Lack of Content…

Just a quick note to apologize for the lack of new articles lately. To say that I have been busy would be an understatement. I have not, however, given up my passion for SUFA. I will try to get some new articles posted very soon…

About these ads

Comments

  1. gmanfortruth says:

    I apologize as well. Summer has been very very busy, October will be just as busy, but the weather should help give me time to contribute. Sending one that I just put up on mine!

  2. I have got the final one on Iran done and a new one for you USW…..Been a little busy with these brush fires down here and coordinating military equipment to the civvies but we have our fires down to 11 now and we are handling everything pretty well. We did get some Federal help with three fully loaded fire trucks and we got one C130 for two trips.

    We did get some paperwork to fill out from FEMA…..

  3. I feel your pain, USW … no, not just the wes cravens of Baltimore (what a let down) … but your schedule. My temp work has been extended to January, there’s school work, the book for next year to edit and other writing (including my blog) … it’s all overwhelming. Not enough hours in the day …

    See, even socialists can be very hard and responsible workers … :)

  4. No apology necessary-I appreciate the hard work you, USW and all the other people who write articles do here- giving me a place, to learn, discuss, and sometimes Vent. We’ll just call it an extended Open Mic Party :)

    Now my rant for the day :) I use these E-cigs. and they are great-No, I haven’t quit smoking but I have cut down. I also use them when I go out to restaurants, etc. something I had just about quit doing. Which is another plus for E-cigs-people will actually go out and spend money-instead of just having parties at home.

    Now I’m no scientist but this puts out a water vapor-which has no smell and it dissipates very quickly-no smoke-so I have a hard time believing they can hurt other customers with second hand what?

    So why are they writing laws to outlaw there public use???????

    September 19, 2011 4:00 A.M.
    The War on E-Cigarettes
    The CDC should stop funding harmful campaigns.

    Earlier this month, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reported that from 2005 to 2010, the nation’s smoking rate experienced a measly decline, from 20.9 percent to 19.3 percent. This, despite hundreds of millions of dollars in government anti-smoking campaigns and higher cigarette taxes. The CDC now estimates that the smoking rate will be 17 percent in 2020, far short of the sub–12 percent goal set by the 2009 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act.

    If there’s any chance of reaching the goal, influential anti-tobacco activist groups should quit stubbornly relying on the government to solve the problem, especially when the private sector is coming up with innovative approaches to reduce the risks related to tobacco use.

    - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – -

    ADVERTISEMENT

    - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – -
    The Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, perhaps the most prominent anti-tobacco group, wrote in a press release that the decline in smoking rates was “nothing to cheer” about and that the news “underscores the need for elected officials at all levels to more aggressively implement proven measures to reduce tobacco use.” Except by their own admission, the only thing proven about the current government approach is that it isn’t working.

    In fact, groups like Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids have remained steadfast in their adamant opposition to many commonsense strategies for making tobacco less deadly. The most egregious example is their continued prohibitionist stance towards electronic cigarettes. E-cigarettes, which deliver nicotine to the user in a water-like vapor that does not contain the deadly amalgamation of particles found in tobacco smoke, have caught on over the last half-decade with smokers looking for less risky ways to get nicotine, or even trying to quit entirely. Published surveys suggest that e-cigarettes have helped a significant number of people remain abstinent from traditional cigarettes. Furthermore, despite fear-mongering by activist groups, tests performed on e-cigarette liquid and vapor demonstrate that the product is no more toxic than other nicotine-replacement therapy products such as the nicotine patch, gum, and inhaler.

    Apparently, the city of Boston hasn’t gotten the memo. Earlier this month, the Boston Public Health Commission took the first step toward banning the use of e-cigarettes in workplaces, restaurant patios and decks, and loading docks. If passed by the Health Commission, Boston will join a small but growing list of communities — one of the most significant being King County, Wash., (which includes the city of Seattle) — that have voted to force e-cigarette users, many of whom are ex-smokers, back into the smoking section based on nothing but pure hype and conjecture. There is no evidence whatsoever that e-cigarette vapors contain anything more harmful than small amounts of nicotine, which is not a carcinogen.

    Unfortunately, these are not isolated examples of local governments’ interfering with effective private-sector solutions. In fact, these campaigns have been bankrolled by the CDC, the very same federal bureaucracy that’s spending recklessly — and ineffectively — to fight smoking.

    When Congress passed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, it created a CDC slush fund called Communities Putting Prevention to Work. Initially created as part of the 2009 stimulus package to distribute $400 million in grants to state departments of health and local governments, the CPPW program, like most big spending programs, refused to die. Its funding now stands at $750 million a year, and will rise to $2 billion a year beginning in 2015. The cash handouts are supposed to be targeted at “reducing chronic disease morbidity and mortality associated with obesity and tobacco use . . . through implementing evidence- and practice-based approaches.”

    What is the “evidence” supporting a CDC-funded campaign to restrict the use of e-cigarettes? The Boston Public Health Commission declined to share with us a report issued by their CPPW advisory council to Mayor Thomas Menino on the topic. And the CDC dismissed any notion of accountability and transparency by referring our questions back to the (non-responsive) grant recipient.

    Whether achieved by national or local policy change, governmental micromanagement of health behaviors not only restricts freedom, but is failed policy. Boston’s proposed law is undoubtedly a waste of money and resources. But by creating obstacles for smokers to switch to e-cigarettes, it will actually do far more harm than good.

    Most important, it again illustrates what the few rational voices in the tobacco-control movement have been saying for years: The so-called public-health community simply strives for more control over our lives, even at the expense of shortening them.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/277484/war-e-cigarettes-jeff-stier

    • gmanfortruth says:

      I quit smoking 4 weeks ago today. So far so good. On the economic front, Loydds of London has removed all of it’s money from European banks. Is this a big sign or what.

      • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

        A few weeks ago Switzerland came right out and said that it would buy as many Euros and other foreign currencies as necessary so that the Swiss Franc to Euro ratio would not exceed 1.20:1

        This is obvious outright manipulation but is not any different from what we do, or what Japan does, or lots of other countries.

        The Swiss Franc is viewed as a safe haven, and people flocked to it which drove up the value. The high (relative) value of the Franc meant that Swiss goods rapidly became “more expensive” relative to other competitors whose costs and prices were based in Euros.

        By buying up tons of Euros, the Swiss drove down the value of their own currency, but now they are going to have to hold on to all of those Euros, or run the very real risk of dumping them at a much lower price when the @#$! does actually hit the fan in Europe.

        Temporary “solution” at best, and really not a good idea for the Swiss. They basically decided that shooting themselves in the foot would hopefully prevent worse injury at some later time… but I doubt that is going to work out well for them in the long run.

      • Congrats G. 3 years and counting for me.

      • :grin:

      • Way to go G. Quitting cigarettes was/is very difficult. I can’t stop myself from the pipe, but I know the cigs were worse.

    • Good for you, G. :)

    • SK Trynosky Sr says:

      You have to extrapolate. If it even looks like you are smoking a cigarette, you are sending the wrong message to the childrun. The freaking fascists can’t stand the thought of somebody sending any message that they do not approve of to anyone, let alone the childrun.

      I think that we should spend more time trying to link ourselves with American Indians. I suspect my Eastern European DNA would actually have a lot in common with American Indians. Anyone ever notice how much Jack Palance and Charles Bronson looked more like American Indians than most Americans Indians do?

      Anyway if we can find the link, then we can sue the government over the fact that their war on tobacco violates our rights. I never did cigarettes, only the pipe and Borkum Riff, cut tobacco for thirty years or so. I will miss filling up that bowl till the day I die. Even last night, we went out to dinner and afterwords my hand instinctively went in the pocket for the pipe fifteen years after I gave it up!

      For all you smokers out there, my Masters in Public Health son has informed me that if you: A. ever smoked and B. ever told a medical practitioner that you did and C. die, you will be listed as a smoking related death . My father a fifty year smoker who gave it up five years before he died of lung cancer, was listed as such even though his cancer was NOT a smoking type cancer but related to the Benzene, Carbon Tet and Acetone fumes he apparently constantly inhaled indoors as an aircraft mechanic in England with the 8th during WW 2. Mom too was a smoking related death even though she made 84, was a social smoker only and had not been near a cigarette in over 20 years. Note: exceptions will be made for accidental deaths unless you dropped the butt in your lap while driving and went off the road.

      Believe nothing!

  5. PeterB in Indianapolis says:

    Here’s something to talk about if you all like:

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/09/20/pielke-sr-on-that-hide-and-seek-ocean-heat/#more-47793

    Some important things to note here that even Roger Peilke did not point out very clearly.

    #1: This entire paper is based upon a computer simulation. NO ACTUAL OBSERVATIONS OR DATA WERE USED WHATSOEVER.

    According to me, how is it even possible to properly design a computer simulation unless you base it upon real data and real observations?

    #2: Real observations show no significant sea level rise over the past 10 years (yes there has been a tiny rise of a few millimeters, but that’s hardly significant), also there has been no statistically significant warming over the past 10 years. However, the concentration of atmospheric CO2 has indeed risen over the past 10 years. According to the AGW hypothesis, an increase in CO2 levels MUST lead to a higher temperature SOMEWHERE within the climate system.

    According to me, if the surface was warmer in the past 10 years, we would have seen it in the temperature records, and we don’t. Further, if the heat were “hiding” 1000 ft. down in the Ocean, it is well known that warm water (just like warm air) expands and takes up a greater volume than cold water does. If the layer of ocean approximately 1000 ft. down was warming over the past 10 years, it would have undergone thermal expansion, and thus, sea level would have risen over the past 10 years.

    So, my opinion as a scientist is that the computer simulation they ran was an intentional GIGO project. They used no real observations for the inputs, and the outputs are contradicted by the things we can observe. It looks to me like the “missing heat” is missing because CO2 is not the primary driver of the climate system. Looks to me like the primary driver of the climate system is the sun and solar activity (or lack thereof).

    I don’t deny that CO2 COULD play some role in climate variations; however, it is looking more and more like it is a VERY small percentage of the atmosphere as a whole, and consequently the role it plays in climate variations appears to be pretty insignificant.

    There, I am sure that will stir up the pot some :)

  6. Canine Weapon says:

  7. Caption Time!!!

    http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2011/09/21/the-he-really-doesnt-get-it-does-he-memorial-open-thread/

    I like the “All those in over your head, raise your hand” among many others……

    What a complete doof.

  8. And then there’s this. Did anyone else watch when BO gave his latest scolding speech? I think two days ago maybe? Hard to keep track. Anyways, he then went to the crowd and did some handshaking of his admirers and I swear I saw the great Rev. Jesse there.

    Ooops! Might not be invited anymore after this story hits….well then again, maybe so.

    WARNING – absolutely disgusting!

    http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/09/20/39904.htm

  9. gmanfortruth says:

    Thanks to everyone for the support on the smoking issue. It is not easy at all, but I’m holding my own. I even stopped the E-Cig that i had at the beginning. I do feel better, that’s for sure.

    As I’m following the economic issues, I can say that I still believe it will get terribly bad before it gets better, if it does get better. I hope all of you at least prepare for the worst and hope and pray for the best. The next 3 months will be a bitch, I hope this country doesn’t fall apart, but it sure seems to be on that path.

    Thanks again to all my friends here!

    • Terry Evans says:

      G, I quit on January 31 of this year…cold turkey. A request from my only granddaughter was something I simply could not ignore…

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Charlie, Your blog is always worth the time to read, keep it up. Get Doc back on as well!

    • Good morning Charlie………something for your blog. This is about the workers party (union) retirement in Chicago…..56 million dollars to 23 union bosses…….$115,000 per year. At age 78, they will have collected 4 million each. Pretty good pension for an average salary of $54,000 per year. But since they are union and not terrible corporations………..it is ok. So, perhaps you could write a piece about the union bosses living off the backs of the same workers you claim the corporations are living off.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        But Colonel, Unions have saved so much suffering that somehow the union bosses deserve there big pensions. They stopped all the child labor and poor working conditions, although this was decades ago, but the unions are just so important to the saftey and wellbeing of all the workers they represent, that they should become wealthy on the backs of the workers. :) Disclaimer: Unions are just as corrupt as the pathetic administration in the White House. All of them should be jailed.

      • And here’s some more information about those unions-retiring at 50 or 51-getting an inflated retirement based on their union salaries-not a teachers salary. So their taking money from the teachers pension fund(which is running out of money), for a job they aren’t doing, paid for by the state which they don’t work for-and some of them are still working for the union drawing salaries of $200,000.00 which they are also taking from the teachers. Oy Vey

        Chicago union bosses raking in millions from city pension fund
        Share120
        posted at 2:05 pm on September 21, 2011 by Jazz Shaw
        printer-friendly

        In case any of you were having too nice of a day, here’s something sure to get your heart rate worked up toward the red zone. Out in the Windy City (where else?) we find a heartwarming tale of hard working union bosses scraping by in their golden years with a little help from the taxpayers.

        All it took to give nearly two dozen labor leaders from Chicago a windfall worth millions was a few tweaks to a handful of sentences in the state’s lengthy pension code.

        The changes became law with no public debate among state legislators and, more importantly, no cost analysis.

        Twenty years later, 23 retired union officials from Chicago stand to collect about $56 million from two ailing city pension funds thanks to the changes, a Tribune/WGN-TV investigation found.

        The short version of the story is that a couple of decades ago, somebody (amazingly they can’t seem to find anyone willing to admit they did it) inserted a change into the pension laws which essentially says that the pension city workers receive can be based on the last salary they drew from the union instead of the actual salary they earned working on the public payroll. Here’s a couple of the notable results:

        Liberato “Al” Naimoli, president of the Cement Workers Union Local 76. He retired last year from a $15,000-a-year city job that he last held a quarter-century ago. Today, Naimoli receives more than $13,000 a month from the city laborers’ pension fund even as he continues to earn nearly $300,000 annually as president of Local 76. His city laborers’ pension will pay him about $4 million during his lifetime, according to a Tribune/WGN-TV analysis based on the funds’ actuarial assumptions.

        James McNally, vice president of the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 150. He receives nearly $115,000 a year even though at the time he retired, in 2008, he had not worked for the city in more than 13 years. He was only 51 when he started collecting a city pension. By the time he turns 78, he will have received roughly $4 million from the city laborers’ fund.

