Before Today:
Cum Word Count Goal: 8,000
Actual Word Count: 3,642
Status: Short 4,358
Today:
Words to Type Today Goal: 2,000
Cum Word Count Goal: 10,000
Actual Words Today: 2,284
Actual Cum Words: 5,926
Status: +284 on the day; -4,074 total.
I'm not caught up yet, but I'm getting closer!
Posted by: Raven at November 08, 2007 04:41 PM (Vvbj+)
4
Don't feel bad Raven, though common sense told me it was a special acronym I don't know about... I laughed when I saw it too! LOL!!!
Now I'll go shake the gutter crumbs off my mind!
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 08, 2007 05:27 PM (eaqGd)
1
That's so true it's sad. Just look at how Hillary vascilates... probably faster than 2.7 seconds!
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 07, 2007 07:40 PM (eaqGd)
2
I think Bill Clinton perfected the "say whatever you mean just for a moment, then you never said it" mantra better than anyone else. Now everyone just tries to copy him.
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2007 07:47 PM (oifEm)
3
I'll never forget the day I was running for office and talked to a guy for about 20 minutes. We agreed on EVERYTHING. He loved my positions. When we were done talking, I said, "So, will you vote for me?"
He said, "I can't. I'm black, so I have to vote Democrat."
So sad.
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2007 11:56 PM (2WD8n)
Well it seems like everyone else is making endorsements, so I suppose I should make one as well.
I'm a registered Republican. I've been a Republican for as long as I can remember. I've run for election as a Republican. I helped get other Republicans elected. I'm even a life member of the Republican National Committee.
I like freedom more than any other aspect or issue in politics. I think abortion is murder. I'm pro-gun and vociferously pro-freedom. So what sort of candidate should I support?
Mitt Romney just got an endorsement from Moral Majority co-founder Paul Weyrich and conservative Bob Jones III. Romney supports same-sex marriage (sometimes). Romney supports government forcing people to buy health insurance. Romney's campaign is spending more money than they're taking in. Romney wants to increase the war in the Middle East and spend more money. Romney wants more immigrants in America (legal or illegal). Romney wants to spend more money on "education."
I'm not sure I agree with Mitt Romney on ANYTHING. And I'm not sure he supports freedom anywhere. But hey, if you like government and you like government getting bigger, more controlling, and spending more, it appears that Romney is your guy.
Rudy Giuliani just got an endorsement from Pat Robertson. Mr. Robertson loves Rudy because Rudy "is the best candidate to handle the War on Terror." Well, Rudy LOVES illegal immigrants, spending, abortion, and same-sex marriage. He hates guns. He wants to increase power and control of government. In fact, when asked to name a difference, ANY difference between his positions and those of Hillary Clinton in a recent debate, Rudy COULD NOT NAME ONE.
So hey, if you're a single-issue voter that thinks sending more troops to Iraq and Iran is the way to go, I would say that Rudy is your guy. But if you like freedom, you cannot possibly argue that Rudy supports freedom.
John McCain just got the endorsement of Sen. Sam Brownback, a former candidate for president. McCain wants a bigger, stronger military and wants to fight more terrorists in more places around the world. McCain despises freedom of speech. In fact, if McCain had his way, I would literally not even be able to post these words on the Internet. McCain wants government to control all insurance to ensure that everyone gets "fair" insurance. McCain thinks we should have no southern border at all and anyone who wants to get free stuff from the American government should be able to, even if they're not citizens.
If you're a big supporter of government regulation of speech, McCain is your man. Oh, and he's a war hero.
Johnny Thompson -- or whatever his name is. He was a Senator. And in a TV show. Yeah, that's about all he's got so far. So I guess if movie stars are your thing, Thompson's your guy.
Duncan Hunter is the first candidate to agree with me on immigration. He wants a damn fence. I'm with Hunter on abortion and a few other issues. I like a lot of what Hunter wants to do. In fact, there's not much I can actually disagree with Hunter on -- except he does think we should keep fighting in Iraq. He's got a few ideas that make federal government intrusive, but for the most part, he does support freedom and states rights.
Mike Huckabee is a destructive force. He's loved by some, but he really is a true big-government type. He might say the right things for some people, but he supports wacko ideas like a federal government ban on smoking everywhere. He wants enormous piles of new money to be spent on education. He wants to force people to be healthy, rather than "permit" them to be free to make bad choices. He is just outright dangerous to freedom, if you ask me.
Ron Paul, however, likes freedom. He has consistently voted for freedom for decades. He thinks that we've spent enough time and money in killing in Iraq and that we should just come home. I don't know if that idea will work, but I'm sure willing to give it a try. Paul is also anti-abortion. He's pro-gun. And he really, really supports freedom -- both socially and financially. He absolutely terrifies the establishment because he will get rid of those thousands of people who are becoming the richest in the country by living off government contracts. And Paul recently got the endorsement of over 38,000 citizens who all put up around $100 for him.
So, since my primary issue is freedom, I find that I simply will not be able to vote for Rudy, Mitt, Thompson, Huckabee, or McCain. That leaves me with a choice of Ron Paul or Duncan Hunter. Since I think Paul will do more to advance freedom, I'm going to throw my support (and my money) behind Ron Paul. I think he would be GREAT for freedom and WONDERFUL for this country. I think he would advance freedom and we'd have an economic boom the likes of which have never been seen (after the government employees actually find productive work).
But don't worry, hard-core big-government, pro-war Republicans -- I live in North Carolina and unlike some Democrats, I believe in playing by the rules -- so my vote won't make any difference as it will all be over long before our presidential primary (but I'm still sending campaign donations to Paul).
1
Isn't it amazing how some Republicans want to spend and control like Democrats. I did a survey on 6 issues for each candidate and I matched perfectly with Duncan Hunter. But since he probably doesn't stand a chance of making it on the ballot, I'm probably not going to be able to vote for him. I still think Ron Paul is good, but I think a sudden pull out from Iraq will meet with disaster. I would like to see Iraq safe enough to help rebuild their infastructure and so they will stand a chance when we leave or withdrawl. But if we don't strengthen our borders, it won't matter where our troops are. And Homeland Insecurity is a JOKE! I have a feeling everything would get scrapped or reorg'd in Washington. when Ron Paul was through, big government and Homeland Security would probably be no more. :-)
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 07, 2007 07:39 PM (eaqGd)
2
I'm not thrilled with a quick withdraw from Iraq, but I'm not thrilled with spending years over there, either. Reading more about the founding documents, we're NOT SUPPOSED to be there in the first place. Jefferson and Washington both argued that we should simply not get entangled.
But that position aside, I agree with Paul on everything else. He really can make a change, a BIG change. I don't know how he will get past the political machinery in place to stop him, however.
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2007 07:46 PM (oifEm)
3
Maybe "the People" will get their act together, grow a brain, and vote according to what they know in their heart is right, and not what some campaign ad tells them. It's time to kill the clones and the Zombies! I just wish people would go back to the Founding Fathers and what they had to say in documents like the Federalist Papers, etc.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 07, 2007 07:51 PM (eaqGd)
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2007 07:57 PM (oifEm)
5
my biggest problem with paul is that he truly believes that if the US left the middle east alone, that they wouldnt attack us... and i cant believe that... the isolationist attitude is fine in a world where catapults are the biggest weapons... but in an age where small missiles can reach hundreds of miles and bigger ones can easily circle the globe, that kind of policy is dangerous, bordering on insane
Posted by: chris at November 08, 2007 01:40 AM (qz/By)
6
I'm not sure that's true, either -- but know what? It's never been tried! We have been in the Middle East for decades! What would happen if we stopped? No one can possibly know. I'm willing to give it a shot and see what happens.
Posted by: Ogre at November 08, 2007 12:41 PM (oifEm)
7
Wow! A blog on the right that is not censoring Ron Paul! Good for you Ogre. Ron Paul is honest and conservative despite what the fake conservatives say. Conservatives do not censor we welcome the free expression of ideas.
Posted by: DW at November 08, 2007 06:44 PM (hXOCH)
8
The more I find out about Ron Paul, the more I find I really have no choice but to support him because I really DO like freedom! Thanks for stopping by!
Posted by: Ogre at November 08, 2007 06:50 PM (oifEm)
Well, it's time to see if America has any guts left at all. If they did, America would immediately boycott the 2008 Olympics in China. Why? Because China has banned Bibles. That's right, a simple religious BOOK has been banned on the premises of the Olympics in China.
America, if it were still a world power with morals, would immediately protest the religious crack down. America would stand up and say, "We will not participate with a country that refuses to allow ANY freedom of religion." America would lead the world and tell China, "If you want to ban religious books, you have your games without us, because we will not participate and support that action."
I'm not holding my breath.
Instead, I bet a couple people will say, "Gee, China shouldn't do that." Then all the athletes and corporations and corporate sponsors will join up and go for the green -- the cash from the games. That just goes to show where morals are in the world today -- absolutely nowhere.
I wonder if any individual athletes will have the courage to tell China where they can stick their religious intolerance. I sure hope so.
Update (Thanks to HoosierArmyMom): Contact information for the US Olympic Committee:
U.S. Olympic Training Center - Colorado Springs
National Headquarters
1 Olympic Plaza
Colorado Springs, CO 80909
Tel: 719.632.5551
More info here.
Please do let me know if you contact them, and if you get a response from them. I'd like to keep up with that sort of information.
1
Yep, heard that one this morning. I will go as far to refuse to buy products touting the 08 Games. I guess it's time to write letters and emails again! Stupid Commies.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 07, 2007 03:42 PM (TzKlC)
2
I'm a BIG supporters of the Olympics. Well, for the amateur events -- I don't care much for any event that lets professional athletes play.
