters.
We have a fractured coalition of alarmists too! We have the Glenn Beck alarmists vs. the Ron Paul/Alex Jones conspiracy theorists. Wonderful! I can't wait to big tent myself with the mothership!
Mind you, none of this is a good sign for a relationship with the Tea Party. Tea Party folks are family oriented. If this is what the GOP thinks will win them 2012, I got news for you: the Tea Party will abandon you in a heartbeat. If this keeps up, we will have a whole lot of 3 way races, mark my words.
There are two groups driving this movement: former liberals & libertarians that have had there eyes opened recently, & wet-behind-the-ears young-uns (some that get their paychecks from the GOP establishment). Their purpose for this event was more about their personal need for social interaction than truly advancing conservative causes.
I even had a friend tell me "THESE ARE HARD CORE CONSERVATIVES!" Really? Where was Rush Limbaugh? Mark Levin? Sean Hannity? Did Ronald Reagan get honest mention? Yeah OK. This was more like a loony libertarian freak show. This is what happens when you let "new conservatives" run the show. They revert to trying to bring in all the groups that either willfully or ignorantly wind up voting Democrat.
So there you have it. Let's try to make CPAC12 about CONSERVATISM instead of BIGTENTISM shall we?
What do I mean? Well, 1st off, let's take for example how they recklessly snubbed their longtime religious support by allowing groups such as GOProud entry. While I'm not any-phobic, the idea that a group is formed based on what is, for all intents and purposes, a non-natural behavior, is incompatible with authentic conservatism, and has no true foundation.
Also, the Ron Paul-ers ruined the evening. They couldn't wait to jeer & mock Donald Rumsfeld &, by default, Dick Cheney, making for a mockery of the entire event. It got to the point that longtime Hillary Clinton supporter Donald Trump (& maybe liberal mole) had to tell the Paul-ers their candidate is "unelectable". It seems appropriate that Trump's somewhat clownish character on TV was appropriate for this year's CPAC.
Add to the fact that they scheduled, and I think intentionally, their event directly opposite NASCAR media day. I know some will say "why does that matter?" It matters because while CPAC is entertaining anti-family groups such as GOProud, they are snubbing REAL FAMILIES that want to spend time doing something wholesome with their children, CPAC need not apply.
Why did this happen? Ignorance. I'm watching many conservatives make the same mistakes that brought us a Democrat majority & an Obama victory. You can't snub traditional support to try to "big tent" yourself with fringe political groups like the Ron Paul-ers, GOProud & the pro-aborters.
We have a fractured coalition of alarmists too! We have the Glenn Beck alarmists vs. the Ron Paul/Alex Jones conspiracy theorists. Wonderful! I can't wait to big tent myself with the mothership!
Mind you, none of this is a good sign for a relationship with the Tea Party. Tea Party folks are family oriented. If this is what the GOP thinks will win them 2012, I got news for you: the Tea Party will abandon you in a heartbeat. If this keeps up, we will have a whole lot of 3 way races, mark my words.
There are two groups driving this movement: former liberals & libertarians that have had there eyes opened recently, & wet-behind-the-ears young-uns (some that get their paychecks from the GOP establishment). Their purpose for this event was more about their personal need for social interaction than truly advancing conservative causes.
I even had a friend tell me "THESE ARE HARD CORE CONSERVATIVES!" Really? Where was Rush Limbaugh? Mark Levin? Sean Hannity? Did Ronald Reagan get honest mention? Yeah OK. This was more like a loony libertarian freak show. This is what happens when you let "new conservatives" run the show. They revert to trying to bring in all the groups that either willfully or ignorantly wind up voting Democrat.
So there you have it. Let's try to make CPAC12 about CONSERVATISM instead of BIGTENTISM shall we?
Saturday, February 05, 2011
If I were a Nigerian scam artist ...
Respected - Dear,
Good-Day!