        Dennis Gannon, former president of the Chicago Federation of Labor. In 2004, he began receiving more than $150,000 a year after retiring at age 50 from a $56,000-a-year city job that he had left nearly 13 years earlier. He received his city pension while collecting a salary of about $200,000 from the federation. During his lifetime, the city municipal pension fund will pay him approximately $5 million. Gannon told the Tribune that he was only following the law in filing for a city pension.

        There’s more meat on this bone at the link, but I thought I’d stop before we get blamed for one of you jamming your fist through your monitor. In case you’re thinking we can at least clean up the mess now that it’s been exposed… think again! It seems that the state constitution includes a provision stating that pensions “can not be diminished once they are earned.”

        Just makes you want to move to Illinois, doesn’t it? The City of Big Shoulders… and Even Bigger Pensions!

        http://hotair.com/archives/2011/09/21/chicago-union-bosses-raking-in-millions-from-city-pension-fund/

        • One other thing-the State Constitution “stating that pensions “can not be diminished once they are earned.” I for one, think it could be legally argued that the pension wasn’t earned.

        • One-day rehiring nets former Chicago labor leader a $158,000 city pension

          By Jason Grotto, Tribune reporter

          9:00 p.m. CDT, September 21, 2011
          Most city workers spend decades in public service to build up modest pensions. But for former labor leader Dennis Gannon, the keys to securing a public pension were one day on the city payroll and some help from the Daley administration.

          And his city pension is more than modest. It’s the highest of any retired union leader: $158,000. That’s roughly five times greater than what the typical retired city worker receives.

          In fact, his pension is so high that it exceeds federal limits and required the city pension fund to file special paperwork with the Internal Revenue Service to give it to him.

          Gannon’s inflated pension is a prime example of how government officials and labor leaders have manipulated city pension funds at the expense of union workers and taxpayers. Like other labor leaders, he was able to take a long leave from a city job to work for a union and then receive a city pension based on a high union salary.

          But in a new twist, a Tribune/WGN-TV investigation has found that Gannon is eligible for the lucrative pension deal only because City Hall rehired the former Streets and Sanitation Department worker for a single day in 1994, then granted him an indefinite leave of absence.

          Gannon quickly rose to become one of the most powerful labor leaders in the city, speaking on behalf of more than 300 Chicago-area unions as president of the Chicago Federation of Labor.

          State law allowed Gannon to retire from the city in 2004, the year he turned 50; since then, he has received about $1 million from his city pension. He stands to collect approximately $5 million during his lifetime, according to an analysis based on the fund’s actuarial assumptions.

          Until last year, that pension came on top of Gannon’s union salary, which had grown to more than $240,000. He now draws the pension while working for a hedge fund, Grosvenor Capital Management, that does work with public pensions, including the Teachers Retirement System of Illinois. The firm also was one of Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s largest campaign contributors.

          Gannon declined to be interviewed for this story but issued a statement through a spokesman for the Illinois Sports Facilities Authority, where he is a board member.

          “I am extremely proud of my many years of service to the city of Chicago and the working men and women of organized labor,” Gannon wrote. “I have always followed the pension laws governed by the state of Illinois statute as well as the city of Chicago municipal pension plan.”

          Terrance Stefanski, who oversees the city’s municipal pension fund, confirmed that the city helped Gannon qualify for an inflated pension by hiring him for a day. But he said he has no control over city hiring and must follow the pension laws.

          “Once the city rehired him and he went on a leave of absence to work for the union, he was eligible under the law,” Stefanski said.

          Streets and San officials provided a statement about Gannon’s one-day hiring: “This was a personnel matter that happened more than 16 years ago, and at this time we don’t have all of the details needed to determine exactly why these decisions were made.”

          Gannon’s inflated city pension is one of at least 23 handed out to union leaders who have retired from the city, records uncovered by the Tribune and WGN-TV show. The joint investigation revealed Wednesday how the legislation that created the pension perk for union leaders found its way in to the state statutes with no transparency or accountability.

          Gannon started his climb to the top of organized labor in 1973. He was 19 years old and made $6.95 an hour working for Streets and San as a steamroller engineer, compressing asphalt on city streets.

          During the next 17 years, he worked his way into the role of hoisting engineer foreman, overseeing the use of heavy cranes at road construction sites at a salary of about $56,000. He also gravitated toward union politics. By 1990, Gannon had been tapped to become a business agent with Local 150 of the International Union of Operating Engineers.

          “It is with mixed emotions that I am requesting a leave of absence from my position as general foreman of hoisting engineers,” he wrote to his bosses at Streets and San in December 1990.

          Although he was leaving city service, Gannon moved to take advantage of the law that allowed him to stay in the municipal pension fund. In April 1991, records show, Gannon had Local 150′s business manager write a letter on his behalf making that request.

          Only a few months earlier, on his last day in office, Gov. Jim Thompson had signed into law the pension code changes that would allow Gannon’s city pension to be based on his salary as a union official.

          Gannon could have stayed on a leave of absence indefinitely because no one from Streets and San filled in an expiration date on the form. Then, on Oct. 12, 1993, he resigned from his city post and received a refund of the contributions he had made to the municipal pension fund, records show.

          With that action, Gannon lost his eligibility to land an inflated city pension.

          But on June 20, 1994, Streets and San rehired Gannon to his old job. It didn’t last long. The very next day, he was granted a leave of absence to work for Local 150, even though records show that Gannon never left his union job in the first place.

          That shuffling of a few pages of bureaucratic forms by city officials made Gannon eligible to re-enter the city pension fund, according to records and interviews. And eventually he would.

          Six months later, Gannon became the assistant to Chicago Federation of Labor President Don Turner. A year after that, he was elected secretary-treasurer, the No. 2 spot, and his salary grew nearly 60 percent to $126,000.

          With his pay increasing at a steady clip, Gannon sought to get back into the municipal pension fund in 1998. To do so, he would need to restore the money he had previously taken out and start making regular contributions again as if he were a city employee. He would also have to cover the contributions that normally come from the city.

          Gannon applied to receive union service credits in January 1999. But in the months leading up to his application, questions arose over whether he could repurchase the pension credits he had given up earlier. Once again, he appears to have received help from city government.

          On March 6, 1998, Gannon wrote a letter to Mayor Richard Daley’s chief financial officer, Walter Knorr, who is now vice president of the University of Illinois System.

          Knorr wasn’t a trustee of the municipal pension fund. In fact, he played no official role in the fund’s operations. Yet Gannon outlined his work history during the previous seven years so that Knorr could assist him in figuring how to get back into the fund.

          “Hopefully, these numbers will assist you in calculating the portion of the monies I owe to the pension fund,” Gannon’s letter says.

          Knorr said in an interview that he doesn’t recall the episode and that he thinks he simply passed Gannon’s request on to officials at the municipal pension fund.

          “I have no specific recollection of that particular event,” he said. “This was 13 years ago. I probably received a number of requests from all different directions.”

          The municipal fund’s executive director at the time, Thomas Stack, wrote to Knorr in November 1998 to explain that Gannon could rejoin the pension fund “without returning to active city service.” That’s because Gannon had already been rehired for that one day in 1994.

          But even if he hadn’t been rehired, there’s evidence that lawmakers and City Hall would have helped Gannon anyway. Stack ended his letter to Knorr by writing: “Therefore, it is our opinion that the proposed new legislation is not necessary.”

          The letter did not describe what that proposed legislation was about or who was backing it. Stack died in 2004. Knorr said he can’t recall any such bill.

          Under a state law passed in 1997, Gannon was able to retire from the city at age 50 because he had accumulated 30 years of service. The city credited him with 33 years of service even though he spent more than a third of that time working for private labor unions.

          His pension was so big that the municipal fund had to ask permission from the IRS to pay it to him, according to Stefanski.

          The roughly $130,000 pension Gannon received that first year came on top of his union salary because he went right on working for the federation. Under state law, his pension will grow by 3 percent a year for as long as he lives.

          http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-pensions-gannon-20110922,0,913026.story?page=2

      • I have no problem with putting those union officials caught with their hands in the cookie jar away for a long time (and not in Club Fed) … along with the pols and CEO’s who abused the hell out of the system. No problem here, Colonel. You should know better than to ask.

  10. I don’t even know what to say!!!

    A New Palestinian State Could Deny Citizenship to 45 Percent of All Palestinian ‘Refugees’

    * Posted on September 21, 2011 at 10:53pm by Tiffany Gabbay Tiffany Gabbay

    As the Palestinian Authority scrambles for UN recognition of an independent state, few have mentioned the apparently very real possibility that, if successful, nearly half of the world’s Palestinian refugees — including those currently residing inside “Palestine” — will not be granted citizenship in the newly formed state.

    Commentary Magazine pointed out that in a shocking interview for the Lebanese Daily Star, Palestine’s ambassador to Lebanon, Abdullah Abdullah, emphatically stated that Palestinian refugees the world over would not become citizens of any UN-recognized, newborn Palestinian state. What’s more, Abdullah clarifies that the restriction would not only apply to refugees in countries like Lebanon, Egypt, Syria, Jordan or any of the other 132 countries where Abdullah alleges Palestinians reside, but would even include “Palestinian refugees who are living in [refugee camps] inside the [Palestinian] state.” According to Abdullah, “They are still refugees. They will not be considered citizens.”

    The Star adds:

    Abdullah said that the new Palestinian state would “absolutely not” be issuing Palestinian passports to refugees. Neither this definitional status nor U.N. statehood, Abdullah says, would affect the eventual return of refugees to Palestine.

    “How the issue of the right of return will be solved I don’t know, it’s too early [to say], but it is a sacred right that has to be dealt with and solved [with] the acceptance of all.” He says statehood “will never affect the right of return for Palestinian refugees.”

    “When we have a state accepted as a member of the United Nations, this is not the end of the conflict. This is not a solution to the conflict. This is only a new framework that will change the rules of the game.”

    Meanwhile, according to the Star, the Palestinian Liberation Organization would be the governing body in charge of dealing with the issue of Palestinian refugees and Abdullah says that the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees (UNRWA) would continue its work as usual.

    Commentary Magazine points out, however, that according to UNRWA, 689,000 of the West Bank’s 2.4 million Palestinians and 1.1 million of Gaza’s 1.5 million Palestinians are considered refugees. Which means that aside from the 2.9 million Diaspora refugees, a staggering 45 percent of a new Palestinian state’s residents would, in fact, remain stateless, thereby being deprived of both citizenship and the services it would afford.

    Commentary’s Evelyn Gordon adds:

    This is simply unbelievable. For years, the world has backed a Palestinian state on the grounds Palestinians are stateless people who deserve a country of their own. And now, a senior Palestinian official has announced once they have received a state, most Palestinians will stillbe stateless – even those who actually live in “Palestine.”

    Moreover, the new state won’t provide these residents with any services: It expects UNRWA – or, more accurately, the American and European taxpayers who provide the bulk of that organization’s funding – to continue providing their schooling, healthcare, welfare allowances, etc.

    Gordon perhaps summed it up best when explaining that the PA probably finds refugees, rather than citizens, a more useful tool in realizing its ultimate goal of destroying Israel, as they can then demand “refugees” be resettled in Israel (as opposed to their own prospective territories), thereby creating a disproportionate and destructive demographic for the Jewish state.

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/a-new-palestinian-state-could-deny-citizenship-to-45-percent-of-all-palestinian-refugees/

  11. “I hear all this, you know, ‘Well, this is class warfare, this is whatever. No. There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own — nobody.
    “You built a factory out there? Good for you. But I want to be clear. You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate. You were safe in your factory because of police-forces and fire-forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn’t have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory — and hire someone to protect against this — because of the work the rest of us did.
    “Now look, you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great idea. God bless — keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is, you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.”

    Elizabeth Warren – candidate against Scott Brown

    • Those words are the best argument I’m heard, for not having a government.

      • I see a few problems here. The owners pay taxes just like the rest of us for roads, police, etc. Pay it forward..hmm.. i think that’s covered by giving X number of people employment. And does having a successful business take one single dime out of anyone else’s pocket? People like her have never run their own business.. no one starts a business for the sake of giving their money away.

    • Just watched the clip of this. Isn’t she another Harvard professor then gov’t employee who has never actually run a business? She was the one up for the Financial Overseer job wasn’t she? These people are just scary. But there will be the Charlie-types that buy into this crap.

  12. Found this to be interesting, Bachmann was right in everything she stated about HPV. The vaccine seems “safe”, with only a small number of the 35 million who have received it having complications. I do not like the mandate part, and it also seems the cancer rates are low to begin with, so why should it not be a choice for parents or sexually active women?

    Mother says Bachmann right to call out Perry over HPV executive order

    Karen Hansen
    NORTH CAROLINA The Mother of a teen girl affected by an HPV vaccination says Bachmann was right to call out Perry over his HPV vaccination executive order at the CNN sponsored Republican party presidential campaign debate last evening. Marian Greene has been vigilant about finding a cure for her daughter for the past 3 years, when Holly was just a Junior in High School.

    Greene said, “Holly has never been the same since, while at the same time we are grateful and feel very fortunate that she has made some improvements, it’s been a few months since she has had a mini stroke. She describes her headaches as migraines times 100. Her auto immune system keeps attacking herself.”

    Fortunate – unlike others

    Before the vaccine Holly was known throughout her high school sought out by athletic recruiters for colleges around the state. But there is more than Holly. Alexis Wolfe is yet another highschool student whose story is covered on a blog called Gardasil Side Effects by Kirsten Jones.

    Jones reports “Wolfe, who is diabetic, received all three Gardasil shots although she had already begun exhibiting some perplexing behavioral issues by the time she got the third shot. Eventually a psychiatrist realized that she was in fact suffering seizures that apparently cannot be controlled by medication. According to information posted by her parents, the former honor roll student now tests at a fourth grade level and is in constant pain.”

    She also reports that “the Ronan Law Firm filed a petition in the United States Court of Federal Claims seeking damages for injuries suffered by 16 year old Alexis Wolf after she received the human papillomavirus vaccine, Gardasil. The case seeks recovery under the terms of the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.”

    The Truth about Gardasil

    There are yet more innocent victims that Greene now continues to learn about as President and Founder of the Truth About Gardasil on a site she developed called The Truth about Gardasil. Currently, there are now nearly 800 registrants and thousands more at the Facebook page.

