18 year old Bristol Palin, daughter of the former Republican Vice-presidential candidate and target of much left winged vitriol before the November 4th election, has given birth to her baby, a healthy 7 lb., 4 oz., baby boy.
Great Aunt Colleen Jones said, "We think it's wonderful. The baby is fine and Bristol is doing well. Everyone is excited."
Read more here and here.
Bristol and the baby's father, Levi Johnston have named their son Tripp Easton Mitchell Johnston.
Congratulations to the young parents.
Monday, December 29, 2008
Posted by Lew Waters at 5:37 PM
Sunday, December 28, 2008
After 8 years of parodies and denigration of President Bush, what is all of this hubbub suddenly of a nearly two year old parody of Halfrican-American, B HO? Don’t liberals know the term “Magic Negro” was first coined by a Black Liberal reporter in a March 2007 LA Times article?
No outrage then, little outrage once Paul Shanklin parodied the term to the tune of “Puff The Magic Dragon.” But now, outrage even from spineless Republicans?
Parodies and mean-spirited cartoons of George W. Bush, Condoleeza Rice, even Colin Powell and Dick Cheney, not to mention Donald Rumsfeld, were written off as “political humor.”
But, Halfrican-American Obama is to be left alone?
Is he untouchable? If so, why?
Does being Halfrican-American grant him some special class unavailable to those who preceded him?
Or, is it his messianic status that grants him such untouchable class?
UPDATE 1: The Chair of the National Black Republican Association, Frances Rice, expresses her view on this feigned offense from the Democrats, Obama The Magic Negro
UPDATE 2: Paul Shanklin speaks on 'Barack The Magic Negro.'
Posted by Lew Waters at 11:05 AM
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Astonishing as it may seem, given that today is Christmas Eve, a story is making its way across the web that at the Fayetteville, North Carolina Veterans Hospital, a Viet Nam Veteran has been arrested for continually violating VA Regulation of placing a Bible and a Cross on the Altar within the facilities Chapel.
From a December 2007 article appearing at Military.com, written by Joseph Kinney, Neutralizing the VA, certain “religious specific” articles were ordered removed from the Chapels by officials within the Veterans Administrations, not because Veterans are complaining, but in “anticipation” of potential complaints.
Ironic is that while the Bible and Cross, symbols of Christianity must be removed, a Catholic Crucifix, kneeler and Catholic Bible (same as a Protestant Bible, but with four more books) remain. Are we to believe now that Catholics are not Christian? Isn’t Catholicism the oldest form of Christianity?
Yet, those items may remain and only Protestant items must be removed or hidden from view when the Chapel is not in use for specific religion services.
As I’m sure most know, Chapels are very small rooms set up in various facilities for patients and families to seek a moment of peace, solace and comfort through prayer, often when a loved one is fighting for their life or when the patient feels the need for that solace.
When my ex-father-in-law was undergoing a major life threatening operation at the Portland, Oregon VA Hospital, the family gathered in their Chapel to pray and seek guidance. They were Catholic and I am a Protestant, but no one cared what symbols were present, only that the family sought spiritual refuge within the Chapel.
A retired VA Chaplain, Archie Barringer, who retired early from his position due to the VA’s Bible ban, spoke out in an article appearing in the March 06, 2008 Fayetteville Observer.
Barringer said of the ban,
“I felt that it was a slap in the face to our veterans and their families and a betrayal of the trust of the people in Fayetteville and Cumberland County who have supported that chapel over the years. And I would not be a part of it.”
He also said that, in the 5 years he was chief chaplain at the hospital, no patients or family members had complained that the chapel was oriented toward Christianity.
He believes a separate room for non-Christians to seek their solace or pray is the proper answer.
About 200 Veterans protested at a West Virginia VA Facility over this move. Debra Voloski, Public Affairs Officer at that facility said,
“We are looking at ways to meet the intent of the directive that makes our chapel an all-faith chapel. We want it to be able to be utilized by a veteran or staff member of any faith.”
And somehow, removal or hiding of Christian symbols, in a predominantly Christian area, is supposed to accomplish that?
Since my own time in the U.S. Army and in dealing with the Veteran’s Facilities, I have never heard of any one of any faith being denied use of a Chapel. Regardless of faith every single Chaplain I have ever met is there to offer comfort as they can to any one in need, without regard to their faith or beliefs.
Ms. Voloski went on,
“Our VA is becoming more diverse and we want to recognize that need. However, this is a predominantly Christian area and it has been difficult, to say the least, to get some to understand what we are really trying to do.”
I must admit, I am unable to grasp just what it is the Veterans Administration is “trying to do” here too.
Sandra Long, wife of a Veteran, feels this VA policy takes away from the rights of Christian Veterans. She said,
“Those who do not believe should have their freedom, but Christian veterans should also have the freedom and the right to use the name of Jesus, and to also have our cross.”
Interim Director at this facility, Karin McGraw says,
“There has been no ban on Bibles being available in the chapel for use by in-patients. There has been no ban on the singing of Christian hymns in our facility.”
No, it is just that the bereaved and discomforted must seek out someone and request one be taken out of hiding during a time of spiritual need, when they may most need such an item, instead of one being readily available.
Adding insult to injury, the Veterans were asked to leave the property when media showed up to interview the Veterans. Al Strassburger, a World War II and Korean War Veteran said,
“We were told to get off our own property. Our tax money pays for this property. We fought for this country and who are they to tell us where we can meet.”
Welcome to the America we fought for, Al.
A Muskogee Phoenix article addressing this issue at their VA Facility expressed veterans outrage also. Hospital official there claim there is a “misunderstanding” and that “Patients can request a Bible or other text to keep in their room while they are in the medical center.”
Citing a portion of government handbook on Chapels at VA Facilities, officials stated,
“Such chapels are appointed and maintained as places for meditation and worship, and when not in use, they must be maintained as religiously neutral, reflecting no particular faith group ...,” the official adding, “An atheist can go in there and sit in a quiet place.”
And, Bibles and Crosses must be hidden away for that? Would they somehow interrupt their sitting in a quiet place? Is tolerance so one-sided now that we must be tolerant of any and every thing, while others show absolutely no tolerance at all for us?
If an atheist did choose to enter a Chapel for peace and quiet for a moment, would that preclude a Christian from entering and bringing out those items? If not, why must they be hidden away at all?
To me, it would appear that should an atheist, or person of non-Christian faith utilize a Chapel, Christians must remain out until such time as they were finished since Christian articles would offend that person should they be seen.
Yet, no Christian I know of would demand others stay out of a Chapel when they were using it if the others were atheist or non-Christian. They would only expect that person not interrupt their prayers.
As our country moves further and further away from the Christian Foundation that has seen us through many troubled times, it is especially disturbing that we should see those who fought for our freedoms restricted in expressing their freedom of belief while confined to a Veterans facility.
As Cathy Roberts, the wife of an American Legion Post Commander puts it,
“If my husband is in that hospital in a critical condition, I don’t want to pick up a People magazine. And I don’t want to have to go find somebody.”
The First Amendment to our Constitution states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof …” As I see it, government is violating the second portion by instituting the bans and restrictions on the free exercise of Christianity only.
It is high time that the so called "Tolerant" people within our society began showing some tolerance of their own. Veterans Hospitals are not the place to push your Separation of Church and State issues.
Posted by Lew Waters at 9:43 PM
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Making its way across the internet, B HO's bare chested photo is undoubtedly causing battery sales to skyrocket around the world. Looking closer and considering this photo, it is obviously a staged photo op.
Besides the obvious sucked in belly and pushing out of the chest, if a photograper can get this clear of a shot at B HO, so could an assassin. With the increased security being given B HO, I highly doubt anyone could get this close and have such an easy shot of him unless they were granted permission beforehand and his Secret Service detail had cleared the photographer.
Why stage this photo op? Several reasons, one of which could coincide with the self investigation exonerating him and Rhambo of any wrongdoing in Blagogate.
Sorry girls, but flabby Moobs* does not make him another Brutus Beefcake.
I wonder if Michelle knows who the 'Beach Bunny' is?
Do I detect some belly paunch hanging over the front of his trunks that isn't in the first photo?
