An inconvenient truth and not part of the plan.The press was giddy as it announced that Non-Hispanic whites will drop below half of the population as early as 2042. Why is this happening? How is it happening? Where are the whites going and who is replacing them?
Immigration of course, unplanned and uncontrolled immigration is part of it but not all.
Forget the obvious mess "diverse" parts of the world find itself in, the Left and their mouth pieces are still selling and celebrating diversity and diversity does not mean Poles and Germans and Italians and Irish.
No, diversity means a crayola box of a human party mix and their extended families. That is gospel and if you happen to be white and object, shut up or go to the corner designated for racist thoughts and tendencies.
How did all this happen? It could have something to do with the ethnic cleansing and flushing of unborn Americans down the toilet. That of course is a woman's right to choose. Some could call it an insane formula for the demise of a country. The abortion numbers are in the tens and twenties of million. Conceived in America, the home-grown human variety is non persona, non grata. The American human legacy is being sucked out of wombs and emulsified under the cover of euphemisms. The not quite humanoid is being supplemented by whomever shows up at the airport or hoofing it in on worn out sneakers, manufactured in some diverse part of the world.
Both sides of this population changing scissor are snipping away at America and both are dogma to the Democrats.
The Democrats are still demanding, legislating and celebrating diversity . They think it, dream it and sweat it. They eat it and shit it out for all to admire. They wreak of it and are actually engineering and guaranteeing it with political tweezers, suction devices and verbal gymnastics. The Democratic position and abortion plank is:
“The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to choose a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.”
sheeesh, you lament all those poor white aborted babies, what about all those white folk sperms that have been trapped in evil rubber skins or sent on a journey to nowhere by the Pill. Just imagine how white the good ole USA could be!
ReplyDeleteI think you should stick to posting pinup girls.
ReplyDeleteNot you ash.
ReplyDeleteWow, you managed to shock the Elephant Bar into silence!
ReplyDeleterufus says "way to go pootie" but, to seal the deal, deciding in a crisis (foolishly) the good ole Bush admin agrees to an extra special defense for Poland above and beyond any NATO agreements. Bloody hell, but one of my consistent criticisms of the Bush admins decision making is that they make it so US actions become determined by others or events it cannot control. Foooolish foreign policy!
ReplyDelete"True lies and foreign wars
ReplyDeleteRICK SALUTIN
From Friday's Globe and Mail
August 15, 2008 at 7:28 AM EDT
Since the Second World War, the "good war," people seem to demand unambiguously just wars. So each new conflict provokes attempts to find parallels to Hitler and the Nazis. In the Persian Gulf war, Bush the elder called Saddam Hussein worse than Hitler. The Bosnian war had camps, emaciated prisoners and alleged genocide. Now, in Georgia, President Mikhail Saakashvili says Russian troops are "pushing people into concentration camps" with "World War II-type and Baltic-type ethnic cleansing." He told Katie Couric the Russians are "an insult to humanity." In other words, inhuman monsters like guess who. Russia replies that Georgia attacked first with a "blitzkrieg."
It doesn't really work since the Nazis were pretty much sui generis in their technologized savagery and racist justification. Ethnic cleansing, for instance, used to be called population transfer and was common. It is cruel and despicable, but it's not Auschwitz. Such acts are frequent in foreign policy, routinely cloaked by attempts to claim moral status that are obviously hypocritical. Take the Georgia conflict. Russia supports autonomy in the ethnic regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, but denies it for Chechnya. The U.S. backs separation for Kosovo, but rejects it in the Georgia cases. It praises democracy in Georgia, but in Iraq ignores a democratically elected government's call for it to leave. And Georgia's President is a democrat who suppresses protest in his streets. The claims about fighting the good fight are fig leaves, even Hitler mouthed them. South Ossetia's beleaguered 70,000 people? Barely table stakes for some real politics. What are the true stakes?
These tend to appear lower down in the stories and press releases. Georgia's leader, says Reagan-era official Paul Craig Roberts, is a "U.S. puppet." He studied in the U.S. on State Department fellowships, worked at a New York law firm, his government's election was subsidized by the U.S. National Endowment for Democracy and George Soros's Open Society Institute. He put a George W. Bush Boulevard in his capital. He admits this "is not about Georgia ... It is about America, its values." The U.S.? It wants to ring Russia militarily and move Caspian oil through Georgia so as to bypass Iran and Russia. Russia wants to assert itself in the 'hood, like any great power. It uses autonomy movements in Georgia as "daggers" to threaten the U.S. oil strategy, says energy expert Michael Klare. It differs from the U.S. mainly in that the U.S. considers the Caucasus, the Mideast and the rest of the world all as its "sphere" of "national interest." None of this involves confronting a new Hitler, it might as well be the Boer War or the Indian mutiny. Welcome to the 19th century.
When it comes to foreign policy, Noam Chomsky says, the rule is, all governments lie. There may be exceptions, but not among big powers. Does this mean a nasty retreat to cynicism? It seems counterintuitive to never trust anyone. But governments aren't individuals, they're institutions. You aren't giving up on "people," you're adopting a stand toward public bodies. Start from honest skepticism, and you might get somewhere."
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080815.wcosalutin15/BNStory/specialComment/home
I personally support a woman's right to choose...
ReplyDeleteas for near tern, or late term abortion n position is clear
if the LIFE of the mother is at risk, the fetus can be sacrificed to preserve the mother's life.
if the unborn baby enters the birth canal it cannot be sacrificed....
there are times when during child birth that there are choices to be made
the actual number of "choice" abortions at 6-9 months are almost non-existent
life begins with a birthday not when an egg is fertilized that is why we get birth certificates
if we care about the unborn then we should encourage adoption and public neo-natal care for the poor...
millions of kids are born into under fed, under cared for homes that deserve better...
if woman are getting pregnant and using abortion as birth control those societies that produce these abortions need to look into themselves and find what they are doing with their young people that leads to such behavior.
abortion is not pretty....
no one thinks it is...
Ash, did you ever think that we would put interceptors in Poland without Patriots to protect them? Really?
ReplyDeleteDon't worry; there will be some M1A2's, and F-22's within shouting distance, also.
Yes Rufus, in addition to the agreement to ramp up militarily immediately if Poland is attacked, we have also agreed to station our troops in a former Soviet state.
ReplyDeleteWith respects to Rat's Big News on the Hillary roll call at the Dem. convention I thought this headline funny (h/t balloon-juice):
Clinton Supporters Want To Lose Again For Catharsis
Let's have some "Good" News. How to "Screw" Russia, and Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela, and Nigeria, and . . . . .
ReplyDeleteHere's the Problem.
ReplyDeleteRick Salutin is a Commie. Chomsky, the same. That they might get some detail right some of the time means nothing. Everything they say is wrapped in a lie.
ReplyDeleteYou were a favorite of Trish's. Thankfully, we don't have to read any more of her puffed-up vaporous innuendos. The peacock had her beak beat.
So why are you here, Ashley?
You are a funny guy mats - not funny as in one that makes a person laugh but the other kinda funny.
ReplyDeleteAnother version of The Problem from "S" at BC:
ReplyDeleteThe US has a serious competitive problem and while jingoism feels good, the reality is less easily digested, but as history suggests a pill that is best swallowed early on. Competitiveness is at the crux of the apoplexy in the capital markets. Cheap debt and rolling bubbles have smoothed over a rotting from the inside out. There can be no doubt the problems will/must be addressed and confidence restored, the sooner the better, but merely spending more to the exclusion of long term logistical funding considerations misses the point entirely. The Brits had similar delusion right up until (perhaps still) the British Empire Ended.