    Greene began doing her own research when not getting the support her and her daughter needed. During her own research she learned that 90% of all cancer cells wash out of the body naturally as our bodies are constantly exposed to precancerous cells daily.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        I have heard that over 18000 girls have reported adverse affects of Gardisil. There have also been deaths reported. Vaccines are evil and should be avoided at all costs.

        • All vaccines are evil-that’s a mite strong-but we do need more information, so we can make decisions. And diseases that can be spread ??? And diseases like polio, which are horrible and are now almost/are gone because of mandatory vaccinations??????

          September 22, 2011
          Science for Stupid Idiots
          By Randall Hoven

          You might be a stupid idiot, like me. At least I must be a stupid idiot, since I’m called that quite often. You see, I have doubts about some things. Things like catastrophic, man-caused global warming; neo-darwinistic explanations of evolution; the safety and efficacy of at least some mandatory vaccines; etc.

          I’m not always called an “idiot.” On global warming, I’m a “denier.” On evolution, I’m a “creationist.” On vaccines, I’m an “anti-vaccine nut.” But you get the idea. I’m not rational and fact-based, like they are.

          Here’s my thinking on a vaccine, before injecting one of my kids with one: what are the chances of harmful effects without the vaccine, and with the vaccine? I want two numbers. My nutty logic is that I want to minimize the chances of harmful effects on my child. To calculate that for a particular vaccine, I need those two numbers. An emotionless robot or computer would need those two numbers.

          Yet we are rarely given even one of those numbers, much less both. Not from my doctor. Not from the CDC. Not from geniuses who write articles about how dumb I am for not simply believing their repeated assurances. They tell me it’s all about informed consent, but they don’t inform me (with the two numbers I need), and they don’t ask for my consent. (Sometimes you can opt out, but try that with Hep B shots for your kid.)

          Case in point: a recent press release from the National Academy of Sciences. The NAS told us that “few health problems are caused by vaccines.” That report was then used to tell idiots like me, “For Pete’s Sake, Go Get Your Kids Vaccinated Already!”

          The NAS did not put a number on “few.” Even if it did, that would be only one of the two numbers needed. In fact, the NAS explicitly said it doesn’t have those two numbers. It said this about its study committee.

          It did not examine information that would have allowed it to draw conclusions about the ratio of benefits to risks.

          So the NAS cannot draw conclusions about the single thing of importance to a parent. But somehow everyone else can. You see, “fact-based” people can draw conclusions even where the NAS can’t. And therefore, you are an idiot to not vaccinate your kid.

          If you want us to be fact-based, you ought to provide us some facts.

          Maybe you are thinking this is all too hard and we should just believe the experts here: doctors.

          Do you know how many doctors, some literally brain surgeons, made an important statistical mistake in their studies? Half of them. These were studies trying to prove that some medical treatment was actually effective.

          Yes, half the studies showing that some medical treatment is effective are in error. We just found that out this week (at least for neuroscience journals).

          Sander Nieuwenhuis and his associates from the Netherlands have done a study on one particular type of statistical error that apparently crops up in an inordinately large number of papers published in neuroscience journals. In their paper, published in Nature Neuroscience, they claim that up to half of all papers published in such journals contain the error.

          So how much can we trust an NAS study that is a study of studies, when half of those underlying studies contain a major error? (Also see this study of studies about video games on behavior: “most, if not all, of these studies suffer from common pitfalls in experimental design.”)

          And those errors were not even big enough to cause the papers to be withdrawn. Do you know how many medical research papers were withdrawn from publication due to major errors or outright fraud in the last decade? The answer is 788.

          That is, hundreds of medical research papers have errors so egregious that the papers had to be withdrawn completely. And half or more of the rest might have serious errors. We should not be treated like benighted troglodytes for being skeptical of medical “science.”

          Take salt in your diet. The scientific consensus on that was so strong that the mayor of New York City forced city restaurants to start reducing the salt content in their meals. But a recent study showed that that might all be based on bad science. I don’t know which studies are correct. Then again, I’m not writing laws that tell people how much salt they can have.

          I have a tip for “scientists” and the pundits who love them, from Socrates: “Wisdom is knowing how little we know.”

          Unfortunately, today we are getting the polar opposite of such wisdom. The American Physical Society, for example, says the science on man-caused global warming is incontrovertible!

          Nobel Prize-winning physicist Ivar Giaever had this to say about that.

          In the APS it is ok to discuss whether the mass of the proton changes over time and how a multi-universe behaves, but the evidence of global warming is incontrovertible? The claim (how can you measure the average temperature of the whole earth for a whole year?) is that the temperature has changed from ~288.0 to ~288.8 degree Kelvin in about 150 years, which (if true) means to me is that the temperature has been amazingly stable, and both human health and happiness have definitely improved in this “warming” period.

          Did you grow up reading about the brontosaurus, the largest dinosaur ever? It was the symbol of Sinclair Oil. If you are over 40 you probably knew all about the brontosaurus from science books at the time. But it never existed. It was a screw-up due to a fossil mix-up (head and body didn’t really match). But scientists thought it was real — for decades. It took about 90 years for the real story to come out and to be accepted.

          I went to a science museum only a few years ago. It had an exhibit showing how the Bernoulli effect is what makes airplanes fly. (Maybe you’ve seen the animation of little dots going over the top, and under the bottom, of a wing.) Unfortunately, that is almost totally wrong. NASA explains how it really works. (Blowing over a piece of paper is much easier than solving five simultaneous partial differential equations.)

          About 20 years ago, astronomers noticed that stars on the outer edges of galaxies had greater speeds than the known laws of physics would indicate, based on the observed amount of mass in the galaxies. So the scientists simply assumed there is a lot more mass, unobserved mass, in galaxies. They gave it a name: dark matter.

          Astronomers also noticed that galaxies appear to be accelerating away from each other, counter to all known forces. So they simply assumed there is another force. They gave it a name: dark energy.

          Dark matter and dark energy are believed to make up 95% of the universe. So far, they have been unable to find either thing that is 95% of everything.

          There are many examples of things we thought we knew that turned out to be wrong. Not just the brontosaurus, but epicycles, philostogen, contact static electricity, bathybius, among others. General relativity and quantum theory conflict, unless you believe in string theory, which might not even be testable. There are serious issues with the Big Bang theory.

          Recently, Texas Governor Rick Perry took a lot of grief for the statement that “evolution is a theory” with “some gaps in it.” Oh my. Let me give you a quote from the book Scientists Confront Intelligent Design and Creationism. According to its dust jacket, it “eviscerates the new assault on evolution” with “overwhelming scientific evidence for evolution.”

          There will be questions that perhaps will never be answered, simply because it is unlikely that we will ever uncover enough evidence — the great diversification of invertebrate life at the beginning of the Cambrian period, more than 500 million years ago, being one possible example.

          Being never able to explain the Cambrian explosion sounds a bit like a “gap” in the theory to me. Go ahead and research evolution yourself. If you think there are no gaps in it, who’s being dogmatic? There are gaps in every theory scientists have. The opposite of saying there are gaps is to say there are no gaps. Who in their right mind would say there are “no gaps” in any theory you could name? Rick Perry is simply in his right mind.

          Maybe you heard of the book The Mismeasure of Man, by Stephen J. Gould, famed paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, historian of science, and Harvard professor. That book is devoted to debunking the work of Samuel Morton in measuring skull sizes among races in the 19th century. In the words of anthropologist John Hawks, “Gould used the well-documented work of a long-dead man to make an argument that unconscious bias is widespread in science.”

          As it turned out, the only unconscious bias in this case was Gould’s. Wired writes as follows.

          In a study published June 7 in Public Library of Science Biology, researchers led by anthropologists Jason Lewis of Stanford University and the Paleoanthropology Institute’s David DeGusta re-measured 308 skulls on which Morton had published data. Their conclusion: Morton’s numbers differed significantly from their own in just 7 cases, and those few mismeasurements didn’t favor the narrative of Caucasian superiority that Gould ascribed to Morton’s motivation. Three of them actually overestimated the volume of Egyptian skulls.

          As Wired summarized, “[a]nd Gould did provide an excellent example of how science can be skewed by prejudice. It just wasn’t the example he intended.”

          Speaking of such prejudice, let me give a final example. The “Standard Model” of particle physics says that there is a Higgs particle. If experiments show that there is no such particle, then the Standard Model breaks down. The particle zoo and its strange charms would have to be revamped or even dropped. Scientists have been using the Hadron collider to find the Higgs particle. They are now 95% sure it doesn’t exist. (They want to be 99+% sure, so they’re still looking.)

          I’d like you to look at the last paragraph of the Digital Trends story that reported on the Higgs particle results, where the reporter tries to answer “what it means.”

          Another, less profound, but far more obnoxious, outcome is that people who choose to dismiss science altogether simply because it doesn’t have the all the answers (in this case, the answer to, “How did we come to exist in the first place?”) will have new ammunition for their arguments. So, don’t be surprised when CERN’s troublesome admission that Higgs boson is likely a myth is cited as a reason that global warming doesn’t exist. [My emphasis.]

          The Higgs particle has nothing to do with global warming. But see how it is all tied together in the minds of those who obsess about global warming? Stupid idiots like me must not be allowed to doubt any part of any currently held scientific theory. If we are allowed to doubt one, then we might doubt them all. And then, chaos! We won’t even believe global warming!

          Finally we get to why we must believe “science,” meaning taking whatever “scientists” say is incontrovertible truth. If we start having doubts about any of it, we just might start thinking for ourselves. We will no longer simply swallow what our betters feed us.

          The irony is that so many “scientists” have become the enemy they once fought. They now sit like the elders of the Church at the time of the Guttenberg press. Imagine the chaos that would result if people could read the Bible themselves! Better not teach them to read.

          Real science is the scientific method. It means skepticism. It means publishing your data (as Samuel Morton did). It means doubt. It means humility.

          Wisdom is knowing how little we know.

          It also would be OK to admit that.

          http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/09/science_for_stupid_idiots.html

          • I have to comment on the Standard Model part of this article.

            The Standard Model is the “best guess” at the fundamental structure of the universe. That said, it has glaring holes. Even without the Higgs controversy, the SM is bogus because it doesn’t even include gravity! Whether or not the Higgs exists will not destroy the SM, it’s already broken.

            Now, you need to understand how science works to fully understand the meaning of the SM. Any (good) scientific theory is based on experiment and extrapolation. We say gravity acts like F=G m1 m2 / r^2, because this matches the data very well. But think about this, when r ->0, the equation breaks down! This is not a fundamentally incontrovertible law and yet it is commonly held to be so. As with all such theories, it is constructed because it models the data well.

            The SM models the data well. The theory of spontaneous symmetry breaking that in based on the Higgs field explains what we see very well. If there is no Higgs, we need new theories. The funny thing is, I can write a quantum field theory to describe whatever I want! Just because the Higgs doesn’t exists (where we think it should) doesn’t mean that “the particle zoo and its strange charms would have to be revamped or even dropped.” Those data exist, they cannot be erased because the theory that was created to explain them is.

            By the way, the search for the Higgs has been going on for decades. We just keep looking at higher energies. If the Higgs doesn’t exist at some specific energy, the theory is modified and we look somewhere else.

            That being said, I agree with the final few statements.

            • This is interesting!

              Tiny Neutrinos May Have Broken Cosmic Speed Limit
              By DENNIS OVERBYE
              Published: September 22, 2011

              Roll over, Einstein?

              The physics world is abuzz with news that a group of European physicists plans to announce Friday that it has clocked a burst of subatomic particles known as neutrinos breaking the cosmic speed limit — the speed of light — that was set by Albert Einstein in 1905.

              If true, it is a result that would change the world. But that “if” is enormous.

              Even before the European physicists had presented their results — in a paper that appeared on the physics Web site arXiv.org on Thursday night and in a seminar at CERN, the European Center for Nuclear Research, on Friday — a chorus of physicists had risen up on blogs and elsewhere arguing that it was way too soon to give up on Einstein and that there was probably some experimental error. Incredible claims require incredible evidence.

              “These guys have done their level best, but before throwing Einstein on the bonfire, you would like to see an independent experiment,” said John Ellis, a CERN theorist who has published work on the speeds of the ghostly particles known as neutrinos.

              According to scientists familiar with the paper, the neutrinos raced from a particle accelerator at CERN outside Geneva, where they were created, to a cavern underneath Gran Sasso in Italy, a distance of about 450 miles, about 60 nanoseconds faster than it would take a light beam. That amounts to a speed greater than light by about 0.0025 percent (2.5 parts in a hundred thousand).

              Even this small deviation would open up the possibility of time travel and play havoc with longstanding notions of cause and effect. Einstein himself — the author of modern physics, whose theory of relativity established the speed of light as the ultimate limit — said that if you could send a message faster than light, “You could send a telegram to the past.”

              Alvaro de Rujula, a theorist at CERN, called the claim “flabbergasting.”

              “If it is true, then we truly haven’t understood anything about anything,” he said, adding: “It looks too big to be true. The correct attitude is to ask oneself what went wrong.”

              The group that is reporting the results is known as Opera, for Oscillation Project with Emulsion-Tracking Apparatus. Antonio Ereditato, the physicist at the University of Bern who leads the group, agreed with Dr. de Rujula and others who expressed shock. He told the BBC that Opera — after much internal discussion — had decided to put its results out there in order to get them scrutinized.

              “My dream would be that another, independent experiment finds the same thing,” Dr. Ereditato told the BBC. “Then I would be relieved.”

              Neutrinos are among the weirdest denizens of the weird quantum subatomic world. Once thought to be massless and to travel at the speed of light, they can sail through walls and planets like wind through a screen door. Moreover, they come in three varieties and can morph from one form to another as they travel along, an effect that the Opera experiment was designed to detect by comparing 10-microsecond pulses of protons on one end with pulses of neutrinos at the other. Dr. de Rujula pointed out, however, that it was impossible to identify which protons gave birth to which neutrino, leading to statistical uncertainties.

              Dr. Ellis noted that a similar experiment was reported by a collaboration known as Minos in 2007 on neutrinos created at Fermilab in Illinois and beamed through the Earth to the Soudan Mine in Minnesota. That group found, although with less precision, that the neutrino speeds were consistent with the speed of light.

              Measurements of neutrinos emitted from a supernova in the Large Magellanic Cloud in 1987, moreover, suggested that their speeds differed from light by less than one part in a billion.

