“This site is dedicated to preying on peoples vanity, ignorance, or loneliness, gaining their trust and betraying them without remorse.”

Monday, July 30, 2012

Live Free, Vote for Gary Johnson?



Johnson sees no difference between Obama and Romney




Presidential candidate Gary Johnson just released a bold campaign video that will resonate with a lot of political independents in New Hampshire and around the country. In the advertisement, Johnson, a Libertarian former Governor from New Mexico, says Barack Obama and Mitt Romney would give America four more years of war, more debt, more taxes, bigger government, reduced privacy, and diminished personal liberty. Johnson sees little difference between the President and his Republican challenger, Mitt Romney.
The major media and the political pundits that dominate their airwaves are offering a different narrative. Corporate media outlets rely on advertising revenue for their survival, and they get a lot of it from the Republicans and the Democrats. Consequently, they like to promote simplified sound-bites from well-funded candidates that they can portray as polar opposites. However, as Johnson points out in this persuasive ad, the major candidates may actually be more alike than different.


Johnson and fellow liberty champion, Ron Paul have been making the case that Republicans and Democrats are equivalent throughout the campaign. Many Americans agree with them, but still choose to support one of the major candidates because they fear that support for a third party candidate would lead to the election of the guy they like the least. Libertarian-leaning Republicans are not thrilled with Governor Romney, but they despise President Obama. Moderate Democrats are not thrilled with President Obama but they despise Republicans more. This election has largely been reduced to voting for the least worst candidate.
Johnson and Paul have been asking people to vote their conscience instead of selecting the lesser of two evils. It will be interesting to see if this latest message from Gary Johnson is able to change the hearts and minds of independent voters who are increasingly frustrated by the choices they are given from the Democrats and Republicans.
If you would like to receive an update when Kevin Kervick releases another article, click on the Subscribe and Follow on Twitter links below. Please also like, +1, and tweet this article so that others can receive the content. Please also click Like next to his name on Kevin's homepage.

73 comments:

  1. Romney has just begun his foolish campaign and every honest conservative cannot stand the man.

    Romney has visited two counties. In the first he demonstrated that he is a diplomatic dunce. In the second he is showing that he is a political panderer and another draft dodging boomer ready to pervert the definition of defense to the lower tiers of sound judgement.

    George Bush and Bill Clinton politicized and perfected the optional war concept. They have responsibility for the almost complete conversion of the current professional US military establishment to nothing more than an international hit-man, ready to do the bidding of political opportunists and big business interests.

    ReplyDelete
  2. And that leaves is with Obama the Marxist?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. .

      More a Fabian Socialist really.

      Just saying.

      :)

      .

      Delete
  3. Vote for Johnson, help elect Obama.

    Wasted vote.

    (Somebody said, Job One is getting rid of Obama)

    b

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. .

      I thought that was you.

      Besides, with them it's a matter of pick your poison.

      There are no winners voting for either.

      .

      Delete
  4. Johnson and fellow liberty champion, Ron Paul have been making the case that Republicans and Democrats are equivalent throughout the campaign.

    That sure didn't stop the old racist Ron Paul from sucking off the Republican Primaries for all the publicity they were worth.

    Third party voters were the reason Frankenstein got elected to the Senate in Minnesota.

    In a year with the most important Presidential election anyone can think of, it is really Really REALLY DUMB to think of voting for someone other than the only guy that can take Obama down.

    b

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. .

      In a year with the most important Presidential election anyone can think of, it is really Really REALLY REALLY REALLY DUMBER to think of voting for either of these guys will make a difference.

      .

      Delete
  5. If you think Romney is the guy, go for it. How did the lesser evil Bush work out for you?

    ReplyDelete
  6. When will it ever change? Never, with the lesser evil theory.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "When will it ever change? Never, with the lesser evil theory."

      So correct!

      Delete
    2. Does that mean you will be voting for Obama? Johnson is a liberal in Libetarian clothes.

      Delete
    3. .

      I believe the term is 'classical liberal', much more conservative than today's GOP and definately way different than those they call liberal today.

      Regardless of what you call them, I agree with Johnson almost 80% of the time on the issues (a little more with Paul) as opposed to Romney and Obama where I agree with each about half the time.

      More importantly I agree with Johnson and Paul on the two most important issues to me, wars of choice and constitutional rights.

      .

      Delete
    4. .

      To be more precise, I should have said, a 'much closer' term would be classical liberal.

      .

      Delete
  7. Third party voters were the reason Frankenstein got elected to the Senate in Minnesota.

    The third party also elected Ventura.
    He did good until he went off the rails.

    ReplyDelete
  8. As of now, I'm undecided on Romney or Johnson.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-singer/open-third-party-debate_b_1710962.html?utm_hp_ref=politics
    The reason I voted for Ventura at the time was because of how he didn't dance around people's questions in a three way debate. Unlike the Party Standard Bearers.
    I say open up the Presidential debates to all. Not just who can get a 15% vote.

