?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Some observations and questions for some of my progressive friends:

Have you heard about the Flying Imams case? They are six Muslim imams who have filed suit against U.S. Airways for throwing them off a plane (before take-off) after passengers reported strange and disturbing behavior: walking up and down the aisle, refusing to sit in appointed seats, praying in public, speaking loudly in Arabic, asking for seat belt extenders, etc. They attempted to sue the passengers too but Rep. Pete King, R-N.Y. wrote an amendment to a bill which would make citizens immune to such suits, the threat of which would obviously have a chilling effect on citizens reporting potential terrorist threats. The Dems had repeatedly criticized it and tried to railroad it, but it was finally passed this week. Don’t you sometimes wonder whose side the Dems are on?

Barack Obama stated recently that we invaded a country that wasn’t responsible for 9-11. Okay all you Obama-bots, what COUNTRY was responsible for 9-11? And what did that have to do with the 17 U.N. resolutions demanding Iraq disarm after their unconditional surrender following their failed invasion of neighboring Kuwait? I love the Mitt Romney lines about "having tea with our enemies and bombing our friends" and "going from Jane Fonda to Dr. Strangelove". I used to wonder why conservatives were so much funnier than liberals, but I’ve come to see it’s because the libs give them so much free material.

John Edwards said he’d close Guantanamo the first day he took office, that torture is not the American way. Uh, excuse me … when did scaring the enemy into talking become torture? I thought plucking eyes out, drilling into prisoners’ skulls, electrocution, etc. as the enemy does (for fun) is torture. How would YOU interrogate prisoners? Suppose you knew a terrorist had information of an atomic attack in a city in which your family lived? Would you rather pay for an ACLU lawyer to protect his/her constitutional rights? For that matter, how many of you would prefer these terrorists incarcerated in your backyard, represented by Edwards’ slip-and-fall friends, paid for by your taxes?

On a related subject, whenever we catch the goofy San Diego self-proclaimed Al Qaeda in America “leader” Adam Gadahn, do you think he should be treated as a terrorist or as the poor liberal from San Diego who probably was teased as a kid, couldn’t get a date, and is no-doubt the end-result of a pair of too-permissive parents? Talk about broadcasting your pathetic inadequacies. Just wondering.

Oh, the spying on AMERICANS thing. I’m sick of these wackos repeating the same old lies over and over. The warrant-less wiretaps are not about spying on Americans; they’re about monitoring emails and cell phone calls from terrorist-to terrorists overseas through providers in this country. yes, we do need some safeguards to protect our rights but the restrictions on domestic spying are a whole lot greater than they were during the Clinton administration. Did you know that Robert Kennedy spied on Martin Luther King? Did you know because of Clinton's gang the CIA and FBI weren't permitted to share certain information? Would you prefer another city is attacked, a few thousand more innocent people are ripped and burned beyond recognition, and that we should put more limits on this administration's ability to protect us because you hate the president? Oh, and this new CIA "leak" story … apparantly one of the “leftovers’ from the Clinton administration (didn't get the name) has allegedly been leaking top-secret information on spying tactics and techniques to news sources impeding the government’s ability to moniter terrorists and keep us safe. Does this bother you as much as the benign so-called “leak” of Valerie Plame Wilson’s so-called maybe she was, maybe she wasn't “covert status”? Or maybe harrassing the Attorney General for the legal firing of eight U.S. Attorneys is more important to you? After all there is an election to win and the Democrat must continue their attack on the real enemy (they say) in the White House.

Do you really want to surrender your freedom and control of the health of your family to the likes of John Murtha, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, etc. The government can’t even deliver the mail; do you really think they can deliver health care? If you think fighting an insurance company is bad, you’ve apparently never fought city hall.

Hollywood bad boy Sean Penn visits a ruthless South American dictator and trashes the country that allows him private jets, million dollar mansions, fame, crystal chandeliers. I haven’t seen the hoards of reporters I’d expect to see following him, scrambling to learn what wisdom he imparted to Mr. Chavez and what he learned about the socialist paradise that is Venezuela. Aren’t you curious as to what he has to say? Do you think maybe the media is protecting him?

Does it bother you that House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) can dare to consider good news in Iraq BAD news for the Democrat party? What a disgrace! Of course he followed this up by saying that of course Democrats WANT success in Iraq and elsewhere (LOL) … that they are as patriotic as anyone, that they support the military, but really! Do you actually believe they’d be happy if it turns out that George Bush was right all along, that he will be recognized for standing alone for what's right, and that he would be vindicated when the history of these terrible times are written? Would you?

Back when I was in high school and later in college, earmarks were called “PORK” and it was a sign of corruption and suggestive of kickbacks and special interests. Miss Pelosi made a big production of declaring the previous Congress as being the most corrupt in history and how her Congress would be the most ethical, squeaky clean and bi-partisan of all time. In seven months they have accomplished virtually nothing, no matter what their enablers in the media would have you believe, and PORK is at record highs, led by the likes of Murtha, Pelosi, etc. One day they're passing "ethics reform" and the next they're dividing up their PORK - $150.5 million for Murtha, D-Pa., $117.2 for Young, R-Fla., $95 million for Lewis, R-Cal., $44 million for Dicks, D-Wash., $37.3 million for Pelosi, D-Cal., and so forth. Don’t you sometimes regret getting what you wished for?