              John Learned, a neutrino astronomer at the University of Hawaii, said that if the results of the Opera researchers turned out to be true, it could be the first hint that neutrinos can take a shortcut through space, through extra dimensions. Joe Lykken of Fermilab said, “Special relativity only holds in flat space, so if there is a warped fifth dimension, it is possible that on other slices of it, the speed of light is different.”

              But it is too soon for such mind-bending speculation. The Opera results will generate a rush of experiments aimed at confirming or repudiating it, according to Dr. Learned. “This is revolutionary and will require convincing replication,” he said.

              http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/23/science/23speed.html?_r=2&hpw

              • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

                Nice to see the actual scientific method at work here. Something is observed that by current theory is thought to be “incorrect” so it is treated with a healthy dose of skepticism. However, instead of completely ruling it out, scinetists demand convincing replication to confirm the result.

                THAT’S what I like to see! :)

              • Yeah, this is bonkers…

        • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

          I gotta chime in on this one:

          Measles is now almost unheard of. Mumps is now almost unheard of. Mention “Rubella” and you get a collective “huh?”. Smallpox IS unheard of. Polio isn’t around anymore. Tetanus has been largely eliminated. WHY? Vaccines.

          To say that ALL vaccines are evil is… well… silly.

          However, to say that Gardisil should be mandatory is also silly. ALL vaccines do entail risk. No vaccine is 100% safe (hell, nothing is 100% safe). Gardisil seems to be a vaccine which is riskier than most, while the risk of getting one of the forms of HPV that can lead to cancer may be pretty high, but the incidence of HPV turning into ACTUAL cancer isn’t totally alarming, but the risk is definitely there.

          In order to properly evaluate a vaccine, you need to know the risk of taking the vaccine vs. the risk of doing nothing, and then weigh out which makes more sense to you. Making any vaccine mandatory means that Big Brother has (supposedly) already done this calculation for you and decided for you that being forced to take the vaccine is for the greater good.

          In the case of Gardisil, either Big Brother botched the calculation, or just didn’t do it in the first place.

          Of course, I am not in favor of anyone being FORCED to use any vaccine. Kinda violates my principles. However, I am fine with my doctor explaining to me the dangers of things like measles, mumps, rubella, polio, smallpox, etc. and explaining why getting my kids vaccineated against such diseases is probably a good idea.

          • I know it violates your principles-but I have to wonder-if all these vaccines weren’t mandatory-would all these diseases be no big deal today???? I read somewhere that polio was raising it’s ugly head because of immigration from other countries.

            • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

              “if all these vaccines weren’t mandatory – would all these diseases be no big deal today?”

              Good question – even better question than you probably think it was. So of course, just to emulate BF and piss people off, I am going to answer your good question with a question (or several questions) of my own, rather than “giving you an answer”. I know people LOVE it when that happens! :)

              Lets pick on Polio, since it was an awful disease, and the vaccine has obviously been wildly successful.

              1. What mechanism or mechanisms can you envision which would cause everyone to favor taking the vaccine, even though it was not mandated by the government?

              2. Do you think such mechanisms would have as good of a result compared with making the vaccine mandatory?

              I have some ideas of my own as to just how effective vaccines would be in a free society where they could not be administered by “government mandate”, but lets see what you come up with before I throw my ideas in.

              • OOOOO….pick me pick me……(raising hand to answer but since I am not part of this discussion,,,,,)

              • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

                Anyone can throw ideas around here Colonel, go for it! 8)

              • gmanfortruth says:

                I have come to question everything about the past. We believe that the polio vaccine saved us, because they said so. But how did Polio come to be in the first place? It seems that a new strain of flu keeps coming up and a new vaccine is made and sold quickly to save the people. Why do we have an AIDS virus that we didn’t have 40 years ago? Follow the money and you may see why we need (or are told we need) vaccines to begin with.

                I believ the human body can handle most problems through it’s immune system. Somehow, new problems crop up that we are told they can prevent us from suffering from it. They make millions by producing the problem for which they can fix. That is why vaccines are evil.

              • :) :)

                Okay-1. real statistical answers about the pros and cons of taking the vaccination would make people more likely to have taken the polio vaccination. Seeing a rise in polio because people didn’t take the vaccination would cause people to take the vaccine.

                2. Nothing-will ever make everyone do anything. So is the only way to really get rid of a disease that is spread from one person or another-Force-I don’t know.

                Now D-I pick you-tell us what you think :)

              • G,

                I have had those thoughts myself-why is autism and alzheimers so common. Is it vaccines, processed food, pesticides-what?????

              • One other thing, I’d like to point out that should go along with this discussion- government has also made some things illegal to use-that has hurt people. Can’t think of the name but it was used to kill mosquitoes -now people in other countries are dying from malaria in huge numbers.

            • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

              I could be wrong, but I think Kent once did an article on this on his website… or at least something related to this…. can’t remember for sure.

          • Wait………grog is safe. DP is safe…..Red Bull, however…and when Buck makes coffee….unsafe, I am told.

          • That’s OK. In a few years, if there are any bad reactions to Gardasil, the lawyers will be on TV telling us how we can get our “just compensation”.

          • DisposableCarbonUnit says:

            If I may put my two cents in regarding the vaccine debate…..

            Mandatory is ALWAYS a bad decision!

            Also there is a difference in the disease transmission, mumps, measles, rubella, polio are all highly contagious and can be hard to avoid. HPV is not contagious and is acquired through voluntary (or perhaps involuntary) contact with an individual. This is also true for Hep B. The acquisition of these infections is behavioural. Your daughters (or sons) won’t acquire HPV or HBV floating around on air.

            So there is one difference that helps parents make informed decisions about treatments for their children.

            Second point is the likelihood of harm after contraction of the infecting organism. There is only a percentage of people significantly affected by these microbes (everything in biology follows a gaussian response). The question is whether the incident rate of adverse response is sufficient to warrant vaccination.

            I work(ed) in the business so I understand the functioning of the vaccines (most physicians and public health professionals don’t!). I have had my daughter vaccinated against serious child hood diseases as have most others, but I am still unsure about Gardisil at this point in time.

  13. @ USW, Mrs Weapon, Canine Weapon, and/or Feline Weapon……..I sent you an article that is guaranteed to piss some off. I think I submitted it correctly but who knows. Kept a copy in case.

  14. PeterB in Indianapolis says:

    Why has the market dropped 600 points (Dow) since noon yesterday?

    I don’t know if any of you paid much attention to what Bernanke said, but if you eliminate all of the useless crap from what he said, it boiled ALL THE WAY DOWN to the following:

    The economy is going to be awful for YEARS to come, but I don’t know how many years, and according to Keynsian principles, I don’t have any further ideas what to DO about it!

    When the Fed Chairman basically comes right out and says “We’re screwed and helpless to do anything about it” it doesn’t inspire confidence in the markets.

    The GOOD thing to come out of this (if you currently hold dollars) is that people are dumping EVERYTHING including gold, silver, and oil, all based on the specter of reduced demand. There is probably some truth to that theory. However, it may be a good time to act upon the fact that gold and silver are significantly down. The dollar is up a LOT because people have even less faith in the Euro than they have in the dollar. The dollar is also up because people are dumping stocks, gold, silver, and oil, and the only thing they can think to do with it is convert to dollars. I believe that gold and silver will fall farther, although probably not “crash”, so the time to watch gold and silver is now, and time an entry into the market if you can. This is just my opinion, and I take no responsibility for anyone else’s financial decisions. I am still going by the theory that fiat currencies already are worthless, but it is going to take some time for them to fully realize their worthlessness, so my belief is that the dip in gold and silver is temporary, though they may find a temporary bottom and sit there for a while.

  15. gmanfortruth says:

    Merck vaccine scientist Dr. Maurice Hilleman admitted presence of SV40, AIDS and cancer viruses in vaccines
    http://www.prisonplanet.com/merck-vaccine-scientist-dr-maurice-hilleman-admitted-presence-of-sv40-aids-and-cancer-viruses-in-vaccines.html

    This article explains how the AIDS virus entered the country as well.

  16. YO to Peter B…have not sparred with you in awhile.

    Peter B asks: “1. What mechanism or mechanisms can you envision which would cause everyone to favor taking the vaccine, even though it was not mandated by the government?”

    D13 states: ” I remember well the sugar cubed polio vaccines in the 50′s. Taking them at school. I distinctly remember going to the Nurse’s Office and standing in line. Polio is/was a global issue. It is viral, of course, and was highly contagious. There were epidemic outbreaks all over the world and polio is very debilitating. I remember polio victims being quarantined. So, since it had national epidemic potential and was quite devastating to young and old, the mindset back at that time was of a national concern and a concern to the point of security. The highest number reported I ever heard of was back in the 50′s when approx 25-30,000 people had it and it was spreading and children were being taken out of school. Unfortunate though it was at the time, I also remember polio victims, no longer contagious, were shunned everywhere. To prevent a national epidemic, it was determined to be mandatory. As it turns out, it was probably the right decision but I also remember my mother talking to our doctor about the vaccine and possible side effects. However, to answer your question now that I have finished the preamble (sorry, I think my computer is infected with the BF long version answer virus) would have been much like HIV scare. Communication. One difference….HIV is not contagious by just being around someone….Polio was very contagious.

    But one must remember the late 1970′s, 79, I think, in the Amish Community in Penn. A case was imported from the Netherlands and it spread really fast infecting dozens in days. This could be epidemic of National proportions and considered a National Security issue.

    • Aids scared everybody to death and rightly so. The same media could be used to disseminate the issues…..but….I can see that if there is a virus that spreads so quickly and can cause debilitating issues….enough to quarantine towns and cities and paralyze population centers, I could probably get my hand around mandatory.

      On the border, we now wear gloves and masks when handling border jumpers. There are now reported cases of Polio, TB, and Measles coming across the border form the middle American countries with immigrants. I am even hearing of the reintroduction for shot records to be carried once again when traveling.

  17. gmanfortruth says:

    Positive forensic evidence has surfaced indicating that the e. coli superstrain that recently ravaged Europe, was created by humans.

    Science has proved that the bacteria is resistant to 8 different types of antibiotics and possesses DNA sequences from plague bacteria, a combination utterly unprecedented in nature, which has many authorities theorizing it was created in a lab and either released purposefully (with, perhaps, the intent to control global food and health), or accidentally into the food supply.
    http://www.prisonplanet.com/evidence-indicates-e-coli-engineered-by-humans.html

  18. Points to ponder.

    Bachmann was right about the HPV, but the media is spinning it as her being wrong that vaccine’s are proven safe.

    Since Perry mandated this in Texas, should he be out on violating principals? Would he do the same thing when the next bird or swine flu comes around? What if and AIDS vaccine comes out? I’m at zero risk, will he force me to take one anyway?

    • LOI….Perry tried to mandate it. We would not stand for it. He got the message.

      • He also gave an option-not to take it-He also admitted his mistake-even though I believe he still personally thinks it was the right thing to do and listened to his constituency-I don’t expect perfection-you mess up-fix it-or drop it.

    • Buck the Wala says:

      Bachmann was quoted as saying that HPV vaccine causes mental retardation. It does not.

      Bachmann was wrong.

      • sk tRYNOSKY sR. says:

        It is too late for her. She should have learned a long, long time ago that you actually take the microseconds necessary to think of an answer before you open your mouth. If she really believed that retardation comment, well then she is just plain stupid. If she accidentally shot it out she’s just foolish and foolish won’t beat the great deceiver next November.

      • Buck

        Not sure where you got your supposed “quote” of Bachmann. I saw the interview and the following is accurate. She was repeating a claim made by a parent, not claiming the effect was absolute.

        Furthermore, look at the cases cited above regarding negative effects of the vaccinations. Several involve neurological disruptions that the “experts” claim can not happen. Some of the victims now display functional IQ below the “retardation” threshold. So it would be entirely expected for a parent to make this statement and appropriate for Bachmann to repeat it as she did.

        Here is an article on her original statement and her explanation later.

        “Presidential candidate Michele Bachmann is backing away from a comment she made about the human papillomavirus vaccine (HPV) she made after the CNN Tea Party debate. During the interview with Greta van Susteren, Bachmann blasted Governor Rick Perry’s efforts to make the vaccine mandatory for young girls:

        The problem is, it comes with some very significant consequences. There’s a woman who came up crying to me tonight after the debate. She said her daughter was given that vaccine. She told me her daughter suffered mental retardation as a result of that vaccine. There are very dangerous consequences. It’s not good enough to take, quote, “a mulligan” where you want a do-over, not when you have little children’s lives at risk.

        Today in an interview with Sean Hannity, she backed off her previous comment, stating:
        … I am not a doctor, I’m not a scientist, I’m not a physician. All I was doing is reporting what this woman told me last night at the debate … Now, parents are very busy. And for parents to just assume that if the government says their child has to have an injection that it must be good for them, and, so, that’s why it’s wrong for them to have an opt out policy. It’s more prudent for them to have an opt in policy.
        Doctors and scientists familiar with the vaccine believe the anecdote presented by Bachmann to be factually incorrect. The vaccine is not capable to affect the nervous system, and is highly unlikely to be the cause.”

        • Buck the Wala says:

          JAC,

          “Doctors and scientists familiar with the vaccine believe the anecdote presented by Bachmann to be factually incorrect. The vaccine is not capable to affect the nervous system, and is highly unlikely to be the cause.”

          Bachmann presented the story in a manner so as to make one believe that the vaccine can (and does) cause mental retardation.

          • Buck

            The CDC has cases on record where the vaccination is linked to severe changes in mental function. Functional IQ is now below 50 for some of the girls vaccinated. It is also linked to coma and death and other mental disorders, like severe depression.

            I provided you with her actual statement. You claim she said it caused mental retardation. She DID NOT say that.

            So now your response is that she was trying to present it “in a manner so as to make one believe that the vaccine can cause mental retardation”. Well my lawyer friend, that is called changing the argument.

            Furthermore, the supposes experts CAN NOT explain the effects on some of the victims. This raises serious question about their claims of absolute no possible effect.

            I doubt Bachmann was aware of these reports before her statement, but these cases exist in the CDC files. These cases also SUPPORT her primary point, namely that the vaccine has serious adverse side effects that were ignored by Mr. Perry in his unilateral decision to mandate vaccination.