    ReplyDelete
  9. In the second he is showing that he is a political panderer and another draft dodging boomer ready to pervert the definition of defense to the lower tiers of sound judgement.


    wow tell us how you really feel.....

    deuce your hatred of Jews and Israel is blinding you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. .

      Recent polls in Israel indicate 75% of Israeli Jews favor an international attack on Iran's nuclear facilities. Polls here indicate about 68% of American Jews favor an Israeli attack on Israel while only 24% of the American public favors it.

      Yet, when asked whether Israel should attack Iran if the US isn't involved, the numbers in Israel drop to 45% approval and 40% against.

      With all the polls there are a significant number of Jews that are opposed to an attack on Iran. Are you saying all of those Jews, American and Israeli, who oppose an attack on Iran hate Jews and Israel?

      .

      Delete
    2. Wio, you make assertions that are so outrageous that they are ignored. You are consumed with racial hatred. You are a statist and a fringe fanatic that has fantasies of mass murder and slaughter against just about every middle eastern country except Israel. You haven’t the sense to realize that the blow-back to Israel, if your fantasies came true, would have Israelis slaughtered in incomprehensible numbers. I don’t know any serious Israelis that share your views.

      I look at Israel as a nation state, and Israelis as citizens. You are consumed with Jewishness. I am indifferent to it. It is no more or less interesting to me than Presbyterianism or any other Christian religion.

      You have been reprimanded on this blog, by a jew, for associating your murderous fantasies and hate with your stated being Jewish. You were told that your speech was a discredit to your professed faith.

      I do not know what is in your heart and you do not have a clue about what is in mine. Your posts on this blog are rife with your hatred and indifference to slaughter and murder of your perceived enemies. Search as you may, you will not find a single sentence in over 5000 posts where I have expressed a slur on a person about them being Jewish. I have criticised religious beliefs as practiced, mainly because I find them silly and irrelevant and mostly wishful thinking, not because I hate them.

      Delete
    3. Nonsense Deuce...

      You single out Israel and Jews on a weekly basis to debase. You claim no bias? Bullshit.

      Now to take your other points...

      1. I am not consumed by racial hatred. I am simply pointing out that MY COUSINS, the Arabs are.

      2. You are a statist.... again complete nonsense... do you even know what the word means?

      3. "fringe fanatic that has fantasies of mass murder and slaughter against just about every middle eastern country except Israel." No not quite, but I do have a happiness when the haters that surround Israel that have been rejoicing in the streets every time a Jewish person is slaughtered are now RUNNING for cover now that those same guns are turned on themselves....

      4. As for the "blow back" to Israel? you are one stupid schmuck... I have been talking about the BLOW FORWARD at Israel and Jews for years. Israelis have been DEFENDING themselves against savages for a thousand years. I am all to aware of it, it is you that dismiss the danger of Iran, not I.

      5. I don’t know any serious Israelis that share your views.

      I doubt you know any serious Israelis at all.

      6. I look at Israel as a nation state, and Israelis as citizens. You are consumed with Jewishness. I am indifferent to it. It is no more or less interesting to me than Presbyterianism or any other Christian religion.

      Yes I am consumed with Jewishness, no one ever said it should be YOUR job. SO when you focus as many negative comments aimed at Jews and Israel one must query why you have such a chip on your shoulder. I know you will claim that you don't... but every Jew that has ever passed thru this blog has said the same thing to you. to your credit you loudly say how crazy we are....

      7. You have been reprimanded on this blog, by a jew, for associating your murderous fantasies and hate with your stated being Jewish. You were told that your speech was a discredit to your professed faith.

      Please post that....

      8. I do not know what is in your heart and you do not have a clue about what is in mine. Sure we do, we just read your blog posts and see your hatred towards Jews and Israel.

      9. Your posts on this blog are rife with your hatred and indifference to slaughter and murder of your perceived enemies.

      I have no love lost to those and their families that have actively aimed to cause genocide to me and mine. There is a time for love and there is a time to hate. Hating evil is good. I am not murdering or slaughtering anyone. But when those that have slaughtered and murdered Jews and Americans are they themselves slaughtered and murdered? I have no problem in being indifferent.


      10. Search as you may, you will not find a single sentence in over 5000 posts where I have expressed a slur on a person about them being Jewish.

      Keep protesting loudly.... You and Pat Buchanan are in good company... You are too smart to be honest about your hatred. One only has to read your blog and use a brain. You attack Jews, Israelis on a regular basis, you use codewords and buzzwords to describe Jews and israel (and it's leader)... as Bill Buckley said of pat.... I say of you.....

      Don't like my opinion? Look in the mirror and before you post another Jew trashing, Israel bashing post and maybe find that small black thing you might call a heart and be honest with yourself... You hate Israel, you hate Jews.

      Delete
  10. I think all you Romney supporters should "take a look at Johnson."

    :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. .

      The only thing certain about this year's election is that one set of Doofus will be happy while another set of Doofus will be sad. The other 3% of us will continue on as usual.

      .

      Delete
  11. I think that 3% number is a little low. I support Obama, but I doubt that I will be unhappy for long if Romney wins. The fact is, they really "aren't" all that different. Sure, Romney will pander to his base some, but I have a hunch that by the end of his second year some of his supporters (tea drinker-type) will be unhappier than I am.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. .

      Writes Newsweek’s Michael Tomasky:

      “He’s kind of lame, and he’s really ... annoying. He keeps saying these ... things, these incredibly off-key things. Then he apologizes immediately—with all the sincerity of a hostage. Or maybe he doesn’t: sometimes he whines about the subsequent attacks on him. But the one thing he never does? Man up, double down, take his lumps.”


      The problem is you can say the same thing about Obama.

      They are both dicks.

      .

      Delete
    2. .

      Merely, taking the 3% from the poll that was put up the other day

      The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows Mitt Romney attracting 49% of the vote, while President Obama earns support from 44%. Three percent (3%) prefer some other candidate, and four percent (4%) are undecided.

      .

      Delete
  12. (Reuters) - Grid failure left more than 300 million people without power in New Delhi and much of northern India for hours on Monday in the worst blackout for more than a decade, highlighting chronic infrastructure woes holding back Asia's third-largest economy.

    The lights in Delhi and seven states went out in the early hours, leaving the capital's workers sweltering overnight and then stranded at metro stations in the morning rush hour as trains were cancelled.

    Electricity supplies were restored to Delhi and much of Uttar Pradesh, a state with more people than Brazil, by midday (0630 GMT). But the states of Rajasthan, Punjab and Jammu and Kashmir were still without full power in the early evening . . . . . .


    The government's top economic planning adviser, Montek Singh Ahluwalia, said the blackout may have been caused by a mix of coal shortages and other problems on the grid.

    "I've no doubt that this is the area that we need to show improved performance in, and we also need show a clear sense of what we are doing to prevent it," Ahluwalia told Reuters at his office, where power had been restored some hours earlier.


    300 Million (roughly the pop. of the U.S.) without power

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Keep in mind that India gets a lot of its coal from Indonesia (Indonesia Exports an amount of coal roughly equivalent to 1/3 of the Total U.S. Consumption.)

      Why is this important? Because in 2014 Indonesia Quits Exporting Coal. They have declared it a "Strategic Resource," and have decided that they would be better off keeping it than exporting it to China, and India.

      Delete
    2. You are going to see more of this.

      Delete
    3. .

      We share the same problem.

      In order to accomodate mandated or proposed increases in renewable energy our current grid is going to have to be substantially updated.

      .

      Delete
    4. Decentralized is the word that best describes "substantially updated"

      Delete
    5. Maybe not as much as you think, Q. The results so far have been much better than many supposed.

      Keep in mind that when a, for example, Nuclear Plant goes off-line (dropping a couple of Gigawatts off the Grid) it is, many times, unexpected. Or, when those Tx Coal and Gas Plants froze up last winter noone saw it coming.

      However, it's not all that hard to predict a "sunny" or "windy" day a couple of days in advance.

      BTW, Tx is, as we write, building large transmission lines from the Windy West to the Populated East.

      Delete
    6. .

      A euphemism rat?

      Called it what you like, changed, modified, decentralized, transformed, mutated, transmogrified, whatever; it will still have to substantially updated which was I believe the point of Rufus' post on India.

      .

      Delete
    7. But, Rat is also right. It's bonkers for Ms to import coal-generated power from Tx in July (or Dec. for that matter - the wind blows like crazy here in the fall, winter, and spring.)

      Delete
    8. China is playing the "political/diplomatic" game hard to get permission to ship coal from a Western Canada port (Kitimat is where they're really concentrating.)

      When they're successful the price of Powder River Basin Coal (40% of U.S. supply) will shoot up, dramatically.

      BTW, China just bought Two of the largest Oil Producers in the North Sea.

      Delete
    9. .

      I wasn't arguing the decentralized as much as the diversion. Anything they do with the grid whether for conventional or renewable energy is going to cost money and will require political will.

      As for 'decentralized', it sounds pretty easy; however, I suspect it will prove more difficult than advocates preach. It requires dedicated land and a lot of resources. It's 'relatively' easy to put up a solar farm in the Mohave where there is a lot of unpopulated land. Not so much in populated areas. Don't know much about Ms. but you still have the same problems with land. Putting up wind generation has a bigger initial cost and taxes resources more than putting up natural gas generation.

      .

      Delete
    10. In any power generation scheme, including solar, the cost of land pretty quickly becomes a factoid of little interest. (for ex: A Ten Megawatt Solar Farm should cost somewhere in the range of Twenty to Twenty-Five Million - could be more, now; should be less in the near future - while the Marginal, Ms cropland on which is sited would probably have a market value of around two hundred fifty to 300 thousand.

      Of course, if that was land in Tx, NM, Az, Nv, Ut, and many other places that would more than likely be less by, at least, a factor of ten.

      As for nat gas, well, here's the interesting thing: The more Solar/Wind, etc, that you use the cheaper it becomes (ref. the 90 to 95% drop in cost of Solar Panels in just a half a decade,) but the more Nat Gas, and Coal you use the more Expensive it becomes.

      btw, nat gas is now Up 74% from its low just a couple of months ago.

      Delete
  13. Romney, a liberal Republican from Boston is sure to disappoint the Conservative Right.

    He signed an assault weapons ban and instigated RomneyCare, which is the basis of ObamaCare.
    He feels that the Federals have every right and authority to impose individual mandates, he said that to Fred Thomson in a debate back in '08.

    He will not cut the Federal budget, not if he increases the standing Army by 100,000 as he said he wanted to do.

    If you are going to vote for a liberal, then vote for the authentic one, Mr Obama.
    If you want to support the Conservative cause, 2nd Amendment Rights and personal liberty, than vote for Gary Johnson.

    If you want to be a "Me Too" Republican, then Mr Romney is the way to vote.

    In any State but Ohio, maybe Florida, it doesn't really make a difference, in 2012.
    It may, though, make a big difference in 2016 as to the type of candidate the GOP fields.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. As well as the type candidates that run in 2014.

      Just the other day b, the big bopper, was complaining that Ron Paul's signature policy initiative of auditing the Federal Reserve was voted down by the Senate, after passing the House.

      Today he claims that auditing the Fed amounts to supporting racism.

      Liberals, always playing those race, ethnic and sectarian cards.

      Delete
    3. .

      However, if you listen to Bob, its necessary to vote for Romney in case a new SCOTUS judge is nominated during the next presidential term.

      Well,

      Scalia says Guns Can be Regulated

      :)

      .

      Delete
    4. Scalia is just trying to stir the folks up to vote good sense and get Romney in there. Everyone but you could see that.

      b

      Delete
  14. History is being made in the North Sea, as China makes its first significant investment in its oilfields through two major deals.

    State-controlled energy giant CNOOC last Monday unveiled a $15.1bn (£9.7bn) bid for Canada’s Nexen, the second biggest oil producer in the North Sea. If successful, the takeover will be China’s largest ever foreign investment.

    That same day, Chinese refiner Sinopec said it would pay $1.5bn for a 49pc stake in the UK unit of Canada’s Talisman Energy, also a top 10 oil and gas producer in the North Sea.

    Given the sums, no surprise that the cry from oil industry analyst Malcolm Graham-Wood at VSA Capital was: “The Chinese are coming with their wall of money!”

    Still, money is not the only consideration in purchases of this kind, which will have to be signed off by the UK Government, among other authorities around the world. Eyebrows inevitably raise at the political niceties of having North Sea energy reserves in the hands of Beijing.

    Consultancy Wood Mackenzie calculates that together the two Chinese firms will directly own 13pc of all UK oil production if both deals go through.



    Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-chinese-are-making-an-offer-for-north-sea-oil-that-britain-cannot-refuse-2012-7#ixzz228MKR4wW


    What I find interesting about this is that the U.K. is, already, a Net Oil Importer.

    ReplyDelete
  15. They're Hanging Banksters in Iran!

    No Wonder Romney Wants to Invade.

    Death Terms in Bank Fraud


    Time to "rethink Iran?"

    ReplyDelete
  16. They're "Hanging" Banksters in Iran!!

    No Wonder Romney Wants to Invade.

    Death Sentences for Massive Bank Fraud

    ReplyDelete
  17. Chinese Imports of Iranian Oil? UP about 20% YOY.

    Why, what did you expect?

    :)

    If you're Chinese it's like having a "shooting fish in a barrel" license, nowadays.

    Sanctions? Really?

    ReplyDelete
  18. QuirkMon Jul 30, 01:29:00 PM EDT
    .

    Recent polls in Israel indicate 75% of Israeli Jews favor an international attack on Iran's nuclear facilities. Polls here indicate about 68% of American Jews favor an Israeli attack on Israel while only 24% of the American public favors it.

    Yet, when asked whether Israel should attack Iran if the US isn't involved, the numbers in Israel drop to 45% approval and 40% against.

    With all the polls there are a significant number of Jews that are opposed to an attack on Iran. Are you saying all of those Jews, American and Israeli, who oppose an attack on Iran hate Jews and Israel?


    No I am not saying that....

    Nor have I every said anything remotely like that....

    But nice try putting words in my mouth...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. .

      Putting words in your mouth?

      I merely assumed consistancy on your part.

      Here's your earlier post.

      wioMon Jul 30, 12:56:00 PM EDT

      [Deuce] In the second he is showing that he is a political panderer and another draft dodging boomer ready to pervert the definition of defense to the lower tiers of sound judgement.


      [WiO] wow tell us how you really feel.....

      deuce your hatred of Jews and Israel is blinding you.




      In Deuce's initial post he starts out with a reference to the article about Johnson and his view that Romney is not liked by conservatives. He then describes Romney's performance on his 'world tour' in less than glowing terms. And finally, he attacks Romney's position on Iran.

      You, in turn, imply his criticism of Romney and his position on Iran is based on his hating Israel and the Jews, something you now tell me does not apply to people including Jews that hold the same position. First, I don't see the connection between Deuce's position on Iran and his, in your words, "hatred of Jews and Israel". Second, I don't see why your condemnation applies to him and not to all the others that hold the same views. But then, hey, I don't have a copy of that compendium of yours of codewords and buuzzwords.

      I personally think Deuce is only partially right. While there is no doubt that Romney's current trip is politically motivated, it is also true that he is a friend of Bibi and that he may actually believe what he is saying about Iran. He has proved more than once that he is not a critical thinker. And while I disagree with Romney's position that it is absolutely unacceptable that Iran even be allowed to have the 'capability' to develop a nuclear weapon, I agree with his view as stated by a top advisor that Israel has the right, if treatened, to attack Iran unilaterally. Note the word unilaterally.

      The last is not my business although the effects could be widely felt. However, Israel as a sovereign nation can do what it wants as long as they are willing to accept the inevitable consequences.

      .

      Delete
    2. He has proved more than once that he is not a critical thinker.

      He may have proved it but you have proven you are not a critical thinker either, as all one needs to do is take the small logical step of asserting that Iran is not containable and you are at Romney's outlook, which is also Obama's outlook, though he will probably not do anything about it. It is as rational to conclude that Iran is not containable as it is to conclude that they are containable, and perhaps more so, given their public statements, and their martyr belief system. ("we are muslims, not Iranians, and if this country must burn for islam to triumph in the world, let it burn" -Khomenai) It is a deadlocked argument, not to be decided until after the fact, if at all.

      You think too highly of your own critical thinking.

      b

      Delete
    3. .

      He may have proved it but you have proven you are not a critical thinker either, as all one needs to do is take the small logical step of asserting that Iran is not containable and you are at Romney's outlook, which is also Obama's outlook,...

      Once again you drift.

      The issue you raise here was not raised in my original post, and while it is important, you mis-state positions as well as the reason for my arguments on the subject. What I stated is that we cannot deny Iran the capability of enriching nuclear fuel, but also, that if Israel feels an existential threat from them enriching fuel, then they have a right to, unilaterally, to strike out at Iran in their own defense (as long as they are willing to accept the consequences).

      First, what I argued above. Romney, like BN and the current government in Israel argue that not only can Iran not be allowed to have the bomb, but that they also cannot have the 'capability' of making a bomb, in other words, that they cannot have enrichment facilities and capabilities. While the argument may make sense to Israel, Romney, and you, it also ignores the fact that not only are you denying Iran the ability to make a bomb, you are also taking away Iran's ability to make fuel for their nuclear reactors, forcing them to have to purchase fuel from some third party. I argue that is ridiculous. Iran is a sovereign country. You cannot deny them the right to produce fuel for their nuclear plants. They are not currently at war with us and we have no right to be making that kind of demand. It's a basic issue of sovereignty.

      The issue gets more complicated when you start talking about Iran's capability of enriching fuel to the level that can be used to produce a bomb. You bring up this issue (I think, often hard to tell from your rambling prose) but you mis-state positions all around.

      You state that Obama thinks that Iran is not containable, whatever that means. As phrased, it is rather vague. I am going to assume you mean that if Iran gets the bomb they will use it. Definitely, Israel's position. Romney seems to support Israel in this. However, Obama has never said it. His public statements center on Iran's treaty obligations which preclude them making a bomb. He talks more about the 'threat' Iran would pose with a bomb and it destabilizing the region.

      You argue that all I have to do is take the ‘small logical step’ in believing what you, Romney, and Israel think and I would be in agreement. Good lord, talk about the painfully obvious. The problem is, of course, that I don’t agree with you. And that disagreement doesn’t mean that I am anti-Israel, anti-Mormon, nor anti-Swedish non-farmer. I do not agree the leadership in Iran is non-rational. I do not think they would use a bomb if they had one given the sure and devastating consequences that would fall upon themselves and their country.