Posted by Lew Waters at 11:30 PM
Duncan Hunter on HardBall addressing the usual New York Times "Left Winged Rubbish."
I wonder just how many who wouldn't not support Hunter because others weren't supporting him in early 2008 regret their stance today?
America would be a much better country if we had more Duncan Hunter's in government.
Posted by Lew Waters at 11:14 PM
Sunday, December 21, 2008
A little noticed article by Reuters is claiming the President of the United States and 13 other world leaders were tried, convicted and sentenced to 20 years imprisonment for War Crimes.
Presiding judge Veroljub Rakitic said, “In the name of the people...We sentence...to individual prison terms of 20 years each,” to applause from spectators in the Court Room as he read off the 14 names.
The 14 were charged, tried and found guilty of inciting a war of aggression, war crimes against the civilian population, use of banned weapons, attempted murder and violation of territorial integrity. Rakitic said arrest warrants would be forthcoming.
According to the charges filed, “They fired 600 cruise missiles and made 25,119 air sorties attacking both military and civilian targets, killing and wounding many people and causing mass destruction of property.”
Rakitic also said, “During their so-called humanitarian intervention they have killed hundreds of soldiers, civilians, and children... They have left devastation in the place of modern factories, bridges, schools.”
According to the judge, “We invited the accused to come to the court and present their defense. They ignored the invitation, or were maybe afraid to face reality and their consciences,” adding they had violated the United Nations Charter and describing the attacks as “an unauthorized aggression on a sovereign country.”
All 14 world leaders seemed unphased by the conviction, especially the United States President as he winds down his administration, preparing to hand over the reigns to a successor.
During the three days of the trial, evidence included video, forensic and survivor’s accounts.
Defense attorneys were present; one claiming the American President kept other world leaders in the dark about the war crimes being committed.
That same attorney said, “If I were the judge, and it's a good thing I am not, I would...take a gun and shoot both the U.S. President and the other scum for all the evil they have done,” expressing regret that the courts penal code did not allow higher penalties.
The attorney went on to say, “Our humane criminal code does not stipulate higher sentences because it could not be foreseen that such a crime could be committed...that is why this court is limited by the penalty and has sentenced each accused to 20 years.”
Our own media chose to ignore this trial and report, an unbelievable act given the media’s continual coverage of the scandalous administration. Reuters of Britain reported on the trial and conviction while American media focused their attention elsewhere, perhaps on the presidential campaign.
It is unreported if arrest warrants actually were issued or if they would be served, had they been issued.
No official announcement has been issued by the President’s office and it is highly doubtful that the President would voluntarily surrender.
By now I am sure the Bush bashers are gleefully wringing their hands, expecting to see him “frog-marched” down the White House steps after Obama is inaugurated. As our most hated President, Bush bashers have wanted this very thing to happen to him.
But, sorry to disappoint, this is not about President Bush, but was about President Bill Clinton back in September 2000, as his administration was winding down.
It was about the actions he took in Yugoslavia, the trial held in Belgrade.
As many of you gleefully wring your hands in anticipation of such a trail for George W. Bush and imprisonment of him, just remember, this is still hanging over the head of one of your own.
For the record, I do not believe Clinton guilty of any war crimes and neither is Bush. Both acted within the authority of their office in dealing with threats abroad.
The main difference being, you embraced Clinton for his actions and have accused Bush over his. If you intend to hold one accountable, then you must hold the other as well.
Rest assured, Obama will be held equally accountable for his actions.
You all set a tone this past 8 years so don’t be surprised as it returns to you.
Posted by Lew Waters at 1:43 PM
Friday, December 19, 2008
As if Patty Murray’s (D. Wa.) efforts at blocking the Veterans Administration efforts at weeding out bogus claims for PTSD weren’t bad enough, which would have freed up both money and services for wounded Veterans truly in need, Patty Murray has joined in with Hillary Clinton (D. NY) vowing to overturn President Bush’s Right Of Conscience rule, pledging “whatever it takes.”
As reported by the Hill, Murray and Clinton, along with other abortion rights groups, claim the rule “will limit women’s access to medical care.”
What Bush’s rule does is protect “physicians, nurses, pharmacists and a host of other classes of healthcare workers [who] refuse to perform, or discuss, abortions, or take part in any other activity about which they have a moral objection.”
How that is denying any woman’s right to kill her unborn baby escapes me. There is a plethora of abortion mills around the country only too willing to help kill unborn babies. Why force those who don’t believe in it to participate against their beliefs?
“It’s clear that the Bush administration’s assault on healthcare protections for women will continue up until their very last day in office. This is the kind of desperate, ideologically driven politics that helped convince Americans it’s time for change.”
Does she offer any consideration to the healthcare of the unborn? Is it an “assault” to grant protection for others to follow their moral conscience?
Bear in mind, there remains many others all too willing to perform the procedure. No one is forcing them not to.
Do not others have a few rights to their conscience in America any longer? Do we need Democrats forcing every aspect of their sickness on everyone, denying us of our moral clarity?
Is it a sick mind that is outraged when a mother kills a newborn, yet is gleeful if she killed it two hours earlier in a clinic?
The left claims it isn’t a baby, but a “zygote” or “fetus,” clearing their conscience of killing a human being. But, it is a human being. Granted, it can’t survive outside the womb, but even after birth, can it survive without motherly care?
How sadistic is it that those who propose penalizing mothers who smoke or don’t eat right, would also support her should she decide to have that life sucked out of her womb?
Murray craftily hides her love of killing babies with statements like,
“Under the next administration and Congress, we will reverse this policy and ensure that the health of patients always comes first. I will work with President-elect Obama to explore every possible option to ensure women continue to have access to the healthcare they need.”
Killing unborn babies on a whim is “healthcare?” Again, women that choose to abort their children still may do so. The new rule does not regulate them; it protects the few that hold a moral objection to participating.
Does Murray propose or support firing any who do not agree with killing the unborn? Again, don’t others have rights in America?
Allow me to say here, I also do not support those that use anti-abortion protests to denigrate women who make that choice. I feel the answer is through education and a return to somewhat of a moral lifestyle, but that is just me.
We are told we “shove our beliefs down their throats,” but isn’t the left shoving their beliefs down our throats if they do not allow others to exercise their moral conscience to not participate in abortions?
I have yet to understand the left’s fascination with killing the unborn. If they feel it gives a woman sexual freedom, it does not. It only frees them up to be used sexually by men who don’t really care for the woman and don’t want a baby.
Have the Democrats moved us so far into Socialism that we may no longer exercise our choice? Will they eventually formulate some proposal on who may or may not have a child, forcing all others to undergo abortion?
Wake up, Washington. Do we need to keep a Senator who doesn’t respect one person’s choice, but demands another’s be respected and even engaged in whether they accept in their personal belief or not?
How much further will our individual rights be stripped away now under total Democrat control?
If they cannot respect that some don’t wish to participate in aborting a baby, I shudder to imagine.
Posted by Lew Waters at 12:39 AM
Sunday, December 14, 2008
Much posturing and whining has been going on over ‘bailing-out’ the “Big Three Auto Makers.” All three have lined up for our tax dollars, as have other industries.
Flying in to D.C. in their Private Corporate Jets prompted outrage from Congressional Democrats, who have no problem using Public Jets for their jaunts all over the world and country on our tax dollars.
To placate Congress, CEO’s arrived for their latest beg session over the road in their cars.
As corporations line up for government handouts, our National Debt is skyrocketing and tax revenues are drying up, do we really need to ‘bail-out’ all three automakers? Should we pump Billions of tax dollars to them?
Much is said about the Carter Administrations loans to Chrysler in the 1970’s as precedent for bailing out the Big Three. But much remains unsaid and unknown by the public in that deal, not the least of which is the government’s forcing Chrysler to totally abandon their research and development on their Turbine Powered Car, which had continued up until the time of that ‘bail-out.’
What isn’t said is that Lee Iacocca still had to approach the Unions and Suppliers for concessions, just as if they had filed for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy. Who can forget Iaccoca standing before the Union asking for concessions and the Union Rep asking,
“If we make these concessions, just what can you guarantee Union Members?”