            • Ray Hawkins says:

              @JAC – the bottom line for me is that we have a candidate who will willingly repeat something “she just heard”. She needs to show better restraint.

              • Ray, Buck,

                Her point was more on a mandate, not vaccines in general. That the government says it’s safe because the CDc say’s it’s safe and you little people need to not think for yourself and do what your all wise leaders say, and the all wise media say’s……how can she tell you to wake the **** UP? She never claimed to have the answer, just laid out there that Perry did not have the answer either, but he acted as if he did.

                And you still haven’t considered she may have been right about what the media is saying she said, which is spin, taking her out of context.

                http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/09/hey_professors_pay_up.html

              • Buck the Wala says:

                LOI, I fear you are willing to give Bachmann way too much credit here. If her point was simply that a mandate is bad, she needs to be better able to articulate herself and get her point across. But beyond that, her point, to me, was that a mandate is bad because vaccines have problems. As an example: HPV can cause mental retardation. I know this because someone told me so.

              • Ray

                I agree.

                My point was that Buck was falling into the same habits as all the lefties who went apoplectic on the statement. The “she was quoted as saying” despite the fact that is NOT what she said. It is how those who were predisposed to not like her “interpreted” what she said. The supposed claim was created by media reaction, not her actual words.

                My conclusion was as yours. She had scored big points and should have stopped while ahead. Piling on just creates risk of going to far. Especially in a culture, media/blogs/etc, where everything is picked beyond the nits.

                In fact all politicians should stop using anecdotes to emphasize their points. The factual basis o the anecdotes to often becomes the story, instead of the main point.

      • DisposableCarbonUnit says:

        The proper statement would have been….

        “The HPV vaccine MAY cause, in a very small minority of cases, unintended effects on the central nervous system”

        It would be correct and valid, because ANY vaccine can have this potential when introduced to individuals who inherit their immune systems from the unchlorinated end of the gene pool.

  19. The ISI (Pakistani Intelligence) was complicit in Kabul American Embassy Attacks…..

    Also, money given to Pakistan was redirected to the ISI and the Bin Laden safe house….that was not so safe….but we are still giving money to Pakistan.

  20. sk tRYNOSKY sR. says:

    Couple of things,

    DDT was the most effective insecticide in the eradication of malaria carrying mosquitoes. It was overused like crazy (if a little is good, more is better!) and probably led to problems with wildlife in that it did poison streams from runoff and did apparently weaken eggshells in birds leading to a reduction of hatchlings. Once Rachael Carson got onto this and published “Silent Stream”, DDT was banned, internationally. Mind you the most effective insecticide ever was banned, not restricted, not to be applied only by certified people, not limited in strength or taken off the shelves at K-mart, but banned. Since that time millions have died from malaria, but what the hell, they are mostly third world people and we feel warm and fuzzy for doing it. Please, for your own sanity, do not ever question the left on this one, you will be permanently scorned and ostracized, even from family gatherings (been there, done that).

    If you also have a problem in your community with bed bugs for the first time since the 1930′s, you can lay that at the feet of the DDT ban and, ah….., what the hell, Mexico and illegal immigration. Yes, yes, yes with the easy availability of international travel it could be anywhere but the reappearance of the bed bug problem also seems to coincide statistically with the influx of Mexican illegals. It seems to be more than a coincidence along with those other nasty things like TB the Colonel was pointing out.

    Regarding immunization, you, have to be older than dirt (the colonel and I are the same age) to really remember the panics that set in during polio season. In NYC with the density, pools, beaches, schools were all closed. Mom would not let you anywhere near a public water fountain. This was bad stuff. The horror stories (true) involving iron lungs were enough to make you want to lock yourself in a closet for the summer. Two years ago, a woman about my age died in Tennessee I believe, she was in an iron lung and the power and her battery back up both failed. She had been in that machine since the mid 1950′s. Conspiracy people should remember that FDR was a victim as were many well to do folks. The March of Dimes would not ever let you forget that All races, both genders but mostly young people and young adults were effected. In New York you actually were administered both types, the Salk (injection) and then later the Sabin (oral) at school.

    So, from a Public health standpoint it is a pure cost – benefit ratio or should be. Can we help more than we hurt? There are adverse effects to all immunizations but what is the likelihood of catching the disease. The Anthrax crap in the military is for a strain from the 1950′s which you got directly from interfacing with animals (sheep). The lab Anthrax we were worried about after 9-11 was inhalation Anthrax. No guarantee the vaccine would even work and definite proof that it did have side effects.

    Back in ’47 or so, there was a smallpox scare (real) in NYC. Several people were exposed to someone who picked it up in Cuba I believe and got it. Several died. The Mayor and Governor ORDERED all New Yorkers vaccinated. In two weeks over 6,000,000 New Yorkers were. Imagine that today!

  21. PeterB in Indianapolis says:

    No one has really taken my bait yet and tried to figure out how to vaccinate the general public without forcing them into it. As such, I will throw you guys a bone.

    Let’s say that magically, government was completely out of the education business (POOF! it’s gone!) :)

    Further, let’s say a privately run school (since there is now no other sort) decides that it will have a rule that kids may not attend their school unless they have had the following required immunizations (list of immunizations x,y,z and list of expected ages for receiving the required immunizations follows in fantasy-world HERE) :)

    That is just one idea… I could come up with a lot more, but if I came up with them all, you all would lose out on potential brainal exercise. Although the brain is not muscular in nature, it is like a muscle in that it requires frequent exercise in order to prevent decay and atrophy.

    So, now that I gave ONE example (and far from my best one), someone else have a go!

    • DisposableCarbonUnit says:

      How about…..

      If you want to keep your job at this hospital, get your flu shot or get fired!

      Your example is in use within the Ontario school system already, and mine has been tried in Ontario workplaces but has met legal resistance.

  22. AHHHHHHH!!!

    Black Flag was right! The world is ending!

    -4% and counting..

    Run for the hills!

  23. I used to have a bungo club that met every month of 12-does that mean I could have been fined-or is this just reserved for the religious?

    September 22, 2011
    CA couple ordered by city not to hold home Bible study
    Rick Moran

    Snooping around garage sales, regulating kids’ lemonade stands – anything the government wants to do, can do, it will do.

    Who’s going to stop it?

    An Orange County couple has been ordered to stop holding a Bible study in their home on the grounds that the meeting violates a city ordinance as a “church” and not as a private gathering.

    Homeowners Chuck and Stephanie Fromm, of San Juan Capistrano, were fined $300 earlier this month for holding what city officials called “a regular gathering of more than three people”.

    That type of meeting would require a conditional use permit as defined by the city, according to Pacific Justice Institute (PJI), the couple’s legal representation.

    The Fromms also reportedly face subsequent fines of $500 per meeting for any further “religious gatherings” in their home, according to PJI.

    “We’re just gathering and enjoying each other’s company and fellowship. And we enjoy studying God’s word.” Stephanie Fromm told CBS2.

    The city officials forget their heritage:

    The city of San Juan Capistrano was founded as a mission in the late 1700s by Catholic priest Junipero Serra, who established a local chapel that remains the oldest standing building in California.

    It’s as if the Constitution is some kind of museum piece – like a moldy sarcophagus, or a bit of fossilized bone from some extinct species. We take our kids to see all these ancient relics and wonder what things were like when Pharaohs walked the earth or saber tooth cats stalked early man.

    Now we can pretty much do the same thing with the Constitution. “Look, Tommy. It’s the Constitution.” It’s how America used to live in the old days. Isn’t it quaint?”

    This is not an isolated incident. It’s happening everywhere. Property rights trampled, religious freedom abridged, free speech stifled, the right to assembly curtailed. This is not a left issue or right issue. It is an American issue. And it’s time we wake up before the Constitution starts gathering dust in warehouse somewhere – forlorn and forgotten.

    http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/09/ca_couple_ordered_by_city_not_to_hold_home_bible_study.html

    • SK Trynosky Sr. says:

      Interesting. Initially I thought, How dare they? Then I thought, how many people, how long?
      How did the town find out? Are all the neighbors atheists? Then I remembered that I have seen, out here in the exclusive suburbs, religious gatherings at homes that have blocked driveways, tied up traffic and have gone on for entire mornings on a weekly basis. Is this what happened?

      So, to judge, we need more facts. What’s that old line about, “Your freedom ends where mine begins”.

      Right now, out here in the exclusive suburbs about two blocks away we are dealing with some loon who has a rooster and six chickens for “pets”. Sorry Buck, the loon happens to be an attorney. When asked by the town and the neighborhood association (which he is a dues paying member of) to desist he refuses on the grounds that since in the 1920′s this was still a farming community, the town’s incorporation made some anachronistic provision for the farmers to continue what they had always been doing. This, apparently allows him, because of poor wording to initiate being a farmer and livestock breeder. The whole thing would be funny were it not for the smell and for the fact that that G– D—– rooster crows all friggen day starting early! By the way, we are talking about 50′ by 100′ lots here, not two acres.

      A friend, on the other side of town, used to have to deal with the garage sale of the week next door. That entrepreneur decided he would supplement his income by having a weekly rummage sale on his front lawn. Again 50′ X 100′ lots. Driveways were blocked, flower beds on adjacent properties were trampled and he was afraid to let his kids go out front. Eventually the town passed an ordinance but not before he was threatened by an overzealous cop (who drew her weapon) for harassing his neighbor when he put the mega speakers on his property line and blasted the neighbor with Sousa at odd hours of the day. Now mind you, he had told the other folks on the block what he was going to do and they were fine with it.

      Now, both of the cases I’ve cited involved personal freedom but, as a civilized human being, exactly how much of somebody else s personal freedom do we have to put up with?

      • All that has merit-BUT :) It shouldn’t be against the law to have a regular meeting of more than 3 people-religious or otherwise. If they are being a public nuisance than that should be the basis of the charge. Not a law that disallows the right of assembly.

      • SK

        The cases you cite all involve violations of personal ethics and manners by those visiting the others.

        But that is NOT the fault of the guy who holds a yard sale.

        We have chickens in our neighborhood, small lots as well. The City has an ordinance prohibiting roosters but allowing hens.

        • SK Trynosky Sr. says:

          Disagree on the premise that I am responsible for the behavior of my “guests”. In addition I fall back on the idea that yours ends where mine begins. Years ago, in NY State they passed a housing code called the “warranty of habitability”. Part of that code was the recognition that one should be allowed “the quiet enjoyment” of ones premises. Unfortunately, it quickly devolved to a “kill the landlord” kind of thing where a tenant could withhold rent because of a noisy or destructive neighbor and the landlord would then have to try and remove him. The courts however would not allow the landlord to invoke the warranty of habitability as a rationale for eviction since he was 99 times out of a hundred not a resident himself!

          • SK

            You misunderstood. I agree that YOU are not at fault for your friends parking on somebody’s yard. They are responsible and guilty of trespass.

            Thus there is no need for an ordinance to prohibit you having a yard sale or other gathering.

  24. Nice Quote!

    “When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion — when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing – when you see money flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors – when you see that men get richer by graft and pull than by work, and your laws don’t protect you against them, but protect them against you – when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice – you may know that your society is doomed.”

    Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged (1957)

  25. Dateline, Sept 12th and Gman presents his article on communist infiltration, the Naked Communist.

    Today I received this in my email from a friend in Montana.

    http://www.therightscoop.com/open-thread-grinding-america-down/

    Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeerie Coinkydinky.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      I’m not alone in my thinking. Sometimes it takes more than one nut to feed the squirrels, LOL :)

  26. Oh Good Grief-Psychopath’s-Okay, I think we need to test politicians too.

    Study: 1 in 25 Business Leaders May Be Psychopaths
    By Maia Szalavitz Tuesday, September 20, 2011 | 61 Comments

    One in 25 bosses may be psychopaths — a rate that’s four times greater than in the general population — according to research by psychologist and executive coach Paul Babiak.

    Babiak studied 203 American corporate professionals who had been chosen by their companies to participate in a management training program. He evaluated their psychopathic traits using a version of the standard psychopathy checklist developed by Robert Hare, an expert in psychopathy at the University of British Columbia in Canada.

    Psychopaths, who are characterized by being completely amoral and concerned only with their own power and selfish pleasures, may be overrepresented in the business environment because it plays to their strengths. Where greed is considered good and profitmaking is the most important value, psychopaths can thrive.

    LIST: Top 10 Worst Bosses

    They also tend to be charming and manipulative — and in corporate America, that easily passes for leadership. But, as the U.K.’s Guardian reported:

    The survey suggests psychopaths are actually poor managerial performers but are adept at climbing the corporate ladder because they can cover up their weaknesses by subtly charming superiors and subordinates. This makes it almost impossible to distinguish between a genuinely talented team leader and a psychopath, Babiak said.

    In fact, it can be hard spot the psychopath in any crowd (according to Hare, psychopaths make up 1% of the general population). They’re not all ruthless serial killers; rather, psychopaths who grow up in happy, loving homes might end up channeling their energies in a less violent way — say, by becoming a CEO. “Psychopaths really aren’t the kind of person you think they are,” Babiak said.

    Read more: http://healthland.time.com/2011/09/20/study-1-in-25-business-leaders-may-be-psychopaths/#ixzz1YjOiuLMQ

    • SK Trynosky Sr. says:

      Actually makes a damn lot of sense. We have all worked for psycho bosses who may “talk the talk” to the big bosses but rarely deliver. Once the employees figure them out they go into sabotage mode. On that wonderful old WW 2 Ft. Benning list of the 11 attributes of a leader most of these clowns wouldn’t make it to # 3.

      Good point about pols too. Same mental mindset and goals ie. lording it over others.

  27. The Doc is back … and boy is he pissed off … you crazies on the right will LOVE this one.

    Oy vey …

    http://temporaryknucksline.blogspot.com/2011/09/doc-is-back-and-hes-pissed-so-what-else.html

  28. What I learned from the Republican Debate last night …

    Rick Santorum: He wants to stay in Iraq, Afghanistan and sounded as if maybe we should start a few more wars because “Americans want a victory” … he also wants to reverse our military policy regarding gays, except his cover for that was “Sex doesn’t belong in the military.” Straight from the dark ages … I’ll assume he has the support of his immediate family …

    Herman Cain: Funny guy, but I don’t think he’s figured out he’s the token African-American on their stage …

    Newt Gingrich: He still looks like the kid from A League of Their Own … you know the kid who you wanted to slap the shit out of …

    Gov. Gary Johnson: Who?