A little too generic for my taste since I think it glosses over the lull before the storm of the next generation of energy technology. That "competitiveness" is quietly generating a lot of intellectual capital - right now - as we speak/blog.
In this country - and Israel - and Japan - and India - and Korea - but not in Russia.
Why are you here?
ReplyDeleteWhy are you here, Ashley?
ReplyDeleteJust passing the time of day Mattie my little obsessive one. And you, trying to change the world are you?
ReplyDeleteash said...
ReplyDeleteJust passing the time of day Mattie my little obsessive one. And you, trying to change the world are you?
Ash,
Mat and I are charged by the creator of the Universe to change the world for the better...
You and others of your ilk are charged with "Just passing the time of day" therein is the difference between us..
Just passing the time of day Mattie my little obsessive one. And you, trying to change the world are you?
ReplyDelete==
Shouldn't you do that amongst friends, Ashley? You seem to think very highly of Commies and Jihadis, shouldn't you spend some of your time with them?
Hey, if I manage to change the world for the better whilst tapping away at the keyboard I'll be a happy guy but I don't have many illusions of prying open the willfully head in the sand ideologues. Keep chirping away for I manage to learn something from most everyone.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteUnlike you Mat, who seem to seek out only like minded opinions, I try to learn what others think, even if they are woefully misguided, just plain stupid, or well thought out. (please apply the descriptor that you think most applies to you). Even you Mattie offer some beneficial insights, though rarely. Most of the time you just spew statements that make sense only in your personal world but you think others understand.
ReplyDeleteCarry on..
You apply the verb you think most applies to you.
ReplyDelete==
I'll apply the noun that most applies to you. Jihadi.
ouch, you slay me with your wit...
ReplyDeleteouch, you slay me with your wit...
ReplyDelete==
No, I slay you with the truth.
Ash: ouch, you slay me with your wit...
ReplyDeleteHalf-dead, at any rate.
Metuselah: You seem to think very highly of Commies and Jihadis, shouldn't you spend some of your time with them?
ReplyDeleteLove the commie, hate the communism.
Love the jihadi, hate the jihad.
Speaking of quality of debate and RACE this video dovetails quite nicely
ReplyDeletePretty Damn Funny
Love the commie, hate the communism.
ReplyDeleteLove the jihadi, hate the jihad.
==
Right. Because the Jihadis are completely divorced from Jihadism, the Commies are completely divorced from Communism, and the thieving pederast priests are completely divorced from their sin.
McCain promised Florida voters two things:
ReplyDelete1. That he will nominate Supremes in the mold of Roberts and Alito.
2. He will secure the borders before attempting comprehensive immigration reform.
The rumor today is that he will select a pro-choice VP candidate. If he does that, I might just stay home on election day.
What does it say at the top of the page?
ReplyDeleteWe encourage freewheeling conversation, keep it civil and interesting.
It also says,"
ReplyDeleteA Congenial Place for Calm Discussion ."
There had been speculation Tom Ridge was being ramped up for that mission, whit.
ReplyDeleteHe's a pro-choice kinda Republican.
Nothing solid though. Still in the air, Maverick will wait on Obama, he won't try to get ahead of the curve.
Which makes sense, really.
Senators, at both the State and Federal level sometimes see advantages, for themselves, their State or District and the Country or State, as the case may be, by not voting, abstaining or voting Present.
ReplyDeleteIt is a time honored tactic in the course of machination and manipulation.
Find another cross to bear, but Maverick's voting record. He keeps getting reelected, so his storyline sells, here. He is solid amongst the more affluent of the grey whites, which AZ has in abundence.
Does McCain say what he'll do when those in the mold of Roberts and Alito that are nominated for the Supremes are soundly rejected by the Senate?
ReplyDeleteash said...
ReplyDeleteHey, if I manage to change the world for the better whilst tapping away at the keyboard I'll be a happy guy but I don't have many illusions of prying open the willfully head in the sand ideologues. Keep chirping away for I manage to learn something from most everyone.
I learn something from everybody too...
But as for illusions of prying open the minds of the retarded?
No illusions, just try to make them irrelevant that way they dont slow us down from changing the world for the better
Just read where Rev. Rick Warren (Purpose Driven Life) will have both Obama and McCain at his Church in California together but with separate interviews. Should be interesting.
ReplyDeleteto station our troops in a former Soviet state.
ReplyDeletejesus CHRIST! Ash. How you think. Poland is not a former Soviet state. It IS POLAND! Roughed up by the Soviets for a good while. Divided between two thugs before that. GODDAMN.
Good on you, Bob. It's hard not to lose one's temper with that thing.
ReplyDeleteBobal: jesus CHRIST! Ash. How you think. Poland is not a former Soviet state. It IS POLAND!
ReplyDeleteYeah, jeez, ash, didn't you listen to President Ford in the debate? ;-)
"I don't believe that the Poles consider themselves dominated by the Soviet Union. Each of these countries is independent, autonomous, it has its own territorial integrity, and the United States does not concede that those countries are under the domination of the Soviet Union." -- Jerry Ford
Poland - Good people, bad geography
ReplyDeleteRight in the middle of the "scrimmage line" between Russia, and Europe (Germany.)
Makes for a long couple of milleniums.
sheeesh, you lament all those poor white aborted babies, what about all those white folk sperms that have been trapped in evil rubber skins or sent on a journey to nowhere by the Pill. Just imagine how white the good ole USA could be!
ReplyDeleteGIBBERGIBBERGIBBERISH
Abortion has become a convenience. Having that baby is just too much trouble.
There are differences of opinion on 'when life begins'. In the east, Buddhism and Hinduism, in the different sects, the issue isn't clear either. Some say, not at conception, not at birth, but some number of days --can't remember the number--before birth. I'm ignorant of what the rabbis have ruled. They may disagree too. Logically to me, it seems at conception, life being a continuum. All the potential is there right at the beginning. However that may be, in our fast food throw away society it's just become another convenience. There isn't much excuse for it these days, birth control being so readily available. Hemingway thought it was selfish, that's the word he used. Promiscuity is no solution and abortion is selfish. Hills Like White Elephants.
T. our Presidents have made some real bonehead remarks, haven't they? Reagan said trees cause pollution. Carter said in one debate, Amy and I were talking about that the other night(can't recall the subject, but it was important, sounded abosolutely bone headed, turning to his 8 yr old daughter for advice) Eisenhower said, people need religion and I don't care what kind it is! which wouldn't go well today, etc. Obama thinks we've got 57 states. Many other examples.
ReplyDeleteLogically to me, it seems at conception, life being a continuum.
ReplyDelete==
Same here. But,
As long as baby is in her body, the baby is her body. What she does to her body is her affair, and not the State's.
Billary hijacks the democratic convention---
ReplyDeleteTHE CLINTON CONVENTION
By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN
Hillary and Bill have hijacked the Denver convention, making it into a carbon copy of what it would have looked like had she won until the last possible moment. By the time Obama gets up to speak and put his stamp on the convention, Hillary will have had one prime time night all to herself. Bill will have pre-empted a second night. Hillary will have had all the nominating and seconding speeches she wants. And the roll call of the states would record, in graphic detail, how the voters of state after state rejected Obama’s candidacy in the primaries. Only then, after three and a half days of all Clinton all the time will the convention then, finally, turn to its nominee and allow him to have an hour in the sun!
And what leverage did the Clintons have to achieve all of this? None. Hillary could not have taken the convention by storm and any show of party disunity would marginalize her forever in the Democratic Party. Had she or her supporters tried to pull off distracting demonstrations or to recreate Lafayette Park in Chicago in 1968, she would have paid a permanent price among the party faithful for sabotaging Obama’s candidacy.