Iacocca’s answer, “Their jobs!”
Chrysler pulled through then with concessions and by partnering with Japanese Auto maker, Mitsubishi, a partnership that somewhat continues today with the manufacture of their World Engine program, although Chrysler no longer offers Mitsubishi vehicles under the Chrysler name tag.
Now, we seem to have three major American Auto manufacturers begging for government money to remain in business, while the Japanese autos assembled in America seem to be getting by.
CATO Institute has compiled sound bites of Dan Ikenson arguing against any bailouts of the Auto manufacturers below.
We were recently told it is “unpatriotic” to not support Auto Bail-Outs, but is it any less that UAW leaders will not agree to concessions today, as they once did with Chrysler?
We taxpayers are expected to tighten our belts during tough economic times. Why not UAW members too?
Does it escape Union Leaders that if the companies file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, they lose anyways?
Of course, just as did Lee Iacocca in the 1970’s, restructuring of the Big Three, even if they must combine operations or merge would be the most economical way out of their mess.
Do UAW leaders even admit that their excessive contracts have contributed to the current financial trouble of the big three?
As an Auto Mechanic of 42 years experience, most of it employed at Dealerships, the current one for the past 19 years, I have seen the quality of the cars that are delivered. Engineering has vastly improved but assembly often is lacking. Who assembles the cars?
When we have a warranty complaint, I am paid far less to troubleshoot and repair the vehicle than is the Union Members idly placing parts on it as it travels down the assembly line.
If my dealership faces hard times, no one runs in to bail us out and we end up unemployed, as has happened in the past.
Although assembly of our cars is at times lacking, they are not the junk they were made out to be in the 1970’s. Imports, even those assembled in America aren’t that vastly superior. Remember, even their dealers have to employ mechanics and have repair shops.
The cry of American cars not being energy efficient is just as bogus. The imports that have the best mileage are their smallest cars with the smallest engines, something most Americans don’t buy. This is attested by the imports beginning to manufacture larger vehicles and trucks with V-8 engines to capture that market.
That being said, as is shown in the CATO video, we do not really need to bail out the Auto Industry. Chapter 11 bankruptcies are in order here to save them and yes; even mergers are in order.
Sweetheart Union contracts need to be rolled back to more align them with the rest of society.
If for no other reason, the bail out of the Auto Industry must be turned down to stop the Nationalization of the industry, as Democrats desire. If you think it is a mess now, just wait as politicians, who often stumble over themselves and have a history of corruption, begin deciding what can be built and how they will be built.
Current and past government regulations have hurt the industry, adding thousands of dollars to the price of our cars and creating as many problems as they wanted to solve. You just cannot legislate technology.
The time is now to curtail these government bailouts of private companies, if we are to retain a free market. We simply cannot afford to continue throwing money away in hopes of things getting better.
Similar policies turned a Deep Recession into the Great Depression decades ago.
We do not need a repeat of that.
Posted by Lew Waters at 10:32 PM
As our cries of Big Oil “ripping us off” diminish due to oil prices plummeting and gas price at the pump falling, our economy still falters as industry after industry pleads before the government for ‘bail-outs.’ The Mortgage Industry, Banks, Wall Street and the Auto Industry have lined up for ‘bail-outs’ as some within their ranks failed and closed shop.
Billions and Billions of our tax dollars are being handed out or are pending for disbursement to struggling industries on the brink of bankruptcy. Job loss and unemployment rise accordingly as we all face uncertainty in our lives and an unknown untested president perched to take over the Oval Office.
As dire as our economic circumstance is, we have at least one major industry appearing as if they could help ‘bail-out’ America, instead of begging for tax dollars to stay afloat. Big Oil!
That’s right, the Oil Industry, the companies we all love to hate when gas prices rise and so many feel are ripping us off at the gas pumps, and who we just ignore as prices fall to acceptable levels, seems uniquely poised to help ‘bail-out’ America, if only we allow them.
Recently, the American Petroleum Institute commissioned a study from ICF International on the economic benefits to America should they be allowed to explore and develop energy sources in the ‘off-limits’ areas of ANWR, the Rockies and in offshore areas still under the drilling moratorium.
We have survived another generated crisis from OPEC, which helped immensely in crippling our economy this year; we undoubtedly will see another in the future if Iran or other member nations unfriendly to America gets their way on oil production.
While we work towards energy independence with alternative fuels, we remain at the mercy of OPEC in meeting our minimum energy needs, which is a massive cost to our economy, spending energy dollars in their countries instead of our own.
Strategically, we are weakened as our defenses depend on foreign sources of energy while we allow untold amounts of resources to languish under our own soil, just sitting there, waiting to be used.
In the immediate time, though, our economy continues to falter as we seem to have run out of sources to raise more revenue and jobs dry up. This does not need to be.
Findings from the API Study shows us,
Development of America's vast domestic oil and natural gas resources that had been kept off-limits by Congress until recently could generate more than $1.7 trillion in government revenue, create thousands of new jobs and enhance the nation’s energy security through royalties, bonus bids and taxes.
The study estimates that the development of all U.S. oil and natural gas resources on federal lands could exceed $4 trillion over the life of the resources.
Our Natural Gas production could increase by the equivalent of 61 percent of the expected natural gas imports in 2030.
API issued a Press Release on December 8, 2008 directing the public to the study. From that release we read,
“This study underscores how the oil and natural gas industry can enhance America’s energy security and help solve our economic problems by increasing production of our nation’s vast oil and natural gas resources. The U.S. oil and natural gas industry supports more than six million jobs, and more drilling for oil and natural gas will mean more energy for America, more well-paying jobs, and trillions of dollars of much-needed revenues that will help federal, state and local governments pay for critical services.” (API President and CEO Jack N. Gerard)
At a time when we have far leftists and scare-mongers as Al Gore trying to frighten the nation with his Reality Coalition attacking another energy source, Clean Coal Technology, we are left with limited energy sources that not only affect our ability to defend our nation, but takes a huge bite out of our economy by sending Billions in energy dollars to foreign nations, often unfriendly to us.
Viable alternative fuels are still under development and America has energy needs that must be met. We are in a lose/lose situation as long as we allow both energy and economic sources to sit idle, left unused.
Tapping our own resources and environmental protection can be balanced, API has been striving towards that for some time. Returning balance to our economic needs can be largely met too by tapping our own resources and rebuilding jobs for Americans in America.
Although I am no fan of the incoming president, he is facing a severe economic challenge and America’s needs must be met, not cast aside.
Big Oil, those people we American’s love to hate, are uniquely positioned to help achieve both economic and energy needs, if only we allow it.
Contact your Senators and Congressman/woman today. Tell them you support developing our own energy and getting back to solid economic footing.
If we are to remain a free nation, we must become more independent.
Posted by Lew Waters at 8:19 PM
Saturday, December 13, 2008
A video tribute to Viet Nam Veterans.
The truth of Viet Nam has yet to be accepted by many Americans, particulary those who fell for the anti-war rhetoric spread about during the war, much of it planted by KGB agents.
Their actions set America on a course of degradation where we are perceived as a weak ally not to be trusted.
Our citizens have looked to entertainers for guidance with songs as "All You Need Is Love," "Imagine," "Give Peace a Chance" and many others. Our Police and Military receive little respect and honor that they once did. Many distrust both and fail to see that our enemies do not embrace the songs our citizens do or look to song writers for guidance.
And yet, in spite of it all, they continue to come to defend our country.
We now face some very rough days ahead, entering uncharted territory with a junior Senator at the helm who no one bothered to check out. We have Troops in harm's way again facing what we did long ago.
Let no one steal their honor like they did ours.
Posted by Lew Waters at 12:26 AM
Friday, December 12, 2008
Few names in America have demanded the respect that General Colin Powell’s has. He received many firsts and promotions during his Military Career. The first and so far only Black Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the first Black Secretary of State to mention just two.
He received many accolades for his leadership during the First Gulf War as America’s top General, although actual boots on the ground leadership was by Gen. H. Norman Schwarzkopf who, unlike Powell, chose to retire to his family and peaceful life supporting charities and community activities in Florida.
