Gore's "Global Warming" Swindle

AlGore Himself

The "Global Warming Swindle" being run by former Vice-President AlGore is the "biggest swindle ever perpetrated on the American public," according to Sen. Inhofe and meteorologist John Coleman, founder of the Weather Channel. It's a simple swindle: convince as many people as possible that the one-quarter degree higher temperature we will experience over 100 years is man-made, and a serious danger to humanity. (In other words, "The Sky is Falling!"). Then create a way to make millions from something like "carbon offsets" people can buy to "offset" their "carbon footprint," making sure your name appears on the list of major owners of the largest of the companies that offer "this service." They claim that these companies "plant trees" with your money, and this "offsets" your "carbon footprint." Bulldroppings! It's a scam to make AlGore a bigger millionaire and make him think he's doing something good. The truth is, temperature rises and drops are cyclical and not man-made. This is a scientific fact. Another scientific fact is that man is sufficiently insignificant as to be unable to seriously affect global weather for good or bad, even if he wanted to. No amount of "tree planting" is going to make a change in the global temperature. Did you know the same "scientists" who are touting global warming now were touting global cooling 25 or more years ago? Were they right then, or now? I don't think they are right either time. Gore says global warming is "settled science." It isn't. On what and whose authority does he make this statement? Those who disagree with him are not "out of the mainstream of science." It is Gore and his accomplices who are "out of the mainstream of science." Translated, that means they are "on the margins" and are basing their notions on "trash science." They cannot cite a single source for their silly claims that cannot be shown to be false by real scientists. (John Stossel)

The "Working Rich" Are Necessary

The liberals spend a lot of time and money knocking "the rich." Unfortunately, they don't tell us which "rich" they don't like, and why. There are two kinds of "rich." The "coupon clippers" who really do nothing to improve the lot of anybody but themselves, and the "working rich" who have made themselves (and others) rich through their sweat and effort. Most of the liberals who profess to hate "the rich" are, themselves, the "coupon clippers" who did not work and earn their money, but inherited it from their parents or grandparents. You know, like Ted Kennedy, who inherited $750 million from his father and fiddled away half of it, while claiming to "know what poverty is." Then there are the "working rich" such as Bill Gates, of Microsoft fame. You remember him, the rich guy who wouldn't "play the game" and "wine and dine" politicians and bureaucrats in Washington so they decided to just take what he didn't bother to give them. What they don't tell you is that Bill Gates and Microsoft created more wealth for everybody while he was creating his own wealth. The "working rich" invested their money in many places and many ways that created jobs and, in many places, created more fortunes. Without "the rich," this economy would "go down the tubes" in short order. Yes, the "rich" don't always do everything just as we would like them to do it. Sometimes it seems as if they just "brush us aside" in their quest to make more millions. And some do. But not all. Most "working rich" remember what it was like to wonder where next week's food money is going to come from. "Coupon clippers" don't. They've never had to wonder where their next meal will come from. (Does anybody think Teddy Kennedy ever wondered?) But "the rich" are a necessary part of our society, and we depend on them more than we know. So why do the liberals (Democrats) hate them so much? It's because they've made their riches from capitalism, and the liberals want socialism, where they get to control the money. They know you don't have to own the money if you get to control how, and where it is spent, to enjoy the benefits of the money. (Seattle Times)

Pull Peddlers

Some people will try and make money on anything, even other people's problems. If they have "pull," they can always find a way to peddle it. For instance, in Colorado, they're talking about allowing people with no passengers in the "high-occupancy" lanes if they can pay for it. People who can't, or won't, will continue to be required to have two or more people in the car. Another proposal is to charge skiers $12 toll if they drive from Denver to the "ski country" during "rush hour" on weekends. And they're already selling special ID cards that will allow frequent fliers who can afford it that will allow them to "fly" through airport security lines ahead of everybody else in five minutes. People who do this kind of thing I call "Pull Peddlers."