But every year I buy stuff and I support them, and I watch them in the early morning. But unless China rescinds this policy, I'm out for this one.
But I'm just a tiny cog. I really hope that America as a country can stand up to these religious bigots. And if America won't, I hope that some athletes really grow a pair. If neither does, they'll just be bowing at the altar of cash, no matter the cost.
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2007 04:02 PM (oifEm)
U.S. Olympic Training Center - Colorado Springs
National Headquarters
1 Olympic Plaza
Colorado Springs, CO 80909
Tel: 719.632.5551
http://www.usoc.org/12181.htm
Put this where it can be seen in your article and encourage people to express support for boycotting the Olympics if the Chinese won't budge. The website addy provides additonal contact address, but I would think the headquarters would be sufficient.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 07, 2007 07:19 PM (eaqGd)
"Election" results in Charlotte continue the communist trend. Go ahead, claim we're free and Democratic, but you're just fooling yourself. Also note I said election "results" not the people voting. As usual in Mecklenburg, there were very late return from some precincts and various people are questioning the results. One very odd result is that over 48,000 people signed a petition to put the sales tax repeal on the ballot, but less than 35,000 votes appeared for the repeal.
So what are the real results of the election? Well, nothing. The transit tax increase passed, so the city will build a train. Well, they were going to build the train whether the tax increase passed or not. While the tax increase was claimed to be for the train, it raised $70 million last year -- most of which was spent on buses. Oh, and the train will cost over a billion dollars -- very little of which will be paid for with the tax. Say hello to property tax increases, anyway.
Results also showed the exact same politicians holding their seats. Three communists who believe the only government that is good is one that spends MORE "retained" their seats (as if there were ever any doubt).
Election results also handed the city and county another $600+ million in "bonds." Hello, property tax increase, again. But you see, you're too stupid to understand that only government knows how to spend money, so you should just shut up and let government tell you how much money you should have.
Again, seriously, this will continue communism in Charlotte. What is communism? It's a system of government where the few control all means of production and every aspect of people's lives. That's what Charlotte is doing. Charlotte, with their "transit plan," is deciding exactly which type of business will exist and where it will exist. You absolutely cannot for a business that disagrees with government. They also will determine exactly which type of housing will be built where. No, there are NO property rights in Charlotte. Instead, they will built soviet-style apartment buildings because THEY want them, not because people want them.
The other part of communism is the election process -- it is closely controlled by government, and if you're not a member of The Party (Republicrats), then you have no power. You get no government contracts. You cannot participate in public debate -- gee, just like Charlotte.
Another aspect of communism is the state threats of force. In order for the government to retain power in such a system, they have to effectively threaten the people. Know why a lot of people voted the way they did? "I was afraid they would raise my property tax if I voted against it [sales tax increase]."
And it will fail, just like communism fails everywhere else. Gee, I wonder what it would be like to live in a free state.
But since government is doing it, economic feasibility DOES NOT enter into the equation. Government has unlimited money, so they honestly do not care how much ANYTHING costs.
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2007 02:09 PM (oifEm)
3
Add to this theme, Home Schooling is now under liberal attack. Someone is saying that home schooling doesn't teach enough "liberal values" and they feel the "state" should step in and force home schoolers to "teach differently"!!! Shades of Soviet Education!!! Why does a parent choose to home school in the first place? Because the government teaches immorality and atheism. I swear, it is getting very scary in this country!
It seems that liberal feminist's want to force "their agenda" on Home Schools and violate a parents right to educate their children according to their own Christian values! It is just such a crock!
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 07, 2007 04:15 PM (TzKlC)
4
Freedom scares social-ists because they lose control!
Social-ism CANNOT survive the light of freedom and truth -- it never does.
It can only survive with darkness and half-truths, forced onto people without allowing them to question.
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2007 04:49 PM (oifEm)
"This Article seeks to begin to fill this void by examining the constitutional implications of state abdication in this area"
That's just plain, unadulterated EVIL. The author is actually claiming that allowing people any sort of freedom is the state abdicating it's responsibilities.
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2007 04:51 PM (oifEm)
6
That is exactly what the Witches of Eastwick that were debating it on Fox this morning were saying. ogre, these people can't leave "parents alone to raise THEIR CHILDREN as THEY SEE FIT" and most likely the way they and their parents were raised????? No one died, no one was unhappy having a God they could call upon in prayer anytime they wanted! God designed the union between man and woman the way it is for a good reason. These feminist, commies are getting on my last nerve. The state taking over the children... isn't that like sooooo cold war Russia????
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 07, 2007 06:53 PM (eaqGd)
7
It's amazing how many people today really have that view that not only do they know better than the "Average Joe," but that they should force their views and opinions down everyone else's throat because they're SO superior.
And if you want to see heaven for these sorts of people in relation to home schooling, just take a peek at Germany today. People are being fined, jailed, and sent to psychiatric hospitals for home schooling their children!
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2007 07:14 PM (oifEm)
8
That's why liberals like give-a-way programs.
They want us to be voting political slaves.
Dependent on them to provide our insurance, and anything else so we won't dare buck them. They are literally sick with the desire for power.
If this liberal feminist has her way, the State will make sure you teach your children the "liberal values agenda" in homeschool or ELSE! Looks like we are going the route of Germany before we know it!
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 07, 2007 07:57 PM (eaqGd)
9
Absolutely. It is rather difficult for me to understand this thought process -- because I like freedom. If I see someone doing something that I, personally, think is stupid, I might tell them it's stupid, but I'm not going to rob someone else and use that money to hire goons to come grab the person and stop the from doing something I, personally, don't like. But the liberal will.
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2007 08:17 PM (oifEm)
10
I think the Anti-Christ will be a liberal.
Sometimes I think it will be George Soros. That man wants to be King of the New World Order, that's why he undermines what's good for America. That's why he spends so much of his money creating anarchy and discontent... to make us all ripe for the plucking!He probably paid for the liberal study to be done on Home Schools because you can't have conservatives teaching their children real values! Even with my crazed thinking I still have hope. As long as there are others like me, there is hope. :-)
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 07, 2007 09:16 PM (eaqGd)
11
There is always hope -- and not because of any man.
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2007 09:54 PM (2WD8n)
12
You are sooo correct. Jesus took care of that long ago free of charge didn't he.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 07, 2007 10:43 PM (TzKlC)
Wow. I just happened upon a news report for a small town school board race. Voters had to pick one of the following candidates. Using their own words, translated from newspeak, here are your choices:
Candidate #1: Incumbent. Has been board member for 8 years. Was a teacher in the education system for 25 years. Goals: raise test scores, no matter whether kids actually learn anything. Use racist hiring practices to discriminate against people based on the color of their skin. Find more cash to spend on "education." Stop people from having the freedom to build houses on their own land.
Candidate #2: Incumbent. Board member for 10 years. Be nicer to teachers. Spend more taxpayer money on teachers. Spend more "corporate" money on teachers. Will make decisions for everyone else based on what he, personally, wants for his child, no matter what anyone else actually needs.
Candidate #3: College professor since 1982. Wants to shake down private companies and force them to "donate" land to schools. Wants to shake down private companies for "donations" for schools. Also wants to base hiring decisions on the color of someone's skin, rather than on their actual qualifications.
Candidate #4: Clerical assistant at the school. Wants to reduce class sizes even though it does absolutely nothing to increase learning. Wants to increase test scores, no matter the cost or actual learning. Wants to base more decisions on which kids go to school based on their skin color. Wants to "prevent" teachers from leaving the school.
Candidate #5: Former Assistant superintendent. Wants to spend more money on teachers. Wants to spend more on technology, no matter what people need. Wants to force corporations to "give" money to education. Wants to maximize spending opportunities.
Holy crap, what choices, eh? Remember -- the government education system, as can be very clearly seen here by school board candidates -- is about SPENDING MONEY. It has NOTHING to do with educating children, learning, or anything else. They just want more money so they can spend it.
Think I could win this one?
Candidate #6 (Ogre): Thinks the government-run monopoly on education is crap. Will vote against spending any more money for anything related to education. Will not discriminate based on skin color.
Yeah, me neither.
Oh, how I yearn for freedom.
1
Having a brother and sister in education, my brother being a principal for many years, I can tell you that most school boards are made up of politicians who had nothing at stake in the system they govern. It is all about money and power and not the kids. Our last superintendant was all about handing out phat building contracts to his relatives in a town that has lost a lot of population from losing 2 GM Plants and several supporting industries. How corrupt is that. We have the highest drop out rate in Indiana for sure. Everyone I talk to is dealing with corrupt, good ole boy school boards. The state of education in this nation is approaching meltdown fast!
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 07, 2007 11:37 AM (TzKlC)
2
It is, quite literally, beyond repair. The entire government education system should be scrapped because it has no redeeming qualities. Seriously.
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2007 12:22 PM (oifEm)
3
I hear you. Every year it gets more and more corrupt in every way. I was happy to see my sister retire after about 20 years of teaching 4th grade. The last few years were hard on her as the kids attude changed because the parents were more and more liberal. I really feared for her a time or two because she had some dangerous little boys in her class with a "sue happy Mommy". My brother being a principal, he tells me nightmare stories as well.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 07, 2007 07:09 PM (eaqGd)
4
The part so many people cannot understand is that the system is totally evil -- even while individuals in the system are trying to do good. In other words, it doesn't really matter that you know this teacher or that teacher, who are really concerned with teaching and learning. The system is NOT, no matter what the people inside the system want.
And most people simply cannot comprehend that gap.