    Rick Perry: Exposed once again as somebody who makes George W. Bush look intelligent (think about how hard that is) …

    Michele Bachmann: She wants us to keep every dollar we earn. I guess she’ll be holding bake sales for the construction of America’s infrastructure, paying the military bills, social security, etc. The woman remains a nonsensical candidate.

    Ron Paul: Poor Ron … he’s lost it of late. He used to be somewhat engaging, but he’s probably done more to damage the libertarian cause this election than help it.

    Jon Huntsman: If this guy looked any more programmed, he could be a robot … that said, he’s probably the most intelligent guy up there (which is NOT saying much). His wanting to get out of Afghanistan was refreshing (to everyone except Santorum, but he’s nuts) … I guess he just doesn’t have the support because he served a Democratic President …

    Mitt Romney: I guess he was the big winner last night, although I still don’t see how or why. At this point, I see Romney as Obama has been to Bush (sometimes Bush III, sometimes Bush Light and sometimes Bush on Steroids). He has about the same spine (jello) and I’m not sure which candidate has less conviction in what they espouse (Obama or Romney).

    Again, I don’t see why the Republicans are running anybody against Obama. He’s doing more for their cause than any GOP President I can remember …

    • You may be correct,,,,,,but anyone of the candidates up there,,,,is better than what we have now,

      The only area that I will disagree with you on is Herman Cain….. he is no token. Your attempt at tokenism is beneath even you, my Plutonian friend.

      Other than that…how is everything in Canoli Land…..

      • Pluto is great this time of year, Colonel (with my Bills running roughshod over the rest of the league) … but do you seriously think the GOP would nominate Herman Cain? Be honest now (and I know you’re an honest man) … think about it. Not who you would nominate, but the GOP …

    • The doctor is in: Ron Paul is on the rise

      Fielding questions from reporters Wednesday at a press breakfast sponsored by The Christian Science Monitor, GOP presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul talked at length about his favorite subjects: economic freedom, the failure of the Federal Reserve and the follies of foreign intervention.

      It was a familiar spiel to everyone in the room that morning — journalists whose e-mail inboxes are no strangers to Paul’s devoted supporters. But that itself is perhaps a measure of the success of Paul’s decades-long campaign against big government.

      Over the course of his career, Paul and his special brand of small-government activism have moved from the political hinterlands into the mainstream discussion. The man who was once the 1988 Libertarian Party presidential candidate is now a visible presence in the Republican presidential field.

      The U.S. representative from Texas has only picked up steam following his 2008 campaign for president. He performs well in straw polls. In fact, he won a California GOP straw poll with 44.9 percent of the votes on Sep. 17.

      Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/22/the-doctor-is-in-ron-paul-is-on-the-rise/#ixzz1Ymu6YUBk

  29. Bottom Line says:

    I remember watching a documentary years ago about a circle of gay lovers in the late 70′s/early 80′s, whom had all been sleeping with each other, and had all contracted HIV…

    …with the exception of one.

    There wasn’t much known about HIV at the time, so they carefully studied these men. What they found was that the one that did not have HIV, for all practical reasons, most certainly should have contracted it.

    So why didn’t he? It was almost as if he were immune to it.

    Well, he was/is.

    After extensive research to try and answer this question, they found the answer in the form of a gene mutation known as “CCR5-Delta32″.

    As I understand it, this particular gene mutation is rather rare, originates from northern Europe and primarily occurs in less than 1% of white people . It IS found in other races, but is an exceptionally rare find.

    From what I’ve gathered, CCR5-D32 essentially makes you highly resistant/immune to a whole family of nasty diseases to include HIV, Bubonic Plague, and TB.

    Today, after years of research, they may have actually found a way to use it for a cure.

    http://nymag.com/health/features/aids-cure-2011-6/

    BTW, There is evidence to suggest that I have this very gene mutation. I think I may get tested for it. I have to wonder, …if I do, how much is my blood worth?

  30. gmanfortruth says:

    I wouldn’t make that public, your stem cells would be worth a fortune, if your dead.

    • Bottom Line says:

      Good point, G.

      That’s definitely something to consider.

      I think I will/should get tested though, as it may be my ticket out of poverty.

      It’s not like I know I have it. I just know that the chance exists and there are some interesting things to suggest that I may have some type of delta 32 gene mutation. What I meant above as evidence is that…

      A – With the exception of a little Cherokee, my entire genealogy originates in the same area that CCR5-D32 does.

      B – My mother’s grandmother was an orphan by age 11 as her entire family had died of TB. She was equally exposed and should have caught it. But she did not. Why?

      C – When my father donated plasma, they told him that his blood had special immunities, and that they were setting it aside for research.

      It is enough to make me wonder, and I think it is worth checking out.

  31. I think Obama has settled on his campaign strategy, blaming the Republicans for not acting on his suggestions, resulting in continued high unemployment. He blamed them for not passing his free trade agreement, even though the whitehouse had still not sent it to the senate yet. He blames them for not passing his jobs act, which the democratic senate has decided not to review for at least a month, and which Obama delegated how to pay for to the deficit committee. Wouldn’t it be nice if you could walk into a restaurant and order whatever you wanted, and had the bill to the guy at the next table?

    Care to explore how he gets away with it?

    CNSNews.com) – Rep. Joe Walsh (R.-Ill.) said Wednesday in an interview with Media Research Center President Brent Bozell that he believes the media will show “real desperation” to protect President Barack Obama during the 2012 campaign.

    Having noted that Tea Party audiences show tremendous enthusiasm for Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain, Bozell asked: “Yet, you see this administration playing class warfare and race warfare games. Now, that’s their problem. But what does it say about the national media that they are aiding and abetting this by not exposing the dishonesty here?”

    “This guy pushed every one of the media’s buttons,” Walsh said. “He was liberal, he was different, he was new, he was black. Oh my God, it was the potpourri of everything.

    “They are so vested in our first black president not being a failure that it’s going to be amazing to watch the lengths they go to to protect him,” Walsh continued. “They, I believe, will spout this racist line if some of their colleagues up here aren’t doing it aggressively enough. There is going to be a real desperation.”

    Walsh added that he believed the campaign should not be personal, but should be about public policy. However, he did not believe the president’s allies would follow that rule.

    “His policies to my way of thinking are destroying this country,” said Walsh. “We need to keep the discussion at that level. But the other side won’t. The other side is going to personalize it. And [Texas Gov.] Rick Perry, Michele [Bachmann], whoever our nominee is going to be, is going to really be in to it.”

    • the main points here are directed at the AP’s Kuhnhenn, specifically these:

      In the speech, as you quoted it and as it appears at the White House web site, the President implored John Boehner and Mitch McConnell to “Help us build this bridge. … Pass this bill.” As a result, anyone hearing only Obama’s speech who is otherwise unaware of the truth has every reason to believe that passing the American Jobs Act would ensure that the Brent Spence Bridge gets replaced. It wouldn’t. You said so yourself.
      Later in your report, you tell readers that “Obama said his legislation would put construction workers back to work around the country on projects like the Brent Spence Bridge.” To whom did he say that? I read Obama’s entire speech (my pain and suffering compensation request is in the mail), and Obama said nothing of the kind. As stated, anyone there uninfluenced by other news sources would have left believing that the Jobs Act, if passed, will replace the bridge. It won’t. You said so yourself.
      Did Mr. Obama tell you, Mr. Kuhnhenn, that only projects like Brent Spence are in the Jobs Act? If he did, where are the quotation marks? If you can make the “like” statement because of a separate private conversation with Obama, you needed to tell us that. Otherwise, readers have to assume that you believe it was in the speech. It wasn’t.

      Absent evidence to the contrary, tonight Jim Kuhnhenn covered up a bold-faced falsehood stated by the President of the United States in a public speech to thousands by creating out of thin air a separate qualifying statement the President never made, for no apparent reason other than to make readers believe that Mr. Obama didn’t “symbolically” lie in the first place when he said: “Help us build this bridge. … Pass this bill.” Again, absent evidence to the contrary, he did.

      Chalk up another probable entry into the Obama Administration Whitewash Hall of Shame.

      Read more: http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2011/09/22/prez-cincy-help-us-rebuild-bridge-pass-bill-did-aps-kuhnhenn-fabricate-q#ixzz1YmTk5ED5

    • I know this will come as a total shock to readers — not — but the president wasn’t being truthful. Behold what Siceloff and his paper found, and how he felt compelled to come up with a new word to describe Obama’s untruthful characterizations (HT to Rush Limbaugh, who brought this up on the air today):

      Worry not: Triangle’s bridges are safe

      President Barack Obama scared some of us last week when he stopped in Raleigh to pitch his American Jobs Act.

      He told an audience at N.C. State University that the nation should beef up spending to repair bad bridges – before one of them falls on us.

      “In North Carolina alone, there are 153 structurally deficient bridges that need to be repaired,” Obama said Wednesday. “Four of them are near here, on or around the Beltline. Why would we wait to act until another bridge falls?”… readers wondered whether there really was cause for alarm.

      … DOT engineers and administrators are fielding calls about the president’s remarks, too. They say the bridges around the Beltline and across the state are safe.

      “The key thing is: We don’t have any bridges that are about to fall,” said Wally Bowman, DOT’s division chief for Wake and six neighboring counties. “We don’t have any bridge out there that is structurally inadequate, where it cannot handle the traffic. We make sure those bridges stay in a good state of repair.”

      Obama appears to have undercounted his bridges. And at the same time – employing the deft spin that political speakers use when they spice up a little information to make a big impression – the president may have over-suggested the risk to public safety.

      Dictionary.com says that “over-suggest” is not a word. Neither is “oversuggest.”

      Read more: http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2011/09/22/new-term-obama-fib-he-over-suggested#ixzz1YmUI0brH

  32. gmanfortruth says:
    • Light reading indeed, my head almost exploded. I’ve read some of his stuff these last few years, seems very sharp. Not sure I buy that default is a sure thing, but his advice makes good sense even if you don’t think the world is going to end. Thinking about buying a little more gold, silver and lead.

  33. Buck, out of space above,

    “LOI, I fear you are willing to give Bachmann way too much credit here. If her point was simply that a mandate is bad, she needs to be better able to articulate herself and get her point across. But beyond that, her point, to me, was that a mandate is bad because vaccines have problems. As an example: HPV can cause mental retardation. I know this because someone told me so.”

    “she needs to be better able to articulate herself and get her point across.”
    I agree. She needs to be very clear so people understand what she thinks should have been done and why it was wrong. She also must try to keep the media from twisting her words into something she did not say. Ex. A mother told me HPV caused mental retardation in her child. The media and her opponents took that to be Bachmann STATED HPV causes mental retardation. It’s not that I do or don’t support Bachmann, I want truth and accuracy, not some talking head to think for me what someones words mean.

    I also have had issue with mandated vaccines and suggest Ray may want look into them soon. They have combined some into one shot instead of several, and there are claims it’s a cause of the increased levels of autism. Myself, I wanted a choice, to be able to take the old, proven multiple shots for my kids. My doctor told me they were no longer available. Makes me wonder if pharmacy companies were not making enough on the old ones, so had to invent new, more expensive ones the government forces us to use. Big business, big government, small freedom.

    • Buck the Wala says:

      I agree — let her come out and make an actual argument that the vaccine is not safe, causes side effects, etc. etc. etc. True, Bachmann did not claim HPV causes mental retardation. But she definitely tried to use that story as fact to make her point.

  34. New gaffe: Obama hails America’s historic building of ‘the Intercontinental Railroad’
    September 23, 2011 |

    “We’re the country that built the Intercontinental Railroad,” Barack Obama.

    That’s what the president of the United States flat-out said Thursday during what was supposed to be a photo op to sell his jobs plan next to an allegedly deteriorating highway bridge.

    A railroad between continents? A railroad from, say, New York City all the way across the Atlantic to France? Now, THAT would be a bridge!

    It’s yet another humorous gaffe by the Harvard graduate, overlooked by most media for whatever reason. Like Obama saying Abraham-Come-Lately Lincoln was the founder of the Republican Party. Or Navy corpseman. Or the Austrian language. Fifty-seven states. The president of Canada. Etc.

    If you talk as much as this guy likes to talk instead of governing, if you believe you are a Real Good Talker as much as this guy does, you’re gonna blow a few lines. But this many?

    No doubt, we’ll see a collection of Obama’s Best Bombs on ‘Saturday Night Live’ this weekend, one right after the other. No doubt.

    The Democrat had traveled to Ohio on Thursday to tout his American Jobs Act, the….
    …$447-billion boondoggle he proposed to a joint session of Congress this month because his previous $787-billion boondoggle didn’t create anywhere near as many jobs as Joe Biden had promised.

    This president is in a jam. The economy sucks. Unemployment sucks. His job approval sucks and his economic approval sucks worse. Independents have abandoned the flailing White House occupant, so are some Jews, liberals and even blacks. His Hollywood bundlers had trouble selling out the POTUS fundraisers in L.A. next week.

    Obama’s own Democratic Party controls the Senate and won’t put their leader’s jobs bill on the schedule because more wild spending like this doomed bill could also doom some Dem senators next year.

    So here’s how the ex-state senator from the Chicago machine reacts: At an operating cost of $181,000 per hour, he flies Air Force One nearly four hours roundtrip for 17 minutes of remarks touting infrastructure repairs by a bridge that doesn’t need them.

    The real reason he’s at the Brent Spence Bridge is because it links the home states of both congressional Republican leaders, John Boehner and Mitch McConnell. So Obama can cutely blame Republicans for holding up his jobs bill, even though it’s Nevada Democrat Harry Reid.

    Obama turns the empty rhetoric into a pep rally for himself, leading the obedient audience to chant, “Pass this bill! Pass this bill!”

    This guy, who will ride around in Secret Service SUVs for the rest of his life, has this thing for railroads that other people should ride in. So, according to the White House transcript (scroll down for full version and related stories), here’s what passes for Obama leadership:

    Now, we used to have the best infrastructure in the world here in America. We’re the country that built the Intercontinental Railroad, the Interstate Highway System. We built the Hoover Dam. We built the Grand Central Station.

