Tuesday, July 31, 2007

Faced with the truth...

...Democrats do what they do best and what they want the US military to do in Iraq, run away. Here she is explaining herself after she was able to collect herself enough to return to the hearing;
"..... As many of us, there was only so much that you could take until we, in fact, had to leave the room for a while, and so I think I am back and maybe can articulate some things that after so much of the frustration of having to listen to what we listened to."

"But let me just first say that the description of Iraq as if some way or another that it's a place that I might take the family for a vacation, things are going so well, those kinds of comments will in fact show up in the media and further divide this country instead of saying here’s the reality of the problem and people, we have to come together and deal with the reality of this issue."

Now come on Congresswoman! Get a grip. The General, which all of you democrats have been imploring the president to listen to, said nothing of the kind. The Washington Times sums it up very nicely;
We are at a moment when freshman Rep. Nancy Boyda, Kansas Democrat, feels justified walking out on retired Army Gen. Jack Keane at a hearing because she cannot stomach the general's positive assessment of developments in Iraq. Let us hope we will soon arrive at a moment when Mrs. Boyda can be regarded as histrionic and no more.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Good news from Iraq means bad news for Democrats.

With the potential of a more positive report than expected coming from General Petraeus in September the Majority Whip in the house isn't jumping for joy, in fact it quite depresses him;
House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) said Monday that a strongly positive report on progress on Iraq by Army Gen. David Petraeus likely would split Democrats in the House and impede his party's efforts to press for a timetable to end the war.

Clyburn, in an interview with the washingtonpost.com video program PostTalk, said Democrats might be wise to wait for the Petraeus report, scheduled to be delivered in September, before charting next steps in their year-long struggle with President Bush over the direction of U.S. strategy.

Clyburn noted that Petraeus carries significant weight among the 47 members of the Blue Dog caucus in the House, a group of moderate to conservative Democrats. Without their support, he said, Democratic leaders would find it virtually impossible to pass legislation setting a timetable for withdrawal.

"I think there would be enough support in that group to want to stay the course and if the Republicans were to stay united as they have been, then it would be a problem for us," Clyburn said. "We, by and large, would be wise to wait on the report."

Many Democrats have anticipated that, at best, Petraeus and U.S. ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker would present a mixed analysis of the success of the current troop surge strategy, given continued violence in Baghdad. But of late there have been signs that the commander of U.S. forces might be preparing something more generally positive. Clyburn said that would be "a real big problem for us."

The US winning in Iraq is a real big problem for the democrats! Why? Because they are invested in defeat and only care about there power in Washington.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Wishing John Roberts all the best...

From Wonkette:
Chief Justice John Roberts has died in his summer home in Maine. No, not really, but we know you have your fingers crossed.

Sounds like a hate crime to me!

Powered by ScribeFire.

Monday, July 30, 2007

Iran says nuclear power for peaceful means but....

...they sorta forgot one thing. From The Guardian
Before the Isfahan tour, a promotion film was screened showing the production of the first UF6 at the plant in 2004. The Iranian government also claims to have mastered the next step in the process, the engineering feat involved in spinning the UF6 in a high-speed centrifuge and separating out a variant, or isotope, of uranium, that is highly fissile - uranium-235. The work is being done at a centrifuge plant being built in Natanz, to the northeast of Isfahan.

Spinning the UF6 gas until it is up to 5% rich in U-235 produces nuclear fuel. Keep spinning until it is 90% enriched and you have the makings of a bomb.

That - combined with the fact that Iran omitted to tell the IAEA about Natanz until its existence was revealed by an opposition group in 2002 - lie at the roots of the global scepticism over Iran's programme.

But there is another huge question mark hanging over Isfahan and Natanz: why is the government in such a rush to enrich fuel, when it has no nuclear power plants in which to use it?

Just a minor thing.

Oh well, I guess they'll make bombs instead.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Shock: NY Times editorial "A War We Just Might Win"

Thats if Congress butts the hell out and lets the military do its job! It seems the NY Times can no longer ignore the obvious that is happening in Iraq;

A War We Just Might Win

VIEWED from Iraq, where we just spent eight days meeting with American and Iraqi military and civilian personnel, the political debate in Washington is surreal. The Bush administration has over four years lost essentially all credibility. Yet now the administration’s critics, in part as a result, seem unaware of the significant changes taking place.

Here is the most important thing Americans need to understand: We are finally getting somewhere in Iraq, at least in military terms. As two analysts who have harshly criticized the Bush administration’s miserable handling of Iraq, we were surprised by the gains we saw and the potential to produce not necessarily “victory” but a sustainable stability that both we and the Iraqis could live with.

After the furnace-like heat, the first thing you notice when you land in Baghdad is the morale of our troops. In previous trips to Iraq we often found American troops angry and frustrated — many sensed they had the wrong strategy, were using the wrong tactics and were risking their lives in pursuit of an approach that could not work.

Today, morale is high. The soldiers and marines told us they feel that they now have a superb commander in Gen. David Petraeus; they are confident in his strategy, they see real results, and they feel now they have the numbers needed to make a real difference.

Everywhere, Army and Marine units were focused on securing the Iraqi population, working with Iraqi security units, creating new political and economic arrangements at the local level and providing basic services — electricity, fuel, clean water and sanitation — to the people. Yet in each place, operations had been appropriately tailored to the specific needs of the community. As a result, civilian fatality rates are down roughly a third since the surge began — though they remain very high, underscoring how much more still needs to be done.

In Ramadi, for example, we talked with an outstanding Marine captain whose company was living in harmony in a complex with a (largely Sunni) Iraqi police company and a (largely Shiite) Iraqi Army unit. He and his men had built an Arab-style living room, where he met with the local Sunni sheiks — all formerly allies of Al Qaeda and other jihadist groups — who were now competing to secure his friendship.

In Baghdad’s Ghazaliya neighborhood, which has seen some of the worst sectarian combat, we walked a street slowly coming back to life with stores and shoppers. The Sunni residents were unhappy with the nearby police checkpoint, where Shiite officers reportedly abused them, but they seemed genuinely happy with the American soldiers and a mostly Kurdish Iraqi Army company patrolling the street. The local Sunni militia even had agreed to confine itself to its compound once the Americans and Iraqi units arrived.

Be sure to read all of it.

Powered by ScribeFire.

NY Times doesn't believe their own poll, takes another...

...and the results come out the same. And they still can't believe it!
THE war in Iraq is the single most important continuing news issue right now. Public opinion about the war is a critical part of that story. That’s why when a finding about the war in a New York Times poll could not be easily explained, the paper went back and did another poll on the very same subject. It turns out the poll had gotten it right. Support for the initial invasion of Iraq, as measured by a question The New York Times/CBS News Poll has asked since December 2003, increased modestly compared with two months ago.

The NY Times admits in the first paragraph that they do polls to create a news story. But this poll was meant to further their anti-Iraq war agenda but for some strange reason they did not get the result they wanted so they did the poll over again. Surprise! Same result.

Of course they describe the increase in support for the Iraq war from 35% to 42% a modest increase. A 7% increase over two months sounds like a significant increase and it corresponds with the positive news that is beginning to creep out due to the "surge" in troops in Iraq.
The polling took place during a week when there was no shortage of news about the war. Congress was debating the war; the Bush administration issued a report saying the Iraqi government had failed to meet many of the benchmarks it was supposed to meet; and prominent Republicans were distancing themselves from Mr. Bush on Iraq.

Again the NY Times just cannot understand what is going on. They tried their best to continue the negative news drumbeat but somehow the public support increased.
The July numbers represented a change. It was counterintuitive. None of the other war-related questions showed change. Mr. Bush’s approval rating had not changed. Nor had approval of his handling of Iraq. The level of support for Mr. Bush’s decision to send more troops to Iraq — the “surge” — was about the same as it had been in past polls. Support for the decision to go to war had risen modestly and nothing else in the poll could explain it.

