Newspapers Losing Circulation

And they just don't or won't, understand that Americans are tired of being fed the "liberal line" instead of the truth. That's one reason why Fox News is now the biggest news provider on the net, despite the best efforts of the liberal media to marginalize them. "NEW YORK - The Audit Bureau of Circulations released circulation numbers for more than 700 daily newspapers this morning for the six-month period ending September 2007. Of the top 25 papers in daily circulation (see chart, separate story), only four showed gains." (Editor & Publisher, 11/5/07)

Liberals Twisting Facts (As Usual)

New World Order media pundits attempt to distort Ron Paul's fund raising victory. Most Ron Paul supporters had never heard of Guy Fawkes before media pundits attempted to stain Ron Paul's fund raising victory by using its date (Nov. 5, 2007) to allege a connection with Guy Fawkes. Ron Paul's campaign fund raising promotion never made any mention of Guy Fawkes, or his attempt to blow up the Parliament on Nov. 5, 1605. In light of the reality that there are only 365 days in the year, we should realize that any date can be arbitrarily associated with some negative historical event. This is especially true when taking such license as to desperately search back to over 400 years. The fact that Nov. 5 most often appears as the date for American elections was ignored. This leads one to discern that such a misrepresentation could not possibly be attributed to mere stupidity. Recently these pundits had claimed that Ron Paul's support was merely"'spammers" and "hackers", who were manipulating the polls. Now they dodge having to "eat their own words" by "grabbing at straws" with an outlandish fabrication designed to stain this clear demonstration of real support. The encouraging reality is that Ron Paul is no longer a "long shot", to be ignored by the media. Gandhi said:"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." Ron Paul has just graduated to the next level. It appears that the intent is to make Dr. Paul appear to be some "radicalized thought crime" candidate. [This was sent me (thanks) by John Perna, a friend of mine from the web. He has sent me many pertinent posts in the past and I expect he will in the future, as well. It is used by permission. -RT]

Home Schooling Now a Crime?

"Government officials determined to stamp out 'parallel societies' [translation: individualism -RT] have in the past ordered police to take children from their homes to school and have placed a teenager involuntarily in psychiatric care for being homeschooled. Now they are fining a German husband and wife $6,300 for refusing to require their children to attend public schools. The Home School Legal Defense Association has written a letter to Mrs. Senatorin Renate Jurgens-Pieper in Bremen, asking for a continuation of previous permission for the Neubronner family to teach their children at home." The liberals in our government and elsewhere just don't want your children to escape the conditioning to collectivism (socialism) they inevitably get in public schools. So now they're doing everything they can to "criminalize" those who still insist on teaching their children themselves, thus allowing them to learn the truth about the world instead of the lies promoted by the collectivists (socialists) in our schools and government. This is a movement that is growing in our country and elsewhere to remove the authority to raise our children from us so they can teach them to be "good little socialists." Don't believe me? Look at what they DO, not what they SAY. (World Net Daily, 11/6/07)

No U. N. Control of the Seas!

"Alert: The United Nations' Law of the Sea Treaty, a wide-ranging measure critics say will grant the U.N. control of the 70 percent of the planet under its oceans, is now headed to the full Senate for ratification. The measure passed the Senate Foreign Relations committee today by a 17-4 vote. 'If you want a U. N. on steroids, you want the Law of the Sea Treaty', Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., has said. I am absolutely convinced it undermines U. S. sovereignty.' President Ronald Reagan, however, refused to sign LOST because he realized that the treaty doesn't serve U.S. interests.............." Do you want a socialist world government organization peopled by bloody dictators and other people who HATE the U. S. controlling the seas? I certainly don't. Let your legislators know so they don't "wimp out." I'm not sure we can count on Bush to veto this measure if they pass it. Bush is no Reagan. (SOS,)

"Your Papers, Please"