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2007 07:18 PM (oifEm)
5
I can think of an example. How stupid is it that if a student comes at you with a knife, you are not allowed to defend yourself??? Teachers, no matter how good they are, cannot maintain control over the classroom! Why??? Because the kids don't fear them or the system in any way. Why? Because Liberalism says they should not be punished or held accountable for their actions, that liberal lawyers will get them off the hook and make lots of money. The schools are run by liberals and the liberal lawyers keep conscience, discipline and God out of the schools. The more failing kids, the more pregnant teens, the more their give-a-way programs will take them over. This is only a small example, but I think you get the idea of what I'm saying. All of this, if you love your kids, is just wrong!
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 07, 2007 09:25 PM (eaqGd)
6
Indeed -- and that's the way the system is DESIGNED. It has to create a need to exist. The more problems it creates, the more it can prove it needs to exist -- to solve those very problems it created.
I honestly believe that sending your children to public school is child abuse.
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2007 09:55 PM (2WD8n)
7
I also think most "government run schools" are teacher abusers too. Any teachers who truly care are run off by the "social(ist)" rules" they have to adhere to. Teachers are required to have at least 6 years of college, a rather large investment, and yet they make very little money. Other professions with that much education "name their price". Add to that the fact that teachers are not allowed to run their classrooms and maintain proper discipline, it is a rough profession with very little job satisfaction these days.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 08, 2007 12:17 PM (TzKlC)
8
No question about it. The system honestly does not want people who have knowledge and the ability to teach. Instead, they only want people who have followed the state-prescribed courses that tell them exactly what they're supposed to do (not teach). For example, when is the last time you heard about an actual professional teaching in a government grade school? They're NOT ALLOWED to -- because they know too much and might actually teach kids stuff the state doesn't want them to know.
Posted by: Ogre at November 08, 2007 12:39 PM (oifEm)
9
The first time I hear David HOrowitz speak, it was on the Commie Channel C-SPAN about 2 years ago. It was about how colleges hire people who don't know squat about the subjects they are supposed to be teaching. Then they espouse their own, usually social(ist), agendas. I was shocked, but it was also an awakening for me. I went out and subscribed to the FrontPageMag newsletter, thus the blinders slowly began to melt away! Government schools seem to only start the process that our Colleges and Universities only started. Ogre, have you read Ann Coulter's account about McCarthy and how history was rewritten by liberals in regard to him and what was really going on in the 1950s?
I read a Coulter newsletter about it last night and I am still reeling. Everything stated was researched and backed up with evidence and we were all taught a lie when we were growing up about it. Amazing, and like you, I do not trust government education anymore.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 08, 2007 05:43 PM (eaqGd)
10
If you really want to get the crap scared out of you, read the true history behind the government schools in America. It's a long, long, read, but completely truthful, accurate, and damn scary:
In the past, once I get going, the story usually writes itself. Last year, when writing about the group that went through the fairy door, they just kept going and having adventures. This year I'm trying to write a suspense novel about intrigue and spying, but it's just not there. I keep plodding ahead, but the characters are pretty boring. They're just not doing anything. Ugh.
Well, I've only 1,053 words today, and I wanted to write 2,000 today. Overall I'm at 3,133 and on pace should have me at 8,000. All my data for actual vs. projected are in the negative numbers. Someone feed the muse! I'll keep trying, I think once something interesting happens, these wooden characters will get up and DO something...
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 06, 2007 10:18 PM (eaqGd)
2
wow thats a lot of words dude!..heh keep on truckin!
Posted by: Angel at November 06, 2007 10:27 PM (AM2ss)
3
That's a really neat article! I love the way it ends, talking about other people sacrificing!
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2007 12:02 AM (2WD8n)
4
Sounds more Libertarian than Republican... :-), and it's a really cool comparison to classic mythology too!
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 07, 2007 12:41 AM (TzKlC)
5
Ogre, you have much more creative writing skills to entertain without getting bogged down with boring S-chip details. Write a novel about special forces adventures, like that TV show "The Unit" or the movie "Rendition".
Posted by: John Daley at November 07, 2007 09:55 AM (y2s/z)
6
Today's Libertarian position is yesterday's Republican position -- just like today's Democrat position is yesterday's communist position.
Thanks, John. I started with a novel in the present-day on a Marine base. I think that's why it's going slow -- that's pretty darn boring!
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2007 12:14 PM (oifEm)
7
You need to jazz it up a bit for today's audiences. Check out Mark Harmon in that TV show "NCIS" (Naval Criminal Investigation Service?) Handsome ex-Marines (Mark Harmon) and beautiful women in distress ... military bases are pretty boring, so you need to have off-base heroin smugglers bringing in supplies from Afghanistan (with beautiful women and Blackwater guards, of course). James Bond GPS tracking gadgets and everything!
Posted by: John Daley at November 08, 2007 08:14 AM (7ppVp)
8
I don't watch much TV. But I'm working on it (not TV, the writing).
Posted by: Ogre at November 08, 2007 12:37 PM (oifEm)
9
* Comment deleted by moderator because it continued to troll without adding any substance or facts and included libelous statements *
Posted by: John Daley at November 11, 2007 08:06 AM (oN/VZ)
10
* Comment deleted by moderator because it continued to troll without adding any substance or facts *
Posted by: John Daley at November 11, 2007 09:04 PM (O0YsD)
Want to know what government health care looks like. take a peek.
Just think about it, seriously. When you go to a government office, ANY government office, to deal with a bureaucrat, when is the last time you thought they had ANY feelings? Have you heard them say, "Gee, I'm sorry, I'm just doing my job?" Or perhaps you've heard, "Well, we just have to do it that way." Put government even more in charge of health care and you WILL have doctors and nurse bureaucrats saying the exact same things. Go ahead, elect Hillary. You WILL see more of this sort of thing.
(H/T to Kender)
1
My biggest nightmare. Anyone who has ever had to fill out a FAF (Financial Aid Form) while in college can understand the absolute loathing one feels when dealing with Government Buracracy. Add to that the Unemployment Office frustration... you and your former employer pay into it, and that lady behind the counter acts like she is paying you out of her bank account.
Dealing with the government insures tons of red tape and paperwork, long waits, frustrating stupid rules, being treated like a dog (dehumanized) and think about doctors... what kind of quality of care will their be when they can't make enough to pay off the huge amount owed on student loans or to pay their high premiums for malpractice insurance! We won't get the quality of doctors we have now.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 06, 2007 03:40 PM (eaqGd)
2
We will get forced doctors -- that's what happens every time this system is tried. People won't become doctors, at first, because it won't be profitable enough. Then the government will just have to give away more to "attract" people to become doctors -- and they will just end up being more unfeeling bureaucrats that are "just doing their job." It will be a nightmare.
The only hope is that since this is America, there WILL be an underground that will provide medical services, even if it will only be for those who can afford it.
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2007 04:04 PM (oifEm)
3
That poor woman in England is raising her son alone because of deplorable care in a hospital!
But those are the kinds of people who will be in nursing if we become socialized. It is all scary to me.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 06, 2007 04:08 PM (eaqGd)
4
That should be "deplorable care in a GOVERNMENT hospital." That's the scary part.
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2007 04:11 PM (oifEm)
5
Amen to what HoosierArmyMom said ... I have had to deal with Financial aid and unemployment.
The financial aid people, even though it was a LOAN acted like I was a leach and unemployment people acted like I was the worst loser in the world and talked to me like I was a brain damaged child.
They were both very demeaning experiences and the goberment worker acted like they were very superior to me.
I do not want that when dealing with my health, god knows I have enough problems dealing with health insurance right now, I don't need the goberment thrown into that mix.
Posted by: Quality Weenie at November 06, 2007 05:31 PM (uHRYR)
6
Just picture dealing with the intake medical office assistant who is annoyed that you're bothering her when she could be on her bureaucratic 10-minutes per hour break. She won't care that you're bleeding on the floor.
Then picture the nurse who will tell you to stand on the scale because she needs your weight -- even if you're there because you've a broken ankle. I can easily hear, "If you don't stand on the scale so I can get your weight, you cannot proceed. That's my job, taking down your weight, and I'm just not allowed to let you go on until I've got it. Now get on the scale."
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2007 05:39 PM (oifEm)
But you have to realize that today the word "racism" ONLY means white people being mean to black people. Seriously. It's absolutely, completely impossible, in today's PC world, for a black person to be racist. Or a Democrat.
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2007 08:11 PM (oifEm)
8
Well Wuptdo, I am white... kinda... add Cherokee, Choctaw and I'm not sure what else to that description.
Kewl Vid... thanks for sharing. LOL!!!
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 06, 2007 09:03 PM (eaqGd)
9
Oh, so you're "American Indian." You get free cash, too.
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2007 11:59 PM (2WD8n)
10
Actually, I'm too watered down for cash, my Great Great Grandmother was full blooded Cherokee, but was raised by a white family in Missisippi and there is no "paper trail". The Choctaw comes on my Great Grandmother's side and was her Grandmother. But you can tell by looking it's there. When I and my brother and sister were babies, everyone asked Mom if the adopted Korean babies! LOL!!! My son had the Asian look when he was an infant as well!
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 07, 2007 01:52 AM (TzKlC)
to see how much your profit-making private monopolies care about you.
“Every enrollee in a private Medicare plan is a potential source of substantial profits,” just about says it all. Customer service is not even a small part of their equation.
Posted by: Your Privatization Pals at November 07, 2007 10:13 AM (y2s/z)
12
Which is why government should completely and totally get out of the medical business. They shouldn't regulate it, and they shouldn't provide Medicare.
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2007 12:15 PM (oifEm)
13
Well according to my college and financial aid I use to be black, but when I changed to being white I was no longer allowed financial aid.