Five-Year-Old Sex Harassment

In Hagerstown, Maryland, the school charged a five-year-old with "sexual harassment" because he pinched the rear end of a female schoolmate. My question is this: "How can a five-year-old commit sexual harassment when he knows nothing about sex?" I remember when I was that age, an older female cousin of mine showed me her vagina. I looked, because it was "forbidden" and I was a kid. At no time did I think of sex, because I did not know about sex yet. If she had tried to initiate sex, I'd have probably "run for the hills." When I was 12, a girl did try to initiate sex with me and I did "run for the hills." Typical liberals will ruin a child's life for an "offense" he could not possibly have committed because he's too young to even know about sex.. Now he will forever be known as "that kid who sexually harassed a classmate," never mind he was unaware of it. This is what liberals do to advance their agenda. Never mind how many people's lives they ruin in the process. (The Herald-Mail, 12/20/06)

How Do You Tell The Difference?

Eight GIs were charged with murder in the case of the killings of everyone in a house from which they were attacked, in Iraq, after one of their number was killed from within. My question is, "How do you tell the difference" between combatants and innocent civilians when the person shooting at you might be a child" and nobody (except us) wears a uniform? One of my brothers had to kill a 9-year-old boy (I think) in Viet Nam after the kid had just blown the head off his sergeant, to keep this kid from killing him. I think this has haunted him his entire life since. Fact is, the combatant in Iraq who is shooting at you might just be a 7-year-old child or a woman -- or a man dressed as a woman to fool you. Not only that, the Islamic terrorists routinely put innocent civilians in harm's way so they can claim we killed innocent people on purpose. Never mind they do it all the time -- on purpose. I sincerely hope military officials take this into consideration. (Yahoo News, 12/21/06)

U. N. "Sanctions" Iran

Big effing deal! How many U. N. "sanctions" did it take before we lost our patience with Saddam's "flipping them off" and took action in Iraq? Iran has already "flipped them off," and shows all signs of continuing to do so. Do we need any further evidence that the United Nations is nothing but a "billion dollar debating society" that accomplished nothing but the illegal enrichment of U. N. "top guns?" So what happens now that Iran has told them to "stick it?" They'll go back to the debating society and come up with another "sanction," which Iran will reject, and they'll come up with another one, and another one, and another one, ad infinitum, ad nauseum, until we lose patience again and topple the Iran government, as should have been done a long time ago. Notice how the logo above shows the U. N. icon laid over that of the United States. How better to show their intent? (Fox News, 12/23/06)

This is MY Country!

MY Country!

Not yours. "And, because I make this statement does not mean I'm against immigration. You are welcome here in my country. Welcome to come through like everyone else has. Get a sponsor. Get a place to lay your head. Get a job. Live by our rules. Pay your taxes. And learn the language like all other immigrants have in the past. [Don't demand I learn your language. -RT] And please don't demand that we hand over our lifetime savings of social security funds to you to make up for 'your losses.' When will Americans stop giving away their rights? We've gone so far the other way .. Bent over backwards not to offend anyone. But it seems no one cares about the American that's being offended."I was sent this with instructions to forward it, or be "part of the problem." But I elected to do more, not because I'm afraid of being "labeled," but because this is what I believe. (Just common sense)

Americans Kill Top al Qaida Commander

Naturally, They deny it, just as they have been denying all along that bin Laden is dead, and has been for years (We made a "crispy critter" of him a long time ago). They've been (figuratively) "propping up the dead body ever since, trying to make us believe he's still alive. My evidence? NOBODY has seen him alive since we dropped a "big bomb" on one of his caves in Afghanistan. Yes, there have been tapes made, using old footage, carefully edited to make it look like they were made recently. They may even come up with a look-alike and keep trying (It's not hard to look like a tall, skinny, bearded thug wearing a turban). Islamics are well known for using look-alikes of their "leaders." Just as they are known to put innocent women and children between them and their enemies so they can claim we killed those innocents on purpose if we attack them. They cry if we attack them in a Mosque after they attack us from WITHIN that Mosque, yet they attack Christian churches and Jewish synagogues routinely (Fox News, 12/23/06)

Is Islam a "Peaceful Religion?"