    So how can we now sit back and let China build the best railroads? And let Europe build the best highways? And have Singapore build a nicer airport?

    Quick question: Has anyone ever heard any American express jealousy over Singapore’s sweet airport?

    – Andrew Malcolm

    • Fox News Poll: Ron Paul Wins Orlando Debate

      Fox News
      Friday, September 23, 2011

      UPDATE: Our policy to screenshot poll results has proven necessary once again. Fox News has now pulled the poll from its own website and separately claimed that Mitt Romney won the debate. More on this coming soon.

      RELATED: Fox Sends to Memory Hole Another Ron Paul Poll Win

      The screenshot below shows results from a Fox News poll on who won the debate last night. Once again Ron Paul emerges as the winner, with close to 40% of over 70,000 votes.

      • LOI

        There is really no way to know if he won, because the Ron Paul folks are good at stuffing the vote box. Especially telephone or internet polls.

        I don’t disagree that the media is trying to drive the bus once again. But I doubt Paul is pulling 49% of those who watch the debates.

  35. Buck the Wala says:

    Sorry guys, but you’re not gonna have old Buck the lawyer to pick on anymore. I guess you’re just going to have to find another lawyer to pick on…or you can heap it all on Mathius. That could be fun!

    The Mrs. and I are heading off on vacation (as soon as I can get these last files off my desk and get outta here) — be back next month!!

  36. So people who know they need to use an inhaler have to go to the doctor and pay an office fee plus higher costs for the product-to protect the environment-seriously-inhalers can hurt the environment. And these people say they care about the poor-they want to reduce the cost of medical care-Yea, Sure you do-that is why you keep doing everything possible to raise the costs and destroy the economy.

    Obama Administration to Ban Asthma Inhalers Over Environmental Concerns
    3:00 PM, Sep 23, 2011 • By MARK HEMINGWAY

    Remember how Obama recently waived new ozone regulations at the EPA because they were too costly? Well, it seems that the Obama administration would rather make people with Asthma cough up money than let them make a surely inconsequential contribution to depleting the ozone layer:

    Asthma patients who rely on over-the-counter inhalers will need to switch to prescription-only alternatives as part of the federal government’s latest attempt to protect the Earth’s atmosphere.

    The Food and Drug Administration said Thursday patients who use the epinephrine inhalers to treat mild asthma will need to switch by Dec. 31 to other types that do not contain chlorofluorocarbons, an aerosol substance once found in a variety of spray products.

    The action is part of an agreement signed by the U.S. and other nations to stop using substances that deplete the ozone layer, a region in the atmosphere that helps block harmful ultraviolet rays from the Sun.

    But the switch to a greener inhaler will cost consumers more. Epinephrine inhalers are available via online retailers for around $20, whereas the alternatives, which contain the drug albuterol, range from $30 to $60.

    The Atlantic’s Megan McArdle, an asthma sufferer, noted a while back that when consumers are forced to use environmentally friendly products they are almost always worse:

    Er, industry also knew how to make low-flow toilets, which is why every toilet in my recently renovated rental house clogs at least once a week. They knew how to make more energy efficient dryers, which is why even on high, I have to run every load through the dryer in said house twice. And they knew how to make inexpensive compact flourescent bulbs, which is why my head hurts from the glare emitting from my bedroom lamp. They also knew how to make asthma inhalers without CFCs, which is why I am hoarding old albuterol inhalers that, unlike the new ones, a) significantly improve my breathing and b) do not make me gag. Etc.

    Well, tough cookies asthma sufferers! You should have written bigger checks to the Democratic party while you had the chance.

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-administration-ban-asthma-inhalers-over-environmental-concerns_594113.html

    • Title of this article misleading-this stupid idea started in 1989 with the “Montreal Provision” -Obama didn’t ban them.

      • Exciting FDA green initiative: Banning over-the-counter asthma inhalers to save the ozone layer
        Share213
        posted at 6:10 pm on September 23, 2011 by Allahpundit
        printer-friendly

        I know what you’re thinking, but no, this didn’t originate with the green braintrust in the Obama administration responsible for such glorious planet-saving measures as the Solyndra loan. It’s part of the Montreal Protocol on the ozone layer, which went into effect in 1989; the FDA decided back in 2008 to extend the protocol to chlorofluorocarbons (CFC) in asthma products, with a total ban to take effect in 2012. Today’s announcement is essentially just a reminder to asthma sufferers that the ban’s a-comin’ and that they should switch to products that don’t use CFC in case they haven’t already.

        The bad news? The only over-the-counter asthma inhaler currently available in the U.S. uses CFC. The worse news? Upwards of one to two million people use that inhaler. The worst news? Prescription inhalers can cost up to three times as much, which means the crusade to rid the planet of this sliver of the CFC supply will operate as a de facto regressive tax on asthma sufferers.

        The good news, via Jim Geraghty: “Think of how much smaller the U.S. carbon footprint will be without all of those asthma sufferers around.”

        But going green may have some inhaler users seeing red, as the ozone-friendly inhalers cost more. Epinephrine inhalers go for around $20. The alternatives, which contain the drug albuterol, cost $30 to $60.

        The FDA finalized plans to phase out the products in 2008, and the only one now sold in the U.S. is Armstrong Pharmaceutical’s Primatene mist. Other inhaler makers have switched to an environmentally friendly propellant called . Both types of inhalers offer relief from symptoms, such as shortness of breath and chest tightness, but the environmentally friendly inhalers are prescription-only.

        “If you rely on an over-the-counter inhaler to relieve your asthma symptoms, it is important that you contact a health care professional to talk about switching to a different medicine to treat your asthma,” Badrul Chowdhury, FDA’s director of pulmonary drug division, said in a statement.

        Why are the green inhalers so much more expensive? Well, because they’re green: The patents on inhalers that use CFC expired long ago but the patents on the new environmentally safe hydrofluoroalkane inhalers will be in effect until 2015 at least. You’d think the FDA might have held off on banning CFC for a few years until the patents lapsed, at least, so that lower-income asthma sufferers wouldn’t have to choose between their wallets and, er, breathing. Ah well; we’ll probably end up subsidizing them until either the patent expires or asthma technology figures out a way to drive down the cost. Exit quotation from asthma sufferer Megan McArdle (via this Weekly Standard), commenting on the joys of green breakthroughs: “Er, industry also knew how to make low-flow toilets, which is why every toilet in my recently renovated rental house clogs at least once a week. They knew how to make more energy efficient dryers, which is why even on high, I have to run every load through the dryer in said house twice. And they knew how to make inexpensive compact flourescent bulbs, which is why my head hurts from the glare emitting from my bedroom lamp. They also knew how to make asthma inhalers without CFCs, which is why I am hoarding old albuterol inhalers that, unlike the new ones, a) significantly improve my breathing and b) do not make me gag.”

  37. SK Trynosky Sr. says:

    Calling Black Flag!, Calling Black Flag! Calling Black Flag!

    An economics question if you would sir. Seems to me that 15 or so years ago, when the Japanese economy went into free fall it did so primarily because of the collapse of the real estate market. I seem to remember that right before the crash they were asking and getting $ 400,000 US or more for 150sq. ft. closets with a bed anywhere within an hour of Tokyo. The economic news reports at the time happily forecasted continued accelerated demand and then the people woke up. The market collapsed, still has not stabilized and Japan has been in the doldrums ever since.

    Are we not in a similar situation? Looking around at the quantity of for sale signs and the prices being asked within an hour of NY (and I assume other major cities), are we not in a similar situation where the base has really not yet been established?

    I grew up with my elders always telling me that my investment in real estate (my house) was the safest bet I could make and it still is for me. It does however seem that someone who grossly overpaid let’s say $ 700,000 for a house now at $ 450,000 and falling who must pay in my area some $ 10,000-15,000 in property taxes plus repairs, commuting and utilities is better served by walking away (equity is already long gone) and renting a nice three bedroom for $ 2,000 per month.

    I would posit that with a gross oversupply of the thing that is the most expensive thing we will ever buy there is sort of a continuing economic earthquake going on that prevents any kind of stability or equilibrium from being re-established as a starting point.

    Having just returned from DC I must say that their market seems to be immune to what has happened. While borrowing is difficult there is no shortage of obscenely priced real estate to go around. I assume this forecasts a continued huge growth in government no matter who wins. It also sort of isolates those folks from the reality of what is going on.

    I take it as a given that there are many other causative factors which have put us here but as a Gestaltist I see them as inter related, Regarding the real estate portion of the problem, I would see your position as that it merely brought the thing to a head much sooner than it would have otherwise. I, on the other hand, merely want someone to focus my immediate ire on (there is only a limited amount of ire you can focus you know.)

    Thank you,

  38. Perry is really being hammered on immigration-here’s another opinion

    September 23, 2011 2:00 P.M.
    Santorum’s Ill-Advised Border War

    He stepped into unknown territory to criticize Perry’s legitimate immigration policies.

    Rick Santorum, in his day the U.S. senator I most admired, is an embarrassment as a no-hoper presidential candidate — and nowhere has that been more painfully evident than in his attempt to characterize Rick Perry as being soft on illegal immigration. Last night, he ridiculed a health-insurance initiative Governor Perry had supported for the benefit of those living on the Texas–Mexico border. “He gave a speech in 2001 in which in talked about ‘binational health insurance’ between Mexico and Texas,” Santorum said. “I don’t think even Barack Obama would be in favor of binational health insurance.” This was followed by thunderous applause from an audience that clearly didn’t know anything more about the issue than Santorum does.

    Santorum is absolutely correct about one thing: Barack Obama would not have supported the plan, which would have liberalized health-insurance regulations in Texas, allowing insurance companies — private companies — to write policies on both sides of the border, and to write policies that cover medical procedures on both sides of the border. Which is to say, Santorum was giving Perry grief for having the audacity to suggest that insurance companies ought to be allowed to sell insurance to whom they please and where they please, that consumers ought to have more choices, and that we can alleviate the costs of providing health care to the uninsured by letting markets work. No doubt Barack Obama would be opposed — but why is Rick Santorum? Two possible answers to that question: 1. He is engaging in cheap demagoguery. 2. He has no idea what he is talking about.

    - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – -

    ADVERTISEMENT

    - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – -
    Texas has more than a thousand miles of border with Mexico, and it has many thousands of people who have ties to both countries: Mexican nationals who live in Texas, U.S. nationals who live in Mexico, people who live in one country but have family in the other, people who travel daily between the countries, etc. Illegal immigrants are, of course, a part of the picture, but they are not the entire picture. There are more than 1 million people who live on one side of the border and work — legally — on the other side. Let’s say you’re a Mexican national working in Laredo, Texas, with a wife and children in Nuevo Laredo, Mexico. You can buy health insurance for yourself through an employer-provided plan — but not for your wife and children, and not a plan that covers expenses for treatment in Mexico if you get sick or injured while you are there. Health insurance that doesn’t cover you where you are, or that excludes your family, is not terribly useful. And if those uninsured spouses and children get sick or injured, whose emergency rooms are they going to end up in? Mexico’s? Probably not.

    Beyond that, there are thousands of Americans who cross the border every day to take advantage of less expensive medical and dental services in Mexico. (Memo to Rick Santorum: Markets work.) You will not be surprised to know that the main opponents to the binational proposal were physicians’ groups whose members did not want to compete with Mexican doctors and dentists.

    There’s a boatload of illegal immigrants in Texas, to be sure. There’s also a boatload of illegal immigrants in Santorum’s native Pennsylvania, and an even bigger boatload in the Washington suburbs, where he now lives. Texas’s binational health-insurance initiative was not a plan to have the government buy immigrants insurance; it was a plan to let them — and Americans living along the border — buy insurance for themselves. Are we better off with more immigrants insured or with fewer immigrants insured? The answer to that is obvious, but, if you cannot figure it out, visit an emergency room in Alexandria, Va.

    Governor Perry has got a lot of grief for allegedly coddling illegals, but here’s something to keep in mind: Governors don’t set federal border policy — they just have to deal with its real-world consequences. Congress writes the law.

    Santorum, during his time in the Senate, was pretty solid on illegal immigration, opposing the “comprehensive” reform proposals of George W. Bush and authoring the Border Security First Act of 2006. Santorum’s border-security act is worth reading. (Do so, here.) In his key piece of immigration legislation, Santorum did not call for a sea-to-shining-sea border fence, or even one stretching from Galveston to El Paso. What he called for was: limited strategic fencing, surveillance, increased manpower, technology, infrastructure, and a stronger federal commitment to securing the border. In other words, when Senator Santorum proposed border-security legislation, he proposed exactly what Rick Perry proposes today. I happen to think that Governor Perry is wrong about building a border fence — the logistical challenges are significant, but they are not insurmountable — he is not entirely wrong when he says that “the best solution involves added manpower, not unmanned walls.” A guy who wants to deploy Predator drones and the U.S. military to police the border, who would ban sanctuary cities, and who handed the Obama administration a $350 million bill for the cost of dealing with illegals in Texas is not an open-borders squish.

    Santorum ought to approach the issue with a little more circumspection. He spent a decade and a half in Washington, during which time the federal government did approximately zilch on border security, while Perry — who does not have an army or the power to make immigration policy — has dispatched the Texas Rangers, along with millions of dollars, to do a job that Washington ought to be doing but isn’t.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/278207/santorums-ill-advised-border-war-kevin-d-williamson

    • Strikes me as a damned if you do issue. The illegals are there (and here) and we are constrained by federal law on how to handle that situation. Treating their kids, who are mostly legal citizens the same as all other in state kids does not bother me, better to help assimilate them into our society.

      • It all seems to boil down to damned if you do-all these problems IMO come about because of open borders. We have a Supreme Court ruling that says we must supply an education to illegals and everyone else from 1st through 12th grade. In-state college tuition isn’t the problem-the lefts and even the libertarian policy of open borders is the problem.

        I for one, find it difficult to scream that children shouldn’t be educated or children of illegals should be treated differently because of the sins of their parents. Or that people who have lived here for years should ALL be thrown out of the country. But I also see that this problem cannot be fixed until we quit allowing people to just walk across the border and then they, and the government demand that we act like decent humans to other humans. I resent the hell out of all this. I want to treat people well-I want every person living in this country to have a decent life. I find the “it’s my right, even though I am breaking every law crowd” to be hypocritical to the 10th degree. They aren’t even talking compassion-they are talking Rights-well you don’t have the right to break our laws. Now compassion-that argument I understand. That argument I agree with-but not when it is being used, while allowing the problem to grow ever bigger.