This Clintonian tour de force raises a key question about Barack Obama: Is he strong enough to be president or can he be pushed around? His failure to stand up to the Clintons makes one wonder how effective he will be against bin Laden, Iran, Chavez, or Putin.
And now word emerges from the Obama camp that Indiana Senator Evan Bayh is on the short list for vice president. To select Bayh would bring Obama’s nemesis, Mark Penn, in through the campaign’s back door. Penn and Bayh are an item. Mark’s second (and current) wife, Nancy Jacobson was the key fund raiser for the Senator during his Senate campaigns. Penn has always been Bayh’s consultant and chief advisor. Penn played the key role in 1996 in getting Bayh a slot as the convention keynote speaker. Bayh has always marched to Mark Penn’s tune.
This, of course, the same Mark Penn who structured the vilification of Barack Obama as a marginal American and orchestrated the campaign to summon the white working class in opposition to his candidacy.
How much will Obama take?
His weakness if the face of the Clinton demands coupled with his refusal to debate McCain in the town forum meetings raise the question of whether he is tough when the teleprompter is turned off. Why is he afraid or unwilling to do tough interviews? It is not enough for him to say that he is the front runner and ask why he should risk such confrontations. In case he hasn’t noticed, he’s not the front runner. The tracking polls all suggest a tied race where taking certain risks would be reasonable, unless his handlers worry about his vulnerability in difficult or extemporaneous situations.
Is an unscripted Obama a pushover? Will foreign leaders conclude that he is not up to the job, just as Khrushchev did with JFK at his 1961 Vienna summit that presaged the Cuban Missile crisis? If he does so poorly in negotiating with the Clintons, how will he do with the Russians?
Bobal,
ReplyDeletePlease excuse my loose use of language thus implying Poland was formerly a Soviet state. I was referring in particular to these concerns which have been reported in a variety of locations. On source I read characterized the violation of an informal agreement not to station US troops in States formerly in their 'sphere of power'.
"The deal reflected growing alarm in a range of countries that had been part of the Soviet sphere about a newly rich and powerful Russia’s intentions in its former cold war sphere of power. In fact, negotiations dragged on for 18 months — but were completed only as old memories and new fears surfaced in recent days.
Those fears were codified to some degree in what Polish and American officials characterized as unusual aspects of the final deal: that at least temporarily American soldiers would staff air defense sites in Poland oriented toward Russia, and that the United States would be obliged to defend Poland in case of an attack with greater speed than required under NATO, of which Poland is a member. "
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/15/world/europe/16poland.html?hp
And a quick google search regarding the informal agreement came up with:
"Following the agreement of 19 November 1990 between NATO and the Soviet Union, formally ending the Cold War, the future necessity of NATO is uncertain. There has been talk of replacing it by the Organization on Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). Its opponent the Warsaw Pact ceased to be a military power and disbanded its military aspects in June 1991. The territory of East Germany is now considered part of the NATO area but there is an agreement not to station non-German forces there. Russian troops left in 1994 after Germany provided the money to pay for new accommodation in Russia. Soviet troops have now left Czechoslovakia and Hungary. The desire of the governments of the members to reduce military expenditure is leading to reduction in forces and the closure of some of the United States bases in Europe."
http://www.angelfire.com/mac/egmatthews/worldinfo/europe/nATO.html
and this:
"CHARLES KRAUSE: That new structure is at least partly contained in the new charter between Russia and the alliance which Clinton hopes to work out with Yeltsin during the summit. Among the issues still to be negotiated is Yeltsin's demand that NATO pledge to never locate nuclear weapons, nor station American or Western European troops in any of the new NATO countries. Before leaving for the summit yesterday Clinton sought to reassure Russia."
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/europe/jan-june97/nato_3-20.html
Mat said: As long as baby is in her body, the baby is her body. What she does to her body is her affair, and not the State's.
ReplyDeleteDisagree. Baby has no say. Might as well let mom's kill new borns and toddlers as they are her affair too. 48 million killed since R vs W. That's infanticide.
no bobal it is not gibberish if you accept our dear hosts contention that:
ReplyDelete"Where are the whites going and who is replacing them?
Immigration of course, unplanned and uncontrolled immigration is part of it but not all.
...snip...
How did all this happen? It could have something to do with the ethnic cleansing and flushing of unborn Americans down the toilet."
Here's a rabbinical ruling folks my age might well agree with :)
ReplyDelete"I don't believe that the Poles consider themselves dominated by the Soviet Union. Each of these countries is independent, autonomous, it has its own territorial integrity, and the United States does not concede that those countries are under the domination of the Soviet Union." -- Jerry Ford
ReplyDeleteActually T., read a little more closely, that doesn't sound quite so bad now, as it did at the time.
Somehow your wife might not agree with that Rabbinical ruling Bobal and I'm guessing I know who has more power.
ReplyDeleteOn that, you've quessed right, Ash.
ReplyDeleteBaby has no say.
ReplyDelete==
The baby has a say when it can heard.
So now the question for the Rabbis is, do babies cry in their mother's womb?
Bobal: Obama thinks we've got 57 states.
ReplyDeleteWe do. The seven extra states are Kenya, the District of Columbia, Bittergate, Hymietown, the Police State, the State of Denial, and the Vampire State (worse than Taxachusetts).
..has a say when it can ^be heard..
ReplyDeleteRussian troops left in 1994 after Germany provided the money to pay for new accommodation in Russia.
ReplyDelete:) hehe
I don't know about such deals as you reference, Ash. Maybe we're fudging a bit.
It's sad to see Russia slip back--so soon too--to the old ways. They had a brief period there when it looked like they might go the other way. It's a police state, kgb state, now. Putin the Poisoner. Polonium Putin.
do babies cry in their mother's womb?
ReplyDeleteThat's a good question. My answer would be no, the crying begins with the separation from that paradisical environment. But, I ain't sure.
Separation from the womb, and, mama's breast, is a big deal in mythology, an analogue of the fall, the expulsion from paradise, or, the bursting of the blissful one into many.
and McCain thinks Iraq borders on Pakistan, Putin is President of Germany, Darfur is in Somalia, and my favorite: "But in the 21st century Nations don't invade other Nations".
ReplyDeleteTime for nap I think.
Mat
ReplyDeletenot to carry on with this as you will not change my mind, but toddlers and new borns can be heard and they usually don't have a say.
Yeah, Russia is slipping back into it's ugly authoritarian nature and we had them beat. Unfortunately we have been continuing to press our advantage and now the angry bear is fighting back and, what with two wars on the go, Iran staring US down, we are in a weak position. Not good chess playing.
ReplyDeleteBTW, I wouldn't bet more than $0.10 to, at max, $0.15 to the dollar that the Missile Defense Deal will get done.
ReplyDeleteIt's got to get past the Parliaments of two countries (Czechoslavakia, and Poland,) and the U.S. Senate, and then get funded by the U.S. House of Representatives.
Hmmm, make that $0.05 on the dollar.
Philip K. Dick keyed on the problems associated with defining the beginning of life:
ReplyDelete""The Pre-persons" is a science fiction short story by Philip K. Dick. It was first published in Fantasy and Science Fiction magazine, October 1974.
It was an anti-abortion response to Roe vs Wade. Dick imagines a future where the United States Congress has decided that abortion is legal until the soul enters the body, which is specified as the ability to do simple algebra"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pre-persons
heck, every sperm is sacred, the egg gets fertilized, first trimester, second, third, birth, simple algebra. The joys of the arbitrary.
toddlers and new borns can be heard and they usually don't have a say.
ReplyDelete==
Why not?