Still dumbfounded!
Once in a while a poll finding doesn’t make sense. Sometimes The Times will wait to publish the results until another poll is taken asking the question again. But such a shift happens rarely with questions like this one, which the paper has asked many times over a long period.

What could explain the change? Perhaps, the answers about the war had inadvertently been influenced by placing them a few questions away from one about Mrs. Clinton’s not having repudiated her decision in 2002 to vote to authorize the war.

It was just a hunch, but it was all there was. Along with CBS News, The Times decided to poll again, to ask the war trend question without the possible influence of the question about Mrs. Clinton.

When the second round of results came back, the numbers were nearly identical to the ones found in the poll about Mrs. Clinton. In the poll conducted last weekend with 889 adults, 42 percent of the respondents said the United States did the right thing in taking military action against Iraq, and 51 percent said the United States should have stayed out.

It really is quite comical to read this piece. You can sense the exasperation of Janet Elder who is just unable to figure just what the hell is going on!

But wait...she may be on to something;
There was also a drop in the number of people who said the war was going badly. In the latest poll, 66 percent of Americans said things were going badly for the United States in its efforts to bring stability and order to Iraq. That is down from 76 percent who said the same thing in May.

What was driving the change still wasn’t all that clear, but at least the paper had confidence in the results and was able to report the findings.

One thing is certain. The question will be asked again. The polls were conducted nationwide by telephone and each had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.

Well....the answer is right there in front of Ms. Elder and she still can't see it.

Obviously if positive news gets out that we are winning the war, that in turn creates positive poll results. Or in the NY Times case poll results they just didn't expect (or want) due to all of the work they have done to undermine the administration and the military and convince their readers that we cannot win and that we must surrender!

Powered by ScribeFire.

Friday, July 27, 2007

Chuckie Schumer admits what everyone knows....

...that the dems are easily fooled and just plain stupid. The question is when will the voters make them pay!
U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts and Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito “duped” the U.S. Senate into confirming them, a top Democratic lawmaker charged on Friday, days after a key Republican questioned if they had lived up to their promises.

Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, a member of the Judiciary Committee that held hearings on the two, said they staked out moderate positions in congressional testimony but became part of a conservative bloc that issued restrictive rulings on issues from free speech to civil rights.

Schumer, in a speech to the American Constitution Society, talked about the confirmation of Roberts and Alito in 2005 and 2006, respectively.

“Were we duped?” he asked.

Were we too easily impressed by the charm of nominee Roberts and the erudition of nominee Alito?” Schumer asked. “Did we mistakenly vote our hopes when our fears were more than justified by the ultraconservative records of these two men?”

“Yes,” he said

There you have it! Why should we have idiots in charge of the country? People who are easily duped into anything!

Watch out Elisabeth...

It seems that we won't have to wait much longer for more fireworks from "The View" since Whoopi Goldberg has been hired to replace Rosie O'Donnell. But this quote from the LA Times blog Show Tracker really says it all;
"She is exactly what the show needs,” said Hollywood publicist Howard Bragman. “She is a beloved brand name; she is outspoken; she has done this before, she is a person of color; she is as far left as Rosie; she lives in New York; and she can kick Elizabeth Hasselbeck’s ass."

Isn't that what is really all about? Lets hire someone as looney as Rosie and who can go on the air and kick the crap out of the only conservative and sane voice on the show. Maybe Whoopi will provide us with more deep thoughts like this from Whoopi's appearance at a Kerry/Edwards fundraiser in 2004;
"That's why I'm here tonight. Because I love bush. But someone's giving bush a bad name. Someone has tarnished name of `bush.' Someone has waged war, someone has deliberately misled the country, someone has attempted to amend the constitution, all in the name of bush. The bush I know and cherish would never do such things. My bush is smarter than that. And if my bush is smarter than that, you can understand just how dumb I think that other bush is. And anyone who would wave to Stevie Wonder is not fully there. I will do whatever it takes to restore bush to its rightful place and that ain't in the White House. Vote your heart and mind and keep bush where it belongs."

This should be fun...

Powered by ScribeFire.

Thursday, July 26, 2007

Scottie loves Elspeth !

Sorry, I just watched "Scott Baio Is 45...and single" last night...

This stuff just writes itself...If you haven't been following the "Scott Thomas Affair" check the links below ...

Michelle Malkin
Ace of Spades
Allah @ HotAir

Powered by ScribeFire.

Reid: "I was wrong and Senator Cornyn was right"

Sheepish Harry Reid admits he was wrong...and will Barack Obama ever participate in another vote...
Senators Compromise on Border Security
By ANDREW TAYLOR 07.26.07, 11:44 AM ET


Senate Democrats and Republicans came together Thursday to devote an additional $3 billion to gaining control over the U.S.-Mexico border, putting Congress on a path to override President Bush's promised veto of a $38 billion homeland security funding bill.

The deal resurrects a GOP plan launched Wednesday to pass some of the most popular elements of Bush's failed immigration bill, including money for additional Border Patrol agents and fencing along the southern border.

Democrats liked the money but objected to such GOP proposals as allowing law enforcement officers to question people about their immigration status and cracking down on those who overstay their visas.

After some parliamentary fireworks Wednesday, efforts to advance a compromise containing only the border security money broke down.

But Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, resolved their differences overnight and announced agreement Thursday morning. Cornyn won a promise to have some of the money used to go after immigrants who had entered the United States legally but had overstayed their visas.

Reid had apparently thought earlier that Cornyn wanted harsher language.

"I was wrong and Senator Cornyn was right," acknowledged a sheepish Reid.

The revised plan was poised to be approved around midday Thursday.

The measure is opposed by the White House, top Republicans said, and it clearly puts the president in a box. Bush had already promised a veto of the underlying homeland security bill for spending $2.3 billion more than he requested.

Now, Bush's GOP stalwarts in Congress such as Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., are poised to override the president's veto.

Cornyn predicted the bill would "pass by a veto-proof margin" and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., told reporters the bill might get 90 votes in the 100-member Senate.

The measure is likely to be the first spending bill to arrive on Bush's desk, despite his demand Thursday that the Democratic-controlled Congress focus on delivering the Pentagon's massive budget to his desk before going on its August vacation.

As adopted Thursday, the funding would go toward seizing "operational control" over the U.S.-Mexico border with additional Border Patrol agents, vehicle barriers, border fencing and observation towers, plus Cornyn's crackdown on people who overstay their visas.

The underlying homeland security bill had already drawn a veto threat for breaking Bush's budget. White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said Wednesday that the new border security measures under consideration would not be financed by fines on illegal immigrants as were comparable provisions from the broader bill that died last month. Stanzel declined further comment Thursday.

Bush and GOP allies such as Graham and Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona had argued during last month's hotly contested immigration debate that a comprehensive approach to immigration reform was the only way to attract bipartisan support to such a polarizing issue.

In the wake of the failure to pass the comprehensive bill - decried as offering "amnesty" by conservative talk radio and opposing lawmakers - Graham and the others changed their minds and offered the border security plan, combined with the tough GOP policy provisions.

Graham and Kyl said the public won't accept more controversial elements, especially the plan to give millions of illegal immigrants a way to earn U.S. citizenship, until the border with Mexico is made more secure.

"Border security is the gate that you must pass through to get to overall comprehensive reform," said Graham, who is up for re-election next year and facing political heat at home for backing Bush's unpopular immigration plan.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Wednesday, July 25, 2007

General Patton speaks...

Maybe Congress should make this required viewing;

Powered by ScribeFire.