"New York - The federal government's efforts to create a standardized, secure driver's license that would also serve as a national ID card have hit some significant stumbling blocks." Soon you'll have a national ID card if certain legislators in the federal government have their way. The trouble with such a thing is that if you don't have one, after it is required, you cannot do business, anywhere in the country. The government can make you an "unperson" at will, and ruin your life, on the whim of some bureaucrat somewhere, whose name and location you usually can't even find out. Yes, there is the problem of identity theft. But that will ALWAYS be a problem as long as crooks are as good as they are at falsifying documents. It doesn't matter how sophisticated such cards are, the bad guys often make it to the streets with any new "wrinkle" even before the government can get it out. In any case, we already HAVE A "national ID card." It's called the Social Security card, which every American is REQUIRED to have, in order to pay his taxes or work -- and non-payment of taxes can get you in big trouble. It was SUPPOSED to NEVER be used for general identification. The government even promised faithfully that it would not. They even printed, right on the card, "not to be used for identification." Unfortunately (or intentionally, maybe?) they didn't make a LAW to enforce it. Then about 35 years later, they started "encouraging" private business to use it for identification. That was about the same time they QUIETLY, with "no fanfare," removed the "no identification" notice from the Social Security card. I go by what people DO, not what they SAY. And those actions, at the same time, tell me they had planned to use the SS card for national ID when they first imposed that pyramid scheme called Social Security on us back in the thirties, the same year they created the Federal Reserve System. You don't think the two are connected? C'mawn! Don't be naïve. (Christian Science Monitor, 11/5/07)

How Stupid is This?

"Legislation said to prohibit people dying while in the Houses of Parliament has been voted one of the most ludicrous laws in the UK. Treason laws which reportedly could be used against someone who places a stamp upside down on a letter were also cited by those polled by UKTV Gold." How do you prosecute a dead man? Sounds a little like ruining a congressman's career for making hand and foot motions where the guy in the next stall can see. I guess the Brits aren't the only people to make stupid laws. That "stamp thing" would net me the next time I send a letter to Britain, I guess, because I do that all the time and I'm not apt to stop, for anybody. (BBC, 11/7/07)

Communist China to Ban the Bible

Surprise, surprise! That's what you get when you allow a renegade state such as Communist China to host an international event that is supposed to be "non-political." You get politics up the ying-yang. Personally, I wouldn't go to Communist China on a bet. I don't allow ANY government to "shut me up" and you can get killed for that there. Especially if you have an organ they need in your body. They'd be following me around and I'd get arrested before I could get out of the country and probably spend the next ten years in one of their pokeys if they don't want my kidney or spleen. Oh, by the way; they're also banning video cameras, which are a staple of such events, especially for the families of participants (and CUPS, ferGawdsakes!). They'll probably trump up some drug charges against any non-Chinese who beat out Chinese participants, as France did when an American won their "Tour De France" 7 times in a row after beating cancer. "According to the Italian daily La Gazzetta dello Sport, organizers have cited 'security reasons' and have prohibited athletes from bearing any kind of religious symbol at Olympic facilities." Boy, that's gonna get them in BIG TROUBLE with Muslims. Representatives of that "religion of peace" are going to want to KILL somebody. (CNA, 11/2/07)

Are ALL Liberals Socialists?

No. There are many people out there who claim to be liberals, who not only are NOT socialists, but who haven't the slightest idea what socialism IS! This is one of the biggest problems out there. I spend most of my days decrying our steady march toward socialism, and many of the people who read what I write also haven't the slightest idea of what socialism is! My own SISTER didn't know, until I explained it to her. Socialism is actually very simple: it is taking money and property from those capable and willing to earn their own way, and giving it, unearned, to those who don't, or won't. Now socialists will tell you confidently that socialism is a lot more complicated than that, but their efforts to "complicate it" are simply that: complicate it so you won't understand it. My mission here is to MAKE IT SIMPLE so it can be understood, not only by moderately intelligent people, but also by those of less-than-moderate intelligence. Elite liberals in Washington are socialists, no matter how much they deny it. Don't go by what they SAY, go by what they PROPOSE. Hillary, for example, speaks of TAKING from the "big oil companies" and using the money to "benefit the poor." What is that but socialism? Look at the many other things she proposes and where she expects to get the money. It's ALWAYS by "taking" it from "the rich" (Any "rich" but her or Bill, that is). She doesn't define what "rich" means, but I will, here. "The rich" are those who have more money than you do. To her, "rich" means those EARNING more than you do by their original ideas and hard work. It does not include people like Teddy Kennedy, who INHERITED his wealth, and doesn't really "earn" much money outside of his handsome Senate salary. So basically, she wants to take away people's EARNINGS and give that taken (stolen) to people who do NOT earn. That's socialism, whatever name you give it. It has had many names; among them socialism, communism, Fascism, etc. All are slightly different forms of COLLECTIVISM. Socialism is the best-known form of collectivism, but ALL include TAKING from those who EARN, and GIVING to those who DON'T, in order to gain their SUPPORT so they (the socialists) can gain, or retain POWER. (Ashbrook Center,)

Stop Criminals From Suing Victims!