How are you this morning? I know that you might see my mail coming to you as one of the mails you receives and you are not being surprise, with how you are going to be feeling over my mail message, please even we never knew before or meet through any means like (phone conversation or in person) consider this message as a request from a woman in dare need of your help, to relocate your President's birth certificate so I can live a new life.
I also find it very difficult to trust people but I have to use this medium to contact you for your co-operations and for security reason to avoid suspicions which I will disclose in due course and you will know me more, I know you might not trust my mail.
I am located in Kenya which I will disclose to you once am sure of your willingness to help me with this and really sure of your, Trust worthiness, Accountability and confidentiality.
I have a proposition for you which involve $18,500,000 Millions of US Dollar I have been offered for the sale of your President's birth certificate, Can I trust you to help me move this birth certificate?. All I need of you is assistance with Banking and Investment of any profitable Investment you may deem okay to help me transfer the sale of said birth certificate through you in your country.
I would like you to give this matter your deep immediate thought and looking forward to your response. Do have in mind that is going to be legitimate transaction but absolute confidentiality.
Best regards, and have a great day.
Ms.O.L
Good-Day!
How are you this morning? I know that you might see my mail coming to you as one of the mails you receives and you are not being surprise, with how you are going to be feeling over my mail message, please even we never knew before or meet through any means like (phone conversation or in person) consider this message as a request from a woman in dare need of your help, to relocate your President's birth certificate so I can live a new life.
I also find it very difficult to trust people but I have to use this medium to contact you for your co-operations and for security reason to avoid suspicions which I will disclose in due course and you will know me more, I know you might not trust my mail.
I am located in Kenya which I will disclose to you once am sure of your willingness to help me with this and really sure of your, Trust worthiness, Accountability and confidentiality.
I have a proposition for you which involve $18,500,000 Millions of US Dollar I have been offered for the sale of your President's birth certificate, Can I trust you to help me move this birth certificate?. All I need of you is assistance with Banking and Investment of any profitable Investment you may deem okay to help me transfer the sale of said birth certificate through you in your country.
I would like you to give this matter your deep immediate thought and looking forward to your response. Do have in mind that is going to be legitimate transaction but absolute confidentiality.
Best regards, and have a great day.
Ms.O.L
Wednesday, February 02, 2011
Will the REAL Egypt please stand up?
It turns out, after all this time, that the stories of the "Muslim takeover" of Egypt, "Persian invasion", Ahmedinjad, Iran, blah blah blah, are nothing more than media hype.
They are Obama media creations, something that we should be getting used to by now, but somehow we seem to think CNN FOX NBC CBS ABC are in the truth business. We need to get used to the fact that every BIG story by our media is a LIE, a big fat LIE, every day, all the time.
The REAL Egypt, as it turns out, is nothing at all like we're being "cattle fed". The real story is about Government eltitlements! See here: http://bit.ly/dEyuN5
Hosni Mubarak, at the behest of his wife (even he was reluctant to the idea), was grooming his son, Gamal Mubarak, as successor, while Egyptian army commanders were vacationing in WASHINGTON DC, As if this story can get any more suspicious towards Obama.
I'm just now reading that Anderson Cooper was "attacked" by pro-Mubarak protesters. How staged is this?
Something is amiss, and Obama has a lot to answer for ...
They are Obama media creations, something that we should be getting used to by now, but somehow we seem to think CNN FOX NBC CBS ABC are in the truth business. We need to get used to the fact that every BIG story by our media is a LIE, a big fat LIE, every day, all the time.
The REAL Egypt, as it turns out, is nothing at all like we're being "cattle fed". The real story is about Government eltitlements! See here: http://bit.ly/dEyuN5
Hosni Mubarak, at the behest of his wife (even he was reluctant to the idea), was grooming his son, Gamal Mubarak, as successor, while Egyptian army commanders were vacationing in WASHINGTON DC, As if this story can get any more suspicious towards Obama.
I'm just now reading that Anderson Cooper was "attacked" by pro-Mubarak protesters. How staged is this?
Something is amiss, and Obama has a lot to answer for ...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