You just can't make this stuff up....

Really, you can't...
Movie creator charged

By Jake Palmateer

Staff Writer

ONEONTA _ An Oneonta man who helped produce a 9/11 conspiracy documentary that became an Internet hit was arrested Monday for allegedly deserting the Army.

Korey Rowe, 24, a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq, was picked up by deputies at about 10:45 p.m. Monday, Otsego County Sheriff Richard Devlin Jr. said.

Rowe, along with Dylan Avery and Jason Bermas, are members of Louder Than Words, a production company that is working on a third edition of the movie "Loose Change," which contends the U.S. government was involved in the 9/11 terrorist attacks. That edition is intended to be a theatrical release.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Isn't John Edwards the candidate?

Because Elizabeth sure does most of the talking.

From the Politico;
No tangerines for you?

The politics of global warming got very concrete, and oddly difficult, in a meeting with local environmentalists in the coastal town of McClellanville today, where Elizabeth Edwards raised in passing the importance of relying on locally-grown fruit.

"We've been moving back to 'buy local,'" Mrs. Edwards said, outlining a trade policy that "acknowledges the carbon footprint" of transporting fruit.

"I live in North Carolina. I'll probably never eat a tangerine again," she said, speaking of a time when the fruit is reaches the price that it "needs" to be.

Edwards had talked about "sacrifice," at the meeting, but Elizabeth's suggestion illustrated just how difficult it is to sell the specifics of sacrifice.

Asked about her comment immediately after the event, John Edwards avoided the question twice, then said he isn't sure.

"Would I add to the price of food?" he asked. "I'd have to think about that."

UPDATE: Just to be clear, he's not talking about a food tax. The basic point is that any plan that imposes new costs on carbon emissions is going to make anything that's transported long distances with fossil fuels cost more. It is, in a way, a moment of clarity in this debate.

A moment of clarity? I am waiting patiently for Hillary's stand on tangerines, peaches, bananas and other assorted fruit...

Powered by ScribeFire.

It's a little late for that...

Always on top of everything....

Democrats Pushing to Avoid a ‘Do-Nothing’ Label


WASHINGTON, July 24 — Congressional Democrats celebrated the first minimum wage increase in a decade on Tuesday with a festive labor rally across from the Capitol. But they know they will have to accomplish considerably more to avoid the sort of do-nothing labels they hung on Republicans not too long ago

“It is not enough, but it is a great start,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi said as she told the cheering crowd that the wage increase that took effect Tuesday was just one element of a middle-class economic program that includes college tuition help, expanded health care coverage and other emerging proposals.

Democrats hope to post more legislative victories in a few days, including enacting into law some of the remaining recommendations of the bipartisan Sept. 11 commission. They also want to pass a lobbying overhaul that was central to their campaign last year against the “culture of corruption” so they can start their late-summer recess on a high note.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Prius outsells Civic, why?

The Washington Post says because of its distinctive styling it makes it a status symbol for people who want to advertise that they are saving the planet. The Civic just looks like, well, a Civic.
This helps explain why the Prius so outsells the rival Honda Civic Hybrid. Both have similar base prices, about $22,000, and fuel economy (Prius, 60 miles per gallon city/51 highway; Civic, 49 mpg city/51 highway). But Prius sales in the first half of 2007 totaled 94,503, nearly equal to all of 2006. Civic sales were only 17,141, up 7.4 percent from 2006. The Prius's advantage is its distinct design, which announces its owners as environmentally virtuous. It's a fashion statement. Meanwhile, the Civic hybrid can't be distinguished by appearance from the polluting, gas-guzzling mob.

How about this, the Prius is the ugliest thing on four wheels currently on the road...

Powered by ScribeFire.

John Doe amendment back in homeland security bill

Thank goodness...sanity (or relection fear) prevails.

Michelle Malkin notes that we should remember what the roll call was for this amendment...

Powered by ScribeFire.

Historic? Maybe not so much...

The CNN/YouTube debate was suppose to be the greatest thing since sliced bread...Not really.
Comparing the ratings for the CNN/YouTube Debate with the ratings for the CNN New Hampshire Democratic Debate, CNN was down a bit across the board; down by 6% in Total Viewers and down by 21% in Demo Viewers (25-54)…

YouTube Debate - 2,552,000 Total Viewers/831,000 Demo Viewers
New Hampshire Debate - 2,714,000 Total Viewers/1,050 Demo Viewers

So the CNN/YouTube debate actually drew less viewers than the previous debate. But I thought that this was going to be the wave of the future? The way to draw in the "yutes" of the country? Well, thats what the experts said. And that is probably they problem right there. When was the last time the experts were right?

Powered by ScribeFire.

Tuesday, July 24, 2007

How long will it take?

When will the MSM give in and start to report what is really happening in Baghdad? Here is Michael Totten on patrol with the troops;
Everyone was friendly. No one shot at us or even looked at us funny. Infrastructure problems, not security, were the biggest concerns at the moment. I felt like I was in Iraqi Kurdistan – where the war is already over – not in Baghdad. . . .

“This is not what I expected in Baghdad,” I said.

“Most of what we’re doing doesn’t get reported in the media,” he said. “We’re not fighting a war here anymore, not in this area. We’ve moved way beyond that stage. We built a soccer field for the kids, bought all kinds of equipment, bought them school books and even chalk. Soon we’re installing 1,500 solar street lamps so they have light at night and can take some of the load off the power grid. The media only covers the gruesome stuff. We go to the sheiks and say hey man, what kind of projects do you want in this area? They give us a list and we submit the paperwork. When the projects get approved, we give them the money and help them buy stuff.”

Not everything they do is humanitarian work, unless you consider counter-terrorism humanitarian work. In my view, you should. Few Westerners think of personal security as a human right, but if you show up in Baghdad I’ll bet you will. . . .The soldiers were talking and acting like aid workers, not warriors from the elite 82nd Airborne Division.

“Man, this is boring,” one of them said to me later. “I’m an adrenaline junky. There’s no fight here. It won’t surprise me if we start handing out speeding tickets.” So it goes in at least this part of Baghdad that has been cleared by the surge.

“When we first got here,” said another and laughed, “shit hit the fan.”

It was all a bit boring, but blessedly so. I knew already that not everyone in Baghdad was hostile. But it was slightly surprising to see that entire areas in the Red Zone are not hostile.

Anything can happen in Baghdad, even so. The convulsive, violent, and overtly hostile Sadr City is only a few minutes drive to the southeast.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Monday, July 23, 2007

John Edwards on Esquire Magazine

Is Esquire trying to tell us something?

Obama plays the race card

From the Washington Times:
The Illinois Democrat said the recent Senate immigration debate "was both ugly and racist in a way we haven't see since the struggle for civil rights."

So I suppose that all of the people opposed to the immigration reform bill, 67% by the last poll, were racists?

Powered by ScribeFire.

Friday, July 20, 2007

NY Times: US is an inhibitor against violence in Iraq

But Obama seems to be ok with mass killing if we leave...
SUNAPEE, N.H. (AP) - Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said Thursday the United States cannot use its military to solve humanitarian problems and that preventing a potential genocide in Iraq isn't a good enough reason to keep U.S. forces there.

"Well, look, if that's the criteria by which we are making decisions on the deployment of U.S. forces, then by that argument you would have 300,000 troops in the Congo right now—where millions have been slaughtered as a consequence of ethnic strife—which we haven't done," Obama said in an interview with The Associated Press.

"We would be deploying unilaterally and occupying the Sudan, which we haven't done. Those of us who care about Darfur don't think it would be a good idea," he said.

Obama, a first-term senator from Illinois, said it's likely there would be increased bloodshed if U.S. forces left Iraq.

Only one problem with his logic, we aren't in Sudan or the Congo but we are in Iraq and we are the only thing holding the country together.

Here is what NY Times Baghdad Bureau chief John Burns said on Charlie Rose's show just a few nights ago;

CHARLIE ROSE: I read - I read the front page of "The Washington Post" and a piece written by Karen DeYoung and Tom Ricks. First paragraph, "If U.S. combat forces withdraw from Iraq in the near future, three developments would be likely to unfold. Majority Shiites would drive Sunnis out of ethically mixed areas, west to Anbar province. Two, southern Iraq would erupt in civil war between Shiite groups. And three, the Kurdish north would solidify its borders and invite a U.S. troop presence there. In short, Iraq would effectively become three separate nations."

Do you agree with all that?

JOHN BURNS: Charlie, I guess we would love to have that crystal ball, and so would the people in Congress who are trying to decide this matter. Some parts of that I do agree with. I think it`s pretty clear that the majority Shiites are increasingly confident that if the U.S. troops go, they will have the upper hand. The 60 percent majority they have, the control of the armed forces that they have. The oil resources in the south would give them quickly an upper hand in what would be in effect an all-out civil war.

I think there`s quite a lot of reasons to worry about whether or not they`re right about that, not to worry about it, to question it. The Sunnis are not going to roll over. The Sunnis are good fighters. They ruled this country for most of the last 1,200 years or this -- at least this terrain. They have the backing of the hinterland of the - of the Sunni Arab world, and I think the outcome would be very much in doubt.

But the one thing I think that virtually all of us who - who work here or have worked here for any length of time agree is that the levels of violence would eclipse by quite a long way the bloodshed we`ve seen to date.

CHARLIE ROSE: Can you give me more understanding of what you mean by that?

JOHN BURNS: Well, I think, quite simply that the United States armed forces here -- and I find this to be very widely agreed amongst Iraqis that I know, of all ethnic and sectarian backgrounds -- the United States armed forces are a very important inhibitor against violence. I know it`s argued by some people that they provoke the violence. I simply don`t believe that to be in the main true. I think it`s a much larger truth that where American forces are present, they are inhibiting sectarian violence, and they are going after the people, particularly al-Qaeda and the Shiite death squads, who are provoking that violence. Remove them or at least remove them quickly, and it seems to me -- controversial as this may seem to be saying in the present circumstances, while I know there`s this agonizing debate going on in the United States about this -- that you have to weigh the price. And the price would very likely be very, very high levels of violence, at least in the short run and perhaps, perhaps - perhaps for quite a considerable period of time.

Powered by ScribeFire.

He coulda been president....

John Kerry said the following yesterday on C-SPAN;
Sen. John Kerry said during a C-SPAN appearance that fears of a bloodbath after the US withdrawal from Vietnam never materialized. He says he's met survivors of the "reeducation camps" who are thriving in modern Vietnam. An award-winning investigation by the Orange County Register concludes that at least 165,000 people perished in the camps.

Watch the whole clip...its scary to think this guy was one state from being president.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Very illuminating votes...

Last night we had two votes in the Senate that crystalize the mindset of the Democrat party.

First the Senate voted 39-57 against the "John Doe Amendment" that would protect citizens from being sued after reporting suspicious behavior to authorities causing its removal from an unrelated education bill. Of note, not a single Republican voted against it but not enough Democrats voted for it to reach the 60 votes needed since it was attached to an unrelated education bill by Sen. Susan Collins in an attempt to rescue the legislation after the Democrats successfully stripped it from the Homeland Security bill. Also particularly troubling is that two presidential candidates, Sam Brownback and Barack Obama, decided not to cast a vote at all even though they were present in the Senate at the time of the vote. If you are running for the presidency don't you think that its important that you cast a vote for important legislation like this? This shows no backbone or leadership, qualities essential for a potential president of the country.

And second, an amendment to the student loan bill that would have required voters to show a photo ID at the polls was voted on. The amendment was to prevent voter fraud by stopping non-citizens from voting in elections. Seems reasonable to me....but not the Senate. It failed 42-54. Not a single Democrat voted in favor of this bill. Not one. And 4 Republcians also voted against it.

Simply stunning.

So to sum up, the Democrats are in favor of concerned Americans who report suspicious activity to the appropriate authorities being sued and losing everything they've worked for their entire lives, like the flying imams are attempting to do. They also are in favor of illegal aliens voting in our elections and corrupting the process.

Just lovely!

Powered by ScribeFire.

Thursday, July 19, 2007

Who's not listening to the Generals now?

Like they ever intended to anyway...

The U.S. ambassador to Iraq and a top military commander there said today that U.S. forces are making progress against al-Qaeda, with successes in the western province of Anbar now being replicated in other volatile parts of the country.

Ryan C. Crocker, who took over as ambassador in Baghdad four months ago, cautioned the Senate Foreign Relations Committee via a balky video hookup that a "non-conditioned withdrawal" of U.S. forces from Iraq -- such as a redeployment mandated by Congress -- could undo recent successes and give al-Qaeda "further room to operate."

Earlier, Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, commander of the Multi-National Corps - Iraq, told a Pentagon news briefing by teleconference that while the U.S. command in Baghdad plans to deliver a progress report on the Bush administration's troop-surge strategy by a September deadline, the military needs at least until November to see whether trends are holding and to make a "more accurate assessment."

Both Crocker and Odierno asserted that the surge has had a significant impact on al-Qaeda in Iraq, the group held responsible for most of the spectacular suicide bombings in the country. And they said a potentially crucial phenomenon in Anbar province, where Sunni Arab tribes have turned against al-Qaeda, is spreading to parts of the capital and other provinces, including troubled Diyala province, which has seen a rise in violence in recent months.

At the Senate hearing, a few Republican lawmakers joined Democrats in expressing skepticism about the surge and the Iraqi government's ability to meet political and economic benchmarks considered crucial to achieving national reconciliation. Democrats criticized Crocker for appearing to play down the benchmarks in recent remarks in which he emphasized that concerns such as the electricity supply were more important to average Iraqis.

Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), the committee chairman, urged Crocker to convey to Iraqi leaders that they are running out of time and need to move toward national reconciliation by meeting the benchmarks, "or they will have traded a dictator for chaos."

Biden said, "I believe there is no possible way we will have 160,000 troops in Iraq a year from now. Time's running out in a big way."

He later warned Crocker, "We're not staying. You don't have much time."

In response to Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), who charged that "the goalposts are now moving," Crocker said he was trying to give his best assessment and denied painting a rosy picture.

"I'm certainly not moving any goalposts," he said. "There are a lot of processes at work -- some of them positive, some of them negative." While Anbar is unique, "there are similar phenomena being repeated around the country," Crocker said.

"I'm not trying to gild any lilies here," he added. "But there are opportunities in that complexity. We have to be aware enough and quick enough to turn them to the advantage" of the Iraqi government.

Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), an outspoken GOP critic of President Bush's Iraq war policy, charged that "we're buying time for a political reconciliation process that is not occurring."

Crocker stressed that at the national level, he has been encouraged by the evolution of a "presidency council" made up of Iraq's Kurdish president, the country's two vice presidents -- one Shiite, the other Sunni -- and the Shiite prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki. He said the council brings an Iraqi Sunni leader together with Maliki in a venue where they can deal with crises, and he expressed hope that it could "over time chart the way forward on legislative benchmarks" demanded by Washington.

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) pointed to a recent comment by Maliki that Iraqi forces are capable of handling security without the help of U.S. troops.

"You have an Iraqi leader who says you can go home . . . don't stay on our account," she said. "How many Americans have to die while we're buying time for an Iraqi leader who says we don't have to be there?"