Not according to the Koran: "After examining a number of scriptures which warn of the dangers of having Christian and Jewish friends, the lesson concludes: 'It is compulsory for the Muslims to be loyal to each other and to consider infidels their enemy.' This comes straight from the Quran. 'O believers,' the Quran says (Sura 5, Verse 50), 'do not hold Jews and Christians as your allies. They are the allies of one another; and anyone who makes them his friends is surely one of them.' As historian Paul Johnson noted in National Review, such 'canonical commands' -- along with 'slay the idolaters wheresoever you find them' (Sura 9, Verse 5) -- 'cannot be explained away or softened by modern theological exegesis, because there is no such science in Islam.' Johnson goes on to explain that contrary to the evolving nature of both Christianity and Judaism, Islam has never undergone any update, reformation or enlightenment since its inception in the seventh century. 'Islam,' he wrote, 'remains a religion of the Dark Ages. The seventh-century Quran is still taught as the immutable word of God, any teaching of which is literally true. In other words, mainstream Islam is essentially akin to the most extreme form of Biblical fundamentalism.' " In other words, they're trying to foist upon us a seventh-century ideology, disguised as a religion. (Just common sense)

George Soros: "Capitalism Coming to an End

Another "filthy rich" billionaire claiming what made him rich is "going away." He finances literally every socialist (liberal) outfit going, and meanwhile he's making money from capitalism, but he says "the era of capitalism is coming to an end." Maybe he'd like that, now that he "has his." "George Soros, the Davos partygoer who finances near every left-wing political-action group on both sides of the Atlantic pond, recently wrote in the Financial Times that the era of capitalism is coming to an end. Soros, of course, has been predicting this for at least 20 years -- through the greatest world boom in history. And how was it that Soros made his money? Trading currencies in the technologically advanced world financial markets, the very same markets that were spawned by 20th century free-market capitalism." The bad thing is that some people actually LISTEN to people like this, and it affects what they do, creating more opportunities for people like Soros to loot them, then promote socialism. (Lawrence Kudlow/Human Events)

They Hate Him Because He's Effective

He's probably the best president since Ronald Reagan overall. That doesn't mean he is "another Reagan. Far from it. Reagan would not have allowed the Border Patrol and the court system to send two Border Control agents to prison for ten years for doing their jobs to the best of their ability by refusing to pardon them. Reagan wouldn't have refused funding for stem-cell research that could find cures for things we had almost given up on, on the spurious claim of "sanctity of human life" while allowing people to murder their unborn children (which are much higher on the cycle) for their own convenience, rather than use condoms. But he did lower the tax rate and create the best economy this country has seen since Reagan did the same thing. His policies are responsible for the almost ZERO unemployment rate. He's the only politician to actually SEE the danger presented by the Islamic terrorists, much as Churchill first saw a similar danger in Adolph Hitler and Nazism and he's not afraid to do something about it. Every liberal politician now claiming to be "against the war in Iraq" were FOR it during the 14 months we waited for Saddam to do something, ANYTHING to make us believe it wasn't necessary, while Saddam ignored UN resolution after resolution. They also agreed with him that Saddam had WMDs, and he did. They were discovered long after Saddam's death, but the liberal press will not report it. He's no Ronald Reagan, but unfortunately, he's the next best thing we have right now. I hear people knocking him every day, and saying things that could not possibly be true about him, mostly from the ignorance of the uninformed who are "parroting" what they've heard their liberal friends say. I get tired of it. I don't know of another Republican now running that could replace him, and CERTAINLY not any of the Democrats. He has prevented another terrorist attack on our soil since 9/11, even while other countries have suffered them. He has restored respect (among the intelligent) to the White House from the "trash" atmosphere that it had during the Clinton administration. I fear we're in for a rough time of it for a while and I hope I live long enough for the pendulum to swing back away from the socialism that's coming if a Democrat gets elected president, or if a Republican who is a "closet" socialist or a wuss does. (Just common sense)