Obama's Energy Policy
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately we have been continuing to press our advantage
And just why shouldn't we press our advantage by protecting free peoples on their doorstep? It might be catching after awhile, for the Russian people to see an alternative right over the horizon. Why should we accept the idea that just because the Russia boot was in the Baltic countries, they have some sort of right to always barge back in there, if they please? It's like saying, because parts of Spain were once muzzie it's always got to be that way. Osama's type thinking.
Rufus, it seems Obama, if this is right, doesn't want the oil companies to even look for oil--
ReplyDeleteJust look at the legislation Obama has introduced in the Senate. The Oil SENSE Act, S. 115, would repeal the authorization in the 2005 Energy Policy Act for the Interior Department to study and inventory how much oil might be available under America's Outer Continental Shelf. Moreover, the bill would prohibit expanded use of 3-D seismic technology to locate and measure offshore oil deposits, even by the oil companies.
As columnist Deroy Murdock explains, "Obama's Don't Ask, Don't Drill policy spurns [modern technology] and embraces outdated information gathered with obsolete instruments. This is the audacity of ignorance."
It is one thing to encourage democracy and quite another to try to move weapons as close as possible to their border all the while trying to expand NATO (primarily a mutual defense pact aimed at the Soviets) closer and closer to them.
ReplyDeleteIt is one thing to encourage democracy and quite another to try to move weapons as close as possible to their border all the while trying to expand NATO (primarily a mutual defense pact aimed at the Soviets) closer and closer to them.
ReplyDeleteYeah, us mean Americans pointing our anti-ballistic missile weapons RIGHT AT the place in the sky where Russia's nuclear missiles might get hit.
er, riiiight, I forgot, America is just a benign friendly warm cuddly nation just tryin' to be nice. my bad.
ReplyDeleteAmerica is more benign, more friendly and more warm and cuddly than too many continental-biased types give us credit for.
ReplyDeleteer, riiiight, I forgot, America is just a benign friendly warm cuddly nation just tryin' to be nice. my bad.
ReplyDeleteAsh, a lot of folks seem to agree with your statement--
Consequences For Russia Begin
A lot of folk seem to be rushing to be near a benign warm friendly cuddly nation, just like ours.
If that other didn't work--Consequences
ReplyDeleteAs your beloved American Thinker wrote:
ReplyDelete"Remember the old line about winning a battle, but losing a war. Putin might have succeeded in flexing his muscles a bit on the world stage, giving everyone a glimpse of the old Russian bear.
But at what long-term cost to his country?"
Yeah, Pootie may have won this battle but we may indeed be stumbling toward a much wider war. Too bad the Ruskies are unable to see US as the warm friendly cuddly nation that we really are.
Here's a nice little feature about ANWR. Complete with pictures and maps
ReplyDeleteAs the word gets out, the Dems will be seen for the lying propagandists that they are.
We have wells and derricks off the coast of California and Louisiana but we can't drill in ANWR? Gimme a break!
Putin is like the typical urban thug who will "pop your ass" if he feels that you "be dissin' 'im."
ReplyDeleteWhit,
ReplyDeleteThat was more than a dis', that was a premeditated kick to the groin calculated for a reflexive reaction.
Whit, it's nuts--
ReplyDeleteJust look at the legislation Obama has introduced in the Senate. The Oil SENSE Act, S. 115, would repeal the authorization in the 2005 Energy Policy Act for the Interior Department to study and inventory how much oil might be available under America's Outer Continental Shelf. Moreover, the bill would prohibit expanded use of 3-D seismic technology to locate and measure offshore oil deposits, even by the oil companies.
If that's right, what are they thinking?
It's lululand, man.
Looks like I've gotten through the summer without ever paying $4.00 for a gallon of gas. Came awfully close, though.
ReplyDeleteyou don't know what your missin' there Bobal, 'tis the good stuff the expensive stuff, ain't it? You get what you pay for...
ReplyDeleteIt's all part of a worldview, bob. A complicated view that evolved mankind is the worst plague on earth and America is the prime evil.
ReplyDeleteI fear Putin less than I do the carbon hysterics.
ReplyDeleteOn the 8th of August it would have taken three B2s on station to destroy the 58th Army, or inflict enough damage they'd have fallen back to regroup, and the Russian Bear wold have been beaten by the Georgians.
ReplyDeleteHumbled.
But no, instead I have to read how, while in control on the ground, the Ruskies have really lost.
A seperate reality, seems to me.
The future, being unknowable, we must only judge the recent past and present.
What has been done and is happening, now.
The US deploys, days late, but not dollars short. We'll be spending cash out the ass on Georgia, now.
One must ask, if the bomber fleet was built to not be used against Russian aggression, why do we have it? Just cause?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhy, whit, do you speak of ANWAR and Democrats?
ReplyDeleteWhen you denounce John McCain's position?
Do you wish to expose him as a liar and fraud?
He compared the ABWAR drilling site to the Grand Canyon and the Everglades. Pristine nature, to be valued and saved, for the enjoyment of future generations of Americans.
Get off the partisan high horse, the GOP will not drill ANWAR, either. There are not 61 votes for drilling, in the Senate. Count the GOP candidate for President amongst the nays.
Tom Ridge or Lieberman as the VP would cause a meltdown. Folk will stay home or vote for Barr, or Nader. Pat Paulsen, heard he may run, again.
ReplyDeleteMcCain’s comments Wednesday to the Weekly Standard’s Stephen Hayes that former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge’s pro-abortion rights views wouldn’t necessarily rule him out quickly found their way into the in-boxes of Christian conservatives. For those who have been anxiously awaiting McCain’s pick as a signal of his ideological intentions, there was deep concern that their worst fears about the Arizona senator may be realized.
“It absolutely floored me,” said Phil Burress, head of the Ohio-based Citizens for Community Values. “It would doom him in Ohio.”
Burress e-mailed about a dozen “pro-family leaders” he knows outside Ohio and forwarded it to three McCain aides tasked with Christian conservative outreach.
“That choice will end his bid for the presidency and spell defeat for other Republican candidates,” Burress wrote in the message.
He and other Ohio conservatives met privately with McCain in June, and while the nominee didn’t promise them an anti-abortion rights running mate, his staff said they could “almost guarantee” that would be the case, Burress recalled.
Now, Burress said, “he’s not even sure [Christian conservatives] would vote for him let alone work for him if he picked a pro-abortion running mate.”
DR wrote:
ReplyDelete"The US deploys, days late,"
Have we deployed? I kow we've got the "humanitarians" deployed against the "peacekeepers" (nice little war that) but have we thrown anything else into the mix? While Bush was saying "Get Out" today I saw a report of Russian tanks rolling toward Tiblisi. Once Condi flys out will they roll in to fetch their "war criminal"? Gates has said we won't respond, militarily.
Rat, if we'd done that, we'd have been in a war with the Russians, over what vital interest of ours?
ReplyDeleteWe've built those bombers so as hopefullly not to have to use them. At least not in a place like Georgia.
I don't think we're gonna do much of anything in Georgia. Arm some guerillas, maybe. We might try to buck up the Ukrainians though.
The main body of Republicans is for drilling Anwar. McCain is as you say, a Maverick. I think we have the two worst choices we could have gotten. McCain at least isn't afraid of nuclear power.
I cannot for the life of me understand why people would be against drilling Anwar. I've never know anyone that's been within 1000 miles of the cold Godforsaken wilderness.
Either I'm nuts, or the world is, take your choice.
Those C17s will keep on flyin' ash.
ReplyDeleteWe deployeed Condi, first.
The Humanitarian deployment is US military, through and through.
Hit even one by accident and Mr Gates will be shown to have been spinning.