Powered by ScribeFire.

Up in Plames

A federal judge on Thursday dismissed former CIA operative Valerie Plame’s lawsuit against members of the Bush administration in the CIA leak scandal.

U.S. District Judge John D. Bates dismissed the case on jurisdictional grounds and said he would not express an opinion on the constitutional arguments. Bates dismissed the case against all defendants: Cheney, White House political adviser Karl Rove and former White House aide I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Reuters and The AP cannot be more stupid, but Congress can.

It seems the Islamic State of Iraq is a fraud, a front setup by AQ. But don't tell the AP or Reuters that...

Read Don Surber and Jules Crittenden for the facts that you won't get from the usual suspects.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Dems protecting the rights....of the enemy

"Democrats are trying to pull a provision from a homeland security bill that will protect the public from being sued for reporting suspicious behavior that may lead to a terrorist attack, according to House Republican leadership aide

Now if they would fight for Americans rights as hard we'd all be a lot better off.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Wednesday, July 18, 2007

While the Senate doesn't sleep...

US: Top al-Qaida in Iraq Figure Captured

The U.S. command said Wednesday the highest-ranking Iraqi in the leadership of al-Qaida in Iraq has been arrested, adding that information from him indicates the group's foreign-based leadership wields considerable influence over the Iraqi chapter.

Khaled Abdul-Fattah Dawoud Mahmoud al-Mashhadani, also known as Abu Shahid, was captured in Mosul on July 4, said Brig. Gen. Kevin Bergner, a military spokesman.

"Al-Mashhadani is believed to be the most senior Iraqi in the al-Qaida in Iraq network," Bergner said. He said al-Mashhadani was a close associate of Abu Ayub al-Masri, the Egyptian-born head of al-Qaida in Iraq.

Bergner said al-Mashhadani served as an intermediary between al-Masri and Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida No. 2 Ayman al-Zawahri.

"In fact, communication between the senior al-Qaida leadership and al-Masri frequently went through al-Mashhadani," Bergner said.

"Along with al-Masri, al-Mashhadani co-founded a virtual organization in cyberspace called the Islamic State of Iraq in 2006," Bergner said. "The Islamic State of Iraq is the latest efforts by al-Qaida to market itself and its goal of imposing a Taliban-like state on the Iraqi people."

Powered by ScribeFire.

Dems now upset about needing 60 votes...

When the Republicans were in the majority the Dems would routinely use the 60 votes needed to block votes, on judges especially. Now in the majority the Dems are suddenly upset about this pesky 60 vote requirement;
Republicans complained that the whole episode was a charade because the Democrats who were complaining about having to come up with 60 votes on contentious issues used the same tactics themselves when they were the minority party.

Reid's hypocrisy in action when discussing the reason for this publicity stunt;
“Because it will focus attention on the obstructionism of the Republicans.”

That pesky 60 vote requirement again...

Powered by ScribeFire.

Ok, so this accomplished exactly what?

Harry Reid's "No Snooze Until We Lose" marathon is still going and it appears he has been out maneuvered by minority leader Mitch McConnell yet again! What a complete buffoon!

The Captain explains it all...

Powered by ScribeFire.

Sunday, July 15, 2007

Whats old is new again...

The 'new' Osama video is not so new after all, but yet.... Someone should let the AP know.

Barack Obama The Cliché Machine

I like Barack Obaman, I think he is a decent guy. I don't agree with him on anything but he seems like a decent guy. But he has got to stop churning out the clichés like in this article;
Obama Bemoans 'Epidemic of Violence'

Jul 15, 4:30 PM (ET)


CHICAGO (AP) - Standing before a church congregation that has witnessed inner-city violence firsthand, Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said Sunday that more must be done to end a social ill that is "sickening the soul of this nation."

Obama told churchgoers at the Vernon Park Church of God on Chicago's South Side that too many young lives are being claimed by violence and more must be done to combat the problem.

This should be BIG news...

But in the world of the mainstream media Iranian rockets found in Iraq aimed at US bases is just not newsworthy. From the AP and The Jerusalem Post;
The report followed two claims by the US army over the weekend implicating Iran in attacks against US forces in Iraq.

According to an announcement on Saturday night, US troops in Iraq uncovered a field containing 50 Iranian-made rocket launchers, all aimed at a US army base.

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

Rosie's definition of a fair fight....no opponent.

What a disgusting and pathetic individual...When aggressively confronted she cries that it wasn't a fair fight, so what does she do?
The comedian, 45, laid into Elisabeth Hasselbeck — her former friend and cohost — in front of a 1,500-person audience on her cruise (from NYC to a private island in the Bahamas) for gay and lesbian families.

A witness tells Us that O’Donnell trotted out a giant photo of Hasselbeck doctored up as the devil, made a “crazy” gesture at the poster and said, “Her only f—king credit was Survivor. Come on!”

And O’Donnell implied that the pair’s famous last battle wasn’t held on an even playing field.

“I can’t fight with pregnant people. Just go have your baby and have a nice life.”

Powered by ScribeFire.

Yes the MSM is really that stupid

AFP and Yahoo are running this photo of an elderly woman who claims that the bullet she is holding hit hit her bed during a raid, there just one problem. Click here for more.

Powered by ScribeFire.

I'm sure John Murtha will new apologize

Yeah, right. When monkeys fly out of his ass....
Marine Investigator Recommends Dropping Charges in Haditha Killings

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

SAN DIEGO — An investigating officer has recommended dismissing murder charges against a U.S. Marine accused in the slayings of three Iraqi men in a squad action that killed 24 civilians in the town of Haditha, according to a report.

The government's theory that Lance Cpl. Justin L. Sharratt had executed the three men was "incredible" and relied on contradictory statements by Iraqis, Lt. Col. Paul Ware said in the report, released Tuesday by Sharratt's defense attorneys.

"To believe the government version of facts is to disregard clear and convincing evidence to the contrary, and sets a dangerous precedent that, in my opinion, may encourage others to bear false witness against Marines as a tactic to erode public support of the Marine Corps and mission in Iraq," Ware wrote.

Defense attorneys James Culp and Gary Myers said in a statement that he was pleased with the report and that it "reflected the value of the calm of a courtroom and the adversarial process."

Sharratt's mother Theresa said she was overjoyed.

"This is a huge result, that report is a declaration of Justin's innocence," she said. "This is very, very good news."

Powered by ScribeFire.

Tuesday, July 10, 2007

They actually needed a study to figure this out...

CHICAGO (Reuters) - Muscular young men are likely to have more sex partners than their less-chiseled peers, researchers at the University of California Los Angeles said on Monday.

Their study, published in the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, suggests muscles in men are akin to elaborate tail feathers in male peacocks: They attract females looking for a virile mate.

"Women are predisposed to prefer muscularity in men," said study author David Frederick of UCLA.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Monday, July 09, 2007

AP prefers fiction to truth

Apparently the AP would rather report on bogus, made up, completely false massacre stories like this one rather than report on a real massacre that took place in a village outside of Barquba where 10-14 men, women and children were found dead, beware there are very graphic photos found at that link.

For more on this disgraceful behavior by the AP see this report by Bob Owens.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Powered by ScribeFire.

AP prefers fiction to truth

Apparently the AP would rather report on bogus, made up, completely false massacre stories like this one rather than report on a real massacre like took place in a village outside of Barquba where 10-14 men, women and children were found dead, beware there are very graphic photos found at that link.

For more on this disgraceful behavior by the AP see this report by Bob Owens.

Powered by ScribeFire.