Some how the college wrote down I was black (I could have sworn I checked white) and for the first 4 years of college I got finanical aid loans, but when I finally got it corrected that I was indeed white (took a full year) I no longer got a financial aid loan.
Why?
Because when your black you get extra points for fianancial aid. So even though I had been getting FA and my dad was making the same money, etc I couldn't get FA because I lost the "black" points.
Talk about racist. We were "poor" enough to get FA when I was black but we were "to rich" when I became white.
Posted by: Quality Weenie at November 07, 2007 03:25 PM (R6yie)
14
Bingo. And it's sad that the colleges actually deny that they do that. And worse, they actually claim that it's not racism when they give bonus points to people based on the color of their skin.
I always check or write in "Native American" just to screw with those forms.
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2007 04:00 PM (oifEm)
15
But if Medicare were stopped how would retired people get health care?
Posted by: Your Privatization Pals at November 08, 2007 08:04 AM (7ppVp)
16
Actually, it's not the colleges that make the rules on FA, it our wonderful government getting involved and making the "Rules" so I guess that means our government is "RACIST" eh?
I know this because I just did a 2 year contract testing software for a large FA company! Colleges do choose the programs they offer and other options, but the rules come staight from Uncle Sam and are influenced by the Lender's Lobby (Bankers).
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 08, 2007 12:09 PM (TzKlC)
17
That's true. Again, yet another example of government incapable of doing anything right.
Posted by: Ogre at November 08, 2007 12:35 PM (oifEm)
18
The Republicans have had since 1994 to straighten things out ... do you ever get the feeling they don't want government to work?
Citizens of "Richistan" (Americans with estates worth $1 million or more) don't need health care or police services. They are rich enough to pay for their own private bodyguards; their own private "concierge doctors".
They don't need factory workers or retired military, which are just an expense to them. They can invest their money anywhere in the world.
What are you going to do when Congress cuts your pension and denies your health benefits?
Posted by: Privatization Pals at November 08, 2007 07:31 PM (WHCOZ)
19
Once again I point to the same solution that is the answer to nearly every question you ask: GET GOVERNMENT OUT OF THE WAY.
That will solve problems, especially those related to health care.
Posted by: Ogre at November 08, 2007 07:40 PM (oifEm)
20
* Comment deleted by moderator because it continued to troll without adding any substance or facts *
Posted by: Privatization Pals at November 11, 2007 07:39 AM (Cj1+K)
21
* Comment deleted by moderator because it continued to troll without adding any substance or facts *
Posted by: Privatization Pals at November 11, 2007 09:02 PM (O0YsD)
Wow. How is this not bigger news? Ron Paul, Republican candidate for president, just raised more money in one day than ANY OTHER REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE. He raised more than Rudy, Mitt, or Thompson. He raised more than Hunter, McCain, or Huckabee. And while the story is in a few news reports, it's really not showing up much.
Even more amazing is HOW he raised this money. He didn't have a big dinner in New York to gather lobbyists. He didn't charge $1000 a plate for corporate donations and soft money. He didn't invite Chinese businessmen to a downtown party. He didn't even wander to Hollywood and have a party. So what did Ron Paul do to raise all this money in one day? Absolutely nothing. And that's the real story there.
This money came from people. With over $3.8 million raised from 35,000 people, that's an average of just over $100 a person. A few people just got together and said, "Hey, let's all raise a pile of cash on one day." They told their friends. Eventually, around 35,000 people, completely on their own, without any help or organization from any campaign, just donated $3.8 million in 24 hours. That's just unreal.
No matter what you think about Ron Paul, this is really huge. NO other candidate can claim anything even close to these numbers with ZERO campaign coordination. You might think the Ron Paul Revolution is just a few college kids, but this event shows it's at least 35,000 people around the country who are willing to put their money where their mouth is (in just 24 hours). Ron Paul could win this thing.
Even more amazing, imagine if Paul won the Republican nomination. I think he'd cream any Democrat on the ticket. Think about it -- do you think many Republicans would cross over and vote for Hillary just because they think Paul's a nut? Sure, some might, but not huge numbers. And then Paul would pick up a lot of the Democrat vote because he'd get all the billions or so (according to the media) anti-war voters. I really think he'd win in a landslide.
Of course, he'd have to get past the Republican nomination, and there's a lot of Republicans vehemently opposed to him because of his position on the Iraq war (primarily). Also, those fat cats in Washington oppose him because he doesn't like giving away billions in taxpayer money to people, just because they want it. The establishment honestly hates him because he WILL upset the apple cart and stop billions flowing to private individuals and corporations.
So think about it -- if you like freedom, you should vote Paul. If you're anti-war, you should vote Paul. If you hate the rich and insider Washington deals, vote Paul. If you hate high taxes, vote Paul. If you support less government regulation, yes, vote Paul. If you are pro-gun, vote Paul. If you don't want government controlling insurance and want health care freedom, vote Paul. Heck, if you're anti-establishment, again, Paul is your man.
He's raised over $7 million from individuals with no soft money included since October 1st. That's more than just a few college kids who are supporting him. He could actually win this thing.
1
As you know Ogre, my problem with Ron is the Iraq War stance. We are there, we are making a difference, we have run out Al Qaeda in Iraq for the most part, we are looking at Iran seeking to get nukes, we are looking at Pakistan going amok politically and the possibility their nukes could fall in the the hands of the Taliban... Holy Cow! Ron is such a little, whiney guy, how on earth can we trust him to deal with War, which we have, like it or not, when he is "Anti-War"? Just my question, since you seem to be more knowledgable on the subject. I for one do not want to leave Iraq vulnerable to their not so nice neighbors, and I really think we need someone who when he speaks, the World will listen and take him seriously in these times. I like everything Ron Paul stands for, except the War, and I think this War is going to make or break our nation and the world as we know it... so help me out here. Since I'm a very conservative, former Democrat with Libertarian leanings, I need help understanding all this! Also, do you think Ron Paul would get us out of the United Nations? I used to laugh at the John Birch billboards I'd see them... now I think he was dead on right! We just flip the tab for an organization that hates us and works against us.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 06, 2007 03:32 PM (eaqGd)
2
First, I'm pretty sure we'd be out of the UN in a minute with Paul as president.
As for the war stance, I've got a two-part take on it. In general, I agree that going into Iraq was the right thing to do. I think we really are making a difference now. However, when you go back and read the founders documents and writings, they warned us NOT to interfere -- because we simply do not understand the other cultures. Do I think Iran will nuke us as soon as they can? No, I really don't. Will us withdrawing from Iraq cause a global war? I don't think so. The people in the middle east have been fighting one another for centuries -- I don't think the US can do ANYTHING to ever stop that.
Second -- I don't agree with any current candidate completely. I hate just about every stance Rudy has. I despise Mitt's forced insurance programs. I don't like Thompson's positions on abortion and government size. I don't like Huckabee's position on government regulation. In fact, the only candidate with whom I disagree the least is Paul -- I like every one of his ideas except the war (I think). So if we're supposed to support the candidate with whom with disagree the least, Paul is it.
I also think that every other candidate will just be more of the same we've been getting for the past 20 years or so. I think Paul would bring REAL change to America -- for the better.
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2007 04:02 PM (oifEm)
3
I believe politics has changed so much since the 1950s. Today's politicians don't know what works and what doesn't. They are all wailing and flailing about with no clear direction. You could well be right, the whole system needs a shakedown and new thinking at the helm. I like the Fair Tax idea. I think Ron Paul is for that as well. This country needs to size down government, shut down the borders and keep up a strong defense.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 06, 2007 04:16 PM (eaqGd)
4
I haven't seen any other candidate, from either party, campaigning on lower taxes and a reduction in government. And I think Paul's idea for the border is perfect: instead of just trying to build a wall, stop the government giveaways that are bringing people here for free stuff. Then, if people still want to come and just work (without getting free health care, housing, education, and food), they can come work.
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2007 04:18 PM (oifEm)
5
I think the only thing that should be free to them is a screening when they come in to make sure they don't bring communicable diseases, just like they did on Ellis Island. I heard again this morning that Resistant TB is on the rise and spreading into more states. As for government givaways, I want to see the law changed that makes babies born here US Citizens automatically. A friend of mine working in Brownsville, TX a few years ago was telling me you could see pregnant women in labor crossing or wading across the Rio Grande to make sure their babies were born here... why... for the government checks. This was several years ago, and it was a scam then. I don't think citizenship should be easy, it should be earned.
If a baby has one parent who's a US Citizen, fine. If someone wants citizenship, learn English, the pledge, the Premble to the Constitution and so on. Earn it. I'm not sure we can do it without fences and secure check points, but you may have a point. I heard on the news this morning (on Fox) that wonderful Homeland Insecurity works so well they have let serveral "terrorists in over a certain period of time"!!! How messed up is that!
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 06, 2007 06:25 PM (eaqGd)
6
I'm telling you, you're on the same page as Ron Paul. He completely agrees that non-citizens who squirt out kids shouldn't get granted citizenship, nor should their children!
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2007 06:31 PM (oifEm)
7
I'm going to have to consider him as I think he would be a strong reformist. Hillary wants to "reform things" but in a negative, big government, tax increases way. That woman scares me.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 06, 2007 06:40 PM (eaqGd)
8
Hillary won't reform anything. She, like most politicians, just wants to spend more money. And no, she doesn't want to spend HER money, just yours. Keep in mind, this woman has never had a job in her life. She's never produced, well, anything. She has no concept of what the working world is about. None.
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2007 06:51 PM (oifEm)
9
I guess she and Bill have never paid a mortgage either. Her house on Long Island is a $10K a month mortgage payment. The government decides to provide them with Secret Service Security for the rest of their lives, she builds the agents a guest house to live in and guess what the government is paying them for the shack? You guessed it, 10K!!! So the government is paying their mortgage, Bill's retirement, and the salaries for their security! They are both cons as far as I'm concerned.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 06, 2007 09:09 PM (eaqGd)
10
seeing a lot of reports today of people that are "selling" merchandise to overseas customers for ron paul... if this is true, id say that he an hillary should both get investigated for illegal campaign financing...
Posted by: chris at November 06, 2007 11:10 PM (qz/By)
11
I haven't seen those reports. The only way that's illegal is if the money from the sales goes to the campaign. I'd be very surprised if that's the case with Paul, as he is really running a grassroots campaign. I'm not sure his campaign sells much of anything for contributions.
Hillary, on the other hand, from reports I've read, gets millions from other countries in contributions.
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2007 11:58 PM (2WD8n)
12
Don't forget, Ron Paul is the only candidate that takes the efforts to create a North American Union seriously. If the people pushing it get their way, no other issue will matter. An NAU bureaucracy would never end abortion, cut taxed, allow you to own a gun, limit immigration, or in any way limit government.
I wanna know next time an effort like yesterday is arranged. I wanna donate too, and maybe help him break his new record.
Posted by: Echo Zoe at November 07, 2007 01:01 AM (nIDjA)
13
I'll be sure and spread the word to you, Echo -- there's already a couple more of these afoot.
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2007 03:13 AM (2WD8n)
Posted by: Selfish __MEEEE__ at November 07, 2007 10:03 AM (y2s/z)
16
Awesome link! I like Paul even more now! Yes, I really do agree with most of the positions listed on that page!
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2007 12:20 PM (oifEm)
17
Oh believe me, the establishment is absolutely terrified of Ron Paul! They are completely scared to death! Why? Because he will stop massive amounts of government handouts to people who are now dependent on the government giving them cash.
And I'm not talking about the poor on welfare, I'm talking about government contractors and government employees who are making more money than anyone who is actually productive in this country!
Good points on his foreign policy. The worst I've heard is people who complain the middle east will nuke us if we withdraw. Of course, that's never been tried, so we don't know that. In fact, as some of my good commenters have suggested, if we get out of the Middle East, they will likely be so focused on killing one another that we will be fine.
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2007 03:58 PM (oifEm)
18
I'm really glad to hear you are also upset with the privatization of government services. No-bid contracts with White House cronies upsets me far more than the powerless people at the bottom of our economic ladder.
No country with nuclear weapons has ever been attacked. With the largest arsenal of nuclear weapons owned by the U.S. I doubt that anyone in the middle east would nuke us. Who would buy their oil?
Posted by: Selfish __MEEEE__ at November 08, 2007 07:58 AM (7ppVp)
19
I went out and looked at your link Selfish_Meee.
It was all pretty interesting to see another take on Ron Paul. Up until reciently I thought he was a flake. I have changed my thinking.
On the Ron Paul quotes from the site you linked to, tell me, what is "untrue" in what he says?
Separation of Church and State came into being, I believe, in the late 1930s or somewhere in that time frame. It was not part of the Constitution, Bill of Rights or even the Federalist Papers. And the very essence of democracy, is "majority rule", so rightfully, any minority offended by my religion, should just go back to their own country or find a new country where they are more comfortable. Our government has gotton way far away from those simple principals. Now, tell me what is untrue in these statements please? And remember, just like everyone here, it's MHO.
"The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers. On the contrary, our Founders’ political views were strongly informed by their religious beliefs". — Ron Paul
"The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America, with churches serving as vital institutions that would eclipse the state in importance". — Ron Paul
"Through perverse court decisions and years of cultural indoctrination, the elitist, secular Left has managed to convince many in our nation that religion must be driven from public view. The justification is always that someone, somewhere, might possibly be offended or feel uncomfortable living in the midst of a largely Christian society, so all must yield to the fragile sensibilities of the few. The ultimate goal of the anti-religious elites is to transform America into a completely secular nation, a nation that is legally and culturally biased against Christianity". — Ron Paul
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 08, 2007 09:51 PM (eaqGd)
20
The more people read about Ron Paul, the more they like him. The media HATES him, so they only focus on statements he'd made that might alienate some people.
I absolutely love how nearly every answer he gives to any question related to government can be answered, "Well, according to the Constitution..."
That's just awesome. He really would make a great president.
Posted by: Ogre at November 09, 2007 02:07 PM (oifEm)
21
* Comment deleted by moderator because it continued to troll without adding any substance or facts *
Posted by: Selfish __MEEE___ at November 11, 2007 08:52 AM (h1vJ/)
22
* Comment deleted by moderator because it continued to troll without adding any substance or facts *
Posted by: Selfish __MEEE___ at November 11, 2007 08:40 PM (O0YsD)
23
* Comment deleted by moderator because it continued to troll without adding any substance or facts *
Posted by: Selfish __MEEE___ at November 11, 2007 08:53 PM (O0YsD)
24
You know, HoosierArmyMom is the one who brought up "separation of church and state" -- I was just replying with what I was taught in school. Was she asleep during U.S. History class?
It seems to have hit a nerve with you, but don't you think other people like me are going to raise an eyebrow when they hear Ron Paul make claims that disagree with what they learned in school?
I like your enthusiasm for your favorite candidate! That is 100 times better than wusses who are afraid to pick someone they're happy with. But don't you see that your candidate is going to have trouble if what he says doesn't ring true with the American public?
$7 million and 35,000 votes is not going to win the 2008 election.
Posted by: Michael Beschloff at November 13, 2007 08:36 AM (604CD)
25
Actually, in your spam, you were demanding that she answer why Ron Paul feels the way he does. You responded to me saying I like Paul's position on the Constitution by questioning me on why Paul supports freedom of religion. And you twisted his words.
Oh, and if you believe what you were taught in public school history, perhaps there is no hope for you.
Posted by: Ogre at November 13, 2007 09:44 AM (2WD8n)
Well today is the big day in Mecklenburg County. The people are supposedly voting to decide whether to raise taxes in order to pay for a train set. Of course, in reality, they're not -- because the uptown boys' club IS building a train, no matter what any of the scumpeons voters want. If you don't give them the money in the form of sales taxes, they'll just raise some other taxes. And of course, the campaign to raise taxes has been HUGE -- paid for by corporate interests and yes, giant contributions from taxpayers. Yes, taxpayer money was used in large amounts to fund the campaign to support higher taxes. But well, that's the way government works today, whether you like it or not.
Just a few examples:
With the willing assistance of the Charlotte Observer, they have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars, including an out of state PR firm in an attempt to overwhelm the voter with an avalanche of television, billboards and mailings filled with misleading information.
DECEIT: By calling itself a Grassroots campaign, they were mired in deceit from the beginning. A look at their contributors shows that over 90 percent of their funds come from two sources: (1) large uptown corporations, developers, builders etc who stand to gain from the expenditure of billions of tax dollars----for example Bank of America gave $60,000, Wachovia $60,000 and Duke Energy $50,000 and (2) companies who are in business to plan, engineer and build mass transit lines, including companies who have sold these services or equipment to CATS---- for example Siemens builds light rail cars that are being used on the South Line. Siemens contributed $50,000, which at best shows a conflict of interest and comes close to being a bribe. In order to appear ‘grassroots’, the employees of many of these large contributors were solicited for small contributions---another example of deceit. Several employees of uptown law firms who do business with city/county government or these same big corporate givers, gave small amountsl
CORRUPTION:
1. This ‘against repeal’ campaign was involved in a conspiracy involving the head of Charlotte Chamber of Commerce, the president of the University, officials of the University’s transit department and executive in residence, Dennis Rash risking besmirching the good name of UNC-Charlotte.
2. Several instances where government employees risked breaking the law in an effort to aid this campaign. For example, members of the hired PR firm met with employees of County Department of Social Services, most likely an illegal activity, which resulted in threats to senior citizens that repeal of the tax would mean reduction of their much needed bus service.
3. The Charlotte Regional Visitors Authority made an illegal contribution of $5,000 to this corrupt campaign. The money was returned after the CRVA was confronted and the city attorney ruled the contribution to be illegal.
THREATS: This campaign verbally or through written material has threatened reduction in bus service to the handicapped, the aged and the Black communities. A Westside community gathering was told that repeal of the tax would mean reduction in bus service to folks who work uptown, especially those who work uptown at night. Bus drivers were told that many might lose their jobs. Taxpayers throughout the city and county have been threatened with property tax increases. They say that economic development will be threatened.
FALSEHOODS/HALF-TRUTHS:
1. Cost of the South Line: This campaign tells the voters that the cost is about $462 million dollars, but this figure does not include $73.2 million which came from budgets outside the transit budget. At least
$50 million came from 2002 and 2004 bonds that you, the voter, approved for infrastructure throughout the city.
2. Their advertising states that repeal of the tax will mean worsening of congestion and air quality, which is simply not true.
3. Their advertising misleads by implying that light rail will relieve congestion----also not true.
4. This corrupt campaign has labeled those of us in favor of repeal, as being opposed to public transportation-----absolutely not true.
5. This campaign attributes all the development in the South End to the light rail/trolley line. This of course is absurd.
tAll the above are just a few of the many examples of the willingness of the ‘against repeal’ committee to deceive the public in their desperation to continue this mammoth waste on light rail. Our mayor and his political friends are ‘sold out’ to powerful uptown crowd that contributes to their campaigns-----a crowd that will benefit from continued light rail spending. Light rail is not about a solution to transportation problems. It is all about land development and lining the pockets of those involved in this development.
1
Are you originally from the Charlotte area? I'm just curious if this level of corruption goes way back to the start. I've seen the tactic before. If you can scare a group into thinking they will lose something of value to them... they will blindly vote for that candidate out of fear. Sad... but oh so true.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 06, 2007 04:30 PM (eaqGd)
2
I used to live there until I learned how the politics there worked. I left the area as quickly as I could for an area with less crime and lower taxes. I still work in Charlotte, unfortunately.
But yes, the threats on this vote were vicious, as outlined above. The city council openly said that if the property owners DARED to vote down this sales tax that they were going to raise property taxes. The message was clear: we're building this damn train come hell or high water. It doesn't matter what the people want, this corrupt government IS going to build that damn train.
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2007 04:33 PM (oifEm)
3
Trains just create more congestion on city streets. Not to mention Charlotte, if I remember right, doesn't have a by-pass or an interstate system going around the city, so that would mean even more congestion waiting on trains to pass.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 06, 2007 04:50 PM (eaqGd)
4
They're working on a by-pass. It's current completion is scheduled for around 2012 -- it's been delayed by spending money on the trains...
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2007 04:57 PM (oifEm)
5
ROTFLMAO!!!! They need to focus on the by-pass and forget about the trains! This ain't Europe you know. What a bunch of Cretans! Corrupt Cretans I might add.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 06, 2007 05:32 PM (eaqGd)
6
It's about power and money. These people need trains because it will give them power. It will let them create jobs for their friends -- with high salaries. It will let them create jobs for the scum -- getting them more votes and more power. And it will require a literally endless supply of money to keep the train running which gives them the means to demand even MORE money for them to spend. Welcome to politics today.
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2007 05:41 PM (oifEm)
7
Yes and it does take a lot of money to spead lies and propoganda at election time, which I'm sure Siemens and whoever else makes money from the rail system is happy to provide. And yes, we have ole boy networks here that are happy to provide things no one needs in the first place and let other important things like schools go down the tubes. I'd love to see the stats on how many more are home schooled in this state now compared to 10 years ago!
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 06, 2007 05:59 PM (eaqGd)
8
Charlotte now has near to 100,000 kids that are home schooling. That should say quite a bit about the education system in Mecklenburg. 10 years ago, I'm pretty sure it was still illegal (or at least strongly discouraged by officials).
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2007 06:04 PM (oifEm)
9
That is a lot of children being home schooled.
It seems your politicians don't feel schools are important either. Really it is a blessing for those who can home school. Indiana is so messed up, funds come from the state to print tax bills usually in February and then mail them out, plus the school get state funds at the time for the next school year... this year, I still haven't got my tax bill and the school have had to do a bond issue at last I heard, in order to meet payrolls and stay open! This is every county in the state hasn't gotton tax bills. I would bet plenty that by the time we get them, they will be at a substantially higher rate than was paid last year! It's a rip off.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 06, 2007 06:37 PM (eaqGd)
10
Well, DUH. There's almost NO politicians that feel schools are important. Instead, schools are just a jobs program for the unemployable. It's always about control and money. Schools are a GREAT power item because in mosts places, "It's For The Children" STILL works. Today, on the ballot in Charlotte, at hundreds of millions of dollars in "bonds" -- so politicians can spend millions!
And under this government, taxes ALWAYS go up, and never down.
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2007 06:50 PM (oifEm)
11
I can't wait for the returns. I would SO love to see the tax repealed. I think the powers that be have spent so much, lied so much, and threatened so much that they will win -- but I can hope. Of course, if they don't win, they can just change the results, too.
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2007 08:12 PM (oifEm)
12
The joy of crooked politics. The bad thing about Dems always being in control, it is spend, spend, spend, and no one ever get's in that will clear up the debt and make taxes go down!
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 06, 2007 09:16 PM (eaqGd)
13
And it's so filthy here that good people don't want to get in, and when they do, they get driven out of politics REAL fast. You go along to get along, or they throw you out quick.
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2007 11:59 PM (2WD8n)
14
Well, we got a Republican for mayor 4 years ago after 16 years of a corrupt, good ole boy, Democrat mayor who darn near raped the ravaged town of everything he could. The new mayor in the last 4 years has done a good job of trying to rebuild the town. Last night a Democrat won the bid for mayor. I voted to the incumbant because the Dem was stressing that in the last 4 years jobs decreased along with population.
What he did not say was that the loss was attributable to the 16 year term of the corrupt mayor, and not the newer Republican. We have some good companies moving into the area, but they are still building. These people slide in based on lies or reinventing the truth. I consider this a major set back and can't believe how dumb the voting public can be.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 07, 2007 11:53 AM (TzKlC)
15
Lying is part and parcel of today's political system. If you tell the truth, you will lose.
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2007 12:23 PM (oifEm)
16
It's the bending and twisting of the truth until it is no long recognizable as such that gets to me. It is an insult to one's intelligence that they do that, then you realize, their lies got them elected, so there are way too many stupid people out there voting!
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 07, 2007 03:40 PM (TzKlC)
17
Welcome to newspeak. Words only have the meanings that those in power want them to have.
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2007 04:00 PM (oifEm)
Tancredo condemns continued use of giant crescent in Flight 93 Memorial
In September 2005, Colorado Representative Tom Tancredo said that he would not be happy so long as the Flight 93 Memorial still included the giant crescent. He has kept his promise. The crescent is still there, and Tom Tancredo is NOT HAPPY.
Alec Rawls has just received from Representative Tancredo a letter of complaint that Mr. Tancredo sent to Park Service Director Mary Bomar this afternoon. It notes the continued presence of the crescent:
Unfortunately, it appears that little if any substantive changes to the most troubling aspect of the design – the crescent shape – have been made.
And it calls for scrapping the crescent design entire and starting anew:
And while I regret having to contact the Park Service again about this issue, I sincerely hope that you will direct the committee to scrap the crescent design entirely in favor of a new design that will not make the memorial a flashpoint for this kind of controversy and criticism.
Thank you Tom Tancredo! The full text of Mr. Tancredo's letter is pasted below.
G Gordon Liddy is on it
Alec Rawls will be on G Gordon Liddy's radio show tomorrow morning (Tuesday) from 11-12, talking about the many Islamic and terrorist memorializing features in the planned memorial. The show should be a blockbuster.
Tom Burnett Sr. is going to call in. Tancredo or his press secretary TQ Houlton may call in. And YOU can call in:
1 800 GGLiddy
Streaming audio and broadcast stations here. Podcasts here. For the full expose, see Alec's Crescent of Betrayal book, available for free download until the print edition of the book comes out in February.
A crescent and star flag on the crash site
For those who are not familiar with the memorial debacle, the original Crescent of Embrace design would have planted a bare naked Islamic crescent and star flag on the crash site:
Architect Paul Murdoch's job is to work with symbols. He did not plant an Islamic flag on the crash site by accident. But even if this were somehow coincidence, it would still be wrong to build the memorial in a shape that the hijackers claimed as their own.
Representative Tancredo was the only Congressman to state the obvious, that "the crescent's prominent use as a symbol in Islam--and the fact that the hijackers were radical Islamists," raises the possibility that "the design, if constructed, will in fact make the memorial a tribute to the hijackers." (Tancredo Press release, 9/12/2005. See Crescent of Betrayal, download 1, page xiii.)
Two days later, Tancredo's press secretary laid out Tom's conditions:
... that the congressman would be happy with the changes only if the crescent shape is removed.
Nothing was changed
All the Memorial Project did was add some surrounding trees. Every particle of the original Crescent of Embrace design remains completely intact in the Bowl of Embrace redesign. The crescent shape was NOT removed. It was only very slightly disguised:
The graphics were recolored, and a few trees were added outside of the mouth of the crescent (lower left). Every particle of the original crescent and star structure remains. (Click here for site plan view.)
Representative Tancredo was right to demand removal of the crescent. It turns out that a person facing directly into the half mile wide crescent will be facing Mecca. That makes it a mihrab, the central feature around which every mosque is built. You can plant as many trees around a mosque as you want and it will still be a mosque. This is the world's largest mosque, by a factor of a hundred.
If you want to thank Tom Tancredo for keeping his Flight 93 promise and standing up again for the honor of our murdered heroes, his phone numbers and online email form are here.
Full text of Representative Tancredo's letter to Park Service Director Mary Bomar
November 5, 2007
The Honorable Mary A. Bomar
Director
National Park Service
U.S. Department of Interior
1849 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20240
Dear Director Bomar,
I am regrettably writing you in reference to the proposed memorial to commemorate the victims of Flight 93 which crashed in Pennsylvania on September 11, 2001. As you may know, I contacted Director Mainella in late 2005 about my concerns with the design.
The appropriateness of the original design, dubbed the "Crescent of Embrace," was questioned because of the crescent's prominent use as a symbol in Islam – and the fact that the hijackers were radical Islamists. As I pointed out in my September 2005 letter, the use of the crescent has raised questions in some circles about whether the design would make the memorial a tribute to the hijackers rather than the victims whose mission the flights passengers helped to thwart.
When I received Director Mainella's response to my letter on October 6, 2005, I was pleased to read her assurance that the advisory committee and the architect were amenable to "refinements in the design which will include negating any perceptions to the iconography." I was also pleased to learn that the name of the memorial was to be changed.
Unfortunately, it appears that little if any substantive changes to the most troubling aspect of the design – the crescent shape – have been made. This deeply concerns me. As I told Director Mainella in 2005: Regardless of whether or not the invocation of a Muslim symbol by the memorial designer was intentional, I continue to believe that the use of this symbol is unsuitable for paying appropriate tribute to the heroes of Flight 93 or the ensuing American struggle against radical Islam that their historic last act has come to symbolize.