      Despite WiO’s assertion that people who disagree with his position on Iran are comfortable with Iran getting the bomb, I am not, and, I would guess, neither are most of the people who argue against US military intervention in this matter. As Obama has stated, if Iran gets the bomb it could have a destabilizing effect in the region with more nations seeking to get the bomb to assure their own defense. However, I believe that the US is doing all it legally can at present; and the chances of me taking that “small logical step” on this subject are nil. Small? Logical? Nitwit. It's the crux of the argument.

      Iran having the bomb makes the ME a more dangerous place, though how it can get more dangerous than at present is a matter for dispute. However, we still must proceed under international law. And frankly, all Iran has to do is withdraw from the NNPT and we would have no legal basis for our actions at all.
      What we do have (and Israel shares) is the capability to blow them back to the stone age if they ever develop a bomb and use it against our interests.

      .

      Delete
    4. .

      It is a deadlocked argument, not to be decided until after the fact, if at all.

      And the only solution I have heard you utter in the past is military intervention as preventative. Hasn't the last decade taught you anything?

      .

      Delete
  19. Some of you morons might actually vote for a Danish/Norwegian/Russian? Without any Swedish?

    You don't know what you are doing.

    b

    ReplyDelete
  20. I love the fact that deuce thinks I am horrible that I am indifferent to slaughter of my "perceived" enemies.

    Now that is a cool blog post...

    Did Americans not cheer the death of Bin Laden?

    Is not "indifference" the actual foreign policy of the USA as we speak?

    Does anyone remember the indifference to the Iranians that were being slaughtered in the streets 3 years ago? Or the Syrians for that matter...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. .

      There is a big difference between the indifference born of being de-sensitized by the daily death toll and knowing you are unable to do anything about it and, on the other hand, taking joy in the slaughter and viewing it as entertainment.

      There is a big difference between bin Laden and small children.

      Apparently, there is a big difference between you and me.

      .

      Delete
  21. This from today's press...

    TUNIS, Tunisia (AP) -- Thousands of hardcore Muslims chant against Jews. Youths rampage through cities at night in protest of "blasphemous" art. A sit-in by religious students degenerates into fist fights and the desecration of Tunisia's flag.


    Now do you hold it against me when they have a crop failure and they starve?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Is Gary Johnson just like the rest of the candidates? http://ow.ly/cwZYD

    ReplyDelete
  23. Germany's Free Democrats, the junior partner in Chancellor Angela Merkel's coalition government, criticized Mr. Geithner's contributions in comments to German newspaper Handelsblatt.

    "If you look at the awful state of the budget and the difficult economic situation in the United States, it's hard to avoid the impression that the debt crisis in Europe is being used as a welcome diversionary tactic," parliamentary party bloc leader Rainer Brüderle told the newspaper, saying the U.S. has a history of fighting crises with looser monetary policy.

    "Germany comes from a different historical experience, for monetary stability and fighting inflation," he said. "The United States should understand and respect that."

    ReplyDelete
  24. Mohammed Numer, who lived in an adjoining area, one of the very few families to stay on there, wondered what will be left. "Salaheddine is the worst, but other places are getting affected as well.

    We have so little food because the shops are shut, there is no electricity and no water and no medicine. The fighters can live... among all that, but what about the rest of us?

    Who will look after us? We just wish all this will end," he said.

    ReplyDelete
  25. One of the ironies here is that some of the lawyers opposing big proposed American infrastructure projects on environmental or eminent domain or racial discrimination grounds were trained by Warren and her colleagues at Harvard Law School and at other similar institutions like the University of Chicago, where Barack Obama taught after attending Harvard Law School. Such opposition, sometimes spurious, can succeed in delaying and raising the cost of private development projects even if the opponents ultimately do not prevail in court or in the political process.

    Free-market fans tend to like the eminent domain suits and dislike the ones about snail darters, and it is a distinction worth maintaining.

    But if the choice is between having people like Elizabeth Warren and Barack Obama in law schools training students to block these infrastructure projects, or having them in the government taxing the rest of us to pay for more of them, I’m glad to live in America rather than Communist China. Here in America, at least, the people may not get to elect the law professors, but we sure do get to vote on the president and senators.


    Communist China

    ReplyDelete
  26. On this day in 1945, the U.S.S. Indianapolis, after delivering the atomic bomb to Tinian Island, was torpedoed by a Japanese sub, and sank quickly, stranding 900 men in shark-infested water. The story (with an incorrect date) would be used to dramatic effect in the 1975 movie Jaws.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Wall Street is perceiving a Romney win -

    http://www.cnbc.com/id/48400076

    and you will get and deserve more of this if Obama wins again -

    Federal Court finds Obama appointees interfered with New Black Panther prosecution
    July 30, 2012



    A federal court in Washington, DC, held last week that political appointees appointed by President Obama did interfere with the Department of Justice’s prosecution of the New Black Panther Party.