This Cartoon Says It All

Be Careful What You Wish For

I tried to find the original cartoon on Town Hall, but couldn't. So I had to reprint it here and tell you that the cartoons by this man are hilarious. If you can't read the punch line, they're praying for an end to racial strife and bigotry. (Glenn McCoy)

"Screw Jesus!"

Well, that's the "cleaned up version" of what CNN "anchorbabe" Dana Jacobson blurted out while reportedly drunk at a celebrity roast " Did it make you mad to see that title? It would me. I didn't say it. It's a quote. "Catholic League president Bill Donohue said he pressed ESPN on the issue and received an e-mail with an unsatisfactory statement by Jacobson. The statement said, in part, 'My remarks about Notre Dame [Notre Dame? -RT] were foolish and insensitive. I respect all religions and did not mean anything derogatory by my poorly chosen words.' " But she did mean it. You don't blurt out such words at such a gathering if you don't mean it, especially if you're (reportedly) drunk and your inhibitions are lowered. If Catholic League and other religious organizations hadn't raised a bunch of hell about it, CNN wouldn't have done anything about it because from what I've seen, they feel the same. This kind of thing is the inevitable result of the liberal attempt to destroy religion unless it comes from the "religious left." (World Net Daily)

No "Stimulus Package" Needed

Well, not the way the Democrats and most Republicans view it. All we need to do is continue, and maybe augment Bush's tax rate reductions, which have done more in the last few years to stimulate business and increase the "tax take" than any other single factor. But most politicians want to do something that will take money from those who earn it and give it to those who don't, or won't. That's simple socialism, and will never work. All it will do is give more power to the politicians while giving a temporary "lift." Lowering the tax rate is a proven strategy, and has worked every time it has been tried. Try to convince the politicians of that -- including Bush, who authored the latest one. The one that created the latest business boom (which the Democrats hate). The Democrats will always do something that makes the economy worse, criticize the Republicans for it, and then promise to "make it all better" if they get elected. (National Review)

Kill One and You're a Murderer

Man Holds Dead Baby from Saddam's Mass Grave

Kill 300,000 and you're a monster (Statistics just cannot reflect the reality of finding thousands of murdered people). Saddam gives new meaning to the phrase, "I regret that I only have one life to give for my country." It's too bad we can't kill Saddam 300,000 times to "get even" for those he murdered during his time in power. And that's just one group. How many more he has murdered, we'll never know because they're all buried somewhere in a mass grave we probably haven't found yet. And some people (who were not subject to his murderous actions) say we shouldn't execute this monster. How wrong can you be? What idiots! Click the link below to see the remains of some of his victims and learn more about his genocide. And killing people is not all he has done. I don't think he was the first dictator to have "rape rooms" where the wives and daughters of his enemies were raped by his soldiers, but he is the most recent we know about. Killing Saddam was good for the world. (Saddam's mass graves,)

It's Just Backwards!

When you call a number that goes to a computer, you always have to "Press 1 for English" before you can go any further. It happens every time I call my phone company or the Cable company to discuss my bill, and it's just backwards to the way it should be. People who want to talk in ANOTHER language but English in an English-speaking country ought to be the ones who have to "press 1." I get tired of having to do it to speak the language of the country in which I live. If you're tired of it, too, you might want to support the Alexander English Amendment (H.R. 3093), to prohibit EEOC from spending funds to sue organizations for demanding their employees speak English at work, as they did to the Salvation Army. "However, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD), and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) have ordered that negotiations be indefinitely halted because they oppose allowing the Alexander English amendment being included in the CJS bill when it is sent to President Bush. This is dirty politics at its worst!" Is there ONE bill that Americans want that Pelosi and Reid will not try and kill? Way back when I was in security, I worked for a while in the Post Office, where where an old Spanish man "gave me hell" because I did not speak Spanish. Apparently, he thought it was a law that federal employees must speak Spanish. What a "can of worms" THAT would open up, as people of all different languages demanded equal treatment. Does anybody speak Swahili? (Eagle Forum)