He does not want a confrontation and is saying the US will not provoke one. But fire on a C17, kill an aid soldier or try to blockade US shipping.
We have deployeed the minimum assets believed to be required to influence Pootie.
There already were US troops on the ground, before the invasion along with our contractor training infrastructure.
But no, instead I have to read how, while in control on the ground, the Ruskies have really lost.
ReplyDelete:) Yeah, there's lots of talk of how the Russians have lost. They have, lost a lot in public perception, at least in some quarters, but, just who is on the ground? BC's are wargaming incredible war plans, totally divorced from anything that I can see. One guy says we ought to encourage Turkey to conquer Greece. A little intramural intraNATO workout.
Either the world's nuts, or I am, take your choice.
McCain is an abomination as a candidate. He's voted against every alternative energy bill (other than the ones he skipped votes on) presented, and, as Rat stated, he's consistently opposed drilling in Anwar. He honestly believes in "Global Warming;" and now he refuses to rule out a liberal democrat, or a pro-abortion republican as his running mate.
ReplyDeleteFolks, this dumbshit is NOT ready for "Prime Time." Aren't you glad we let the democrats "cross over" in NH, and Fl to choose this old fool for us?
It is not about Georgia, bob, never was, never had been, never will be.
ReplyDeleteIt is about US.
If the US is so intimidated it will not use conventional weapons, covert action and subterfuge to stop Russian agrression, it can not be depended upon to use conventional weaopns and overt action against Russia, anywhere.
The C17's and the existing folks/contractors on the ground haven't done anything yet and I don't see the Russian's worrying about them too much (except hurting them by accident). Heck, from the Russian POV, why not allow the Americans to ship in help for the downtrodden eliminating the need for their soldiers to carry out the burdensome task of caring for the civilian population? Now if our folk on the ground start shooting at the Russians we could face a spiral to a much larger war.
ReplyDeleteWell, yes, but we've got no treaty with them. If they'd been taken into NATO that's something else.
ReplyDeletecovert action and subterfuge to stop Russian agrression,
I'm good with that. But bombing Russian tank columns in a country on their doorstep that we have no obligation to, that's something else again. We'd be at open war with them. Over what? A pipeline? Build nuke plants here and do all the other stuff we talk about every week.
Don't get me wrong, the Russians are the aggressors, pre-planned, they brought those newer tanks down from around Moscow earlier, etc.
ReplyDeleteYou say that we should "buck up" Ukraine, but the Russians have already threatened to take action against the Ukraine, if he was "bucked up"
ReplyDeleteRussia threatens nuclear attack on Ukraine
By Bruno Waterfield in Brussels
17 Feb 2008
Russia has threatened to target the Ukraine with nuclear warheads if the former Soviet republic joins Nato and accepts the deployment of United States anti-missile defences on its territory.
President Vladimir Putin of Russia warned Ukraine's leader Viktor Yushchenko of "retaliatory actions" should his country join the Western alliance during a joint press conference in Moscow.
"It's frightening not just to talk about this, but even to think about, that in response to such deployment, the possibility of such deployments - and one can't theoretically exclude these deployments - that Russia will have to point its warheads at Ukrainian territory," he said.
The Russian and Ukrainian leaders had just held emergency talks in the Kremlin to avert a energy supply crisis over Kiev gas bill - a similar dispute two years ago led to power cuts across Europe.
Mr Yushchenko responded to the Russian pressure by insisting on Ukraine's right to decide its own foreign policy while stressing that his country's constitution would not allow US military bases on its territory.
"You understand well that everything that Ukraine does in this direction is not in any way directed at any third country, including Russia," he replied.
"We follow the principle that any nation has the right to define its own security. Our constitution does not allow deployment by a third country or bloc on Ukrainian territory."
Mr Putin has condemned Washington's plans to include Poland and the Czech Republic in a missile defence shield as a "new phase in the arms race".
Russia fears the shield will threaten its national security and tip strategic military balance in Europe.
"The goal [of the missile shield] is to neutralise our nuclear capabilities," said Mr Putin.
"This would prompt Russia to take retaliatory action."
Moscow has already declared that Russia will pull out of the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty (CFE), which came into force in 1992 and restricts the deployment of troops and tanks near sensitive European frontiers.
So all you want to do is delay and let the pressures build. So that when action is required, it is even riskier. There by making it even less likely that the US would take action.
There is no treaty with Israel, bob.
ReplyDeleteHere is the trial run, for that next push.
``It's somewhat reminiscent, in 1939, when Stalin attacked Finland,'' former U.S. national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski told Bloomberg Television. ``I think this kind of confrontation is the best kind of answer as to why they are seeking to be members of NATO.''
ReplyDeleteNow, Burress said, “he’s not even sure [Christian conservatives] would vote for him let alone work for him if he picked a pro-abortion running mate.
ReplyDeleteFuck.
Oh that's the beginning of the problem.
Fuck it anyway.
The one and only comment I have on this subject is that it is not "pro-abortion". It is a moral issue of right to make a moral decision the consequences of which confined to a single (female) human body.
But don't let simplicity stop the pontificating, the gesturing, the posturing and the gesticulating.
If we start shooting it out with the Russians in Georgia, the first thing they might do is go right into Ukraine. They probably would. All hell breaks loose.
ReplyDeleteYes, we have no treaty with Israel. I wish we did. To my mind, that's a different situation, but I admit the contradiction.
Giving the Georgians excellent anti-tank rockets, etc., as some article mentioned the other day, seems like a good idea, if the Russians stick around, and the Georgians determine to fight.
Rufus - your critique of McCain pales in comparison to the damage field opened by the activist rube from Chicago.
ReplyDeleteIt's a tough election. Instructive to monitor the suicide ratio before years end.
But it ain't that tough.
Four years of What We Know
versus
What we Fear.
Or something like that.
A good portion of Ukraine is pro Russian too, no?
ReplyDeleteThe jihadis would be delighted to see the US and the Russians get into it.
The life within is not confined to the mother, in perpetuity, it will in the normal course of events, blossum, and then have the opportunity to effect the world.
ReplyDeleteSo the moral decision impacts much more than just the body of the woman, it impacts the weakest amongst us.
To deny that life its' opportunity, that is the injustice. Because that baby in the picture above, it is just that, a baby.
The presumption of - call it "learned experience" - I am sure there is a better phrase - is the counter weight to your "what if argument" Rat.
ReplyDeleteWhat we have learned is less important than what God has divined?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDoes not have anything to do with God's divinity, but everything to do with the life of the baby.
ReplyDeleteOpportunities lost
is not Societies gain
T. Boone Pickens was waiting for John McCain in a small conference room at the Aspen Meadows Resort, where the two, according to Pickens, were going to be “talking about the Pickens plan.”
ReplyDelete---
“You’re looking trim,” Pickens told McCain as they engaged in some small talk. Pickens mentioned yesterday’s Census article in a newspaper about how non-Hispanic whites would no longer be the majority in 2042.
“You and I won’t have to worry about that,” Pickens said jokingly, referring to the age of the two men.
Yuck, yuck, yuck.
ReplyDeleteThat may be true for about half the folk, slade. But for the other half it is what they know and fear vs hoped for change.
ReplyDeleteI see a correlation between those, in 2002 & 03 that projected themselves upon Team43 and the War on Terror. The reality of it now meeting few, if anyone's, expectations as held in 2003.
And those that project hoped for, or feared, change upon candidate Obama. He is a Chi-town politico. He is dirty, that's a given.
He is a liberal Democrat. That's true enough.
Mr Bush's tax cuts are still" temporary", because even though his Party held majorities in Congress, they could not muster 60 votes in the Senate.