        People who are here and have been here for a long time-we must use compassion, human decency to determine how to handle the situation-but the open borders and more and more coming in-and then they fall under the -we must be compassionate with them too. Just won’t work.

        So it’s difficult to know what is the right path-but taking it out on people who have been here since they were kids just isn’t my idea of the right way to handle the situation.

        I’m posting an article, I don’t agree with every point-or it might be more accurate to say-I understand the counter-point- but it is another opinion to consider :)

        Rick Perry Isn’t Entirely Wrong on Illegal Tuition
        September 23, 2011 3:35 P.M.
        By Christian Schneider

        Kevin covered last night’s Perry-Romney colloquy regarding illegal immigrant tuition well here. A couple of years ago, my organization conducted a poll that showed that 86 percent of Wisconsin residents opposed giving illegal immigrants in-state tuition, and 46 percent disapproved of “illegal immigrant children” attending public schools. Obviously, it makes sense for Romney to make this an issue, since opposing tuition for illegals is about as popular as opposing the guys at the mall who squirt lotion on you when you walk by.

        But as Kevin points out, the issue is more nuanced than Perry’s opponents make it out to be. And it doesn’t help that Perry’s “heartless” response was woefully inadequate. (It also doesn’t help that Perry’s reasonable “DREAM Act” shares a name with President Obama’s less reasonable one.) Of course, children of illegal aliens born in America are American citizens, and therefore entitled to whatever tuition their state of residence permits for in-staters. Perry’s law dealt with the children of illegal immigrants who were brought here after their birth, making them just as illegal as their parents.

        In most cases (and pursuant to the Plyler case cited by Kevin), these kids are already going to the same high schools as our kids (in the case of Texas, for at least three years of school). They have the same teachers. They play on the same sports teams. They take the same tests, and get the same high-school degree. They are indistinct from any other high-school students. By the time an undocumented child makes it from first grade to graduating high school, taxpayers have already sunk over $100,000 into that child’s education. To pull the plug on those children because of the actions of their parents would be unfair, and would nullify the investment taxpayers have already made in the kid.

        Contrast that with a kid who goes to high school in, say, Georgia, then moves to Illinois, lives there for a year, and becomes eligible for in-state tuition. Even if the family of the immigrant had been paying state taxes (sales, property, and even income) for 18 years, the student from another state is granted the full state subsidy after only living there (and likely not attending school) for a year.

        Detractors of Perry’s plan would say that such benefits constitute a “magnet” that draw illegals across the border. But the notion that families will risk their lives to cross the border in the hopes that their children will one day be able to pay in-state tuition seems far-fetched. In fact, a far more enticing inducement is simply the fact that if they try to cross the border, they will likely succeed.

        Consequently, we should have strict immigration policies that keep people from entering our country illegally. But people who think the federal government is going to start rounding up law-abiding undocumented families and deporting them anytime soon are living in a dream world. (Criminals, on the other hand, should be banished immediately.)

        So while they’re here, our state would be better off giving these kids the chance to make our country better, rather than sentencing them to a second-class existence. It’s not their fault.

        http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/278222/rick-perry-isn-t-entirely-wrong-illegal-tuition-christian-schneider

        • SK Trynosky Sr. says:

          So, subsidize a college education for them and then they can’t legally work here upon graduation . Makes a lot of sense. In Long Island NY we have a young lady who came here before age five with her Dad who had a green card. Dad went back, Mom and her stayed here, 11 years ago Mom and Daughter were told they would have to return to Bangladesh. They fought it for 11 years and lost. Now, next week, she will be deported. She, at the moment is supposedly an honors student at SUNY Stonybrook. By not immediately deporting them we have created the dilemma they now face. As previously pointed out, Eisenhower, Truman and Hoover all .deported aliens in massive quantities. Maybe, it is time to do so. Maybe the border will not be secured until it happens. Maybe the smugglers won’t “get it” until we do so.

          • I think your example was a perfect picture of the problem. The problem is we haven’t been enforcing our laws for years. We really need to start doing that, if we are going to stop the problem of illegal immigration. But do you really want to send a girl who is an American in everything but legality back to Bangladesh. This just isn’t a black and white issue-these are people-not pieces on a chess board.

            • SK Trynosky Sr. says:

              Later on, below, I spoke to the issue. perhaps we should allow her to graduate before sending her back. She would certainly be an asset to that impoverished nation. I do not particularly want to be an SOB here but where can the line be drawn? The omelet cannot be made without breaking eggs. Break them at 2 or at 5 or 12 or 19, they will still be broken. Maybe, until we get back on track, the issue does have to be black or white. There is always an excuse. Blame Mom and Dad not me or INS. Besides, don’t you see what a blatant ploy this is by the administration. they certainly are not going to hold up some scumsucker living on the dole as an example, are they?

        • SK Trynosky Sr. says:

          On second thought, guess what? I will reconsider and allow them to get the degree and subsidize it at that. If, and here is the big if, they must promise to return to their native country and work to improve it. Probably will beat the hell out of the Peace Corps and be lots cheaper. Us Yankee imperialists won’t be accused of being Yankee Imperialists either. Win, Win as I see it. But, alas, its too simple an idea, only complicated expensive ideas work.

    • The left (and the European left in particular) doesn’t like certain facts because they are dying — literally. The triumph of the secular welfare state in Europe is associated with a catastrophic population decline. Three-fifths of southern Europeans will be elderly pensioners by mid-century. Of course, they’re going to go bankrupt. And Muslim society is fragile, and much of the Muslim world has entered a tailspin from which it won’t recover. The left clings to the magical idea that if only Israel would roll over and die, and validate the illusions of the Muslims, that somehow this horrific future might be avoided.

      • http://www.theblaze.com/stories/a-new-palestinian-state-could-deny-citizenship-to-45-percent-of-all-palestinian-refugees/

        I posted this above-just in case you didn’t see it-just further proof-that this has nothing to do with having a 2 State solution. It’s all about getting rid of Israel as a Jewish state-it agrees with my opinion-that the only issue that needs to be addressed-before a compromise could ever be reached-if that is even possible-is the question of the right of return.

        I find it rather revealing that the Palestinian authorities don’t even believe all these people have the right of return-except of course to Israel-and that is to insure that Israel wouldn’t be a Jewish State anymore-and then they could go about disallowing Jews in Israel -just like they are planning to do in Palestine-if they get their state.

  39. September 22, 2011 12:00 A.M.
    Can Israel Survive?
    The country has never been in more danger.

    Will Israel survive? That question hasn’t really been asked since 1967. Then, a far weaker Israel was surrounded on all sides by Arab dictatorships that were equipped with sophisticated weapons from their nuclear patron, the Soviet Union. But now, things are far worse for the Jewish state.

    Egyptian mobs just tried to storm the Israeli embassy in Cairo and kill any Israelis they could get their hands on. Whatever Egyptian government emerges, it will be more Islamist than before — and may renounce the peace accords with Israel.

    - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – -

    ADVERTISEMENT

    - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – -
    One thing unites Syrian and Libyan dissidents: They seem to hate Israel as much as the murderous dictators whom they have been trying to throw out.

    The so-called Arab Spring was supposed to usher in Arab self-introspection about why intolerant strongmen keep sprouting up in the Middle East. Post-revolutionary critics could freely examine self-inflicted Arab wounds, such as tribalism, religious intolerance, authoritarianism, endemic corruption, closed economies, and gender apartheid.

    But so far, “revolutionaries” sound a lot more like reactionaries. They are more often retreating to the tired conspiracies that the Israelis and Americans pushed onto innocent Arab publics homegrown, corrupt madmen such as Bashar Assad, Moammar Qaddafi, and Hosni Mubarak.

    In 1967, the more powerful periphery of the Middle East — the Shah’s Iran, Kemalist Turkey, a military-run Pakistan, and the Gulf monarchies — was mostly uninvolved in the Israeli-Arab frontline fighting.

    Not now. A soon-to-be-nuclear Iran serially promises to destroy Israel. The Erdogan government in Turkey brags about its Ottoman Islamist past — and wants to provoke Israel into an eastern-Mediterranean shooting war. Pakistan is the world’s leading host and exporter of jihadists obsessed with destroying Israel. The oil-rich Gulf states use their vast petroleum wealth and clout to line up oil importers against Israel. The 21st-century United Nations is a de facto enemy of the Jewish state.

    Meanwhile, the West is nearly bankrupt. The European Union is on the brink of dissolving, its population shrinking amid growing numbers of Islamic immigrants.

    America is $16 trillion in debt. We are tired of three wars. The Obama administration initially thought putting a little light between Israel and the United States might coax Arab countries into negotiating a peace. That new American triangulation certainly has given a far more confident Muslim world more hope — but it is hope that just maybe the United States cannot or will not come to Israel’s aid if Muslim states ratchet up the tension.

    It is trendy to blame Israeli intransigence for all these bleak developments. But to do so is simply to forget history. There were three Arab efforts to destroy Israel before it occupied any borderlands after its victory in 1967. Later, it gave back all of Sinai and yet now faces a hostile Egypt. It got out of Lebanon — and Hezbollah crowed that Israel was weakening, as that terrorist organization moved in and stockpiled thousands of missiles pointed at Tel Aviv. Israel got out of Gaza and earned as thanks both rocket showers and a terrorist Hamas government sworn to destroy the Jewish state.

    The Arab Middle East damns Israel for not granting a “right of return” to Palestinians who have not lived there in nearly 70 years. But it keeps embarrassed silence about the more than half-million Jews whom Arab dictatorships much later ethnically cleansed from Baghdad, Damascus, and Cairo, and sent back into Israel. On cue, the Palestinian ambassador to the United States again brags that there will be no Jews allowed in his newly envisioned and American-subsidized Palestinian state — a boast with eerie historical parallels.

    By now we know both what will start and what will deter yet another conflict in the Middle East. In the past, wars broke out when the Arab states thought they could win them and stopped when they realized they could not.

    But now a new array of factors — ever more Islamist enemies of Israel such as Turkey and Iran, ever more likelihood of frontline Arab Islamist governments, ever more fear of Islamic terrorism, ever more unabashed anti-Semitism, ever more petrodollars flowing into the Middle East, ever more prospects of nuclear Islamist states, and ever more indifference by Europe and the United States — has probably convinced Israel’s enemies that finally they can win what they could not in 1947, 1956, 1967, 1973, 1982, and 2006.

    So brace yourself. The next war against Israel is no longer a matter of if — only when. And it will be far more deadly than any we’ve witnessed in quite some time.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/277932/can-israel-survive-victor-davis-hanson

    • Sadly, I think the prediction is correct. The Arabs will attack Israel again soon, maybe even before Obama leaves office. They view us as weak and tired, our economy and the European economies are stagnant and need only a slight push to tip them into full depression. A war in the ME accompanied by an oil embargo could do just that. For those on here who are old enough, think back to ’73. OPEC shut off the oil to the US ostensibly in support of the Arab attacks on Israel. The other reason was to drive up the price of oil and to prove to the world they could do it.

      Our situation is now much worse than in ’73. We are deeply in debt, our domestic oil production has declined further. We have fewer oil drilling rigs and insufficient refining capacity. I would imagine that much of the fuel the military needs for current operations in the ME comes from ME refineries.

      Think back to ’73 and the gas lines and radical (at the time) price increases. If it were to happen again, it would be much worse. Industry in this country would have a hard time getting the energy we would need to keep production up. There would be price controls, rationing, prioritization, rolling blackouts, etc. Woodstoves would be back in vogue despite EPA regulations.

      In ’73, the Saudi’s significantly hurt their own economy with the embargo. The royal family and their citizens had become accustomed to the constant inflow of petrodollars. The world has changed though as the demand from other countries for their product is much higher. So cutting off oil to the US and Europe will not be so costly.

      So if a simple person like me can think of this scenario, why can’t the planners in DC see it as see domestic oil production and refining as the strategic resource it really is?

  40. The Capitalist Police State shows it’s “toughness” on Wall Street (choking 90 pound women and pepper spraying those who weighed more than 91 pounds).

    And how ’bout those Buffalo Bills!

  41. “No similar legislation was enacted or introduced that would require corporations from getting specific approval from its employees to use their involuntary payroll deductions for political purposes.”

    Help me out here! Just what payroll deductions can be used for political purposes? I can see an argument based on stock holders having a say but employees based on deductions-I don’t understand this statement.

    UFCW: Federal Judge Rules on Legislature’s Anti-Union Measure
    Sep 24 07:17 PM US/Eastern
    Email to a friend Share on Facebook Tweet this Bookmark and Share

    PHOENIX, Sept. 24, 2011 /PRNewswire/ — Federal District Court Judge G. Murray Snow has issued a temporary injunction to block implementation of anti-union legislation SB 1365 in an order issued late Friday.

    In his order, Judge Snow writes, “The claims allege constitutional harms, which are necessarily irreparable. The balance of equities and the public interest likewise tilt in favor of enjoining a law that implicates core constitutional rights.”

    The temporary injunction blocks Attorney General Tom Horne from enforcing SB 1365.

    United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCW) Local 99 brought the lawsuit against SB 1365 misleadingly dubbed the “Protect Arizona Employees’ Paychecks from Politics Act.”

    Local 99 President Jim McLaughlin said, “SB 1365 and other efforts are just attempts to silence the voices of the middle class who depend on Arizona’s working families to engage elected officials on important issues.”

    The Union argued that the law was discriminatory and an unconstitutional attack against the free speech rights of labor unions and their members. Enacted in April, SB 1365 tried to prevent Unions from making political contributions and other political activities funded by its members through paycheck deductions.

    No similar legislation was enacted or introduced that would require corporations from getting specific approval from its employees to use their involuntary payroll deductions for political purposes.

    “SB 1365 was just another attack on working people,” said McLaughlin. “Honest conservatives recognize that the First Amendment protects people they don’t like including organizations that stand up for the rights of working people like labor unions.”

    http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=xprnw.20110924.LA74564&show_article=1

  42. I too an confused. In thirty years of working, the only involuntary deductions from my checks have been federal, state and local taxes. Maybe they mean our federal taxes that laundered back through unions and crony capitalists!

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 119 other followers

%d bloggers like this: