Anyone running for the presidency of the United States has to accept the rules and traditions of US law and the procedures established for change and transition of power. It is the culture and it is mandatory. It is the law. It is a sensible law, necessary for a civil society.
Any military man knows that a salute is a recognition of the uniform and the office. It is mandatory and not reserved for an officer that you like. It is part of military culture and vital to discipline and cohesion.
Barack Hussein Obama, by association, deed and mouth has demonstrated contempt for America. He does not have African slave roots, yet has taken up with the most radical of the left-wing black agenda. That is fine for the ghetto and race-hustling industry, but not for the real America. Yes, there is a real America as there is right and wrong, good and evil, patriotic and unpatriotic.
An educated fool is still a fool, and slick smooth cool Barack, with the thinest and weakest of real American roots, talks the jive of the radical left when he states that George Bush is "John McCain's president." The American people should make sure that Barack Hussein Obama is never president of anything.
In case you need to be reminded about what is a real American:
Guy on the radio a few minutes ago made a good case that McCain may pick Romney, kind of by a process of elimination.ReplyDelete
Be fine with me, if he can bring Michigan along.
My electoral map has McCain 9 away from 270, and Michigan would do it.
An educated fool is still a fool.ReplyDelete
A fool is still a fool, be he e'er so holy.
If a fool looks into a book, don't expect a wise man to back out.
A fool sees not the same tree that a wise man sees.
A fool and her money are soon courted.
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.
Only a fool tests the depth of the water with both feet.
The Constitution gives every American the inalienable right to make a damn fool of himself.
I don't know how many Hollywood elites, actors, singers I've heard say 'if X gets elected I'm leaving'. Very few ever do. Susan Saranwrap comes to mind. As one who hasn't left, far as I know.ReplyDelete
It's unbecoming to say the least for a candidate to say X is somebody else's President, and by implication, not mine.
It's also foolish, and tears at the fabric of the body politic.
It's also real smart ass.
One virtue of the Republicans is, they make a better loyal opposition.
On the theme of fools--and flakes--ReplyDelete
A flake is a "fool with energy", as the Russian proverb puts it. ("A fool is a terrible thing to have around, but a fool with energy is a nightmare".)
It's time to throw my hat in the ring as regards predicting the election results. So here it is: Barack Obama will be defeated. Seriously and convincingly defeated. Not due to racism, not due to the forces of reaction, not even due to Karl Rove sending out mind rays over the national cable system. He will lose for one reason above all, one that has been overlooked in any analysis that I've yet seen. Barack Obama will lose because he is a flake.
The Odd Choices In Barack Obama's Career
MCCAIN PULLS AHEAD 'BY 5 POINTS'ReplyDelete
The more exposure Obama gets, the more the American people see him as a black candidate with parochial black interests. Listen to c-span at the huge increase in black callers and blackness is clearly their issue. If Obama goes into polls with less than a six point lead, he will likely lose. That was his life choice. He tried to hide it and then run away from it and he failed.ReplyDelete
Ironically, if Obama had seventy percent black support, he would be ahead. The 95% support gives away the game.
His wife can barely hide her anger when she gets comfortable with an audience, although lately they have her under house arrest.
As a comparison, in 2000 Grover Norquist did a study on Catholic voting numbers for presidential candidates. The findings were:ReplyDelete
In 1960 John F. Kennedy won 83 percent of the Catholic vote while defeating Richard Nixon by fewer than 115,000 votes.
NOTE ( Personal observation: Had polls shown that the Catholic vote was 95%, I doubt Kennedy would have won. The increase in Catholic support would have turned off non-Catholic in numbers greater than the incremental number of Catholic supporters.)
Lyndon Johnson won 79 percent of Catholic voters in his landslide over Barry Goldwater.
In 1968 Hubert Humphrey received 57 percent of the Catholic vote yet losing to Richard Nixon.
Nixon in 1972 won with 61 percent of the Catholic vote.
Carter got 57 percent of Catholics when he was elected with only 51 percent of the overall vote.
Ronald Reagan carried 50 percent of the Catholic vote in 1980 while winning 51 percent of the total vote.
In 1984 he was re-elected with 54 percent of the Catholic vote and 59 percent of the national vote.
Clinton won 41 percent of Catholics in 1992 and 53 percent of the Catholic in 1996 vote while winning only 49 percent of the total vote.
I am sure McCain is terrified about this:ReplyDelete
Obama: McCain 'doesn't know what he's up against'
By BETH FOUHY
RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) - A combative Barack Obama said Tuesday that Republican John McCain "doesn't know what he's up against" in this election and challenged his rival to stop questioning his character and patriotism.
Obama, campaigning in a state where he hopes to become the first Democratic presidential candidate to win in more than three decades, implored his supporters to fight for the presidency.
"Our job in this election is not just 'win,' although I'm a big believer in winning," Obama said during the rally. "I don't intend to lose this election. John McCain doesn't know what he's up against."
"He can talk all he wants about Britney (Spears) and Paris (Hilton), but I don't have time for that mess," Obama said.
His remarks carried forward a theme of feisty campaigning he debuted earlier in the day.
His wife can barely hide her anger when she gets comfortable with an audience, although lately they have her under house arrest.ReplyDelete
She speaks on the first night of the convention. If she goes off teleprompter we'll get Sistah Soljah.
There are 31,000 foreign nationals serving in all the service branches. Each one of them is above Obama's pay grade in patriotism.ReplyDelete
Looks like my "Obamessiah" is in a world of trouble. Oh well. I don't like McCrazy; but, I guess it'll be worth it just to see the Lefties batshit crazy for four more years.ReplyDelete
Pass the popcorn.
Can we count on your vote? Please. I'll send you popcorn.ReplyDelete
No, Deuce. I despise McCain. He's been ankle-biting Bush for Eight Long Years. I could never vote for the man.ReplyDelete
He, also, carries the Director of Communications of Dutko Worldwide (Saudi Arabia's lobbying firm) around on his campaign plane. I'm afraid he'll be a disaster in what I think is, by far, the most important issue for the next decade, energy.
This is just one of those elections (the only one in history, for me) where both candidates look horrible; and, I really don't give a Good Goddamn which one wins.
Prepping Denver for the AlGore Express.ReplyDelete
At the RCP map, bob, just click the no toss-ups, bob.
It is now McCain in a squeaker.
But Maverick is peaking early, maybe to early.
The Dems have yet to go negative, which they will, shortly.
Regardless of who the Democratic nominee turns out to be.
The Key State is Missouri. There is no way in the world that McNutz can win without it. If he looks okay, there, then it's on to Ohio, which he, also, has to win.ReplyDelete
You see Missouri as key, rufus, while I see it in Colorado.ReplyDelete
Where the Hispanics will under poll, but have a higher than expected turnout, this year.
Community organizers unite!
Plus Colorado is trending Blue, regardless, and the Dems have an active registration drive going there.
Mav's only up .5% @ RCP, and that may be pretty inflated.
This comment has been removed by the author.ReplyDelete
Virginia, almost ditto for Colorado, a .6% spread.ReplyDelete
Performance on the ground, on Game Day, who's better organized to deliver the voters to the polls.
That's what saved Charlie Wilson's ass. Getting 95% of the patriotic Blacks, in his Texas district, to vote for a Soviet free Afghanistan.
I think I could, maybe, put together a scenario where McBullshit loses either Ohio, or Colorado, Rat (although, I have to admit, it would take some stretching;) However, I can't come up with any scenario, whatsoever, where Obama wins Mo, and McSillyshit wins the Presidency.ReplyDelete
We;;, Missouri, there'll be a Judge that orders the polling places to remain open, in St Louis.ReplyDelete
Again, it hinges on turnout.
I do not see the GOP machine that put Bush in office, working the streets. Perhaps that is just a local abberation, but the reports from around the country seem to mirror my experiences.
Team Maverick has not generated the footsoldiers that Team43 put to such good use.
Or so it appears, at any rate.
Someone will have to explain to me how Obama winsReplyDelete
I am off the reservation on the formal adopted "Obama is a Marxist" theme.ReplyDelete
Wretchard has published numerous thoughtful commentaries re "empty suit versus true believer" generating much comment. I think his latest position is "true believer."
I am more inclined to the "empty suit" version - or consummate politician. It is just too hard for me to reconcile his alleged intelligence with a true buy-in of grandstanders like Rev Wright.
The anger from his true Left backers is very real, but being managed since that is what Democrats do to get elected (there's a lesson there whether it's more for the Dems or Repubs can be debated.)
My opinion - as of 7:00 AM today - is that Obama's element is politics. And I am OK with that. McCain is my selection in 2008 but I wouldn't go looking for the nearest exit if Obama evolved into an honest conservative.
Obama's ideological background is a matter of public (and private :) record. His allegiance to it is not. My opposition to his candidacy is based on his Team and the platform, both of which worry me to no end - the piss poor marketing judgment too closely suggestive of bad science fiction, some of the pie-in-the-sky concepts like "economic justice" for all.
Hard to imagine, isn't it, that there is a substantive reason why the carefully crafted message is so poorly received by such a fixed percentage of the voting population who's looking for a leader not a global therapist.
But Obama the Marxist????????? Level of concern - medium.
Obama's Backers (Democratic Party and financial support)??????????? Level of Concern - extremely high.
This issue with Georgia and NATO is a brain fuck. History providing clear direction, (a little too clear it seems to me) but the position being crafted by Rat - is it valid in the post modern world? Somebody get back to me when you work it out. I'm going to follow the money.
Somebody posted somewhere there is no possible logical means we can make any global entity like U.S. - in either sense of the word. I believe this to be a true statement, which implies two things - (1) negotiation as a tool of conflict resolution will remain marginal not to mention a bit embarassing, and (2) strong defensive military capabilities required for the next century.
A popular anti-ethanol politician failed to beat an unknown pro-ethanol candidate for the Republican Gubernatorial Nomination in Mo the other day, Rat.ReplyDelete
McCain's anti-ethanol message won't resonate in Mo, I'm afraid. Without solid support from all those corn/bean farmers it feels "iffy" to me.
Obama cannot win without Pennsylvania.ReplyDelete
Barack Obama will lose because he is a flake.ReplyDelete
Kiss of Death. Pure and simple. Strip a public figure of gravitas and you're done.
The sad exception to the rule being Al Gore.
On a tangential subject, I am hearing more of the theme that we get the government we deserve. The microscope is focusing in both directions.
That's correct, Deuce. At the end of the day Pennsylvania always goes to the Dem, and Missouri to the Republican. It's been getting closer, and closer in Mo, though. A good Republican incumbent got beat in 04'.ReplyDelete
Personally, I Expect Mo to go for McCain; but, if they didn't it Would be the End of the Line for the Crazy one.
Pennsylvanians serve in the US military.ReplyDelete
WW II, - 1.3 million
Korea - 300,000
Viet Nam - 400,000
Gulf Wars - 50,000
Approximately 10% (1.2 million) of the state's population are military veterans. McCain should squeeze that apple dry.
In PA Obama has the Governor's machine and, at this point is up by 6.4%.ReplyDelete
A possible flipper, to McCain, but the Dems have registered 250,000 or so new voters, since 2006.
Depends so much upon Maverick's choice, for VP.
Ridge or Romney?
Each come with assets and liabilities, to be sure.
I'm a military veteran, I've worked on fund raisers for a military charity that McCain is/was a Board member of and McCain is scum amongst men.ReplyDelete
As a supporter of veterans and their families, for other than his own personal self-interest.
I'd not vote for him to be a street sweeper nor dog catcher.
But his story sells well to the uninformed.
PA is also hard core blue collar. They don't particularly like rich boys, sons of the wealthy or academic elites.ReplyDelete
A large part of PA is shot and beer country. There are 900,000 deer hunters in PA.
Pennsylvania boys recognized a weinie in GWB. McCain can do a lot better.
It is binary Rat. Obama or McCain.ReplyDelete
Obama is not a RadicalReplyDelete
Last night on one of the talking head shows Dick Morris casually stated that Obama is not a radical.
The Radical or the Devil?
We Got A Waiver
What to do? The economically obvious—though perhaps politically difficult—first step would be to eliminate our subsidies for domestic biofuel production and to eliminate our tariff on imported ethanol. Both of these policies provide inefficient incentives to divert corn into fuel, thus raising food prices.
A politically simpler step would be to give the EPA a helping hand in considering waiver requests for loosening the existing mandate.
Oh no, amigo.ReplyDelete
Voting FOR them only encourages them. I'm more inclined to view it as wi"o" does, Obama's an empty suit, that'll be filled by his Team.
Maverick is truly dangerous, to the future of the Republic.
He is neither honest or trustworthy, but most of all, he's mentally unstable. Due to both the torture endured and his age.
The mental stability of Obama is not in question, it's the manipulative manner of his mind that some find objectionable.
I'll vote neither for nor against, either of them.
Rather vote for Ralph, or even Barr. First, do no harm.
Paulsen for President!
If you say so.ReplyDelete
There are times when I feel a mere tenuous relationship with mental stability myself - like a pleasant ephemeral memory from long-ago youth lost in the betrayal of experience.