On immigration the GOP Senators may stand against an Obama immigration bill, but they'll pass a McCain inititive. Even though the proposed law could be one and the same.
Aborting the countries future is fair game for discussion, also, sez I.
ReplyDeletethe consequences of which confined to a single (female) human body.
ReplyDeleteOh, I'm sorry I thought the photo was of a human body. I now have no idea what the subject of the photo is.
It's one of them Aliens from Uncle al-Bob's Radio Show.
ReplyDeleteThe liberals in Ukraine are Pro-Russian, just like Ash is in Canada.
ReplyDelete(al-Bob)
ReplyDeleteAbout a third are proRussian, in the Ukraine, I've read. Mostly in the Southern portion of the country.
ReplyDeleteLook at the photo.
ReplyDeleteWe now know better than the lies we were told that the aborted fetus is nothing more than gelatinous tissue.
The truth is out. Some people can't deal with it.
Aside from the fact and this is beginning to look like groundhog day, (ceasefires and truces everyday this week)now the real recriminations will start:
ReplyDeleteEven as Rice stood with Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili in a show of solidarity, he asked, "Who invited the trouble here? Who invited this arrogance here? Who invited these innocent deaths here?"
Shaky and near tears following a difficult, nearly five-hour meeting with her, Saakashvili answered his own question: "Not only those people who perpetrate them are responsible, but also those people who failed to stop it."
Rice let that pass, focusing instead on the demand that Moscow immediately withdraw its forces.
Oh boy! Somebody's foreign policy has screwed the pooch.
Mexicans or Black US citizens, the politicos and elites have decided.
ReplyDeleteThe donor and a representative of New Mexico Planned Parenthood were recorded as saying:
Donor: "I really face trouble with affirmative action. I don't want my kids to be disadvantaged ..."
Planned Parenthood representative: "Yeah."
Donor: "... against blacks in college. The less black kids out there the better."
Planned Parenthood representative: "Yeah, yeah, it's a strange time to be sure."
Tapes of the calls to New Mexico and Oklahoma Planned Parenthood branches were released on Wednesday. Lila Rose, a UCLA undergraduate who ran the study, told FOX News that tapes for the final three states will be released within the next few weeks.
Rose claimed that Planned Parenthood development officials in all seven states that her group contacted gave similar responses and were encouraging donations that were limited to funding only abortions for black women.
A spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood wrote FOX News that the group questioned the “authenticity of elements of these edited tapes” and added that Planned Parenthood had expanded its employee training program so that employees understand that “our organization helps all individuals — regardless of gender, race, or sexual orientation.”
Rose denied that the tapes were edited and asked, “Why are they apologizing for what is on the tapes when they are simultaneously telling the media not to cover this issue because they say that the tapes were edited?” Planned Parenthood did not respond to questions about how it knew the tapes were edited.
Rose said that the study was done both because of the controversal views of Planned Parenthood's founder, Margaret Sanger, and Rose’s belief that the group was still following those founding principles. Sanger advocated using birth control, sterilization, and abortion to weed out "the problem of the dependent, delinquent and defective elements in modern society."
Rose also noted that she was concerned that “80 percent of Planned Parenthood clinics are in minority neighborhoods.”
Planned Parenthood officials did not produce a response to this claim. The organization performed 22 percent of all abortions in 2005 (260,000 out of 1.2 million abortions).
A Planned Parenthood spokeswoman wrote that the organization “denounces racial bias,” and “what is deeply troubling is that an opponent of reproductive health care is baiting Planned Parenthood employees with deceptive, politically motivated tactics.”
Blacks do, indeed, have much higher rates of abortions than whites or other minority groups.
In 2000, while blacks made up 17 percent of live births, they made up more than twice that share of abortions (36 percent). If those aborted children had been born, the number of blacks born would have been slightly over 50 percent greater than it was.
Over 400,000 aborted black babies, in 2005.
Talk about your racism
bobal wrote:
ReplyDelete"Yes, we have no treaty with Israel. I wish we did."
WHY? Why do you want to entangle US foreign policy with the decision of others? Can Israel do no wrong? Surely they've provided provocation at times (check out the meaning of Zionism) so why would you want to sacrifice our blood and treasure to their decisions?
That picture could easily be a live child, or a still born child, after a natural birth. Ever been there as the kid came out? Loads of blood and stuff. Still, it is but a sensational provactive picture with little added meaning to the debate. Yes, a life is ended when a fetus is aborted. So to is a life ended when I step on an ant, kill an enemy combatant (both lawful and unlawful) as well as letting an elderly, or sick person, die by withdrawing life support. Again, I've said it before, but the key distinction is the mother is a life support system for that unborn child. It is her decision to make whether she is he life support system or not. We withdraw life support often in our society without the hand wringing. We also kill without the hand wringing.
UNITED STATES
ReplyDeleteNumber of abortions per year: 1.37 Million (1996)
Number of abortions per day: Approximately 3,700
Who's having abortions (age)?
52% of women obtaining abortions in the U.S. are younger than 25: Women aged 20-24 obtain 32% of all abortions; Teenagers obtain 20% and girls under 15 account for 1.2%.
Who's having abortions (race)?
While white women obtain 60% of all abortions, their abortion rate is well below that of minority women. Black women are more than 3 times as likely as white women to have an abortion, and Hispanic women are roughly 2 times as likely.
Who's having abortions (marital status)?
64.4% of all abortions are performed on never-married women; Married women account for 18.4% of all abortions and divorced women obtain 9.4%.
Who's having abortions (religion)?
Women identifying themselves as Protestants obtain 37.4% of all abortions in the U.S.; Catholic women account for 31.3%, Jewish women account for 1.3%, and women with no religious affiliation obtain 23.7% of all abortions. 18% of all abortions are performed on women who identify themselves as "Born-again/Evangelical".
Who's having abortions (income)?
Women with family incomes less than $15,000 obtain 28.7% of all abortions;
Women with family incomes between $15,000 and $29,999 obtain 19.5%;
Women with family incomes between $30,000 and $59,999 obtain 38.0%;
Women with family incomes over $60,000 obtain 13.8%.
Why women have abortions
1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest;
6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child, and
93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e. the child is unwanted or inconvenient).
At what gestational ages are abortions performed:
52% of all abortions occur before the 9th week of pregnancy,
25% happen between the 9th & 10th week,
12% happen between the 11th and 12th week,
6% happen between the 13th & 15th week,
4% happen between the 16th & 20th week, and
1% of all abortions (16,450/yr.) happen after the 20th week of pregnancy.
Whatever you say, Ash.
ReplyDeleteAs to foreign policy and entanglements. I think we should just "cool our jets" for a while.
A life at the end of its' cycle and one at the beginning do not have the same societal opportunity, ash/
ReplyDeleteThey are not equivalent
People are not ants, either.
Fetuses are just another class of human, truth be known.
A class you approve the killing of.
While you rail against Capital Punishment for criminals that rape and murder children, in Texas.
ReplyDeleteThinking it better those prisoners be warehoused in perpetuity.
No rat, the distinction I am making is the one where an individual has a choice of being made to be a life support system. It is persons choice, you know freedom. Once the child becomes viable it is entitled to live. A mother can give a child up for adoption, she cannot starve it, nor kill it, but she is not obligated to care for it. Many many children are brought up by grandmothers, foster homes ect. but you have no right to force a woman who becomes pregnant for whatever reason that her body must provide for that other individual. Once the child can live outside her body, she can't kill it but until then it is her choice.
ReplyDeleteIf your wife were involved in a car accident and she was maintained upon life support it is your choice whether that life support is to be continued, not the states. Similarily if you wife were to become pregnant (say, raped for example) she is not obligated to carry the child to term. It is her choice, not yours, not the States. Yes, she is terminating a life, but, again, it is her choice to make.
Perhaps that should be the new execution method
ReplyDelete"remove from life support"
No food, no water,
no public "life support".
Then they'd just die in a week or two.
Re: Missile Defense in Poland.
ReplyDeleteTom Shanker, NYTimes, says that the 10 missle defense systems for Poland were indeed intended against Iran. He says "it's preposterous" to think that they would serve any purpose against the thousands of missiles Russia could throw into Poland.
Now, the Patriot batteries which have been thrown into the mix are a different matter and are a defense against Russia.
It has always been the States responsibility to protet the innocent, ash.
ReplyDeleteJust by redefining human, that does not make it so. But, since the politicos have yet to settle what the definition of "is" is, how can we expect them to define human life.
And yes, the State can demand a 9 month committment, from anyone, let alone a woman to bear a child. The life she is taking is not hers to take.
Been that way for hundreds of years, in the Americas. Just because five lawyers changed the rules and 565 other lawyers let 'em. That does not make it right, definately does not make it moral.
rat, there is a difference between denying a person from acheiving the sustance of life (i.e. locking them up and not providing food and water) and their being unable to get that sustance (i.e. brain dead unable to breathe without mechanical assisatance) Sure, a new born cannot forage for food but its life can be sustained with help from others while a first trimester baby can only survive with a mother's womb providing. Third trimester can survive in an incubator. It is conceivable that with technological advancement any fertilized egg could be viable in some sort of mechanical incubator. My, my every zygote is sacred? It'll give my ethical distinctions a run for the money though.
ReplyDeleteAbout a third are proRussian, in the Ukraine, I've read. Mostly in the Southern portion of the country.
ReplyDelete==
90% in one area. The Crimea.
Ukraine will get to choose: Loss of territory or US defense alliance. Turkey will get to choose: gain of territory or US defense alliance. Turkey will choose both. Georgia and Iraq will get to eat it, just like Greece.
How far does the states obligation go in protecting the innocent? Every homeless starving person deserves a 3000 sq ft home and 3 square meals a day? Of course not. The individual has an obligation to fend for themselves, even children. Is your wife obligated to carry to term her rapists child simply because that child is innocent?
ReplyDeleteI agree the taking of a life is immoral, but hey, we do it, regularly. Should the state legislate and enforce morality? Pretty broad authority for the stae, no?
Not sacred, you cantinue to bring divinity into this, you and slade. But it is not God that protects the innocent. It is not God that judges, here on Earth.
ReplyDeleteNo, it is the opportunity costs, to society, secular society. that makes aboriton unpalatable to any civilized culture.
To lose 1.3 million pre-citizens a year, year after year, has its' costs to a society and a culture.
Ot coarsens the culture, making it acceptable to take a life for the convenience the taking provides.
Actually, I came back to the computer to try to strike that "immoral to take a life" business. Too overly broad and there are definitely circumstances which one kills morally (self defense for example) Yet I disagree that it is a numbers game, a cost benefit analysis kind of thing. The crux of the issue comes down to who gets to decide and under what circumstances. I maintain that the state should have limited influence in the decision when the babies life is wholly dependent upon a single mothers biological system to maintain its viablility. Individual freedom. Once the baby is viable outside the mom, the state has much more say.
ReplyDeleteDead is dead, ash.
ReplyDeleteWhether in a moment, or ten days without water.
yep, dead is dead, and if and how and why we make 'em die plays a part.
ReplyDeleteYou equate equal outcome with equal opportunity, ash.
ReplyDeleteNo government can guarentee outcome, but they can guarentee at least the opportunity for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe gov. can't guarantee life. Is life an opportunity or outcome? If opportunity then we're then back to evey sperm is sacred and no removal of life support, ever. There is always a hint of opportunity.
ReplyDeleteIt's been fun Rat. Loads of respect here.
g'd night!
I never said the government could guarentee life, ash
ReplyDeleteSaid they could guarentee the opportunity for life. Once it already had taken form.
Which they do not now do,
but used to.
In an elitest scheme to replace Blacks with Mexicans, as the working underclass. Exploitable workers with little legal standing.
Ronald Reagan's answer to the abortion debate--he'd always say there's another (unspoken) voice to be heard--the baby's voice, besides that of the mother.
ReplyDeleteIf I was king of the world, I'd just separate those parts of Georgia and Ukraine that have Russians from those parts that don't, incorporate the first into Russia, and the second into the west, and be done with it.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWould that be doing of it, bob?
ReplyDeleteWould we all sing koom bi ya?
Some how I think not, not even for King bob and his Reagent rat
Each incremental step along the Russian border, the threat increases. Urkaine, Georgia, Latvia ... even Poland.
Why risk nuclear armeggedon over Poland or Urkaine but not Georgia?
When in Georgia we were afraid to do a thing. lest it possibly escalate?
Who seems more intimidated by the threat of escalation US or them?
Well, Rat, if you were King o' the world, or just President, you'd use direct US military power right now against Russian tanks in Georgia? Unleash the B-2s?
ReplyDeleteI'd rather unleash over Iran and stop their nuclear program once and for all.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletePerseids Over Vancouver, B.C.
ReplyDeleteJohn Bolton - After Russia's invasion of Georgia, what now for the West - Telegraph
ReplyDeleteRussia’s invasion across an internationally recognised border, its thrashing of the Georgian military, and its smug satisfaction in humbling one of its former fiefdoms represents only the visible damage.
As bad as the bloodying of Georgia is, the broader consequences are worse. The United States fiddled while Georgia burned, not even reaching the right rhetorical level in its public statements until three days after the Russian invasion began, and not, at least to date, matching its rhetoric with anything even approximating decisive action. This pattern is the very definition of a paper tiger. Sending Secretary of State Condeleezza Rice to Tbilisi is touching, but hardly reassuring; dispatching humanitarian assistance is nothing more than we would have done if Georgia had been hit by a natural rather than a man-made disaster.
The European Union took the lead in diplomacy, with results approaching Neville Chamberlain’s moment in the spotlight at Munich: a ceasefire that failed to mention Georgia’s territorial integrity, and that all but gave Russia permission to continue its military operations as a “peacekeeping” force anywhere in Georgia. More troubling, over the long term, was that the EU saw its task as being mediator – its favourite role in the world – between Georgia and Russia, rather than an advocate for the victim of aggression.
Even this dismal performance was enough to relegate Nato to an entirely backstage role, while Russian tanks and planes slammed into a “faraway country”, as Chamberlain once observed so thoughtfully. In New York, paralysed by the prospect of a Russian veto, the UN Security Council, that Temple of the High-Minded, was as useless as it was during the Cold War. In fairness to Russia, it at least still seems to understand how to exercise power in the Council, which some other Permanent Members often appear to have forgotten.
The West, collectively, failed in this crisis. Georgia wasted its dime making that famous 3am telephone call to the White House, the one Hillary Clinton referred to in a campaign ad questioning Barack Obama’s fitness for the Presidency. Moreover, the blood on the Bear’s claws did not go unobserved in other states that were once part of the Soviet Union. Russia demonstrated unambiguously that it could have marched directly to Tbilisi and installed a puppet government before any Western leader was able to turn away from the Olympic Games. It could, presumably, do the same to them.
Fear was one reaction Russia wanted to provoke, and fear it has achieved, not just in the “Near Abroad” but in the capitals of Western Europe as well. But its main objective was hegemony...
It profits us little to blame Georgia for “provoking” the Russian attack. Nor is it becoming of the United States to have anonymous officials from its State Department telling reporters, as they did earlier this week, that they had warned Georgia not to provoke Russia.
