Laugh at Liberals Archive for July, 2008
THREE THINGS TO PONDOR
THREE THINGS TO PONDER
1. Cows
2. The Constitution
3. The Ten Commandments
COWS
Is it just me, or does anyone else find it amazing that during the mad cow epidemic our government could track a single cow, born in Canada almost three years ago, right to the stall where she slept in the state of Washington? And, they tracked her calves to their stalls. But they are unable to locate 11 million illegal aliens wandering around our country. Maybe we should give each of them a cow.
THE CONSTITUTION
They keep talking about drafting a Constitution for Iraq Why don’t we just give them ours? It was written by a lot of really smart guys, it has worked for over 200 years, and we’re not using it anymore.
THE 10 COMMANDMENTS
The real reason that we can’t have the Ten Commandments posted in a courthouse is this: You cannot post “Thou Shalt Not Steal,” “Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery,” and “Thou Shall Not Lie” in a building full of lawyers, judges and politicians. It creates a hostile work environment.
A LETTER FROM IRAQ
I recieved this in my email today. I cannot vouch for it’s authenticity because I do not know the young man who wrote or if he is even real. You be the judge.
Hello everyone,
As you know I am not a very political person. I just wanted to
pass along that Senator Obama came to Bagram Afghanistan for about an
hour on his visit to “The War Zone”. I wanted to share with you what
happened.
He got off the plane and got into a bullet proof vehicle, got to
the area to meet with the Major General (2 Star) who is the commander
here at Bagram.
As the Soldiers where lined up to shake his hand he blew them
off and didn’t say a word as he went into the conference room to meet
the General. As he finished, the vehicles took him to the ClamShell
(pretth much a big top tent that military personnel can play basketball
or work out in with weights) so he could take his publicity pictures
playing basketball. He again shunned the opportunity to talk to
Soldiers to thank them for their service.
So really he was just here to make a showing for the American’s
back home that he is their candidate for President. I think that if you
are going to make an effort to come all the way over here you would
thank those that are providing the freedom that they are providing for
you.
I swear we got more thanks from the NBA Basketball Players or
the Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders than from one of the Senators, who wants
to be the President of the United States . I just don’t understand how
anyone would want him to be our Commander-and-Chief. It was almost that
he was scared to be around those that provide the freedom for him and
our great country.
If this is blunt and to the point I am sorry but I wanted you
all to know what kind of caliber of person he really is. What you see
in the news is all fake.
In service,
CPT Jeffrey S. Porter
Battle Captain
TF Wasatch
American Soldier
OIL PRICES ARE FALLING, THE EARTH IS COOLING AND I’M FEELING FINE
Oil prices are falling again. I’m constantly checking the web to see when the Democrats aand mainstream media are going to George Bush the credit. Wait a minute. They blamed him for the price of oil going up, doesn’t that mean he get’s the credit for the price going down too?
Yeah, right.
Still, to see oil prices fall the way they have is good news for me and you and good news for economy just don’t expect to see any flag waving in the media. Doom and Gloom is the message of the day until Obama gets elected.
GLOBAL WARMING
I watched the Senate hearings on Global Waming on CSPAN the other day. Dr. Roy Spence, a former NASA scientist during the Clinton Administration and a reknowned climate researcher basically laid the smack down on Sen. Barbara Boxer and the rest of the committee regarding global warming. Recent data shows that there has been no increase in global temperature FOR 7 YEARS. Furthermore, he has conducted extensive research that reveals fundamental flaws in the research that Gore, IPCC and others use to hype global warming (climate change now since there is no longer any warming.)
Here are some excerpts from his opening statement.
On the subject of the Administration’s involvement in policy-relevant scientific work performed by government employees in the EPA, NASA, and other agencies, I can provide some perspective based upon my previous experiences as a NASA employee. For example, during the Clinton-Gore Administration I was told what I could and could not say during congressional testimony. Since it was well known that I am skeptical of the view that mankind’s greenhouse gas emissions are mostly responsible for global warming, I assumed that this advice was to help protect Vice President Gore’s agenda on the subject.
Right there is where you pull off your left glove and smack the guy right in the face.
Regarding the currently popular theory that mankind is responsible for global warming, I am very pleased to deliver good news from the front lines of climate change research. Our latest research results, which I am about to describe, could have an enormous impact on policy decisions regarding greenhouse gas emissions.
Despite decades of persistent uncertainty over how sensitive the climate system is to increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels, we now have new satellite evidence which strongly suggests that the climate system is much less sensitive than is claimed by the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change(IPCC). Another way of saying this is that the real climate system appears to be dominated by “negative feedbacks” — instead of the “positive feedbacks” which are displayed by all twenty computerized climate models utilized by the IPCC. If true, an insensitive climate system would mean that we have little to worry about in the way of manmade global warming and associated climate change. And, as we will see, it would also mean that the warming we have experienced in the last 100 years is mostly natural. Of course, if climate change is mostly natural then it is largely out of our control, and is likely to end — if it has not ended already, since satellite-measured global temperatures have not warmed for at least seven years now.