This country has ways. Ask Nixon.
If you think that it is in the best interest of the US to defend Georgia and the Ukraine, with the US military, from Russian ethnic consolidation, then vote for McCain.ReplyDelete
That is the real issue, at hand.
Should NATO or other US proxies be expanded to Russia's borders?
That is the binary question that the future rests upon.
How best to answer "Plan Kosovo" turned 180 degrees and run by the Russians, instead of the Muslims?ReplyDelete
Beginning of August, the issue was energy and the economy.ReplyDelete
In one week, we're back to spheres of influence and military aggression.
What next week?
I am comfortable voting for clarity of position over ambiguity of nuance.
My position will change in the future, if I'm still alive which I doubt, but for the near-term, post-globalization world, it is an absolute requirement. The nuanced position can be dusted off down the road when people settle down.
Oh I see - Rat is Spengler.ReplyDelete
That makes sense.
But I thought Trish was the card player.
Blue collar, veterans, Union members. Represented by the AFL-CIO, which tells all of US, this about Mavericks support of other Veterans:ReplyDelete
McCAIN HAS NOT DELIVERED ON HIS PROMISES TO VETERANS
Union members respect Sen. John McCain’s service to our country. When will he start respecting ours? Although McCain talks about his support for veterans, he repeatedly votes against increased funding for veterans’ health care—and more. We call on John McCain to join us in supporting our veterans and working to turn around America.
McCAIN REPEATEDLY VOTED AGAINST VETERANS’ HEALTH BENEFITS
McCain Opposes the 21st Century GI Bill Because It Is Too Generous. McCain did not vote on the GI Bill that will provide better educational opportunities to veterans of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, paying full tuition at in-state schools and living expenses for those who have served at least three years since the 9/11 attacks. McCain said he opposes the bill because he thinks the generous benefits would “encourage more people to leave the military.” (S.Amdt. 4803 to H.R. 2642, Vote 137, 5/22/08; Chattanooga Times Free Press, 6/2/08; Boston Globe, 5/23/08; ABCNews.com, 5/26/08)
McCain Voted Against Increased Funding for Veterans’ Health Care. Although McCain told voters at a campaign rally that improving veterans’ health care was his top domestic priority, he voted against increasing funding for veterans’ health care in 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007. (Greenville News, 12/12/2007; S.Amdt. 2745 to S.C.R. 95, Vote 40, 3/10/04; Senate S.C.R. 18, Vote 55, 3/16/05; S.Amdt. 3007 to S.C.R. 83, Vote 41, 3/14/06; H.R. 1591, Vote 126, 3/29/07)
Opposed an Assured Funding Stream for Veterans’ Health Care. McCain opposed providing an assured funding stream for veterans’ health care, taking into account annual changes in veterans’ population and inflation. (S.Amdt. 3141 to S.C.R. 83, Vote 63, 3/16/06)
McCain Voted Against Adding More Than $400 Million for Veterans’ Care. McCain was one of 13 Republicans to vote against providing an additional $430 million to the Department of Veterans Affairs for outpatient care and treatment for veterans. (S.Amdt. 3642 to H.R. 4939, Vote 98, 4/26/06)
Voted Against Establishing a $1 Billion Trust Fund for Military Health Facilities. McCain voted against establishing a $1 billion trust fund to improve military health facilities by refusing to repeal tax cuts for those making more than $1 million a year. (S.Amdt. 2735 to S.Amdt. 2707 to H.R. 4297, Vote 7, 2/2/06)
McCain Opposed $500 Million for Counseling Services for Veterans with Mental Disorders. McCain voted against an amendment to appropriate $500 million annually from 2006-2010 for counseling, mental health and rehabilitation services for veterans diagnosed with mental illness, posttraumatic stress disorder or substance abuse. (S. 2020, S.Amdt. 2634, Vote 343, 11/17/05)
McCain Voted in Support of Disabled Veterans Only 25 Percent of the Time from 2004-2005. While McCain claims he “has been a leading advocate” for veterans with disabilities, statistics show he supported the Disabled American Veterans’ interests only 25 percent of the time in 2004-2005. In 2006, that figure slipped to 20 percent of the time. (Project Vote Smart)
McCain Voted Against Providing Automatic Cost-of-Living Adjustments to Veterans. McCain voted against providing automatic annual cost-ofliving adjustments for certain veterans’ benefits. (S. 869, Vote 259, 11/20/91)
INCLUDING BETTER ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE FOR GUARD AND RESERVISTS
McCain Opposed Increasing Spending on TRICARE and Giving Greater Access to National Guard and Reservists. Although his campaign website devotes a large section to veterans issues, including expanding benefits for reservists and members of the National Guard, McCain voted against increasing spending on the TRICARE program by $20.3 billion over 10 years to give members of the National Guard and Reserves and their families greater access to the health care program. The increase would be offset by a reduction in tax cuts for the wealthy. (www.johnmccain.com/Informing/ Issues/9cb5d2aa-f237-464e-9cdf-a5ad32771b9f.htm; S.Amdt. 324 to S.C.R. 23, Vote 81, 3/25/03)
McCAIN ALSO VOTED TO OUTSOURCE JOBS AT MILITARY FACILITIES
McCain Supported Outsourcing VA Jobs. McCain opposed an amendment that would have prevented the Department of Veterans Affairs from outsourcing jobs, many held by blue-collar veterans, without first giving the workers a chance to compete. (S.Amdt. 2673 to H.R. 2642, Vote 315, 9/6/07)
He Also Supported Outsourcing at Walter Reed. McCain opposed an amendment to prevent the outsourcing of 350 federal employee jobs at Walter Reed Army Medical Center—outsourcing that contributed to the scandalous treatment of veterans at Walter Reed that McCain called a “disgrace.” (S.Amdt. 4895 to H.R. 5631, Vote 234, 9/6/06; Speech to VFW in Kansas City, Mo., 4/4/08)
AND HE REPEATEDLY VOTED AGAINST FUNDING FOR THE VETERANS AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT
2003: McCain Voted Against $122.7 Billion for Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain voted against an appropriations bill that included $122.7 billion in fiscal 2004 for the Department of Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban Development and other related agencies. (H.R. 2861, Vote 449, 11/12/03)
2001: McCain Voted Against $51 Billion in Veterans Funding. McCain was one of five senators to vote against the bill and seven to vote against the conference report that provided $51.1 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs, as well as funding for the federal housing, environmental and emergency management agencies and NASA. (H.R. 2620, Vote 334, 11/8/01; Vote 269, 8/2/01)
2000: McCain Voted Against $47 Billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain was one of eight senators to vote against a bill that provided $47 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs. (H.R. 4635, Vote 272, 10/12/00)
1999: McCain Voted Against $44.3 Billion for Veterans Programs. McCain was one of five senators to vote against a bill providing $44.3 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs, plus funding for other federal agencies. (H.R. 2684, Vote 328, 10/15/99)
This is weird.ReplyDelete
Obama's Brother Found Living in Hut
The way my electoral map looked yesterday McCain had to win either Virginia or Michigan.
Up 5 points? wow, have to take another look at my map.
Goin' to Trade School, that other Obama.ReplyDelete
Gonna change his life.
.5, bob, not 5, at least in Virginia
All those "to close to call" States, turnout will be key.
New Mexico and Colorado ...
Energy is still an issue, which is why Obama gets rufus.ReplyDelete
Extending US proxies to the Russian border and the occupation of Iraq for up to 100 years, that's McCain's position.
The US is not prepared to prosecute the confrontation that a McCain victory will ensure.
Ladies, and Germs, I will guarantee you that within 5 years every landfill in the country will have One of These either, in operation, or going up adjacent.ReplyDelete
That will supply approx. 1.5 to 2.0 Million Barrels more transportation fuel every day.
This is why we can't take a chance on McCrazy.
fuel from our garbage is a better dream even then making our cars run on water. Lets hope it is a feasible source!ReplyDelete
Cheer up, lads. (except Rufus, Ash, and maybe Rat) RCP Map With No Toss-upsReplyDelete
They give Virginia to McCain.ReplyDelete
Aww, that's okay, Bob. Both of these turkeys are so bad that I can't get emotional, either way.ReplyDelete
That's not a "car runs on water" technology, Ash. It's the Real Deal. A whole slew of large, well-financed companies are racing to sign up cities, as we speak.ReplyDelete
The cost of the ethanol will come in somewhere around $1.00/gallon. This stuff is going to "explode" onto the scene.
I don't know if we have a big enough volumn of garbage around here to make something like that practicable. Spokane would. I recall many years ago when some folks built three or four houses on top of and near to an old landfill, out in the county. You don't want to do that. Gases would seep up and not only did it stink, it was dangerous too. They kind of deconstructed a couple of those houses, and one at least still sits there, rundown, unoccupied.ReplyDelete
We're not all that stupid, out this way.
We have a garbage problem and we have a fuel problem - it sure would be nice to kill both birds with one stone...ReplyDelete
...gotta be a downside somewhere.
Rat, what do you mean the US is not prepared?ReplyDelete
Is it possible we could somehow prepare to be this Harbinger of NATO writ?
I worry if some fundamental scarcity would preclude such action or at least doom it to failure. Not just unpreparedness. Are you implying there's a possible way to be the, say, the Batman of the planet?
I take it Bruce Wayne never exported all his money on fuel and so fund Gothams outlaws.ReplyDelete
Could a United North America prosecute that?ReplyDelete
Energy, fresh water, security, no disabling backward ethnic struggles, increased opportunity? What could it field? What could the Amero fund?
Cruel, Barbaric Canadians Finally Give Up Chicken Betting RitualReplyDelete
Canadian manhood forced by PETA to cancel Poultry Games.
"I feel as if I've had my head lopped off," stated one enthusiast.
Blogger dynamite said...ReplyDelete
"I take it Bruce Wayne never exported all his money on fuel and so fund Gothams outlaws."
He probably had money in the bank though and those pesky outlaws were deep in at those institutions.
Tight as the bark on a tree.ReplyDelete
Brother can you spare a dime?
The Telegraph reports that the Italian edition of Vanity Fair has tracked down the youngest of Obama's half siblings, the 26 year old George Hussein Onyango Obana, living in a hut in Huruma, a slum on the outskirts of Nairobi.
No-one knows who I am," he told the magazine, before claiming: "I live here on less than a dollar a month.
Huruma is a tough place, last January during the elections there was rioting and six people were hacked to death. The police don't even arrest you they just shoot you.
I have seen two of my friends killed. I have scars from defending myself with my fists. I am good with my fists.
His famous older brother seems rather tight, at least when it comes to spending his own money to help relatives, despite earning a million bucks last year. It was earlier reported that the Senator never made good on his promises to help other family members made during his widely publicized 2006 trip to Kenya.
Posted at 11:37 AM | Email | Permalink
It was earlier reported that the Senator never made good on his promises to help other family members made during his widely publicized 2006 trip to Kenya.
His own money is not good enough. He is waiting until he has access to OPM.
Posted by: james | August 20, 2008 12:03 PM
Of course he hasn't. It's a do as I say not as I do. Don't worry, as soon as he is elected POTUS he will send his relatives and their villages our money instead.
Really I can understand why Obama doesn't want to get in the business of helping his relatives. Lord only knows how many there might be out there in Kenya, Indonesia, etc, brothers and sisters, half brothers and sisters, cousins, nieces, nephews. And then there would be those that would falsely claim a relationship. All this in the biggest political year of his life. It's one thing to be a community organizer and try to filch money from unca Sam, quite another to start writting checks on one's own bank account, with no end in sight, and many unknown news items or scandals that might pop up. I'd be tempted to do the same.ReplyDelete
Syria Turns To MoscowReplyDelete
Some months ago Syria put out some feelers our way that they might peel themselves away from Iran, if the price was right.
Rice said Russia "must know that the United States would never permit an attack on the territory of an ally under Article 5."ReplyDelete
"When you threaten Poland, you perhaps forget that it is not 1988. It's 2008, and the United States has a ... firm treaty guarantee to defend Poland's territory as if it was the territory of the United States," she said.
"So it's probably not wise to throw these threats around."
ICE AGES ACTED AS A BIOLOGICAL PUMP SPURRING EVOLUTIONReplyDelete
One of the most shocking realizations of all time has slowly been dawning on us: the earth’s climate does great flip-flops every few thousand years, and with breathtaking speed. In just a few years, the climate suddenly cools worldwide. With only half the rainfall, severe dust storms whirl across vast areas. Lightning strikes ignite giant forest fires. For most mammals, including our ancestors, populations crash.
Our ancestors lived through hundreds of such abrupt episodes since the more gradual Ice Ages began two and a half million years ago–but abrupt cooling produced a population bottleneck each time, one that eliminated most of their relatives. We are the improbable descendants of those who survived–and later thrived.
William H. Calvin’s marvelous A Brain for All Seasons argues that such cycles of cool, crash, and burn powered the pump for the enormous increase in brain size and complexity in human beings. Driven by the imperative to adapt within a generation to “whiplash” climate changes where only grass did well for a while, our ancestors learned to cooperate and innovate in hunting large grazing animals.
Calvin’s book is structured as a travelogue that takes us around the globe and back in time. Beginning at Darwin’s home in England, Calvin sits under an oak tree and muses on what controls the speed of evolutionary “progress.” The Kalahari desert and the Sterkfontein caves in South Africa serve as the backdrop for a discussion of our ancestors’ changing diets. A drought-shrunken lake in Kenya shows how grassy mudflats become great magnets for grazing animals. And in Copenhagen, we learn what ice cores have told us about abrupt jumps in past climates.
Perhaps the most dramatic discovery of all, though, awaits us as we fly with Calvin over the Gulf Stream and Greenland: global warming caused by human-made pollution could paradoxically trigger another sudden episode of global cooling. Because of the accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, the oceanic “conveyor belt” that sends warmer waters into the North Atlantic could abruptly shut down. If that happens again, much of the earth could be plunged into a deep chill within a few years. Europe would become as cold and dry as Siberia. Agriculture could not adapt quickly enough to avoid worldwide famines and wars over the dwindling food supplies–a crash from which it would take us many centuries to recover.
With this warning, Calvin connects us directly to evolution and the surprises it holds. Highly illustrated, conversational, and learned, A Brain for All Seasons is a fascinating view of where we came from, and where we’re going.
William H. Calvin is affiliate professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the University of Washington School of Medicine in Seattle. He is the author or coauthor of ten books, including Lingua ex Machina, The Cerebral Code, How Brains Think, Conversations with Neil’s Brain, and The River That Flows Uphill. The last third of A Brain for All Seasons is based on his cover story “The Great Climate Flip-Flop” in The Atlantic Monthly.
The scientists said cooler temperatures in the first half of this year are making their task more difficult. "One of the challenges we face ... is to make the case that while we are in a period of warming, we should not expect every year to be the warmest year on record," Snow said.ReplyDelete
The global mean temperature to the end of July was 0.50 degrees Fahrenheit (0.28 C) above the 1961-1990 average, the UK-based MetOffice for climate change research said on Wednesday. That would make the first half of 2008 the coolest since 2000.
Neither campaign responded immediately to questions about the plea for funding. Obama and McCain, who face off in a November election, both support regulation of greenhouse gases through market mechanisms such as cap-and-trade programs on emissions.
Protect Economy From Climate
Ice Ages and Big BrainsReplyDelete
Well, dynamite, I read how the US military is streeeeeched to the breaking point.ReplyDelete
That our equipment stockpiles are drawn down and the heavy hardware is in need of a refit.
I know Jr's current National Guard assignment, an infantry unit, does not even have personal weapons for every Guardsman.
I know that if over 100,000 US troops are in Iraq, there can not be many others, elsewhere.
I know that if the US refuses to use its technological military advantages, it's the same as not having them.
I know that the downside of action against Iran, $100 per barrel oil, has been met and surpassed, without a shot being fired, or the status que improved. So that now, that downside risk is $200 per barrel or more.
A true economic meltdown scenario
It is a strategic problem that shopping will not solve.
The Democrats will control the Congress, regardless of whom the President is.
So President McCain will push for Georgia to be in NATO, and will be rebuffed, either by a European member or the US Senate.ReplyDelete
Another failure of policy, to be circumvented with Executive power, alone.
Another "Special Relationship" for US.
Another step on the road to both Empire and ruin.
Barack is all in a tizzy over John McCain supposedly attacking Barack's patriotism. Obama talks as if patriotism is an entitlement guaranteed by a government affirmative action program to be expected rather than earned. At a minimum, a patriot must support and defend the Constitution. Organizing the takers of the world to line up and get their share of the loot confiscated from the producers is hardly the work of a patriot, not that their is anything wrong with community organizing, but it is hardly the same as leaving school and home to join the military and serve your country.ReplyDelete
What a pity Obamas feeling are hurt. He should have thought about claiming that the duly elected President of the United States, George W. Bush was " John McCain's president."
If patriotism is to be judged by military service, there are few patriots left, in the United States.ReplyDelete
Guess we'll need more wars.
Igor is The OneReplyDelete
RUSSIA AND GEORGIA: THE REAL STORY
By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN
Published on DickMorris.com on August 20, 2008.
Meet Igor Sechin, nominally the Deputy Prime Minister of Russia. In fact, he is the dominant power in the Kremlin. In Russia, the speculation is over whether Putin is his puppet! According to top Kremlinologists, Sechin was calling the shots when Russia invaded Georgia.
Robert Amsterdam, an international lawyer who knows all about the inner workings in Moscow, calls the invasion, in part, "an effort to sidetrack Dmitry Medvedev,” the newly elected Russian president who has focused on bringing to Russia the rule of law. Determined to show real power and to trivialize the legalisms of Medvedev, Sechin and Putin ignored the Russian president in invading their neighbor.
But Amsterdam makes a larger and more important point: The corporatist leadership of Russia, entirely dependent on oil and gas revenues for its economic viability, has an essential stake in promoting global instability. A stable world encourages a drop in oil prices. It is no coincidence that Russia is at the core of the two major threats to world stability: Iran and the invasion of Georgia. Worried by a major drop in oil prices, creating severe economic problems for Russia, the Kremlin has a cosmic interest in promoting turbulence whenever and wherever it can.
Georgia represents the last pro-Western bridge to bring oil and gas from the central Asian former Soviet states to t he west. Three times as much oil flows over rail tracks on the bridge near Gori which Russian aircraft destroyed as through pipelines from Russia.
Bush’s response to the Georgia attack has been prompt and skillful. Introducing American troops into Georgia on a humanitarian mission makes it clear to Russia and to the Georgian people that the United States will not abandon its ally, but it does so in a way that deters further Russian moves.
But the key answer came not from the U.S. but from Poland which approved having a missile defense shield on its territory. Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, elected on a platform of opposing deployment in Poland, quickly reversed field and saw the light when Russian troops began rolling into Georgia. Urgent western attention to the application of Ukraine for NATO membership will further underscore to Russia how short-sighted its invasion of Georgia really was. The backlash in Europe, particularly in Eastern Europe will prove to be far more devastating to Russia than Putin…and Sechin…may have anticipated.
OBAMA'S WOMAN PROBLEM GOES WORSE
The worst thing about the new Zogby show that has Obama down five points to McCain (as opposed to his July lead of seven points) is that there is now virtually no gender gap in the race. In July, Obama was getting 53% of the support of women as opposed to 47% among men. But now he is winning only 43% of women and 41% of men, so while his male support is down by six points, his female backing is off by ten points.