Linked below is a Bill that MIGHT be now before the SD legislature. I can't tell from the posting. But similar bills should be before ALL legislators, and be passed expeditiously into law so as to disallow ANY suit against the VICTIM of a crime by the CRIMINAL. I think any criminal who decides to commit a crime and gets hurt doing it should be forever stopped from filing a suit against the VICTIM of his crime. The commission of a crime should be FOREVER a bar to suit against ANY party to the crime on the victim's side. Current law does not, for the most part, bar such suits, and that is a travesty, since the CRIMINAL, if he is injured by the VICTIM in self-defense, sometimes can sue and get damages. Personally, if a criminal attacks me, I WANT to hurt him, and I'll NEVER pay damages, whatever a court might say. (South Dakota Legislature,)

Can We Reduce Crime?

Yes; but we're not likely to do the things necessary. There are several things we can do to accomplish this, all of which are violently opposed by the liberals. One way is to make it easy for HONEST people to carry guns for self-defense. They did it in Florida, and their crime rate went down precipitously. The liberals "screamed like stuck pigs" and told us Florida would soon be a "wild West" area where people commonly settle minor differences with guns. It didn't happen, but the liberals will never admit it, nor deign to even talk about it They'll simply change the subject. Another way is to SUE THE CRIMINAL. Criminals who get hurt in the commission of a crime have been known too often to sue the victim; some have even won judgments against their victims, thus causing a SECOND crime, for which they won't be punished. But how many times have the VICTIMS of crime sued the criminals, and collected? Not many, I suppose, because they just don't think that way. They should. Liberals would violently oppose this, too: because it is another thing that would prove them wrong and force them to ignore the result. I Googled "victim suing the criminal" and got a lot of "hits," but all I found were talking about criminals suing the VICTIM! Sheesh! ("More Guns, Less Crime",)

Jihad? What Jihad?

The United Nations and the "human rights community" has had its fingers in its ears and its eyes clamped solidly shut about the Rawandan genocide. Actually, the current one is the SECOND one in the last ten years. Many people say the U. N. is a "last bastion" of security for human rights, but the United Nations' best skill is the ability to "close its eyes" to genocides such as that in Rawanda and to deny its existence. If it IS our "last bastion" for security against such outrages (which is not even a sufficiently descriptive word for such things any more), we're lost. All the U. N. wants is POWER over as many nations and as many people as possible; to impose a socialist world government on the world and to collect taxes to which it is not entitled. They're not interested in stopping genocide; quite the contrary, in fact. In many places, they ENGAGE in genocide under the cover of darkness and the lies of the liberals in this world. (Human Events/Jihad Watch, 7/29/04)

Why Are They So Afraid of the Truth?

Actually, that's a rhetorical question, since I know the answer. I usually go by what people DO rather than what they SAY. So the actions of the liberal-Islamo-fascist supporters HERE AT HOME tell me a lot. They want us to believe what THEY say, and any attempt to bring us the truth gets a violent response from them. The attempt, by David Horowitz and "Front Page Magazine" to bring the truth to America is not only the subject of violence from our own liberals in our own society, it has also come to the attention of Islamo-fascists who have the ear of the United Nations: "The Kuwait News Agency (KUNA) has published an interesting story in the aftermath of Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week (IFAW). The report says that when Kuwaiti delegate Khaled Bader Al-Khalifa addressed the UN General Assembly on the Culture of Peace last week, he 'condemned a campaign launched by some American universities against Islam and called on the International Community to take a firm stand against such racial measures'; he 'touched on the significant role that could be played by the media and educational institutes to create a generation that condemns violence and hatred and can effectively spread the culture of peace'; and '[h]e said Kuwait is sparing no efforts to spread the understanding of moderation in Islam.' " Imagine the PURVEYORS OF VIOLENCE condemning an organization that's trying to STOP IT, saying THEY were causing the violence! Amazing! That they can twist the truth and get people to believe it is frightening to me. People are really gullible. They are apparently subject to believing the ones who are the best at propaganda. (Front Page Magazine, 11/5/07)