I remain committed to ensuring that this memorial is a powerful symbol for the whole nation and a testament to the courage and will of the passengers of the flight – as I am sure you are. And while I regret having to contact the Park Service again about this issue, I sincerely hope that you will direct the committee to scrap the crescent design entirely in favor of a new design that will not make the memorial a flashpoint for this kind of controversy and criticism.
Thank you in advance for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Tom Tancredo, M.C.
The phony redesign
To see clearly how the redesign leaves the original Mecca-oriented cescent fully intact, note that the orientation of the crescent is determined by connecting the most obtruding points of the crescent structure, then forming the perpendicular bisector to this line (red arrow):
The green circle shows the direction to Mecca (the "qibla" direction) from Somerset PA. It was generated using the Mecca-direction calculator at Islam.com. Just place this qibla graphic over the original Crescent of Embrace site plan and the Mecca-direction line almost exactly bisects the crescent.
Looking closely at the above graphic (click for larger image), you can see that the most obtruding tip at the bottom of the original crescent structure is the last red maple at the bottom. On top, the most obtruding tip of the crescent structure is the the end of the thousand foot long, fifty foot tall, Entry Portal Wall. Here is an artist's rendering of the end of the Entry Portal Wall as seen in the Bowl of Embrace redesign. It shows how overtly this upper crescent tip remains intact in the redesign:
The redesign only added the extra row of trees on the left, behind the visitors in this graphic. Notice that these trees are not even visible to a person who is facing into the crescent. They do not even affect a visitor's experience of the crescent, never mind affect the presence or integrity of the crescent itself.
Oh that ladder he's standing on? It's about 10 feet tall. And yes, those torches are on fire. I'm telling you, if you live in the area and don't get to this fair, you're really missing something. There's still two weekends left!
1
Do they have meade at the Ren Fair? I may be coming to NC for Thanksgiving, Ft. Bragg area.
How close is it?
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 05, 2007 08:44 PM (eaqGd)
2
Oh yes, they have mead! But the fair ends the 18th, so you'd have to come early. It's an hour or two (I think) from Ft. Bragg. I'd say it's worth a few hours' drive (Google maps calls it 2 hrs 45 min -- but 109 miles).
Posted by: Ogre at November 05, 2007 08:46 PM (oifEm)
3
Wish I could take the week off, but I'm starting a new job the week before. It's going to be me making the marathon trip there and back in the time alotted if you get my drift.
Last Ren fair I went to was in Ohio. Not a bad weekend trip.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 05, 2007 08:57 PM (eaqGd)
4
I know that feeling well! Well, maybe you'll get back down this way next year -- this fair goes on every fall here for 7 weekends.
Posted by: Ogre at November 05, 2007 09:00 PM (oifEm)
5
That would be outstanding and I should have some vaction time by then. :-) The perils of starting over. I've been contracting for about 4 years so now it's a "real job" time. LOL!!! Gotta haircut too!
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 05, 2007 09:05 PM (eaqGd)
6
Hehe. I know that well, too -- I've been in a "regular" job for years now and I've got a couple recruiters trying to talk me into going back into consulting!
Posted by: Ogre at November 05, 2007 09:07 PM (oifEm)
7
The plus side of consulting... the money is awesome, but the down side... you pay dearly for bennies, and no paid time off. I'm looking forward to a normal job.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 05, 2007 09:19 PM (eaqGd)
8
True, the money is usually good. And heck, you don't need benefits today -- the Democrats will take care of you! I just go to the emergency room for all my needs and tell them I have no SSN. They don't seem to care.
Posted by: Ogre at November 05, 2007 09:23 PM (oifEm)
9
Use a little chemical tanning lotion and talk with a hispanic accent too! Yeah, if I have a hard time making it with out the extra money... I'll just contract again and let the Dems take care of my healthcare!!! LOL!!!
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 05, 2007 09:52 PM (eaqGd)
10
They'll take care of it whether you want them or not soon enough...
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2007 01:36 AM (2WD8n)
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2007 02:02 AM (2WD8n)
6
Only difference, the Dems let em talk for em and the terrorists strap bombs on em. Oops, there I go being politically incorrect again!
Call the PC Police!
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 06, 2007 02:53 AM (TzKlC)
7
You're just asking for time in a re-education camp for hate crimes, aren't you?
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2007 02:14 PM (oifEm)
WASHINGTON (November 2007) -- A new Backgrounder from the Center for Immigration Studies challenges assertions by farmers and the media that crops are rotting in the fields for lack of workers. Philip Martin, a professor of agricultural and resource economics at the University of California, Davis, examines workers’ wages, farmers’ earnings, and the prospects of mechanization.
The full report, entitled Farm Labor Shortages: How Real? What Response?, is available at http://www.cis.org/articles/2007/back907.html.
Among the findings:
# Production of fruits and vegetables have been increasing. In particular, plantings of very-labor-intensive crops such as cherries and strawberries have grown by more than 20 percent in just five years.
# The average farm worker makes $9.06 an hour, compared to $16.75 for non-farm production workers.
# Real wages for farm workers increased one-half of one percent (.5%) a year on average between 2000 and 2006. If there were a shortage, wages would be rising much more rapidly.
# Farm worker earnings have risen slower in California and Florida (the states with the most fruit and vegetable production) than in the United States as a whole.
# The average household spends only about $1 a day on fresh fruits and vegetables.
# Labor costs comprise only 6 percent of the price consumers pay for fresh produce. Thus, if farm wages were allowed to rise 40 percent, and if all the costs were passed on to consumers, the cost to the average household would be only about $8 a year.
# Mechanization could offset labor higher labor costs. After the “Bracero” Mexican guestworker program ended in the mid-1960s, farm worker wages rose 40 percent, but consumer prices rose relatively little because the mechanization of some crops dramatically increased productivity.
# Labor-saving mechanization can be difficult for one farmer, since packers and processors are usually set up to deal either with hand-picked or machine-picked crops, but not both. Government has a key role to play in facilitating mechanization.
Well those of us who complain about illegal immigration and lawlessness have seen this coming for a long time now. Illegal immigrants violently attack American citizens -- and are not punished.
Some American citizens were protesting companies hiring people who are actively breaking the law (illegals). The criminal alien invaders (illegal immigration or "undocumented" workers) proceeded to attack and beat the American Citizens who had not broken any laws. Since the illegals are used to breaking the law, and continue to be rewarded for breaking the law -- they continue to break the law. They're just getting more brazen and breaking more laws.
America used to be a country of laws. It is not today.
1
All this at a Home Depot? So they hire illegals too? Are there any businesses that don't? Might be easier to make a list of those that don't so everyone can make a concerted effort to do business with "illegal free businesses" as much as possible. Why are there those that want to give this country away Ogre?
Those who want to just flush it all down the toilet? It's hard to understand IMHO.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 05, 2007 05:07 PM (eaqGd)
2
Indeed, there's a few web sites set up that are designed to list companies that don't hire illegals. However, not many companies will actually admit hiring illegals in the first place!
And in this case, it's not the Home Depot that was doing the hiring, that's just where the illegals hang around waiting for someone to pick them up and hire them.
Posted by: Ogre at November 05, 2007 05:19 PM (oifEm)
3
So they are treating Home Depot like the Unemployment office or Union Hall??? Holy Cow!
I guess HD can't do much about that, but it seems like the law would jail and then deport them as the last I knew, assault and battery was a crime. Sad news, but not surprising.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 05, 2007 06:15 PM (eaqGd)
4
Yes, each community has it's "hiring locations" where you can go and get work daily and get paid cash daily -- no questions asked. I know where they are in a couple cities, because I've done that. Home Depot could tell them to get lost and harass them for trespassing -- but they just don't want to.
And since the illegals already ignore laws, there's nothing even suggesting to them that they should obey any OTHER laws, either!
Posted by: Ogre at November 05, 2007 06:40 PM (oifEm)
5
Just not securing the border and then putting a legal immigration process in place like it was at the turn of last century (Ellis Island), is leaving the door open to get all of Mexico's diseases and criminals and sends a message that we will tolerate anything they want to do in this country. Not good and no one is thinking about what our children will inherit from this.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 05, 2007 06:58 PM (eaqGd)
6
Don't get me started on the diseases. Drug-resistant TB is coming back -- thanks to illegals!
At this point, I favor completely and entirely closing our borders. No one else gets in until those who are here assimilate and become Americans -- including speaking English.
Posted by: Ogre at November 05, 2007 07:16 PM (oifEm)
7
According to Michael Savage, who broadcasts from the Sodom and Goemorrah of the west, San Francisco, among the very large sheltered population of illegals there they have had not only resistant TB, but cholera and another disease I can't remember surface. I am for shutting down the border, and screening every illegal and if any are sick or criminals, ship em back to Mexico. And do the screen before government money is wasted trying to make citizens out of them. I personally hope San Francisco has a big ole earthquake/fire that they are overdue for... and watch me not lift a finger to help the Anti-American Pinkos! I am just about sick of them.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 05, 2007 07:39 PM (eaqGd)
8
There are a large number of diseases that had been completely wiped out in this country that are now making a comeback ONLY because of illegals entering the country and spreading those diseases. Did you read about the recent screening of a chicken processing plant that found HUNDREDS of employees (illegals) who had TB? Wonderful.
Posted by: Ogre at November 05, 2007 07:55 PM (oifEm)
9
Holy Cow, no I didn't, but I do know many of them work in the chicken and turkey farms too. I may just do a ham for the holidays this year!