Put that back up Doug, I didn't get a chance to read it!
ReplyDeleteDoug, if you were President, what would you do?
They may share an authoritarian political instinct, but all logic says that Moscow and Beijing are more naturally strategic rivals than partners. Mr Putin’s support for separatism in South Ossetia and Abkhazia, meanwhile, sends a curious message to those in Chechnya and elsewhere on Russia’s southern border who want to be free of Moscow’s rule.
ReplyDeleteThe Vulnerabilities That Lie Behind Putin's Belligerence
Have Late Nite Taken off the Air!
ReplyDelete2. I'd make you pay more respect to Carpet Kitten.
ReplyDeleteAfterall, she's a fellow Ideehoean.
Excellent idea! And since it's 10pm here I best go listen to that last broadcast.
ReplyDeletePG&E mega solar deal
ReplyDeleteBy Lee Bruno
Published 2008-08-15 07:04
The single largest 800 megawatt photovoltaic commitment just announced by California utility Pacific Gas & Electric sets a major milestone and sends a strong message from the burgeoning solar industry.
Because industry self-congratulations aside, PG&E's move signals technology and policy hurdles that still loom ahead, say insiders.
"It represents the pinnacle in a series of large and innovative U.S. electric utility solar projects that have been announced in the last six months," said Julia Hamm, SEPA executive director in a released statement.
And analysts and vendors also concur the two deals affirm the continued demand for both thin film and crystalline panels as utility-grade PV solutions.
"There is still less than one tenth of one percent solar which means there's plenty of room for growth," David Miller, a spokesperson for Applied Materials, told Cleantech Group. "So there's going to be a need for both thin film and silicon PV."
Both large solar projects are contingent upon the extension of the federal investment tax credit, which is set to expire at the end of 2008. The United States Congress is being urged by the solar industry to extend the 30 percent solar energy investment tax credit (ITC) for another eight years.
Analysts note that the large scale utility solar plant deals hinge on photovoltaic power-purchasing contracts like the underlying the PG&E deal.
Those PPCs pave the way for financing that makes these big solar plants possible. There are still several hurdles for these big solar providers to overcome in terms of ramping up manufacturing and hitting price points. And part of hitting those price points involves tax credits.
"Right now, Applied Materials is ramping up eight new manufacturing plants, four of which are doing thin film solar," said Applied Materials' Miller. "It is a new scale especially in the U.S. ... now if we could get some tax credits it would be great."
The specific terms of PG&E's new deal calls for a 250 megawatt facility built by SunPower using crystalline panels, to start generating power in 2010, reaching full capacity in 2012.
The second deal calls for a 550 megawatt thin film plant built by OptiSolar, another large scale validation of the applicability of thin film PV to large utility scale installations.
There's been a push to bring new large thin film solar manufacturing plants online. One of the most notable recent deals was the $15 billion Masdar Initiative and its ambitious plan for thin film solar to help power its zero-carbon city (see Masdar getting into thin film solar business).
Abu Dhabi Future Energy Co., heading up the Masdar Initiative, has contracted Applied Materials to purchase three SunFab thin film lines for producing solar modules with a targeted capacity of up to 210 megawatts (MW).
.
.
3. Free Beer!
ReplyDeleteWhat's the service life of them panels Matso?
ReplyDeleteForeclosed home sells for $1
ReplyDeletePanhia Yang
DETROIT, Mich. -- One dollar can buy a lot of things, everything from fast food from a dollar menu to a can of beans at the grocery store.
In Detroit, MI, a dollar can buy a house.
The home recently foreclosed and was listed for a mere one dollar.
You would think that would be a bargain, even in its dilapidated state, but it took 19 days for the home to even sell.
It's just another mark against the declining housing market in Detroit.
Real estate agents say homes in depressed neighborhoods go into foreclosure at a higher rate. The houses are then looted for just about everything inside from copper plumbing, lighting fixtures and doors to even the kitchen sink.
The bank that owned the home faced back taxes of $4,000 and an unpaid water bill. They even tried to sell the property for $1,100, but eventually lowered the price to just a dollar. According to the bank, the sale cost them $10,000.
==
DETROIT, Mich. home of Doug's favorite auto maker.
What's the service life of them panels Matso?
ReplyDelete==
Which?
Doug,
ReplyDeleteMy guess is that if you put these in a desert environment, the problem of corrosion is largely alleviated. I don't think 50 years would be much of a stretch.
he, since C2C was crap I tune to KGO and they're talking about Jerome Corsi's book ObamaNation, top of the New York Times Best Seller List. Who calls in but my favorite girl friend, Linda Pall, former city council member, from Moscow. Says what an awful book it is, Swiftboating Obama like that etc., then tries to get a little free publicity and peddle her own book, kind of gets cut off. That's my gal, running true to form, used to go to the rest homes and suck votes out of the incontinent and incoherent and comatose. hehe
ReplyDeleteObama The Biggest Abortion Supporter Of Them All
ReplyDeleteThat's what's cool about being older:
ReplyDeleteYou're not so concerned about where your going.
The big concern is if you'll make it.
"you're"
ReplyDeleteOr, you're content to be just where you are, which is best.
ReplyDeleteAfter a while you will not be content if you don't go.
ReplyDeleteIf that BTC pipeline is such a big deal, why not detour it through Armenia?
ReplyDeleteThe answer seems to be that Azerbaijan (sp) and Armenia are mortal enemies.
ReplyDeleteHint:
ReplyDeleteWorse than that, if you don't go for a long time, not only will you not be content, but incontinent.
:)
ReplyDeleteThe Armenians are on better terms with Russia.
ReplyDeleteI've seen you countenancing retreat here and at other sites.
I forgot Chamberlain's first name, so I won't be using that to address you.
You haven't said what you'd do.
ReplyDeleteGetting Ukaine into NATO and bombing Iran isn't exactly retreat.
Fellow's first name was Wilt, aka, The Stilt.
grrnite
ReplyDeleteRichard, actually.
ReplyDeleteDr. Chamberlain.
I gave you my 3 point plan for the first hundred days.
I'm thinking of moving #3 up to number 1, no need to be thirsty for 99 days.
Dr. Richard al-Bob Chamberlain.
ReplyDeleteAin't a picture worth a thousand words?
ReplyDeleteI go by the picture right above the words,
"A Congenial Place for Calm."
Hey, Whit,
ReplyDeleteDid John make those two promises to Floridians RECENTLY?
(he made the second to all the rest of us long ago, then promised the opposite to some special interest group)
In a recorded message to registered voters on the eve of the Florida primary, 2008.
ReplyDeleteNo government can guarentee outcome, but they can guarentee at least the opportunity for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
ReplyDeleteThat's a real "circle of life" thing you got going there Rat.
Realistically when you talk "potential" the gig is up. There is no finite limit to potential - which is why the environmentalists smirk about about butterfly wings flapping up a dust storm in the desert. No counter argument is possible. And no footprint is small enough to mitigate impact.
Realistically the government guarantee is not. It is a concept that we try to live up to. The purists want logical consistency. Fine. Realistically why not start with the living? Why the focus on the early fetus where the condition is different, dependent, and controversial? I sense moralizing. From the State as well as the public. So far the State has chosen a course of realism. But the public?
If this becomes a campaign issue, I'll be digging out my go-go boots and tie-dyed's and bell bottoms. It looks like we-re going to relive the last century - Cold War and all.
Warning: Dour pessimists with borderline suicidal tendencies are advised to avoid BC until treaty is signed which experts expect to reduce the global threat rating from 90% Armageddon to even crap shoot.