AP continues to smear Fred Thompson

The Associated Depressed:
Thompson's secret role in Watergate
Tapes reveal bonds with Nixon defense

By Joan Lowy
Associated Press
Published July 9, 2007

WASHINGTON -- Fred Thompson gained an image as a tough-minded investigative counsel for the Senate Watergate committee. Yet President Nixon and his top aides viewed the fellow Republican as a willing, if not too bright, ally, according to White House tapes.

Thompson, now preparing a bid for the 2008 GOP presidential nomination, won fame in 1973 for asking a witness, former White House aide Alexander Butterfield, the bombshell question that revealed Nixon had installed hidden listening devices and taping equipment in the Oval Office.

Those tapes show Thompson had a behind-the-scenes role very different from his public image three decades ago. He comes across as a partisan willing to cooperate with the Nixon White House to discredit the committee's star witness.

It was Thompson who tipped off the White House that the Senate committee knew about the tapes. They eventually cinched Nixon's downfall in the scandal resulting from the break-in at Democratic headquarters in the Watergate complex in Washington and the subsequent White House cover-up.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Sunday, July 08, 2007

The big showdown!

This ought to scare President Pelosi;
CRAWFORD, Texas — Six weeks after announcing her departure from the peace movement, Cindy Sheehan said Sunday that she plans to run against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi unless she introduces articles of impeachment against President Bush in the next two weeks.

Boy would that be fun to watch...

The Dems are mind-numbingly stupid!

Remember last year when the DNC website mistook a Canadian soldier for a US soldier on their official website? They took the picture down after being rightfully chastised for it. Well they couldn't possibly make that mistake again, could they?

Yes they could.

On Nancy Pelosi's official website a picture of a Canadian soldier was again proudly displayed and trumpeted as a US soldier. Of course its already been taken down.

It helps to know what US troop looks like before you proclaim to support them.

Unbelievable! Well...not really.

See Michelle Malkin's site for a screen capture and more info.

Saturday, July 07, 2007

"Dead" Live Earth

This thing is unwatchable...

I turned it on in time to see Genesis being introduced for their set. I thought ok this could be good, I like Genesis. So after their first two songs, which were quite good, Phil Collins sounds great, so what's next? Fade to "A Live Earth short film". Huh? They only did two songs? That can't be.

So after the 5 minute film it goes to a commercial for an Toshiba HD DVD Player, made as green as possible no doubt.

When Live Earth comes back Genesis is back on going into their next song. Did they wait for the film and commercials to end? No, it must be a tape delay. So now Genesis finishes up and then another short film. Then a commercial. Then Genesis, then another short film.

Oh forget it...I've lost interest...

And these short films are so depressing, dark, haunting music is used. I can't watch this stuff.

And Wembley seems empty to me, most people are on the grounds with not many in the stadium seats.

And now Al Gore is speaking in Washington DC. Another good reason to turn it off. Where are they holding the event in DC? In a park? Now Garth Brooks and Trisha Yearwood are singing, except we can't hear Garth very well.

Now its Snoopy over in Hamburg. Hamburg? Whatever.

Friday, July 06, 2007

Sanity prevails...

A federal appeals court on Friday ordered the dismissal of an ACLU lawsuit challenging President Bush's warrantless surveillance program.

In a 2-1 decision, two Republican appointees on the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against allowing the lawsuit. A Clinton-appointed judge disagreed....

Powered by ScribeFire.

Some questions on Live Earth for the Gore-acle!

Questions for Al Gore from an Australian reader of Michelle Malkin;
1.) What will be the true source of the power that will power all the lighting, the amplifiers and speakers, the concessions stands? Will it be massive arrays of solar cells?, Hydrogen fusion cells?, Wind Turbines? Ethanol Bio-Fueled generators?

2.) If the latter, who (which company / manufacturer) will supply them and what model No. engine / generators will be used?

3.) Will the food (for the concessions) be cooked on wood fires? Or perhaps they will use dried out cow & horse manure pellets for fuel?

4.) Will they re-use “used toilet paper” in the restrooms (in following what a “Green” labeled performing artist has recently suggested in the media.

5.) How will the performers arrive at the concert areas as well as their Jacuzzi-equipped hotels? Will it be the normal gas-guzzling plush stretch limousines or will they opt for hybrid or Electric vehicles? Maybe they will go all out and pedal a bicycle?

6.) Will the concert tickets & concert programs be printed on the most biodegradable paper available?

7.) Where will all the proceeds as well as all of the financial pledge donations that you and LIVE EARTH are soliciting be distributed to / earmarked for?

Powered by ScribeFire.

You know its all relative!

The AP can barely contain it self;
Payrolls Growth Significant in June

The Associated Press
Friday, July 6, 2007; 8:43 AM

WASHINGTON -- Employers boosted payrolls by a better-than-expected 132,000 jobs in June, enough to keep the unemployment rate at a relatively low 4.5 percent. It was another sign that the economy is snapping out of a nearly yearlong sluggish spell.

News flash: 4.5% unemployment rate is generally considered full-employment.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Do we really need another concert?

Will Live Earth hurt the planet more than help?


July 6, 2007

Tomorrow, when the calendar flips to 7/7/7, more than 100 musicians will perform in a series of events worldwide for a 24-hour concert to be broadcast around the planet in the name of "triggering a global movement to solve the climate crisis."

Led by Al Gore, the former U.S. vice-president who is now chairman of the Alliance for Climate Protection, Live Earth: The Concerts for a Climate in Crisis was co-founded by Kevin Wall, producer of Live 8, an event that cobbled together one of the largest audiences in history to combat poverty.

Not everyone is thrilled about the overlap.

"I'm getting lots of responses from people who think I am organizing it," the famously acrimonious Irish musician Sir Bob Geldof groused to Dutch newspaper de Volkskrant back in May. "I hope they're a success. But why is Gore actually organizing them? To make us aware of the greenhouse effect? Everybody's known about that problem for years."

We're all already conscious of global warming, he added.

Whether you agree with Sir Bob's invective, the question remains: When it comes to rock shows for environmentalism, should we be championing public awareness over carbon burden?

Dr. Dave Hickey, a professor of English at the University of Nevada Las Vegas who is also an art critic and analyst of Western culture, bluntly rejects rocking-out for politics, saying it has "never worked before."

Dr. Hickey, who penned Air Guitar: Essays on Art and Democracy, believes this is "just another gig that will consume enough energy to power Arkansas for the next century and leave a carbon footprint that will validate the sasquatch."

Professor William Rees, a population ecologist at the University of British Columbia and originator of the phrase and methodology behind the "ecological footprint," agrees that, "no doubt any large event has an ecological impact."

But he adds: "There is the question of whether the concerts change people's lives enough to compensate for the additional consumption stimulated by the events."

Phil Thornhill, key organizer for the Global Climate Campaign and national co-ordinator for the Campaign against Climate Change in Britain, believes the answer to that question is yes.

"I welcome all actions designed to raise awareness on climate change and promote the urgent action that we need - be they concerts, demonstrations, carnivals, street parties, mass bike rides or whatever," he says.

Mass movements can work, but when they involve rock stars who use private jets, such as the self-proclaimed material girl Madonna, or Brit rockers Duran Duran (who are potentially in it to carbon neutralize all the hairspray they ripped through in the eighties), how exactly are people's consciences going to be affected?

"Whatever level of respect, or otherwise, we might hold for people, it is not very useful to criticize their motives if they are doing something, or trying to do something, to raise awareness on climate change," Mr. Thornhill asserts.

One main criticism of Live Earth has been its lack of tangible objectives. Sir Bob himself offered that he would organize Live Earth only if he could "go on stage and announce concrete environmental measures from the American presidential candidates, congress or major corporations." Without those guarantees, he said, "it's just another pop concert."