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 05, 2007 10:32 PM (eaqGd)
10
Well, as long as you fully cook the chicken you're okay...of course, as long as you didn't get some raw disease-ridden juice of the chicken on your counter...
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2007 01:39 AM (2WD8n)
11
Now that does it! It's gonna be a Hammy Thanksgiving and Christmas! (Oh my... I just used the "C" word!).
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 06, 2007 01:48 AM (TzKlC)
12
I'm pretty sure that's a thought crime. Go ahead and turn yourself in and save law enforcement some time, would you?
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2007 02:04 AM (2WD8n)
13
I wonder what the local police would think if I showed up at the station downtown to turn myself in!!! LOL!!!!
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 06, 2007 02:50 AM (TzKlC)
14
Depends on your locality. I'm sure some would gladly lock you up.
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2007 02:12 PM (oifEm)
15
The illegals should really start hanging at Lowe's since everything there is bilingual.
At least Michigan is pretty safe from illegals for the next 5 months, they don't like the cold and leave Michigan usually in October.
Posted by: Quality Weenie at November 06, 2007 05:35 PM (uHRYR)
16
Oh and Christmas, christmas, christmas, christmas.
Oh and I heart Jesus and jews!
Posted by: Quality Weenie at November 06, 2007 05:36 PM (uHRYR)
17
I can't imagine the illegals will leave Dearbornistan...
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2007 05:42 PM (oifEm)
I would like to invite each of you to view two screenings of the movie "Border" here in NC that our organization ALIPAC is bringing to the state. We need as many lawmakers, citizen activists, and members of the media to attend as possible.
Many of you may have heard about this movie on CNN, Fox, and CBS or in the New York Times.
This film will be of interest to people that favor enforcement and those that favor amnesty.
The two showing are also being supported by Bill Lumaye of WPTF radio's Bill Lumaye Show and by Jeff Katz of WBT Radio in Charlotte, NC.
You can view a trailer for the film and order advance tickets online at www.BorderMovie.com
I will be speaking briefly at these showings and the film's creator, Chris Burgard, is coming to NC on his national tour with the film and will be glad to answer questions after each showing.
These show times are for 6:30pm EST, but an 8:30 showing will be added if the first sells out. That is why advance tickets are important.
This movie shows you what is really happening at the border in graphic detail. This movie shows you what North Carolina will be dealing with soon. People are planning to come from across the state and from SC and VA to see this film here with us.
Hope to see you there.
William Gheen
ALIPAC
Americans for Legal Immigration PAC
www.alipac.us
1
Seems to me, it might be a good idea to order a copy of the DVD, especially since by the time anyone in my state gets smart enough to start doing screenings, it will probably be too late. Are you going to the screening Ogre? If so I can't wait to see what you think about the presentation.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 05, 2007 06:11 PM (eaqGd)
2
If it were just about any other day, I'd be there. However, I have a prior commitment to a bunch of 9- and 10-year old boys. I'll be teaching them how to build birdhouses this evening.
Posted by: Ogre at November 05, 2007 06:39 PM (oifEm)
3
That is a good commitment to keep. Many will see it by virtue of seeing it on your blog.
At least I'm now aware of it. I can keep my eyes open.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 05, 2007 10:29 PM (eaqGd)
4
I'm going to teach kids the right way before government corrupts them every time I can.
Posted by: Ogre at November 06, 2007 01:38 AM (2WD8n)
So, all you horny teenage boys who want to see naked women, you can now do so in the Montgomery County locker rooms. Well, technically not yet, but the county there is considering allowing any and all genders in the women's locker room. If you're a pervert or a pedophile, you are welcome in Montgomery County. If you like gawking at naked women, move to Maryland, land of open sex.
Of course, you might not actually see any naked women or girls in those locker rooms, because any one female with the tiniest bit of sense will simply avoid those locker rooms at all costs. Don't worry, though, I'm sure this government will soon pass a law allowing perverts and teenage boys in your home bathroom, too. After all, otherwise it would be "discrimination."
Posted by: Ogre at November 04, 2007 08:29 PM (2WD8n)
3
Considering last week Portland, ME schools considered it acceptable to hand out birthcontrol to 11 year old girls,had been doing so for years, and without parents knowledge so this doesn't surprise me. Home school is going to become a safer option in the future. Our forefathers knew that Government should never be allowed to enter private lives to this degree... I am beginning to think the wrong side won the Civil War! States rights over centralized government sounds good.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 05, 2007 06:28 PM (eaqGd)
4
Anything other than home school today is just plain dangerous. Seriously. While everyone thinks THEIR government school is okay, and they know that the people/teachers in THEIR school are fine, it's always everyone else's schools. I have news for those people -- it's NOT. It's ALL government schools. While there can be good people working there, the system, and it's goals, are pure evil.
Posted by: Ogre at November 05, 2007 06:41 PM (oifEm)
5
I listened to Horowitz a year or so ago, and what is going on in Colleges and Universities is Anti-American propoganda pushing. Having had my eyes opened, I have seen agendas being pushed at the local level in high schools and middle schools. Home schooling isn't easy, but it is doable and I'm convienced, should be done.
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at November 05, 2007 07:11 PM (eaqGd)
6
Glad to hear it -- the more children that are freed from the government indoctrination systems, the better educated and more free people will be.
Sure, it's hard, but freedom's never been easy.
Posted by: Ogre at November 05, 2007 07:17 PM (oifEm)
>
Architect Paul Murdoch's job is to work with symbols. He did not plant an Islamic flag on the crash site by accident. But even if this were somehow coincidence, it would still be wrong to build the memorial in a shape that the hijackers claimed as their own.
Representative Tancredo was the only Congressman to state the obvious, that "the crescent's prominent use as a symbol in Islam--and the fact that the hijackers were radical Islamists," raises the possibility that "the design, if constructed, will in fact make the memorial a tribute to the hijackers." (Tancredo Press release, 9/12/2005. See Crescent of Betrayal, download 1, page xiii.)
Two days later, Tancredo's press secretary laid out Tom's conditions:
The graphics were recolored, and a few trees were added outside of the mouth of the crescent (lower left). Every particle of the original crescent and star structure remains. (Click here for site plan view.)
Representative Tancredo was right to demand removal of the crescent. It turns out that a person facing directly into the half mile wide crescent will be facing Mecca. That makes it a mihrab, the central feature around which every mosque is built. You can plant as many trees around a mosque as you want and it will still be a mosque. This is the world's largest mosque, by a factor of a hundred.
If you want to thank Tom Tancredo for keeping his Flight 93 promise and standing up again for the honor of our murdered heroes, his phone numbers and online email form are here.
Full text of Representative Tancredo's letter to Park Service Director Mary Bomar
November 5, 2007
The Honorable Mary A. Bomar
Director
National Park Service
U.S. Department of Interior
1849 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20240
Dear Director Bomar,
I am regrettably writing you in reference to the proposed memorial to commemorate the victims of Flight 93 which crashed in Pennsylvania on September 11, 2001. As you may know, I contacted Director Mainella in late 2005 about my concerns with the design.
The appropriateness of the original design, dubbed the "Crescent of Embrace," was questioned because of the crescent's prominent use as a symbol in Islam – and the fact that the hijackers were radical Islamists. As I pointed out in my September 2005 letter, the use of the crescent has raised questions in some circles about whether the design would make the memorial a tribute to the hijackers rather than the victims whose mission the flights passengers helped to thwart.
When I received Director Mainella's response to my letter on October 6, 2005, I was pleased to read her assurance that the advisory committee and the architect were amenable to "refinements in the design which will include negating any perceptions to the iconography." I was also pleased to learn that the name of the memorial was to be changed.
Unfortunately, it appears that little if any substantive changes to the most troubling aspect of the design – the crescent shape – have been made. This deeply concerns me. As I told Director Mainella in 2005: Regardless of whether or not the invocation of a Muslim symbol by the memorial designer was intentional, I continue to believe that the use of this symbol is unsuitable for paying appropriate tribute to the heroes of Flight 93 or the ensuing American struggle against radical Islam that their historic last act has come to symbolize.
I remain committed to ensuring that this memorial is a powerful symbol for the whole nation and a testament to the courage and will of the passengers of the flight – as I am sure you are. And while I regret having to contact the Park Service again about this issue, I sincerely hope that you will direct the committee to scrap the crescent design entirely in favor of a new design that will not make the memorial a flashpoint for this kind of controversy and criticism.
Thank you in advance for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Tom Tancredo, M.C.
The phony redesign
To see clearly how the redesign leaves the original Mecca-oriented cescent fully intact, note that the orientation of the crescent is determined by connecting the most obtruding points of the crescent structure, then forming the perpendicular bisector to this line (red arrow):
The green circle shows the direction to Mecca (the "qibla" direction) from Somerset PA. It was generated using the Mecca-direction calculator at Islam.com. Just place this qibla graphic over the original Crescent of Embrace site plan and the Mecca-direction line almost exactly bisects the crescent.
Looking closely at the above graphic (click for larger image), you can see that the most obtruding tip at the bottom of the original crescent structure is the last red maple at the bottom. On top, the most obtruding tip of the crescent structure is the the end of the thousand foot long, fifty foot tall, Entry Portal Wall. Here is an artist's rendering of the end of the Entry Portal Wall as seen in the Bowl of Embrace redesign. It shows how overtly this upper crescent tip remains intact in the redesign:
The redesign only added the extra row of trees on the left, behind the visitors in this graphic. Notice that these trees are not even visible to a person who is facing into the crescent. They do not even affect a visitor's experience of the crescent, never mind affect the presence or integrity of the crescent itself.