Muslims Persecute Christians

The world looks the other way. I don't know what the hell is wrong with people that they can't see the threat from radical Muslims who take such preaching very seriously: In the Koran, it says, "Islamic law mandates the death penalty for apostates from Islam, in accordance with Muhammad’s command: 'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.' Many Muslims take this dictum quite seriously today. In August 2007, Mohammed Hegazy, an Egyptian convert from Islam to Christianity, was forced by sentences of death pronounced against him by Islamic clerics to go into hiding. An Afghani, Abdul Rahman, was arrested in February 2006 -- for the crime of leaving Islam and becoming a Christian. And converts from Islam to Christianity are not the only ones being victimized. In March 2007, Islamic gangs knocked on doors in Christian neighborhoods in Baghdad, demanding payment of the jizya. Christians all over Iraq live increasingly in an atmosphere of terror. Women have been threatened with kidnapping or death if they do not wear a headscarf; liquor store owners in Iraq have likewise been threatened. A onetime Iraqi liquor store owner now living in Syria lamented that 'now at least 75% of my Christian friends have fled. There is no future for us in Iraq.' " I know there are such intemperate "rulings" in the Christian Bible too. But no one takes them seriously any more. Unfortunately, way too many radical Muslims take such words literally and many former Muslims have suffered because of it. (Jihad Watch/Human Events, 9/25/07)

Is Fred Thompson "The Man?"

As far as I'm concerned, the "jury's still out" on Fred Thompson as the man I'd vote for to be president, although I'm leaning in that direction. "The principal complaint about Thompson concerns not his ideology but his work ethic. The rap is that he does not burn the midnight oil -- the identical criticism of Reagan, before and during his presidency. That carping may betray resentment that Thompson has emerged as a full-blown candidate without backbreaking campaign travel and tedious fund-raising." If that's all they can come up with to criticize him, he's looking better and better for me. I hold it against him that he voted against kicking Bill Clinton out of office when he had the chance. And that he was in favor of the McCain-Feingold unconstitutional "Campaign Finance Bill" that did nothing but make it harder for ANYBODY to say or write anything against an incumbent in the last months before an election. But his voting record has been 86% conservative, according to the American Conservative Union, which is in his favor on the surface. However, I still have to look at the "specifics" in his voting record. I will, and when I do, I'll come out either for or against his candidacy. So far, however, he's the "best-looking" Republican candidate I can see (which has nothing to do with how pretty he is, or isn't). "Real Clear Politics says, "None of the big-three Republicans has been so consistently conservative as Thompson on tax policy, national security and abortion." To me, most of the Republican candidates lean way too far toward socialism for me to vote for them, though there is NO Democrat I'd EVER vote for. "Thompson's critics assert that, bored with his lucrative career as an actor, he has enjoyed his 15 minutes of fame created by a chance TV interview and will not really run." Again, if that's all his opponents can come up with, "he's golden" in my estimation. (Real Clear Politics/Robert Novak, 4/2/07)

Harry Reid's Phone Log

I don't know how real this is, but it is hilarious. It is a blog entry on a blog called "I Call BS" that purports to be a transcript of a clandestine recording of his secretary's answering of phone calls the morning Rush Limbaugh offered to sell Reid's stupid letter to Rush's syndicator trying to get him fired for specious reasons and match the donations for a charity. It sounds real enough, although it also sounds like one of Rush's own hilarious parodies. (I Call BS,)

Hillary Attacked!

The liberal media is oh, so concerned about attacks against Hillary by her opponents! Isn't that just orful! Last I heard, that's what election campaigns are all about. It isn't as if Hillary isn't constantly attacking her opponents, is it? One thing the liberal media hollers about is "everyone's attacking the girl." What? Seems to me she's a girl and she willingly went into this, knowing she'd be attacked from all sides. So what? How do you have any chance of winning against a "girl" without "attacking the girl?" Stupid! Frankly, if that's what keeps her from being able to impose her brand of socialism on us, I'm all for it, and that hasn't got anything to do with her sex. Attack away. She hasn't gotten anything like the attacks she's going to suffer if she actually gets the nomination and the attacks get REAL instead of the "softball attacks" she has gotten from fellow Democrat liberals so far. (Fox News, 10/30/07)

"Freedom of Speech?"