Don’t you ever wonder why all the news outlets seem to be reporting the same things in the same way? I see Newsweek has a new article on how the "Global Warming Deniers" are so organized and well-funded. Uh, Pot … you’re black! Is this an April Fool issue or what? It’s August so it can’t be. The funny thing is that I saw a pro-global warming show on television a month or so ago that had virtually the same information. Could this have been plagiarized? Can you say AGENDA?

Amazing times! God help us!

***

Here comes my baby, here she comes now,
and it comes as no surprise for me
with another guy
Well here comes my baby, here she comes now
Walking with her love, with her love, that's oh-so fine
never to be mine, no matter how I try


***

Tags:

Comments

( 3 comments — Leave a comment )
japanesedream
Aug. 8th, 2007 12:00 am (UTC)
Corruption, kickbacks, & special interests have been around since the dawn of time, or so it seems. I doubt we'll ever get rid of them.

But here's a question. Now this is gonna sound kinda naive, but...

Wouldn't it at least help to solve or delay the whole global warming thing if we just planted more trees? Isn't half the reason it started in the first place because we've been cutting down things like the rainforest & whatnot, which absorb the CO2?
metaphorsbwithu
Aug. 8th, 2007 12:55 am (UTC)
Well, that's not naive at all. Yes, the more plants and trees, the more CO2 is absorbed in photosynthesis. Of course, there are some areas of debate there too because some experts maintain that trees actually produce more heat into the atmosphere. As a matter of fact, a "global warming expert" in the U.K. just reported that WALKING produces more CO2 emissions than driving a car. The more you exercise, the more food you need. Food production requires energy, and the consumption of food gives off more CO2. He says it's better to be a couch potato but not to eat too much and to leave the telly turned off. This is NOT a joke. Can you see how insane this all is? *lol*

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article2195538.ece

However, if you've read a little of my GW stuff, you'll know CO2 is responsible for only a tiny fraction of the greenhouse effect and I am doubtful that the recent increase since the industrial revolution has little, if anything, to do with any of the alleged warming that has been recorded in recent decades. As a matter of fact, the "Little Ice Age" ended in the middle of the 19th century and many climatologists argue that we are simply in a natural warming cycle.

Without going into detail, I believe this because in my reading of many different sides of the issue and looking at the evidence, it is plain that:

1) The rise in CO2 levels in the atmosphere throughout history followed rises in temperature rather than preceded it. Common sense would seem to conclude that higher temperatures cause CO2 levels to rise rather than the other way around.

2) Global warming on Mars, Titan, even Pluto seem to indicate the cause is Solar variations and, indeed, many studies show higher temperatures during periods of greater sunspot activity. Global warming proponents say the Sun's effect is not great enough to explain out increase but the correlation is still there.

3) The main greenhouse gas contributing to global warming is water vapor, with CO2 having only a minor effect.

4) Stories of melting glaciers ignore historical evidence showing they have been advancing and receding for thousands of years. There are the remnants of forests in areas they've receded from indicating it was far warmer thousands of years ago. Antarctica is actually colder now than it was decades ago and there is more ice in the interior than ever before despite segments breaking off at the outer edges.

I could go on and on and on but I'd just advise you to keep an open but skeptical mind. Reading an article here in there can be mind-numbing because the issue is so political and there is so much propaganda. Simply checking out opposing views can be eye-opening however. We are, IMHO, being deluged with propaganda on the subject and it is up to you to inform yourself on the issue.

Of course I've been writing posts here and there explaining a little of what I've found. I really don't have the time to cover everything but I try to touch on the high points and, at the same time, to be as funny and informative as possible. I'll pretty much guarantee you won't hear any of this stuff on CBS, NBC, CNN, etc. I discuss this subject with my friend tniassaint a lot and we keep each other on our toes. I love to learn things but I can't stand misinformation and having people pull the wool over my eyes.

If you can accept the possibility that there are people who want to create new controls over every aspect of your life, create new layers of bureaucracy (populated by them and people like them), tell you what is good and bad for you, then you can learn not to be so gullible about so much of what you hear. Be prepared though. If you challenge a GW believer's data, their usual response is to first change the subject when you bring up your objections, then to tell you your information is faulty, then to tell you that you don't understand what you're talking about, then to say you're one of "those people", call you names and insult you personally, then to close their ears and run away. Not pleasant but you will learn things on your own. It's up to you ... but you do have to educate yourself. Good luck! ;-)
metaphorsbwithu
Aug. 8th, 2007 12:56 am (UTC)
P.S.
Oh, just for fun, you might want to check up this site. It's by a guy who's been checking and documenting all the surface temperature measurement stations in the U.S. to see how accurate they might be. I can't vouch for the reliability yet, but it stands to reason that temperature measurements on the top of buildings or next to concrete parking lots might not be recording accurate information. Some of these locations are quite startling. Maybe someone will do a reliable report on the subject one day.

http://www.surfacestations.org/odd_sites.htm
( 3 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

August 2014
S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com