Normally, a Democratic presidential candidate will boast a ten to fifteen point gender gap, so Obama's performance in both polls is way below average.
Obama's convention will doubtless erase this temporary deficit, but the Republican conclave will, doubtless erase this erasure. And we will be back to a close race in September after both are over. But it is very likely that Obama's failure to win the votes of women will continue and will be very serious for his campaign.
Igor Ivanovich SechinReplyDelete
The proof of the "real America" can be found in these two numbers, dueceReplyDelete
Manpower reaching militarily significant age annually:
males age 16-49:
The US Army's GOAL is to sign up 80,000 recuits, from an annual pool of almost 2.2 million folks.
It can bearely get 'er done.
The Department of Defense has announced its recruiting statistics by the active and reserve components for Fiscal Year 2007. A "Fiscal Year" runs from October through December.
All of the active duty branches met or exceeded their recruiting goals for the fiscal year. On the Reserve side, four of the six reserve componants met or exceeded their recruiting goals.
The Army's recruiting sucess was not without price. During Fiscal Year 2007, only 79 percent of the new recruits entering the Army possessed a high school diploma. The DOD standard is that at least 90 percent of new recruits should have a high school diploma. The other services met or exceeded the 90 percent goal.
The Army also approved more criminal history waivers than they have in years past. About 15 percent of new recruits required a criminal history waiver. 87 percent of those approved waivers were because of misdemeanor convictions, and the remainder for more serious offenses, including felonies.
The next two years of recruiting will be even more challenging for the Army. Congress has decided to increase the total size of the Army by 74,000 by 2010 — to 547,000 active duty, reservists and National Guard. This will require significantly higher recruiting goals than the 80,000 goal which has challenged the Army for the past two years.
So many Americans, so few patriots
Army Faces Tougher Recruitment in 2008ReplyDelete
by Andrea Seabrook and Tom Bowman
All Things Considered
December 22, 2007 ·
The U.S. Army met its recruiting goals for fiscal year 2007, but had to pay recruiting bonuses and lower its standards. The Army also dipped into recruits from its Delayed Entry Program. It faces an even tougher challenge in 2008 as it seeks to expand enlistment.
The Army has been offering recruits bonuses of up to $20,000. It also brought in more recruits without high school diplomas, who scored low on aptitude tests, and who had to get waivers for criminal offenses. Many defense analysts say this policy is lowering the military's standards, but the Army rejects that claim.
The Army acknowledges that these measures have made their recruitment job more difficult for 2008. They'll likely have to accept more recruits without diplomas and hand out more waivers for criminal records.
In the meantime, the Army is losing captains at an alarming rate due, in part, to extended deployments in Iraq.
This comment has been removed by the author.ReplyDelete
As you say, duece, there are 31,000 legal aliens in the US military.ReplyDelete
There is a manpower pool of almost 20 million illegals, that if made legitimate, regularized, would add to the recruitment pool.
It'd be adding from six to ten years worth of regular growth, in a single year. Oh, the recruitment possibilities, with a waiver of regularization penalty fees, enlistment bonuses and citizenship papers at the end of a six or ten year term of service.
We can bring the Barbarians into the Legions, regularize 'em, teach 'em the language, make 'em Americans.ReplyDelete
Just as the other Empires of global ambition have, in eras past.
New National PollsReplyDelete
CBS News/NY Times: Obama +3
NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl: Obama +3
Reuters/Zogby: McCain +5
LA Times/Bloomberg: Obama +2
Battleground: McCain +1
Who has the salt?
I know that if over 100,000 US troops are in Iraq, there can not be many others, elsewhere.ReplyDelete
The US has 1,255,000 troops (Army and Marines). If 100,000 of them are in Iraq, then 1,155,000 of them are elsewhere.
One of those polling groups, can't remember which one, is infamous for always interviewing more democrats than republicans.ReplyDelete
That is correct, Ms T.ReplyDelete
Already committed to be other places, doing other things.
Or the assignment of two or three combat Brigades to Afghanistan would not be dependent on US troop strength in Iraq.
A reality ALL the Generals and politicos agree is the case.
What's the ratio of support to combat troops? I have no idea but it must be fairly large.ReplyDelete
RCP's got Obama +1.2.ReplyDelete
The search consensus is 1 to 10, bob.ReplyDelete
Tooth to tail
What's the ratio of support to combat troops?
We've got the added variable, now, of private contractors doing what support troops used to.
Then factor in the private contractors, in Iraq, into that tooth to tail ratioReplyDelete
Between the logistics giant Halliburton and a myriad of armed security companies, private military contractors comprise the second largest "force" in Iraq, far outnumbering all non-U.S. forces combined. There are as many as 100,000 civilian contractors and approximately 20,000 private security forces.
They run at 1 to 5
There have been military forces in history which had virtually no "tail" at all. Two notable examples of that are the Mongols and the Zulus. The Zulu army traveled on foot, and the soldiers carried only their spears and shields, because they would be fed by the local villagers wherever they were. The Mongol force was entirely mounted, but its horses could refuel on grass and the men mostly got their food by hunting or foraging.ReplyDelete
And in both cases, there was no need for any support force to move supplies. That's not possible for any army which relies heavily on technology, and as you look at the history of European war in particular, over time you find a rising number of "tail" men for every "tooth" man.
For something like the U.S. Army in Europe in 1944, it's hard to see how it could be otherwise. They were consuming supplies at a ferocious rate, and most of the supplies were created in the heartland of America, moved to Atlantic ports, carried over the Atlantic Ocean on Liberty ships or Victory ships, landed at ports in Britain, unloaded and sorted and reloaded onto other ships to cross the channel, unloaded at French harbors, and then carried to the front by truck. The tooth-to-tail ratio was at its lowest in the U.S. Army Air Corps, where the "tooth" was air crew, and "tail" was everyone else.
The modern U.S. Army actually has an even lower tooth-to-tail ratio, and some who look at the raw numbers may think that it's a sign of bloat and mismanagement. It isn't. It's actually the key to our success. The reason the tail have grown is that they help make each tooth man more effective in combat. One tooth and 10 tail are a lot more deadly than 11 tooth with no tail.
...the modern equivalent of "off balance sheet" entities...ReplyDelete
...didn't do Enron much good, those off balance sheet entities...
That is true, bob, but the knowledge does allow the unknowing to enter into the realm of military manpower realities.ReplyDelete
If T. is right at 1,255,000, and it's 10 to 1, then, we're out of troops now.ReplyDelete
There you have the crux of the challenge, bob.ReplyDelete
Congress has authorized 74,000 more soldiers, for the Army.
Where they'll find them, amother matter entirely.