Still, no one, especially a rock star, should underestimate the proselytizing power of music and stadium politics. Though to really combat global warming, we'd have to alter how we live. How we consume energy. How we fly. How we drive. It's not exactly the stuff of rock concerts. But it does capture the spirit of rock 'n' roll - the idea that anything is possible

Powered by ScribeFire.

Madonna "least green" at Live Earth

There's a joke in there somewhere;

Madonna 'least green' at Live Earth

PA Entertainment

Madonna is perceived to be the least green artist on the bill at Live Earth, according to a survey.

And James Blunt, the Beastie Boys, the Red Hot Chili Peppers and the Black Eyed Peas don't strike the public as particularly environmentally friendly either.

The concert at Wembley is one of several taking place around the world on July 7 to highlight the need to stop global warming.

David Kuo, head of personal finance at fool.co.uk, which carried out the survey of 674 people, said: "Although none of us really know for sure how green celebrities really are, public perception plays an important part.

"Live Earth will go some way to help, but caring for the environment goes beyond exercising vocal chords, rapping and crooning. Wouldn't it be refreshing if all the artists turned up to Live Earth on their bicycles?"

Powered by ScribeFire.

No meat for you at Live Earth!

So says PETA;
Wembley Urged To Take Meat Off Live Earth Menu
Thursday, 5th July 2007, 00:35

Organisers of the Live Earth concerts should not sell burgers or hot dogs at the high profile gigs, an animal rights group claimed today.

Peta said that selling meat at a concert for the environment would be like selling cigarettes at an anti-cancer fundraiser because of the amount of greenhouse gas emitted by the meat farming industry.

And Peta activists said that Wembley should take meat off the menu after a recent UN report found that the meat industry creates more greenhouse gases than all the cars, trucks, ships and planes in the world combined.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Alert Al Gore and cancel Live Earth!

Oldest DNA ever recovered shows warmer planet: report
Jul 5 03:14 PM US/Eastern

Scientists who probed two kilometers (1.2 miles) through a Greenland glacier to recover the oldest plant DNA on record said Thursday the planet was far warmer hundreds of thousands of years ago than is generally believed.

DNA of trees, plants and insects including butterflies and spiders from beneath the southern Greenland glacier was estimated to date to 450,000 to 900,000 years ago, according to the remnants retrieved from this long-vanished boreal forest.

Powered by ScribeFire.

This is Blair's replacement?

Oh brother!
Gordon Brown’s ban on the word “Muslim” in relation to terrorism can be blamed on the EU.

The prime minister has told Cabinet members not to mention “Muslim” and “terrorism” in the same breath.

It comes after the European Commission issued a guide for government spokesmen to avoid offence by ruling out the words such as “jihad”, “Islamic” or “fundamentalist” in statements about terrorist attacks.

It has been working with governments to make sure “non-offensive” phrases are used when announcing anti-terrorist operations or dealing with terrorist attacks.

It is not the first time the EU has tackled the issue of language - last year its guidelines suggested that the phrase “terrorists who abusively invoke Islam” should be used rather than “Islamic terrorism”.

You know because anyone can park two Mercedes Benz cars outside a club sponsoring "ladies night" rigged to explode with gas canisters and packed with nails to kill as many people, mostly women, as they can.

Anyone can.

I just don't remember anyone else doing aside from radical Muslims.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Thursday, July 05, 2007

Back on again in Rio...

Live Earth show in Rio to go on after ban revoked
Thu Jul 5, 2007 2:42PM EDT

By Andrei Khalip

RIO DE JANEIRO (Reuters) - A Brazilian judge revoked on Thursday her own injunction blocking the Rio de Janeiro leg of the Live Earth global series of concerts after organizers secured approval from the police and met security concerns.

"The show is on again. The prosecutor's office asked the judge to reconsider and she revoked the suspension," said a spokeswoman for the Rio Justice Tribunal.

The prosecutor's office, which requested the initial injunction, had argued there were not enough police to safeguard Saturday's climate change awareness concert on Copacabana beach.

It said police officers would be busy with the Pan American Games that start on July 13 in the crime-plagued city.

Powered by ScribeFire.

More acts question the need for Live Earth

Arctic Monkeys shiver at Live Earth 'hypocrisy'

Jul 4 10:57 PM US/Eastern

Rock group Arctic Monkeys have become the latest music industry stars to question whether the performers taking part in Live Earth on Saturday are suitable climate change activists.

"It's a bit patronising for us 21 year olds to try to start to change the world," said Arctic Monkeys drummer Matt Helders, explaining why the group is not on the bill at any of Al Gore's charity concerts.

"Especially when we're using enough power for 10 houses just for (stage) lighting. It'd be a bit hypocritical," he told AFP in an interview before a concert in Paris.

Bass player Nick O'Malley chimes in: "And we're always jetting off on aeroplanes!"

Large parts of the band's hometown of Sheffield were flooded at the end of last month after a deluge of mid-summer rain that some blamed on global warming. Two people were killed.

But the band wonder why anyone would be interested in the opinion of rock stars on a complex scientific issue like climate change.

"Someone asked us to give a quote about what was happening in Sheffield and it's like 'who cares what we think about what's happening'?" added Helders.

"There's more important people who can have an opinion. Why does it make us have an opinion because we're in a band?"

The group, whose first record was the fastest-selling debut album in British history, will clock up thousands of air miles -- in normal airliners not private jets, they say -- during their tour to Asia and Australia in the next few months.

They are not the only stars to take a cynical view of Live Earth, which aims to raise awareness about global warming but which will require many longhaul flights and thousands of car journeys to and from the music venues.

Many of the biggest acts have questionable environmental credentials -- the car-loving rapper Snoop Dogg appeared in a Chrysler commercial last year -- and there are doubts about the ability of pop stars to galvanise the world into action.

Bob Geldof, the architect of Live Aid and Live 8, the two biggest awareness-raising concerts in history, had a public spat with Al Gore about the need for the event.

"Why is he (Gore) actually organising them?" Geldof said in an interview with a Dutch newspaper in May, adding that everyone was already aware of global warming and the event needed firm commitments from politicians and polluters.

Roger Daltrey, singer from 1970s British rock band The Who, told British newspaper The Sun in May that "the last thing the planet needs is a rock concert."

And the singer from 80s pop sensations The Pet Shop Boys, Neil Tennant, attacked the arrogance of pop stars who put themselves forward as role-models.

"I've always been against the idea of rock stars lecturing people as if they know something the rest of us don't," he was reported as saying by British music magazine NME.

Live Earth takes place Saturday in seven cities -- Sydney, Tokyo, Shanghai, Hamburg, London, Johannesburg and New York -- and organisers hope for a television audience of two billion.

An eighth show in Rio de Janeiro was cancelled by police due to security concerns.

"Live Earth is going to bring together a massive audience around the world to take action against the climate crisis," says Live Earth organiser Yusef Robb.

"Some may say that rock stars tend to be conspicuous consumers, but if we can get those people to turn the corner then we're happy to do so."

Planners have put an enormous effort into minimising the environmental impact of the event in an effort to pre-empt sniping from critics about hypocrisy and the pollution caused by the concerts.

Fans are being encouraged to share cars or use public transport to attend, all lightbulbs will be energy-efficient and the food will be sourced locally where possible.

All the signs from the New York show and the stage in Tokyo will be recycled or composted.

"Where we can't use biodegradable materials, there'll be comprehensive recycling programmes," said Robb, who says the Live Earth gigs will set new green standards for the events industry.

After the shows, the organisers, with the help of accountancy group PricewaterhouseCoopers and an army of consultants, will calculate the volume of carbon emissions created and will then "offset" the difference.

Carbon offsetting means investing in carbon-reducing initiatives such as planting trees or making donations to renewable energy projects.

Robb highlights the good work being done by many artists.