    The ruling came as part of a motion by the conservative legal watch dog group Judicial Watch, who had sued the DOJ in federal court to enforce a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for documents pertaining to the the New Black Panthers case. Judicial Watch had secured many previously unavailable documents through their suit against DOJ and were now suing for attorneys’ fees.

    Obama’s DOJ had claimed Judicial Watch was not entitled to attorney’s fees since “none of the records produced in this litigation evidenced any political interference whatsoever in” how the DOJ handled the New Black Panther Party case. But United States District Court Judge Reggie Walton disagreed. Citing a “series of emails” between Obama political appointees and career Justice lawyers, Walton writes:

    The documents reveal that political appointees within DOJ were conferring about the status and resolution of the New Black Panther Party case in the days preceding the DOJ’s dismissal of claims in that case, which would appear to contradict Assistant Attorney General Perez’s testimony that political leadership was not involved in that decision. Surely the public has an interest in documents that cast doubt on the accuracy of government officials’ representations regarding the possible politicization of agency decision-making.

    In sum, the Court concludes that three of the four fee entitlement factors weigh in favor of awarding fees to Judicial Watch. Therefore, Judicial Watch is both eligible and entitled to fees and costs, and the Court must now consider the reasonableness of Judicial Watch’s requested award.

    The New Black Panthers case stems from a Election Day 2008 incident where two members of the New Black Panther Party were filmed outside a polling place intimidating voters and poll watchers by brandishing a billy club. Justice Department lawyers investigated the case, filed charges, and when the Panthers failed to respond, a federal court in Philadelphia entered a “default” against all the Panthers defendants. But after Obama was sworn in, the Justice Department reversed course, dismissed charges against three of the defendants, and let the fourth off with a narrowly tailored restraining order.


    b

    ReplyDelete
  28. quirk here is the sentence;

    In the second he is showing that he is a political panderer and another draft dodging boomer ready to pervert the definition of defense to the lower tiers of sound judgement.

    the codeword/buzzword connect is this...

    to WHOM is he pandering? and why is he PERVERTING the definition of defense.

    these tie into the canard that Israel is to be bowed to, pandered to and is in fact in charge of US foreign policy.

    the other term "perverting" is another historic canard that is put upon the Jews and their supporters.

    now you could say I am paranoid, but if you were to look at the last 10 blogs that deuce has mentioned israel, jewish people and or donors you will see a pattern of slurs that he applies to Jews and Israel.

    Deuce says that Jews and Israel carry no more water than any other nation or group but as you know the topics of Israel and Jewish actions seem to be never far from the surface.

    if it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, smells like a ducK? it's a duck

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Obama never panders to anyone. We all know that. Obama is above pandering. I can't think of him ever pandering to any. body at all. Not to the labor unions, not to the greenies, not to queers, not to the Hispanics, not to the muzzies, or anyone else I can think of. Hell, he ain't never pandered to no one, that's why I'm thinking of voting for him, cause that boy ain't no usual politician. He's above it all.

      b

      Delete
    2. .

      The 'boy', obviously a racial buzzword.

      .

      Delete
  29. Now for our perceived enemy slaughter of the day...


    BEIRUT, Lebanon — As the uprising against President Bashar al-Assad’s government grinds on with no resolution in sight, Syrians involved in the armed struggle say it is becoming more radicalized: homegrown Muslim jihadists, as well as small groups of fighters from Al Qaeda, are taking a more prominent role and demanding a say in running the resistance.
    Multimedia

    The past few months have witnessed the emergence of larger, more organized and better armed Syrian militant organizations pushing an agenda based on jihad, the concept that they have a divine mandate to fight. Even less-zealous resistance groups are adopting a pronounced Islamic aura because it attracts more financing.


    Our Mr Assad (and his dead father) have been supporting the most murderous palestinians in the world for over 40 years. They have honors murderers of Jewish babies as national heroes. Now the Palestinians have switched sides and are now FIGHTING against the ASSAD's...

    I gots to admit... this is funny.....

    Several years ago, Fatah el Islam (a radical palestinian group in lebanon) had it's ENTIRE refugee camp demolished by the Lebanese (they were supported by syria) now? these same folks are the new rebels!

    Yep I am indifferent to my enemies slaughtering one another, every bullet, every rocket, every mortar they shoot at each other is one less they can shoot at Jews....

    May the refugees FLEE, may those who stay to fight? DIE....