Liberals will always confidently tell you they are FOR "free speech" -- until it disagrees with their preconceived notions. They're also "pacifists" -- until a conservative comes to their liberal enclaves and tries to speak. Then that conservative needs a phalanx of security people to "fend them off." They only want "peace" until somebody disagrees with them, then they attack to keep these people from speaking. Universities claim they're "the last bastion of free speech" in the nation. But don't disagree with their liberal notions or the liberals on campus will stomp your face. David Horowitz went on campus to tell people about REAL Islamic terrorists, and for some reason, the liberals on campus didn't like that so they tried to stomp his face (without success). These ignorant people just don't understand that we are AT WAR with Islamic terrorists and if the terrorists win, campus liberals and their ilk will be the first victims of their head-lopping swords. (Front Page Magazine, 11/1/07)

Nobel Laureate Refuses Prize

It's so much of a travesty for AlGore to get the Nobel Peace Prize for his "global warming scam," that even one of the scientists who was a co-receiver has refused his share."I've had a lot of fun recently with my tiny (and unofficial) slice of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize awarded to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). But, though I was one of thousands of IPCC participants, I don't think I will add "0.0001 Nobel Laureate" to my resume. The other half of the prize was awarded to former Vice President Al Gore, whose carbon footprint would stomp my neighborhood flat. But that's another story. Large icebergs in the Weddell Sea, Antarctica. Winter sea ice around the continent set a record maximum last month. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change member John R. Christy. In an op-ed in today's Wall Street Journal, Christy tells the world that not only does he believe it's unproven that humans cause global warming, he's refusing his "share" of the Nobel Peace Prize that he was awarded because it was based on a misunderstanding of science." [Emphasis mine. -RT] Global Warming is NOT "settled science," as AlGore would have you believe. It is a HOAX, designed to separate you from your money and give more power to the government. (Matthew Sheffield/News Busters, 11/1/07)

We're Professionals, So Shut Up!

Basically, that's what the liberal media tells us constantly. They say they have "armies of fact-checkers" and we don't. We're just "bloggers."Michelle Malkin, one of the better-known "bloggers," who is also a nationally syndicated columnist, says, "So, how is it that The Professionals fell for a Code Pink, Blackwater-bashing hoax more obvious than a nosebleed on a white tissue?" The liberal media has been the victim of MANY hoaxes, one of the best-known is the one in which a well-known national anchor ended up being fired because of a story (he still maintains was true, even if he did have to use false papers to show it) about George Bush supposedly lying about his National Guard service. Then there's the picture of a woman holding up her supposedly "blood-smeared hands" in front of Condoleeza Rice, intimation that Rice is somehow involved in an "illegal war" (Which she is not, as the Iraqi war IS approved by Congress). The fact is, with all their "armies of fact-checkers," they are the victims of hoaxers all the time, because they want the things the hoaxers say to be true, as in the case of the Iraqi man who brought an already dead baby (who had died from illness) to the scene of a firefight and told reporters American troops killed him. They bought it, hook, line, and sinker, as they did the Code Pink "Blackwater hoax." This makes me proud to be a blogger who doesn't buy this bull. (Michelle Malkin, 11/1/07)

Iraqi Gravediggers Are Hurting

"NAJAF, Iraq -- At what's believed to be the world's largest cemetery, where Shiite Muslims aspire to be buried and millions already have been, business isn't good. A drop in violence around Iraq has cut burials in the huge Wadi al Salam cemetery here by at least one-third in the past six months, and that's cut the pay of thousands of workers who make their living digging graves, washing corpses or selling burial shrouds. Few people have a better sense of the death rate in Iraq." " Yes, the death rate for civilians (killed by Islamic terrorists, of course) is going down by as much as one-third. You'd think that would be cause for rejoicing. But the liberals can find a "victim" in ANYTHING. Personally, I'd sooner find a different job, rather than decry the falling death rate. But that's not how our liberals do things. They look at EVERYTHING as a "static situation" and assume gravediggers can't find other jobs. They merely whine about the falling death rate and its effect on gravediggers. Sheesh! I couldn't possibly make this stuff up, folks, I don't have that wild an imagination. (McClatchy News Service, 10/16/07)