Clinton Bored at Obama Speech

Clinton's Nap

You probably won't see this picture anywhere in the liberal media, although I saw it several days ago on Fox, which shows both sides (which enrages liberals). If this had been a Republican "catching a few winks" at a Republican meeting, you'd have never heard the end of it. It would be a permanent part of the reel they show to "knock" Republicans for the next hundred years or more. (Glenn Beck)

Clintons to "Inflict Pain" on Their Enemies

Hill, Bill, and Chelsea

Hillary and bill have always been known for inflicting as much pain on their enemies as they could. But it could never be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt. Now it can. Judicial Watch has foun d evidence of it. "Seeking to impose an unworkable plan on an unsuspecting public was bad enough, but the pain Hillarycare supporters were prepared to inflict on opponents demonstrates insensitivity in the extreme. A 'confidential' memorandum written on May 26, 1993 by Sen. Jay Rockefeller, West Virginia Democrat, to Hillary Clinton was entitled 'Health Care Reform Communications.' The Rockefeller memo suggests Hillary employ 'classic opposition research' to attack critics who were excluded by the administration from Task Force deliberations and to 'expose lifestyles, tactics and motives of lobbyists' to counter and overcome criticism. Rockefeller also suggested news organizations 'are anxious and willing to receive guidance (from the Clinton administration) on how to time and shape the (news) coverage.' Rockefeller seems to accept the notion asserted for years by conservatives that the mainstream media are biased in favor of Democrats and their policies. For many, this will not be a revelation. A Feb. 5, 1993 Draft Memorandum from Alexis Herman and Mike Lux to Mrs. Clinton spells out the Office of Public Liaison’s plan for the health care reform campaign. It notes the development of an 'interest group data base' detailing whether or not organizations 'support(ed) us in the election.' The database would also track personal information about interest group leaders, such as their home phone numbers, addresses, 'biographies, analysis of credibility in the media, and known relationships with Congress people.' " This "database" mirrors exactly what was suggested by Rockefeller and knowing Hillary is such a well-known wiretapper she's known as "Senator Wiretapper," no one who pays attention is surprised. (Cal Thomas)

"Looking for a Fight?"

"Them's Fightin' Words!"

Ya think? Isn't that the whole purpose of these debates? Isn't she "looking for a fight? Isn't John "perfect hair" Edwards? What amazes me is Obama's inability to use the word "lie" with regard to her utterances against him. He continues to use "weasel words" like "prevarication," "not true," or "not factual." But it seems nobody, most of all him, can bring themselves to utter the word "lie." For my part, when a candidate lies, I call it a lie. Forget the "weasel words." (Breitbart)

Just Waiting to Be Offended

It's a trend. People out there being "offended" by the slightest real or imagined slight. The worst offenders are Islamists. Only they would be moved to MURDER by the appearance in a Dutch newspaper of several badly done cartoons that just DEPICTED their "prophet," not even in a bad way. They SAY they're "non-violent," but they commit violence at the first opportunity and blame it on some tiny slight an "Infidel" gave them. They're just hunting for a reason to kill somebody. In this litigious society, you can be sued for almost ANYTHING. Yes, maybe you'd win, but it would cost you a LOT, maybe EVERYTHING, just because you "offended" somebody. An example is the recent flap in Seattle where the Airport (Sea-Tac) took down every Christmas tree they had up on just the THREAT of a suit. Sheesh! (Just common sense)