    ReplyDelete
  30. Dinesh D'Souza is a good writer. A Christian, he works with a group of fellow minded on most of the books the bear his name, who do much of the research, then he puts it together, they criticize, and finally out comes the product, a group effort.

    I have several of his books - a recommended read.

    b

    ReplyDelete
  31. .

    We hear that more than 4.4 million private sector jobs have been added in 28 straight months of job growth, and that the president is taking "aggressive steps to put Americans back to work." The happy talk invites a slogan from the 1984 election: "Where's the beef?"

    Twenty-eight months of job growth?

    Another perspective on our current situation.

    .

    ReplyDelete
  32. The Democrats of our befuddled, beloved and amusing Rufus -

    And while no one was up in arms about the fact that a wealthy man had investments in countries outside of America, it not only exposed the hypocrisy of the accusers when it turned out that virtually every Democratic senator and congressman had similar investments, but it raised questions about how so many supposed “public servants” had amassed the kind of money usually associated with titans of industry.

    So many reasons why Obama is going to get slaughtered --

    http://frontpagemag.com/2012/evan-sayet/the-signs-of-a-romney-victory/?utm_source=FrontPage+Magazine&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=6a0ca71611-Mailchimp_FrontPageMag

    it's hard to count them all!

    b

    ReplyDelete
  33. Cnooc's acquisition of Nexen would mark an uptick in Chinese involvement in North America, where China has been relegated mostly to serving as a financial backer to U.S. and international oil companies. Nexen holds sizable assets in the Gulf of Mexico, and a successful acquisition would further open the door for Chinese companies to operate in North American oil and gas fields alongside established energy giants like Exxon Mobil.

    Analysts have said that acquiring U.S. assets by way of a third country is a less politically dicey way to make U.S. inroads than buying American companies outright.

    "Gaining an operating role in the United States via the acquisition of a Canadian company is a smart approach," said Erica Downs, who analyzes Chinese energy policy at the Brookings Institution in Washington. "If Cnooc was attempting to buy an American energy company for $15 billion, I would be much less optimistic about the transaction getting a green light."

    ReplyDelete
  34. The mysterious death and shooting of Vincent van Gogh, complete with evidence of a sort, and speculation:

    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57481909/the-life-and-death-of-vincent-van-gogh/?tag=contentMain;contentBody

    Article, which is good, with slide show of paintings too, argues he was shot, accidentally or on purpose, by some rich kids with a pistol. Van Gogh was not known to have any weapons. The gun was never found.

    b

    ReplyDelete
  35. The plan, circulated by Colonel Qassim Saadeddine, follows last week's meeting of the main external opposition group, the Syrian National Council, to determine plans for a transitional government.

    ...

    Col Saadeddine has denounced the leadership of Col Riad al-Asaad, who is not related to the president but seen by many as the FSA's leader. Analysts and Western diplomats have said the opposition based outside the country is likely to become increasingly irrelevant in the coming months, as more developed power structures emerge.

    The first step on the FSA's roadmap is establishing a higher defence council which would be drawn from the country's military councils and senior defectors. That body would be responsible for creating a presidential council and a six member executive council.

    ReplyDelete
  36. CRUZ HAS SARAH --



    Despite being outspent more than 3-to-1, having never run for office and being tasked with penetrating the Lone Star State’s 20 media markets with virtually zero name recognition, Cruz is well positioned to upset Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst Tuesday. It’s a scenario that would send shockwaves through the political elite and embolden the thousands of conservatives from across the country who have descended here to help push him over the finish line.

    It’s one thing for a tea party candidate to swipe away an individual House seat or dominate a party convention in a small state, but a statewide win in supersize Texas would be a new high-water mark.

    “Dewhurst had every advantage you can have. What Cruz has done to this point was once unthinkable and is now remarkable. He will be an overnight star if he wins, which he is favored to do right now,” said Austin-based GOP consultant Matt Mackowiak, a Cruz supporter and former press secretary to retiring Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison.

    The two most recent public polls have shown Cruz ahead. And a Dewhurst ally with knowledge of an internal survey separate from the campaigns told POLITICO his preferred candidate was trailing by high single digits heading into the weekend.

    “I think [Dewhurst’s] done,” said the Republican who shared the information in exchange for anonymity. “It’s Nebraska, Indiana. You just smell it. He’s toast.”


    b

    ReplyDelete
  37. Corn prices surged to a new record high Monday, as the worst drought in more than 50 years continues to plague more than half the country.

    Almost 90% of the United States' corn crops are in drought ravaged areas, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and nearly 40% are situated in the hardest hit spots.

    Corn prices have soared more than 50% during the past six weeks as the crops continue to shrivel in relentless dry heat throughout the Midwest. They jumped another 3% Monday to a record high of $8.17 per bushel on the Chicago Board of Trade.


    whooeeee.....


    b

    ReplyDelete