Powell chose the political limelight as he announced he was a Republican and supported Republican candidates, earning him the office of Secretary of State under President George W. Bush during Bush’s first term. By many accounts that relationship ended amid much friction, not the least of which was Powell’s knowledge of the name of the person who exposed Valerie Plame’s name to the media in a contrived scandal and kept quiet about it for two years, allowing ‘Scooter’ Libby to be railroaded into a conviction, not for revealing a name, but for supposedly committing perjury when his memory differed from others.
This act becoming public knowledge led many to admit to what we had noticed during Powell’s time as SoS, that although Powell claims to be a Republican, he is more of a left-leaning moderate that a conservative Republican.
Powell himself supplied all the proof needed for this when he brazenly endorsed the junior Senator from Illinois, Barack Obama, who has never served in the Military and who ran on an anti-war ticket, over the candidacy of fellow Veteran and ex-POW, Senator John McCain in the 2008 elections, leading even liberal pundits such as NPR’s Juan Williams to admit he chose race as a predominate factor.
Especially surprising in this endorsement was that in 2004, even with the friction between them, Powell got behind George W. Bush over Senator John ‘F’in Kerry (who served in Vietnam) claiming Bush was better suited for fighting terror, Kerry having a history of weakness.
Further showing how he misled conservatives that supported him over the years, Powell is scheduled to appear on CNN’s "GPS" program with Fareed Zakaria where he further slams the Republican Party and Governor Sarah Palin.
By Republicans as a cause of losing the 2008 election to Obama, Powell now says,
“I think the party has to stop shouting at the world and at the country. I think that the party has to take a hard look at itself, and I’ve talked to a number of leaders in recent weeks and they understand that.”
“Can we continue to listen to Rush Limbaugh? Is this really the kind of party that we want to be when these kinds of spokespersons seem to appeal to our lesser instincts rather than our better instincts?”
Amazingly, Powell still considers himself a Republican after opposing much of the Republican platform, candidates and endorsing a Liberal Democrat.
Did Powell miss that Rush Limbaugh and McCain are often at odds with each other? Did he miss that McCain does not convince Republicans that he is conservative and even liberals admit he is a moderate that often crosses the aisle support liberal Democrat bills?
Listen to his rhetoric for yourself,
McCain conveyed exactly what Powell is calling for yet he endorsed Obama. The very points Powell claims we need to embrace lost the election for Republicans. Governor Palin is not the problem with the GOP, RINO’s like Powell are.
After switching allegiances, where does Powell get off speaking for his former party? How can he speak for those he stabbed in the back?
Rush Limbaugh is an entertainer, a radio personality, not a political leader. But note, not once has he spoken out about “polarization” from the likes of others, such as Barbara Streisand, Al Franken, the Dixie Chicks and so many others who during the last 8 years continually denigrated President Bush as dumb, traitorous, liar, anti-American and you name it. Where has he ever called for America not to listen to any of them?
I was fooled long ago believing Powell was a conservative Republican. I was fooled enough to think he would be a good GOP candidate at one time. But, he will not fool me again. I can see now why many refer to him as the “Affirmative Action General.”
Powell seems to enjoy ‘dissing’ Republicans although he owes his meteoric rise to past Republican Presidents, including George W. Bush. I see no reason Republicans should pay any heed whatsoever to what Powell now says. He crossed over to the Democrat Party and should stay there. We don’t need more liberalism in the GOP, which is why we continue to lose elections.
Conservative principles are what made America great. Democrats have realized this and falsely move to the right during campaigns, only to revert back to the left once winning. Republicans listen to fools like Powell and move left, lose elections and seem to think moving even further left will win. It doesn’t.
It would appear that Powell being labeled as a “House Negro” by Harry Belafonte and other Democrats was taken to heart and Colin is trying to get back in the good graces of those who attacked him a few years ago.
Long ago, another retiring General said, “Old soldiers never die, they just fade away.” That sounds like very appropriate advice for Powell. Just fade away to the Democrats you have embraced, General Powell.
Posted by Lew Waters at 12:56 AM
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Very relevant questions from CNN's Campbell Brown, but would they need to be asked now if the media had done their job before November 4 and actually dug into B HO's record and background, instead of poo pooing everything said in opposition to him?
After giving him a pass on every measure of his campaign, how can they expect him to respond now that he has won the prize?
Posted by Lew Waters at 11:12 PM
Monday, December 08, 2008
The person who made this film, Herbert A. Philbrick, infiltrated the Communist Party in America from 1940 to 1949, so he speaks from knowledge, first hand knowledge.
When I was in school, we were taught of the underhanded tactics and deceit of this group. Somewhere since that time, America stopped listening to the warnings and seems to have fallen wholeheartedly for the propaganda, lulled into a false sense of security believing the Socialist Demokratik Politburo in control now seeks only the "good of the people."
Others fell for it long ago and spent most of the 20th century enslaved under their brutal control, fenced off from the world and receiving only what government said they could have.
Wake back up, America. Listen to one who was there when America was being warned.
Posted by Lew Waters at 11:34 PM
Tip of the hat to Norman
Produced in 1948 when the leftists were ridiculing America for not embracing all their socialist 'isms,' the below cartoon seems so prophetic to what is happening today as the Socialist Demokratik Politburo assumes so much power over our country on promises of 'cradle to grave' care for us all.
All we need do is forgo our freedom and liberty and accept the morsels they will feed us. As Wall Street, banks and the Auto Industry are being nationalized under this Socialist coup d'tat by the Socialist Demokratik Politburo, think of all you are giving up to them, while they keep and retain their own.
Posted by Lew Waters at 8:16 PM
Saturday, December 06, 2008
Matthew Hinton / The Times-Picayune
CBS News is calling the race between indicted Democrat Representative from Louisiana, William Jefferson and politcal newcomer, Anh "Joseph" Cao, a Republican Vietnamese-American, for Cao.
Democrat Jefferson was indicted after he was discovered to be hiding $90,000 in bribe money in his freezer. Democrat Jefferson was also reported to have diverted a Military rescue crew to his home during rescue efforts after Hurricane Katrina, to retreive personal items of his.
Even though under indictment, Democrat Party leadership allowed Democrat Jefferson to retain his seat in the House of Representatives. Democrat Jefferson was favored to win in a race he hoped would bring him redemption.
The election of Cao, in a predominant African-American Democrat stronghold, denies Democrat Jefferson a tenth term in the United States House of Representatives. Cao is the first Vietnamese-American that will serve in Congress.
CBS News earlier reported that Democrat Jefferson is likely to face trial on the "16-count indictment charging him with taking bribes, laundering money and misusing his congressional office for business dealings in Africa."
One crooked Democrat gone, several more hopefully to follow.
Posted by Lew Waters at 11:16 PM
Wednesday, December 03, 2008
Still seeking to out lib the liberal Mecca’s of San Francisco and Seattle, Portland, Oregon is home to a class of professional protesters who live only to protest. Nothing energizes these moonbats more than the United States defending itself or fighting those who seek our total destruction.
It should come as no surprise that once again, the malcontents that have infested Portland are seeking to make Portland a Sanctuary City where those who desert the obligation they volunteered for in our Military can come to when they need a safe place to live.
The anti-war ilk in Portland desire the City Council to “instruct police officers to ignore federal arrest warrants if they make a traffic stop of a soldier absent without leave.” These neo-coms claim their desire is “in line with the city's withdrawal from the federal Joint Terrorism Task Force as well as its policy prohibiting Portland Police officers from assisting U.S. immigration agents” in apprehending ILLEGAL immigrants throughout the city.
This move by the leftist loons in Portland isn’t new, just the latest phase. As reported by Right In a Left World in March 2008, there was a move then to create a Sanctuary for Deserters and AWOL Soldiers when so called “peace groups” drafted a resolution to “make the city a sanctuary where Portland police officers refrain from arresting soldiers who refuse to return to duty because they oppose the war.”
It went nowhere when tried before, but that doesn’t stop this professional class of malcontents from trying again.
With an estimated population of nearly 600,000 people, these wusses are impressed with themselves for gathering some 3,000 signatures of support for their effort.
Portland’s KATU TV covered the meeting and the tearful display of a stud faced young lady crying about her brother who volunteered for the Military and has now changed his mind and wants a “get out of jail free card.”
Others claiming to be Veterans showed up in the obligatory Military Fatigues and BDU’s claiming their own “horrors” as reason for their current opposition.
23 year-old Benjamin Lewis, claiming two tours as a Marine translator whined about being recalled under his Individual Ready Reserve status and vowed not to go because he's opposed to the "open-ended war of aggression."
I guess Lewis doesn’t watch any news reports or he would see that the anti-war favored candidate won the presidential election last month. Of course, even he has begun to see and accept the absolute necessity of finishing the mission begun there amid the staunch opposition of the Democrats who initially voted to go to Iraq.
Sounding more like it was read out of John ‘F’in Kerry’s lies and deceitful “testimony” before the Fulbright commission over three decades ago than based on actual experience, Lewis claims, “Most Iraqis thought we were there for oil and business interests, and a lot of them thought it was a Christian crusade against Muslims.”
Does the young Iraqi boy look fearful of the American Soldier to you?
Lewis must have missed the September 2006 interview of Iraqi Hajim al-Hasani, America, Don’t Leave Us.
While there no doubt are some Iraqi’s who see our Troops as invaders and occupiers, the claim of “most” just doesn’t wash. If it were, would they be cooperating with our Troops and not siding with terrorists? Tired old disproved DNC talking points are so typical of these leftists who work so diligently to undermine our Brave Troops. Very disturbing if they once served alongside those Troops and now sells them out.
Most disturbing coming out of Lewis is his words, “GI resistance is a very important part of questioning military legitimacy.”
Other than seditious activities, why would one volunteer to serve in our Military, especially knowing we are engaged in a war and then, “resist?”
Dan Shea of Veterans for Peace and who also claims to have served in Viet Nam as a US Marine claims, “This is an opportunity for the citizens of Portland and the City Council to support the soldiers who are coming back and their right to speak out.”
One is left wondering just how much support and what opportunity Shea’s Veterans For Peace would give those multitudes of returning Veterans to speak out in support of the mission and against his groups efforts at one of their small functions?
Shea further claims deserters and AWOL soldiers are “being persecuted” for “speaking their conscience.”
If Shea really wants to see persecution, try speaking out in support of the war, President Bush or any member of his administration in Pioneer Square in Portland.
Very surprising in this effort of theirs is an online poll administered by Portland’s KGW TV, showing nearly 84% of respondents opposed to the foolish call to make Portland a Sanctuary City for AWOL’s and Deserters.
The group is having difficulty finding support from the Portland City Commission as well. Commissioner Randy Leonard, outspoken critic of the war said,
“I think it’s a mistake to be in Iraq for a variety of reasons, including the fact that the president lied to us about the reasons for going to war. But to call for anarchy in the ranks and declare Portland as a free zone would be illegal.”
Besides the ridiculous and disproved claim of “Bush lied,” Leonard misses the hypocrisy in his statement given his support of Portland Police ignoring an ILLEGAL immigrants immigration status.
This is the same ilk that undermined us in Viet Nam, prolonging that war for 5 years until they caused the US to abandon the Vietnamese people. As events in Iraq wind down and efforts in Afghanistan will soon be increased to bring that theater to a similar peaceful time, it appears that these neo-coms are seeing their chances to cause another defeat for America dwindling.
Sadly, I doubt these cretins would support defending our country even if a terrorist attack happened in Portland and slaughtered thousands there. They would just blame Bush and seek someone to apologize to.
Posted by Lew Waters at 10:20 PM
Thursday, November 27, 2008
Dotster, a Vancouver, Washington based Web Host and Domain Registrar Company has once again come under fire for hosting a web site linked to a known radical Jihadist terrorist group.
Dotster, located near Westfield Shopping Center (formerly the Vancouver Mall), was first linked as a web host to a Somalia Al Shabaab terrorist group using the domain of kataaib.net earlier this year.
It was May 2008 when the Columbian ran an Op-Ed mentioning Bill Warner, a Sarasota, Florida private investigator’s effort to have Dotster shut down the web site.
Citing First Amendment concerns, Dotster CEO, Clint Page said, “We can’t just arbitrarily go in and shut down sites based on what someone finds offensive,” adding that the problem with Warner's approach is the danger of it leading to abuses and resulting in shutting down sites that are Political Advocates, the ACLU or even the NRA.
An odd disclaimer from them considering that in April 2003, Dotster had no problem pulling down the web site BoycottHollywood.com and voiding their contract with them, forcing them to move to another web host.
Also in May 2008, the Jawa Report wrote of the Columbian’s first article by Courtney Sherwood, referring to Bill Warner’s group as a “group of self-described anti-terrorist vigilantes.”
In that article, Brian Unruh, chief financial officer at Dotster was quoted as saying,
“We are not in a position to judge and be a jury on what content may be legal or acceptable,” adding, “The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects the right to freedom of speech and expression, and for that reason Dotster attempts to be very careful about balancing the rights of its customers with other concerns.”
Was that a consideration with BoycottHollywood.com, just 4 years earlier?
Apparently Dotster must have felt there was insufficient evidence that Al-Shabaab was part of the kataaib.net domain they host and claims to have forwarded the information from Warner to the “right authorities.”
The matter was dropped and sat until recently. Once again, the Jawa Report records a translated page supplied by the NEFA foundation of an intercepted message from Al-Shabaab, ostensibly “correcting” an Al Jazeera article claiming they were in opposition to the Somalia Pirates in the news lately for several high profile ship high jacking.
While the translated communiqué focuses primarily on “setting the record straight” about the group not opposing the pirates, directing Al Jazeera and other interested persons to their PR Web Page, they state,
“The movement has an official website [www.kataaib.net] which carries our official statements. Additionally, we have an official wing that manages all of our audio, video, and written releases. That wing is known as the 'Sada al-Jihad Media Center' and it belongs to the Global Islamic Media Front'.” (emphasis added)
Returning to Dotster’s own “whois” page, searching for kataaib.net reveals,
Domain Services Provided By:
marka caday, warta 5554
Domain Name: KATAAIB.NET
Created on: 13-APR-07
Expires on: 13-APR-09
Last Updated on: 13-APR-07
Administrative, Technical Contact:
cilmi, kataaib email@example.com
marka caday, warta 5554
Just to be clear, I do not subscribe to any notion that Dotster knowingly supports or engages in any terrorist activities, by Al-Shabbat or any other group. Dotster, like many other companies, has millions of customers. Not all customers are what we would deem “good customers.”
Earlier this year Dotster seemed unable to link Al-Shabaab, a known terrorist group to their client, kataaib.net. Given the claim intercepted and translated above, Al-Shabaab has now provided a clear link between the two.
Perhaps now Dotster will be able to “void their contract” with this terrorist group with as much ease as they did with an American group drawing attention to the Liberalism of Hollywood actors.
Cross Posted To Clark County Conservative
Posted by Lew Waters at 8:02 PM
Saturday, November 22, 2008
As most know, Clark County Conservative is one of the supporters of the proposed Initiative 409, a measure intended to encourage Washington State Law Enforcement and Businesses to uphold and enforce our current immigration laws throughout the state.
The heaviest opposition is coming from Hispanic/Latino groups who seem to encourage as many ILLEGAL immigrants to come here as possible.
Some students from Washington State University in Pullman expressed their displeasure with the proposed initiative in the Universities paper, the Daily Evergreen in October and as expected, distorted the purpose of I-409 and pulled on people’s heartstrings.
Students handed out flyers prominently displaying, “No to I-409, Yes to Human Rights.”
One is left wondering, if they really are so concerned about “Human Rights,” why do they not encourage the country of Mexico to treat their citizens better instead of sending them north?
Where are their protests of the mistreatment of Hispanic/Latino citizens by a corrupt government and the wealthier south of us that causes so many from that nation, to speak of just one, to ILLEGALLY enter our country?
Adriana Sanchez, MEChA co-chairwoman said,
“I see I-409 as a discriminating act, it is denying opportunity to the less fortunate. I hope people look outside the box and realize the negative effects this initiative could have on children such as denying them high school education or the negative effects of denying health care to those who need it or the cost to produce productivity. It’s inhumane. If the proposal goes forward, it could be interpreted to say that children illegally in the U.S. could not attend high school, and that anyone over the age of 14 would be ineligible for medical care.”
Ms. Sanchez, with all due respect, no one is denied medical care in an emergency case in this nation. Still, U.S. taxpayers are all too often left holding the bills for such care, straining our already overburdened medical system and tax structure.
Those here ILLEGALLY cost our schools more as many must be instructed in the native language, many not desiring to assimilate to our culture by learning our language. We taxpayers must pay those costs, not the native countries.
Still, I must think back to my original statement, if these advocacy groups fought half as hard to improve conditions for those who feel they have a right to violate our laws in their native lands as they do here, would those who come here ILLEGALLY and operate “under the radar” even need our facilities and tax dollars?
I am left wondering too is Ms. Sanchez has ever looked up the very word she uses, ILLEGAL, in a dictionary.
Readers too might be interested in just who and what MEChA really is.
MEChA stands for Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán, roughly translated, the Chicano Student Movement of Aztlán, considered by some to be an umbrella organization of radical Chicano student groups. It was founded in 1969, during a period of much leftist unrest in America. Aztlán is the territory in the Southwestern United States and West Coast that America purchased from Mexico in 1848, after defeating them in war and paying $15,000,000.00 as per the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo.
MEChA founders feel the mythical land of Aztlán belongs to them, not the United States of America. Their goal seems to be their liberation from the 'White occupiers' of the Western United States.
They claim their desire on the first site linked in the paragraph above as,
“A nation autonomous and free - culturally, socially, economically, and politically- will make its own decisions on the usage of our lands, the taxation of our goods, the utilization of our bodies for war, the determination of justice (reward and punishment), and the profit of our sweat.”
From the second link above, we find,
“MEChA was founded on the principles of self-determination for the liberation of our people,” and “the affirmation that we are Indigenous people to this land by placing our movement in Aztlan, the homeland of all peoples from Anahuak.”
See also MEChA National Constitution (pdf) and MEChA Philosophy.
Audio of some of their statements over the years, mostly through the 1990’s, can be heard at this Snopes.com article. Note, they are mostly taken from California events, not Washington State, but the goals are the same.
Summing this all up is the words of Margarita Esquivel, co-chairwoman of the Chicano/a Latino/a Student Alliance in the Daily Evergreen article,
“It is we who determine how our state is being governed and the policies that are enacted which will effect our future.”
Did Ms. Esquivel forget about the rest of “us?”
Posted by Lew Waters at 1:01 PM
Friday, November 21, 2008
As an old fashioned Southern Conservative, the thought of rising crime is and has been unacceptable to me. It has long escaped me why crime continues to rise in spite of all the efforts we hear of fighting crime, the reality Cop shows where the criminals are caught and arrested and even the Court shows where they are convicted and sentenced.
Okay, we all know the Drama Shows are fictional. Dragnet, Adam 12, Starsky & Hutch and all were actors playing a role, but with the reality shows today and news reports, we are led to believe citizens and the authorities are effectively fighting crime.
And still, crime rises. Theory after theory is given as to why. Poverty, oppressive parents, harsh parental discipline and more are blamed. I reject those reasons myself. Oh, abuse may play a role in a small minority of cases, but I know of several people who survived abuse and did not turn to a life of crime to justify that theory.
Through personal experience I have discovered why at least one segment of the rising crime rate continues. That segment being fraud, criminal fraud through the mail, old-fashioned scam artists.
Let me back up a bit and explain.
Both my wife and I operate small online sales over the internet reselling items we purchase at clearance and closeout sales to supplement our incomes. Nothing major, a good month might bring us a couple hundred dollars extra. For the most part, we deal with very nice people who appreciate finding something they missed when the item was popular in regular stores and we strive to price the items fairly. Nothing too unusual that several other people have begun doing.
We were surprised to receive in the mail a Cashiers Check for nearly $300.00 for an order through her online sales. Surprised because the purchaser did not go through the actual selling site, but copied the order and sent it to us in the mail, bypassing the selling site.
Unusual, yes, but some people can be quirky.
Our initial elation began to wane once she realized the items ordered totaled less than $130.00. Recalling several warnings of online scams, we decided to check into this surprise order.
We discovered that as we suspected, it is the fraudulent check scam where they request the items shipped next day mail and please send them the over payment, leaving us stuck for the total amount and charges once the fraudulent check came back as a fraud, if we had deposited the check.
This check was an excellent forgery, even to the watermarks on the backside and looked very official. We discovered it was a forgery once we called the “bank” that supposedly issued it, Southshore Currency at 110 N. Lake St. Chicago, Il. 60601, drawn in affiliation with J.P. Morgan Chase Bank.
Southshore Currency assured us they were not a bank and did not issue Cashiers Checks from JP Morgan Chase Bank. They do not have an office located at N. Lake St in Chicago as N. lake Street is an East-West arterial anyways.
The routing number on the check was authentic, but for a bank located in Michigan.
The last confirmation we needed was for the purchaser, “Tyson Williams,” most assuredly an assumed name, replied to an email questioning the transaction just as we expected, “ship next day send refund for overpayment.”
At this point, I began discovering why criminals continue to get away with this sort of fraud. Calls to all the Banks listed resulted in numerous incidences of being passed on to another person, once to someone in the Philippines. None wanted to be involved with a fraudulent check written on their bank saying they could do nothing!
Trying our local Washington Mutual Bank, who is now affiliated with JP Morgan Chase Bank, resulted in much the same. All they could do was deposit it and see if it cleared. Uh, no. We already know it is a fraudulent check, why deposit it?
Getting frustrated in trying to report this in hopes it would be taken serious enough to maybe try to find whoever it is perpetrating these crimes, we decided to make a call to the Chicago Police, since it originated in their city.
Explaining it to the officer who first answered, he replied, “throw it away, it’s a scam.” Thanks, like we didn’t know that. Reminding him that we knew it was a scam already and we were trying to report it, he informed us, “there’s nothing we can do, you have the check.”
He did give us a “non-emergency” number elsewhere in Chicago to report it. Or at least we thought. Calling there resulted in the same reply, “there’s nothing we can do, the check is in your state.” Asking if they would like us to send them the check, letter and envelope elicited the reply, “no, just throw it away.”
Thinking maybe it qualified as Mail Fraud, I called the local Post Office and explained it to them. I was first informed that fraud had not been committed because we hadn’t deposited the check and been victimized. Pressing a bit further, the person I talked to finally said I could bring it all to the Post Office and they could look into it and could possibly use it as evidence.
I even called the FBI to inquire about it and was told it was a scam again, duh! The FBI Agent did say report it as Mail Fraud as the FBI had no jurisdiction in it and it was Mail Fraud.
We ended up giving it to the Post Office who took our information and what might be called a “report” on “sticky notes,” saying if they needed additional info, they’d get back to us.
Needless to say my eyes were opened on this sort of crime. I realize it isn’t a major crime and had we fallen for it, we would have been out maybe $200.00 or so, plus the items. But, how many others have received fraudulent checks as this and were not lucky enough to spot the forgery? Is it possible the person responsible for this fraud has made hundreds, maybe thousands of dollars off of unsuspecting people nationwide?
More importantly to me, have we gotten so lackadaisical that we just write off crimes as this and let the criminal walk to victimize the next unsuspecting person, possibly an older person trying to supplement their income a little?
This isn’t a murder, rape or violent crime, but a crime nonetheless.
How do we follow McGruff’s “Take a Bite Out Of Crime” if all we do is file these crimes in the circular file?
Watch out for yourselves, folks. In these “lesser crimes,” it seems as if we are on our own.
Posted by Lew Waters at 6:44 PM
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
It seems we have dodged another bullet in our cost of energy as oil prices have plummeted and gas is preparing to drop below $2.00 a gallon, down from inching just over $4.00 a gallon earlier this summer during the campaign.
Such high costs put a crimp in our living standards and hurt everybody as we stopped driving as much, stopped buying new cars and had to pay increased prices for nearly everything that had to be shipped over the road by truck. We cried out about it and the candidates responded with promises of increased energy efficiency requirements to partially lifting the decades long ban on drilling our own oil supplies.
At one time both major presidential candidates opposed lifting the ban on offshore drilling of our own oil, but the high prices Americans paid at the pumps and the outrage expressed over it has encouraged both to revise their opposition at least partly.
After allowing the drilling ban to expire, Democrats initially let it be known that they might re-impose drilling bans offshore with the new presidents administration.
Today, November 19, 2008, Steny Hoyer (D. Md.) said that his party
“will not push to reinstate a ban on offshore oil and natural-gas drilling next year,” adding “there will be serious discussion as to the ‘parameters’ to which offshore drilling will be pursued.”
Shortly after Hoyer’s comment, the American Petroleum Institute released the following statement,
“We believe the position outlined to news reporters by House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer - that the Democratic leadership would not seek to re-impose the ban on oil and natural gas leasing in federal waters - is the right approach. The American public has made clear its strong support for increased access to untapped domestic oil and natural gas resources. At least two-thirds of Americans in recent exit polling said they supported offshore drilling. Neither Congress nor the next administration should set unreasonable, arbitrary limits on leasing because such restrictions could remove some of the nation’s most promising oil and natural gas prospects for development, and the industry has proven it can develop these resources in an environmentally safe manner. The industry stands ready to help put America’s vast energy resources to good use to strengthen our nation's economy and energy security, generate billions of dollars for the benefit of our federal and state treasuries and provide good jobs for Americans across the country.”
While API stands ready to help America in our quest for energy independence, I am troubled by Hoyer’s call for “serious discussion as to the ‘parameters’ to which offshore drilling will be pursued.”
Cathy Landry, a spokeswoman for API shares my concern as she said,
“When they’re talking about ‘parameters,’ we should point out that putting arbitrary limits on development, whether that’s [prohibiting drilling within] 100 miles from shore, or whatever they’re thinking, could take some of the most promising domestic resources off the table,” adding, “So we would caution them to really look at what they’re doing and learn about what’s out there before they take action. It could potentially keep some of our nation’s best prospects from being developed.”
Younger Americans may not remember, but this isn’t the first time our dependence of foreign oil has drained our personal budgets. We saw this before in 1973 and 1979 with an increase in oil prices from foreign sources in 1990, while we let our own oil resources sit idle in the ground offshore and within the country itself.
Opposition to drilling our own ranges from environmentalists who’d prefer we go back to walking and riding bicycles to politicians who cry oil companies hold leases to lands to drill already, disregarding that the oil reserves aren’t located on those lands.
Drilling and refining our own oil not only decreases our dependence on foreign lands oil, that are often hostile to us, it stands to create more jobs which results in increased tax revenues for the treasury. In a letter to Congress, Jack Gerard, President and CEO of the American Petroleum Institute said in part,
“The U.S. oil and natural gas industry supports approximately 6 million jobs – 1.8 million people directly employed by the industry, with more than 4 million indirect jobs. Expanded access creates more job opportunities – and many of these jobs pay more than double the national average. In addition, oil and natural gas development on federal lands, both onshore and offshore, means billions of dollars for the U.S. Treasury and state governments in the form of royalties, bonus bids, rentals, severance taxes, corporate income taxes and property taxes.”
Sharing in my own sentiments, Mr. Gerard adds,
“Now that the campaigns are over, the time is right for a fresh start on energy. The American people have shown overwhelming support for increased domestic oil and natural gas development. Election Day exit polls found two-thirds of voters favor offshore drilling where it is not currently allowed.”
We have survived another wake up call, America. As oil prices slide back down, we cannot let ourselves be lulled back to sleep and continue our dependence on foreign countries for our energy needs. We have several energy resources right here within our own borders to utilize. We have several alternative energy resources in the works, but they have yet to be perfected. Petroleum remains our best bet for the right now. It’s the most economical in energy returned. And, it is available, if we will demand our politicians get out of the way and stay out of the way of obtaining it.
API has made available a 16-page booklet, Policies for America’s Future: Restoring Our Economic Strength and Shaping Our Energy Future, outlining the Oil and Natural Gas Industry’s costs, taxes and profitability and how our energy resources are not being adequately used currently. Policy recommendations are also listed on page 13.
It’s about time we citizens of America woke up and see that our energy costs are tied to nearly every part of our society. From what it cost to drive our cars to what we pay for groceries, to the comfort of our homes, we have serious energy needs. We have the resources available within our own country to met these needs and meet them in environmentally safe ways.
We must declare energy independence and stand on our own. We can no longer afford to be held hostage by foreign lands that aren’t afraid to use their energy sources as weapons against us.
We will perfect alternative energy sources, but in the mean time, we must use what we have available today. We must let our politicians know we want energy independence and they must support obtaining our own resources, offshore as well as onshore.
We must let them know we will not support imposing restrictive taxes on the industry that is working towards our energy independence nor will we accept higher energy taxes on our own individual energy consumption.
We have been promised “change” and we must demand that change include reasonable energy costs and energy independence.
The campaign rhetoric is over and now it is time to deliver.
Posted by Lew Waters at 3:19 PM
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Somali Pirates have seized yet another ship, an Iranian Cargo ship carrying 30 tons of grain and a Saudi Arabian Super Tanker with a cargo of $100 million worth of crude oil.
Astonishing is that the World’s Leaders and Navies declare themselves “powerless” against this band of criminal thugs, holding world trade hostage.
Saudi Arabia’s Prince Saud al-Faisal says, “Piracy, like terrorism, is a disease which is against everybody, and everybody must address it together.”
In true liberal wimpish fashion, Roger Middleton, a Horn of Africa specialist at the Chatham House think-tank says, “Now that they have shown they are able to seize an enormous ship like this, it is beyond a military solution. You won’t fix this without a political solution.”
The world has seen “political solutions” before and the result was more bloody war.
In spite of a UN Mandate allowing several nations Navies to patrol the area, ships continue to be illegally seized, as the Naval Operations must deal with “legal difficulties,” such as restrictive rules of engagement and rights of habeas corpus.
Forgotten is the world’s right to free trade between nations, unhampered by piracy while Pirates exploit the confusion as we worry about legalities.
Fully understanding that Somalia is besieged with unrest and no legitimate government currently is no excuse for not dealing with Pirates that intercept whatever they please and the mightiest Militaries on the planet sit back and worry about rights for the Pirates.
The UN Security Council unanimously passed resolution 1838 which “precisely and clearly calls on the member States of the United Nations to fight by any means under Chapter 7, the pirates.”
Some 7 ships are currently patrolling the waters off Somalia to combat pirates while NATO says “its priority is escorting World Food Program ships that deliver basic rations for three million hungry Somalis.”
I am left with the feeling that once again, in spite of all the condemnations of America thinking we are the World’s Police Force, these nations are sitting back, doing minimal patrolling and waiting for us to deal with the problem, while they continue to look down their noses at America.
We saw this with the War on Terror, joined in by the bleeding heart leftists within America for retaliating against terror. Terrorist rights seemed to be foremost in the minds of many who want to close down Guantanamo and bring terrorists inside of America for Civilian Trials, with no regard of what afterwards, should they be acquitted.
The world condemns George W. Bush for taking swift action against terrorists and resuming hostilities against the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq before he could support the terrorists even more. Few nations joined in the fight in earnest and a few more gave only tacit support, with too many sitting back complaining, but letting American blood be shed to fight terrorists.
Pirates, just like terrorists, have gotten emboldened by the lack of action against them. They have honed their tactics and gotten brazen in openly seizing cargoes destined for world markets.
President Bush has just weeks left in office before he turns leadership over to a inexperienced novice with no idea of what it is like to deal with whiney world leaders who don’t want their hands soiled protecting their countries.
Will he meet with these Pirates and negotiate an end, only to discover that doing so emboldens them more? Will he tell the world’s leaders it’s their baby and demand they deal with the problem, since it is mostly their ships and cargoes being highjacked?
Do they all forget they claim our Army is stretched to the breaking point and exhausted from fighting terrorists?
If ordered, our Brave Warriors will go and engage this band of criminals and yes, I fell win, provided they a re allowed to fight. But, if B HO orders them to fight, will he be accused like President Bush was of engaging in an “illegal pre-emptive war” against someone who never attacked us?
This very possibly could be the test Joe Biden was talking about, or at least one of them.
I have no idea how B HO will perform in this regard as I have not heard him speak about this problem. I also have no reason to be confident he will act in the best interest of America and take a strong stance and tell the UN and world leaders to deal with this small band of Pirates themselves, we are busy elsewhere.
It is well past time the rest of the world stepped up to the plate and dealt with despots too. Since they complain we should not be the World’s Police Force, it becomes incumbent upon them to deal with those who threaten their nations.
Stop bashing America, get off your asses and fight for your freedom and liberty against these pirates that hold your nations hostage. Stop waiting on us to clean up your messes just so you can complain that we saved your sorry butts.
UPDATE: I must commend the Indian Navy for their actions against the Pirates. Suspected pirate mother ship sunk
A Norwegian Shipping company has ordered their ships to sail around Africa instead of through the Suez Canal, bypassing the area the Pirates operate in and raising their shipping costs considerbaly, I'm sure.
Posted by Lew Waters at 11:30 PM
More an indictment of the Nationalist Media, wholly in the tank for Obama, interviews with 12 Obama supporters right after they voted and what they knew about the candidates and where they receive their news.
HOW OBAMA GOT ELECTED, includes Zogby poll of Obama voters and how uninformed of the issues they were.
John Zeigler on Hannity & Colmes
Posted by Lew Waters at 8:27 AM
Saturday, November 15, 2008
As a Viet Nam Veteran who was away from America during the active time of the Weatherman Underground movement, first for 18 months in Viet Nam followed by 3 years in Germany with the U.S. Army, I missed out on a lot of the news of the activities of this radical leftist group. What little word leaked to us wasn’t paid much attention to, as we were busy with more important matters at the time.
By the time of my return to the United States in March 1974, much of their goals accomplished, ending American involvement in keeping innocent South Vietnamese free, there was scant mention of them in the news.
So it was with particular interest that I paid attention when the name of Bill Ayers popped up during the Obama coup d'état of the presidency. Naturally, the leftstream media, in the tank for Homey, poo pooed any involvement between the two and castigated any who tried to confirm the connection. Even Whoopi Goldberg once said she thought Ayers had “rehabilitated himself,” that sentiment shared and echoed by B HO during campaign stumps.
I have to give B HO credit for quick thinking when he distanced himself from Ayers with,
“This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood … the notion that somehow as a consequence of me knowing somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago — when I was 8 years old — somehow reflects on me and my values doesn’t make much sense.”
Ending his month’s long silence, Ayers now comes out with a similar sentiment saying that the GOP attack was a
“dishonest narrative ... to demonize me,” adding, “I don’t buy the idea that guilt by association should have any part of our politics. This idea that we need to know more, like there’s some dark, hidden secret, some secret link, it’s a myth thrown up by people who want to exploit the politics of fear.”
I wonder if the name Jack Abramoff rings a bell with Ayers? Of course, since that was a different attempt to steal the presidency, I’m sure such a “luminary” and “distinguished” Domestic Terrorist as Ayers would not need to know of such efforts since no corroborative link between Abramoff and President Bush was established, in spite of strong efforts.
In what I can only assume is an effort to appear “softened” and somewhat “rehabilitated” of his radical bombing domestic terrorist activities that cost the lives of three Weathermen, including Ayers then girl friend, Diana Oughton, he now makes the claim that quotes of him saying, “I don’t regret setting bombs. I wish we’d set more bombs. I don’t think we did enough,” from 2001 around the time of the release of his autobiography, ‘Fugitive Days,’ are
“neither my narrative nor my sentiment, but the idea was seized upon by the neocon media machine: I was an unrepentent and violent terrorist.” He added, “I never actually said that I ‘set bombs,’ nor that I wished there were ‘more bombs.’ ... I killed no one, and I harmed no one.”
Did he forget that the bomb that killed his girlfriend in 1970 was a “nail bomb?” Nail bombs are strictly “anti-personnel” bombs, designed only to kill, maim and disfigure humans.
Do you wonder if he ever considers the harm he does to 2.5 million American Citizens who served in the defense of South Viet Nam, including just over 58,000 Brave Souls who paid the ultimate sacrifice, and their families and loved ones when he states,
“I didn’t regret for a minute resisting the murderous assault on Viet Nam with every ounce of my being?”
Or, when he says, “History has shown of the Vietnam War that those who opposed it were on the right side?” I imagine a few million Vietnamese people would disagree with that assessment. Hundreds of thousands more might, if they still were alive today.
In yet another recent narrative by Ayers himself, he states the flagrant lie,
“The war in Vietnam was an illegal invasion and occupation, much of it conducted as a war of terror against the civilian population. The U.S. military killed millions of Vietnamese in air raids—like the one conducted by McCain—and entire areas of the country were designated free-fire zones, where American pilots indiscriminately dropped surplus ordinance—an immoral enterprise by any measure.”
Lies as this has perpetuated the myth of the deranged Viet Nam Veteran for decades now and he claims he “caused no one harm?”
Of that “neocon media machine” he slurs, his claims were made on September 11, 2001 in the New York Times and the August 2001 edition of Chicago Magazine, to mention just two. Neither are what I would classify as either “neocon” or “rightwinged.”
All during the campaign, mentions of Ayers association with B HO would elicit the response shown above that Barry was only 8 years old when Ayers was committing those detestable acts that Ayers now says he really didn’t commit. I recall no one trying to make the claim that B HO was involved in the Weatherman’s activities long ago, just that he was associating with a known and unrepentant domestic terrorist that made the claim, “Guilty as hell, free as a bird—America is a great country.” Yet, Ayers appreciation of this “great country” is to try to bring about its downfall through Socialist programs that have failed in every Communist Nation they were tried in.
Then again, how does Ayers now claim he really didn’t do anything wrong, but make the claim of his guilt and freedom from prosecution? John Murtagh might just feel a bit different about Ayers not really having done anything wrong, as he recalls the night he woke up at 9 years old to firebombs going off around his home, placed by the Weathermen that Ayers led.
Both Barry and Ayers claim they really had no association, to successfully counter claims made about their association. Ayers claimed the only knew each other “professionally,” yet in the same interview, says that B HO was a “Family Friend.”
In the ABC interview, after identifying Ayers as a “distinguished professor of education at the University of Illinois at Chicago,” reminds us that in a new afterward to “Fugitive Days,” Ayers describes Obama as a “neighbor and family friend.”
Is this why Ayers remained quiet all during the campaign, breaking his silence only after B HO’s coup d'état was complete? To protect him from their association?
Then again, how “rehabilitated” is Ayers that he has maintained several radical ideals and ties to Marxists throughout his professorship? What is the possibility, given that B HO expressed several Marxist ideas throughout the campaign, that they share the idea of Subversion of American Youth, Ayers through education and Barry through his Youth Corps.
Newly appointed White House Chief of Staff for the incoming B HO administration, Rahm Emanuel explains some of the Youth Corps here.
There is no claim and if I recall correctly, Barry says Ayers will not be advising him. But then again, Barry said he was bringing “Change” to Washington D.C. and yet, with his appointments so far, he appears to be building a return to the troubled Clinton Administration. Will the “distinguished” unrepentant domestic terrorist find a way into B HO’s ear anyways? Only time will tell.
Might this subterfuge during the campaign be to further the goal of turning our education system into a radical leftist indoctrination system, as was outlined and read into the 1963 Congressional Record by Florida Democrat Congressman, A.S. Herlong?
Interesting yet scary times we live in when a radical like Bill Ayers is regarded as a “distinguished” anything, instead of serving time in prison, where he belongs.
How absolutely hypocritical that Ayers, who expresses and has shown such hatred towards a Capitalist America, is still hawking a book for his own profit.
Could it be that like most other Socialists, curtailing of profit is only for you and not them?
Apparently Bob Dylan was wrong all those years ago. Even with a weatherman, many still don’t see which way the wind blows.
Posted by Lew Waters at 9:22 PM