British ska-rock group The Police and US funk-punk band Red Hot Chili Peppers are examples of "people who practice what they preach."

Meanwhile, nu-metal headliners Linkin Park have their own climate change charity and Hawaiian artist Jack Johnson tours in a biodiesel-fuelled bus.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Do you think Lennon would've performed at Live Earth? Think again...

From John Lennon's Playboy interview:

PLAYBOY: Just to finish your favorite subject, what about the suggestion that the four of you put aside your personal feelings and regroup to give a mammoth concert for charity, some sort of giant benefit?

LENNON: I don’t want to have anything to do with benefits. I have been benefited to death.


LENNON: Because they’re always rip-offs. I haven’t performed for personal gain since 1966, when the Beatles last performed. Every concert since then, Yoko and I did for specific charities, except for a Toronto thing that was a rock-’n'-roll revival. Every one of them was a mess or a rip-off. So now we give money to who we want. You’ve heard of tithing?

PLAYBOY: That’s when you give away a fixed percentage of your income.

LENNON: Right. I am just going to do it privately. I am not going to get locked into that business of saving the world on stage. The show is always a mess and the artist always comes off badly.

PLAYBOY: What about the Bangladesh concert, in which George and other people such as Dylan performed?

LENNON: Bangladesh was caca.

PLAYBOY: You mean because of all the questions that were raised about where the money went?

LENNON: Yeah, right. I can’t even talk about it, because it’s still a problem. You’ll have to check with Mother [Yoko], because she knows the ins and outs of it, I don’t. But it’s all a rip-off. So forget about it. All of you who are reading this, don’t bother sending me all that garbage about, “Just come and save the Indians, come and save the blacks, come and save the war veterans,” Anybody I want to save will be helped through our tithing, which is ten percent of whatever we earn.

PLAYBOY: But that doesn’t compare with what one promoter, Sid Bernstein, said you could raise by giving a world-wide televised concert — playing separately, as individuals, or together, as the Beatles. He estimated you could raise over $200,000,000 in one day.

LENNON: That was a commercial for Sid Bernstein written with Jewish schmaltz and showbiz and tears, dropping on one knee. It was Al Jolson. OK. So I don’t buy that. OK.

PLAYBOY: But the fact is, $200,000,000 to a poverty-stricken country in South America—-

LENNON: Where do people get off saying the Beatles should give $200,000,000 to South America? You know, America has poured billions into places like that. It doesn’t mean a damn thing. After they’ve eaten that meal, then what? It lasts for only a day. After the $200,000,000 is gone, then what?

Powered by ScribeFire.

More Live Earth trouble

RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil (AP) - A Brazilian judge has canceled Saturday's Live Earth concert in Rio because police said they do not have enough officers to guarantee crowd safety.

Organizers of the free show on Rio's Copacabana Beach said Wednesday they were trying to overturn the order to prevent Latin America from being left out of the worldwide music fest aimed at stopping global warming.

Promoted by former Vice President Al Gore, Live Earth concerts are scheduled for London; Tokyo; Johannesburg, South Africa; Shanghai, China; Sydney, Australia; and Hamburg, Germany; and East Rutherford, New Jersey. A band of scientists also will perform in Antarctica, to bring the festival to seven continents.

Brazilian prosecutor Denise Tarin requested a suspension of the concert, saying there were not enough officers to police a crowd that could top 700,000.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Wednesday, July 04, 2007

Al Gore's son drives a Prius...while drunk.

Not the media coverage Al Gore was looking for leading up to his Live Earth concerts and presidential run announcement;

Al Gore's Son Arrested on Drug Suspicion
Jul 4 12:27 PM US/Eastern

LAGUNA NIGUEL, California (AP) - Al Gore's son was pulled over for speeding on a California freeway early Wednesday and arrested on suspicion of possessing marijuana and prescription drugs, authorities said.

Al Gore III, 24, was driving a blue Toyota Prius about 100 mph south on the San Diego Freeway when he was pulled over by sheriff's deputies who said they smelled marijuana, said Sheriff's Department spokesman Jim Amormino.

The deputies searched the car and found less than an ounce of marijuana along with Xanax, Valium, Vicodin and Adderall, which is used for attention deficit disorder, Amormino said.

"He does not have a prescription for any of those drugs," Amormino said.

Gore was being held in the men's central jail in Santa Ana on $20,000 bail.

I didn't think a Toyota Prius could go that fast...

Tuesday, July 03, 2007

Gallup: Best part of a Hillary Clinton presidency?

The #1 answer....nothing. No kidding. Nothing got 28%.

For more illuminating answers click here.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Sonny boy!

”Since the president has intervened in this process, it is now the Congress’ obligation and responsibility to intervene in the executive process and begin an inquiry into these very serious crimes against the constitution of the United States,” said Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-Chicago).

Maybe Jesse Jr. should read the Constitution first...he may learn something.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Pelosi misstates what Bush said he would do...

"The president said he would hold accountable anyone involved in the Valerie Plame leak case. By his action today, the president shows his word is not to be believed." - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

No, he actually said this;
"If there's a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is," Bush told reporters at an impromptu news conference during a fund-raising stop in Chicago, Illinois. "If the person has violated law, that person will be taken care of.

So Libby did not leak Plame's name, Armitage did. Libby was convicted of lying to then grand jury about a crime that did not happen.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Edwards says Bush is mentally ill...

So John Edwards is again channeling for us...
"Only a president clinically incapable of understanding that mistakes have consequences could take the action he did today. President Bush has just sent exactly the wrong signal to the country and the world." - former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C

Clinically incapable? Oh. My. Goodness.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Obama's statement on Libby

"This decision to commute the sentence of a man who compromised our national security cements the legacy of an Administration characterized by a politics of cynicism and division, one that has consistently placed itself and its ideology above the law. This is exactly the kind of politics we must change so we can begin restoring the American people's faith in a government that puts the country's progress ahead of the bitter partisanship of recent years."

Oh Barack, Libby did no such thing. He was not convicted of outing a covert CIA agent. He was convicted of lying to a grand jury about a crime that did not happen. And if Plame was a covert agent, which has not been established definitively, the person who outed her was Richard Armitage and Spec. Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald knew this 3 months into his investigation. So far Armitage has not been charged with any crime and is free as a bird. And why did this tid-bit of info never make into the likes of the NY Times or Washington Post? Because if they printed it then they would not have a story to pound Bush with for 3 years.

Barack continues to speak in clichés looking for the perfect sound bite.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Humans blamed for living...

Human greed takes lion's share of solar energy

July 3, 2007

HUMANS are just one of the millions of species on Earth, but we use up almost a quarter of the sun's energy captured by plants - the most of any species.

The human dominance of this natural resource is affecting other species, reducing the amount of energy available to them by almost 10 per cent, scientists report.

Researchers said the findings showed humans were using "a remarkable share" of the earth's plant productivity "to meet the needs and wants of one species".

They also warned that the increased use of biofuels - such as ethanol and canola - should be viewed cautiously, given the potential for further pressure on ecosystems.

The scientists, from Austria and Germany, who publish their results today in the journal of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, analysed data on land use, agriculture and forestry from 161 countries, representing 97 per cent of the world's land mass.

This showed humans used 24 per cent of the energy that was captured by plants. More than half of this was due to the harvesting of crops or other plants.

The human use of the natural resource varied across the globe, ranging from 11 per cent in Oceania and Australia, to 63 per cent in southern Asia.

An agriculture professor at the University of Melbourne, Snow Barlow, said the paper showed humans were taking up too much of an important natural resource.

"Here we are, just one species on the earth, and we're grabbing a quarter of the renewable resources … we're probably being a bit greedy."

How ridicules.

Powered by ScribeFire.