The Iraq war has become one of the most polarizing issues in American politics. Most Democrats, including Senator Barack Obama (D-Ill.), want large, early troop cuts; most Republicans, including Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.), want U.S. troops to stay until Iraq's stability is guaranteed.ReplyDelete
Most Americans have a mental image of Iraq that is defined by the chaos of 2006. But Iraq today is a very different place than it was two years ago.
As the violence declined, two big changes in the Iraqi state took place -- one military, one political. On the military side, the ISF have grown much more capable than they were in 2006.
74,000 x .1 = 7,400 more combat troopsReplyDelete
This comment has been removed by the author.ReplyDelete
That is why Captains opt out, rather than re-enlist for another series of deployments.ReplyDelete
After three foreign deployments in four years, Jr decided enough was enough. He opted out.
Those Captains are looking at the same rate of deployments as Jr was.
They're reasonable men, as well as patriots. What was being asked of them was not all that reasonable, for the family man soldier that the military caters to, now.
The US is not ready to prosecute the confrontations that Maverick is signing US up for.
Nor will it be, soon.
If we started to refit and retool, today.
The deferred costs for the mis-adventure in Iraq only mow becoming clear to those that must pay them.ReplyDelete
Which may be why, bob, that the majority of Iraqi veterans that took up politics in 2006, they ran as Democrats.ReplyDelete
Patriots that they are.ReplyDelete
It seems Russia's actions in Georgia may have at least had some part in pushing Poland to close the deal on the missile defense system. Kupchan, the senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, noted that as part of the agreement Poland pushed the U.S. to agree to come to its defense in the event of an attack with greater speed than required by NATO.ReplyDelete
As the Bush administration has pushed for the system it has also faced tough opposition from some Democrats in Washington who have raised concerns about whether the technology will work and the wisdom of calling for a program that does not have broad support from NATO allies.
But in a round-about way, the standoff in Georgia could also boost the administration's argument for the missile shield with Congress.
Base In Poland
In the first Iraq war we sent over a larger group, even discounting the allies, so we must have had a larger pool to draw from then.ReplyDelete
And of course there wasn't any occupation.
Those generals that told Bush and Rumsfeld in Iraw II that we needed or should send twice the number, did we have them to send, if Bush had listened to their advice, instead of firing them?
The Fastest Man Ever On EarthReplyDelete
No, he's not the fellow with 'BOB' on his shirt.
That guy looks like the very definition of speed incarnate.
Bolt - great name.ReplyDelete
This comment has been removed by the author.ReplyDelete
Weinberger: Clinton Cut Army to Less Than Half its Gulf War SizeReplyDelete
Thursday Nov. 29, 2001; 7:18 p.m. EST
Former Reagan Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger said Thursday that ex-President Bill Clinton cut back the U.S. military so severely that it's now just a fraction of the size of the fighting force that won the Gulf War ten years ago.
"Just the Army alone that won the Gulf War along with 31 very fine coalition partners was over 900,000," he told WABC Radio's Sean Hannity. "And now it's under 400,000 - just about 400,000, which is a tremendous drop. And that's just one service."
The Reagan defense chief, whose new book "In the Arena: A Memoir of the 20th Century" catalogues the Clinton-era's military neglect, suggested the cutbacks were so debilitating they may have left the U.S. unequipped to fight a multi-front war against terrorism.
Weinberger gave Hannity an abbreviated version of the damages:
"We also lost air and sea lift (capacity). We don't have forward position troops anymore. We had a procurement holiday for two or three years in which we didn't acquire anything. And we cut our research and development expenditure that was responsible for those weapons that enabled us to win the Gulf War at such little cost."
Rumsfeld was trying to retool the military to the new reality, but the occuppation of Iraq got in the way.
Brig. Gen. Arthur M. Bartell, who has been in charge of Fort Bragg since the 18th Airborne Corps deployed to Iraq earlier this year, will become commander of U.S. Army Cadet Command at Fort Monroe, Va.ReplyDelete
Bartell, a low-profile, behind-the-scenes commander, has been the senior official for the installation when Fort Bragg has been in the national spotlight with often unwelcome publicity. A paratrooper’s father took a video of conditions in 82nd Airborne Division barracks that was posted on YouTube and eventually attracted a personal visit by President Bush.
Then the murders of two women soldiers gained national attention.
Cadet Command In Virginia
I really can't stand the Clintons. But if Obama gets in, he will do worse for the military even than the Clintons, I do believe.ReplyDelete
I remember Zell Miller's speech to the convention--"What are we going to fight with, sling shots?"
This piece of information, from the year 2000ReplyDelete
At the Republican National Convention last week, retired Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf noted that he had far more Army divisions to call on when he was planning for the Persian Gulf War.
At that time, there were 18 Army divisions, and a total of 2.2 million people in the U.S. armed forces.
But Schwarzkopf did not mention that the Republican administration of President Bush -- with current GOP vice-presidential candidate Dick Cheney serving as Defense secretary -- was responsible for cutting the Army from 18 to 12 divisions as part of the post-Cold War reduction in the size of the U.S. military. That left 1.6 million men and women serving in the armed forces.
The Clinton administration made further cuts, reducing the Army to just 10 divisions. Now, there are 1.4 million people serving in the U.S. military.
Zinni said that number is too low.
"In the case of the Army, I would feel more comfortable with at least 12 divisions, maybe more," he said.
During six years of war Team43 has stood strong against expanding the military to meet the manpower needs of the stategies they employeed.ReplyDelete
Pete Hegseth, who grew up in Forest Lake, recently moved back to Minneapolis from Washington, D.C. For eight months in 2005 and 2006, he served as an Army lieutenant in Samarra, north of Baghdad and one of the bloodiest cities in the Sunni Triangle.ReplyDelete
On his return, he became a critic of U.S. military policy, calling in a Wall Street Journal article for more troops and new counter-insurgency tactics.
Two weeks ago, Hegseth returned to Iraq with members of Vets for Freedom, an advocacy group of which he is chairman. The transformation he saw in Samarra, he says, has given him great hope.
Transformation In Iraq
"The process is the punishment."ReplyDelete
Canada's 'Human Rights' Revolution
Seems not much progress is being made.
Invoking his catchphrase that liberty is “on the march,” Mr. Bush placed the 2003 so-called Rose Revolution in Georgia, which brought a reformist government to power in the former Soviet republic, within the context of pro-democracy protests in Lebanon as well as the American-led military actions that ousted the Taliban in Afghanistan and Saddam Hussein in Iraq.ReplyDelete
All these events over the past seven years, Mr. Bush said, have been part of “the great ideological struggle of our time, between forces of freedom and forces of tyranny.” And, noting that Georgia had since sent troops to Afghanistan and Iraq “to help others realize the blessings of liberty,” Mr. Bush said that others must now come to Georgia’s aid.
“Georgia has stood for freedom around the world, and now the world must stand for freedom in Georgia,” he said.
RUSH: With Obama we started out, we couldn't talk about his big ears 'cause that made him nervous. We've gone from that to this: Not only can we not mention his ears...ReplyDelete
We can't talk about his mother.
We can't talk about his father.
We can't talk about his grandmother unless he does, brings her up as a "typical white person."
We can't talk about his wife, can't talk about his preacher, can't talk about his terrorist friends, can't talk about his voting record, can't talk about his religion.
We can't talk about appeasement.
We can't talk about color; we can't talk about lack of color.
We can't talk about race. We can't talk about bombers and mobsters who are his friends. We can't talk about schooling. We can't talk about his name, "Hussein."
We can't talk about his lack of experience. Can't talk about his income. Can't talk about his flag pin.
This started out we can't call him a liberal.
It started out we just couldn't talk about his ears.
Now we can't say anything about him.
"I honor his service. I don't honor his policies. I don't honor his politics"ReplyDelete
- Russia Never Wanted a War -ReplyDelete
Gorby, every liberal's favorite BS artist.
Nah, Russia never wanted a war. That's why they moved those newer tanks down there early.ReplyDelete
The point is not that the polls were “wrong,” but that people weren’t honest with the pollsters. Was it because they didn’t want to admit that they weren’t voting for the black candidate? Maybe. In California, we call it the “Bradley effect,” after the former Los Angeles Mayor who led in every poll for governor (including the exit polls), but lost on the secret ballots. Whatever it was — or is — there's certainly reason for Democrats to worry that polls that show this race being too close to call mean that McCain is actually ahead, that he would win if the election were held today.
What animal is white and long, larger than a donkey but smaller than a mule, and who places its hoof a distance equal to the range of vision, and has wings on its sides with which it propells its feet?ReplyDelete
And has a human face.ReplyDelete
Friendly Neighborhood Mosque With Torture Chamber In The BasementReplyDelete
Part of al-Sadr's gang.
Answer to above question: Mo's nag Burak, that took him to Jerusalem in the famous night flight.
The U.S. military presence in Iraq is spelled out by a U.N. mandate that is set to expire by the end of this year. Iraq and the United States want to replace that mandate with an agreement that would provide a framework for how U.S. troops operate within the country.ReplyDelete
Influential Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr has asked religious authorities to issue an edict against the signing of a bilateral agreement.
He's asking the marjaya, the Shiite entity that includes Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, to stand against any agreement that would establish guidelines and strictures in all areas, including security. Al-Sadr also has said he would support the Iraqi government, with which he has been at odds, if it refused to sign such an agreement.
Obama--The Missing YearsReplyDelete
Seems that he teamed up with the terrorist Ayers, spent a lot of money, and the whole project was a failure.
Obama Brings a Knife to a GunfightReplyDelete
Posted by TOM BEVAN
Two months ago Obama declared of the McCain campaign, "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun." And while Obama has sharpened his message of late, today he pulled out a pocketknife and McCain responded by pulling out a .44 Magnum.
The Obama campaign sent out an email announcing they were releasing a new ad in Georgia linking McCain to Ralph Reed and, by association, Jack Abramoff. Here it is:
Brian Rogers, spokesman for the McCain campaign, fired back with this:
"Barack Obama's ad is ridiculous. Because of John McCain, corruption was exposed and people like Jack Abramoff went to jail.
However, if Barack Obama wants to have a discussion about truly questionable associations, let's start with his relationship with the unrepentant terrorist William Ayers, at whose home Obama's political career was reportedly launched. Mr. Ayers was a leader of the Weather Underground, a terrorist group responsible for countless bombings against targets including the U.S. Capitol, the Pentagon and numerous police stations, courthouses and banks. In recent years, Mr. Ayers has stated, 'I don't regret setting bombs... I feel we didn't do enough.'
"The question now is, will Barack Obama immediately call on the University of Illinois to release all of the records they are currently withholding to shed further light on Senator Obama's relationship with this unrepentant terrorist?"
Ouch. The Obama camp had better bring some more firepower to the next fight or put on a flak jacket - or both.
Today's birthdays: Actor-director Melvin Van Peebles, 76... singer Kenny Rogers, 70... singer Harold Reid (the Statler Brothers), 69.ReplyDelete
The Fonz, forever in bronzeReplyDelete
His hair will always be in place, he doesn't mind if you touch the leather, and he's far too heavy to jump the shark.
Thought Arthur Fonzarelli couldn't get any cooler? Meet the bronze Fonz.
No Isaac Hayes airport?
Officials of Memphis International Airport say they probably won't change the airport's name to honor the late singer Isaac Hayes.
During a memorial service for Hayes on Monday, U.S. Rep. Steve Cohen publicly suggested changing the name of the airport.
Moore looks back
It's not easy being Bond.
Roger Moore, who starred in seven Bond films in the 1970s and 1980s, recounts his days as the dashing super-spy in his upcoming memoir, "My Word Is My Bond," and says things weren't always as they seemed.
"Jimmy Bond had a big jet boat chase in 'Live and Let Die,' " writes Moore, now 80. "I did quite a few run-throughs to practice and whilst banking on one such run, the engine cut out.
1946: Norma Jean Baker was signed to a contract with 20th Century Fox, who changed her name to Marilyn Monroe.ReplyDelete
1967: The last episode of "The Fugitive" aired. It was the largest audience in TV history until the "Who Shot J.R." episode of "Dallas."
1968: The Beatles released "Hey Jude" as a single.
Next Week In History
Virginia and its 13 electoral votes are considered to be a prime battleground this election season between Obama and presumptive Republican presidential candidate John McCain.ReplyDelete
On Wednesday, Obama made stops in Martinsville and Lynchburg. On Thursday, he is scheduled to stop at John Tyler Community College in Chester.
From there, Obama proceeds to Chesapeake, the final stop on his two-day swing-state swing.
所以現在的酒店也不會像電影/電視連續劇一樣，強制小姐一定要跟客人出場，現在酒店上班將酒店小姐出場的方式改為小姐個人意願，客人要帶小姐出場時會告知小姐要去那裡，只要小姐不願意跟客人出去店家沒人能逼妳，有些酒店只有規定小姐出場只需陪客人到客人想去的地方(例如:吃消夜 續攤 錢櫃 夜店 )當然也會告知雙方(有床的地方不能去 例如:妳家/客人家/旅館/飯店/辦公室)苗頭不對可立即離開。