You would think there would excitement on the part of Democrats to hear that global warming may not be a manmade problem after all…..and you would be wrong. Spencer went on to explain that the IPCC’s climate models didnt’ calculate cloud cover correctly and were set up to be biased towards predicting warming. His findings are published and are certainly under investigation by other researchers, but read this part.
Significantly, prior to its acceptance for publication, this paper was reviewed by two leading IPCC climate model experts - Piers Forster and Isaac Held– both of whom agreed that we have raised a legitimate issue. Piers Forster, an IPCC report lead author and a leading expert on the estimation of climate sensitivity, even admitted in his review of our paper that other climate modelers need to be made aware of this important issue.
To be fair, in a follow-up communication Piers Forster stated to me his belief that the net effect of the new understanding on climate sensitivity estimates would likely be small. But as we shall see, the latest evidence now suggests otherwise.
He goes on to explain that there is clear and undeniable evidence that the natural forces of El Nino and La Nina have cause the vast majority of global warming over that past few decades. But this fact is completely overlooked by Gore and IPCC researchers.
While this is not necessarily being presented as the only explanation for most of the warming in the last century, it does illustrate that there are potential explanations for recent warming other than just manmade greenhouse gas emissions. Significantly, this is an issue on which the IPCC has remained almost entirely silent. There has been virtually no published work on the possible role of internal climate variations in the warming of the last century.
Why no research into possible other cause of global warming other than man? There’s no money in it.
In his close Spencers brilliantly takes a swipe at Dr. Kevin Trenberth, Al Gore’s scientific guru and lays down the gauntlet for congress.
While it will take some time for the research community to digest this new information, it must be mentioned that new research contradicting the latest IPCC report is entirely consistent with the normal course of scientific progress. I predict that in the coming years, there will be a growing realization among the global warming research community that most of the climate change we have observed is natural, and that mankind’s role is relatively minor.
While other researchers need to further explore and validate my claims, I am heartened by the fact that my recent presentation of these results to an audience of approximately 40 weather and climate researchers at the University of Colorado in Boulder last week (on July 17, 2008) led to no substantial objections to either the data I presented, nor to my interpretation of those data.
And, curiously, despite its importance to climate modeling activities, no one from Dr. Kevin Trenberth’s facility, the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), bothered to drive four miles down the road to attend my seminar, even though it was advertised at NCAR.
I hope that the Committee realizes that, if true, these new results mean that humanity will be largely spared the negative consequences of human-induced climate change. This would be good news that should be celebrated — not attacked and maligned.
And given that virtually no research into possible natural explanations for global warming has been performed, it is time for scientific objectivity and integrity to be restored to the field of global warming research. This Committee could, at a minimum, make a statement that encourages that goal.
The best Barbara Boxer could offer in return is…Aren’t you Rush Limbaugh’s official climatologist? I kid you not. She really said that. It’s testimony like Spencer’s that gives me hope that real science will prevail in the debate on global warming.
THE NIGGER TRAP
Nigger. It’s just a word, right? It can’t cut you, break a bone, steal your money or take your life…unless you’re white.
If you are white and you use that word in the wrong context and you will lose your job. You can be banned from television and radio. Use that word in the wrong neighborhood, it will get you killed.
Now if you’re black, you can use the word in any circumstance without fear. You can use it jokingly. You can use it in anger. It doesn’t really matter. The fact that you are black means you can say it and get a free pass because of the color of your skin.
That pretty much sums up the debate that has emerged after Jesse Jackson was caught on tape by Fox News calling Barack Obama a nigger and saying he would like to cut his nuts off. Mind you, this is the same Jesse Jackson who beat the drums so loudly after Don Imus called a bunch of girls, jokingly, nappy headed hos, that Imus got fired. CBS was so scared of retribution from Jackson and his ilk that they fired Imus and ended up losing the lawsuit he filed. That fear cost them millions, but they figured it was worth it.
I don’t see anybody threatening to fire or ban Jesse Jackson, do you?
I watched excerpts from the view as Whoopi Goldberg explained that the black community has co-opted the word, originally meant as an insult, and turned it into something less vicious…but, she added, if you’re white, you still can’t say it. I can say it, because I’m black. You can’t because you are white, so get over it. I can understand this concept to a degree. It’s the same thing for fat people. I can joke about me being overweight, but if you joke about me being overweight, it’s hurtful. I get it.
The problem is, sometimes, very rarely, but sometimes even white people can get a pass on using the word. I have seen and heard white comedians, in front of black and mixed race audiences, use the word nigger and get howls of laughter. It’s the context I suppose. The comedian was making a joke, it was funny, everybody laughed, no harm no foul, right? Let that same comedian walk outside of the comedy club and call one of the black audience members, in anger, a nigger and he is very close to committing a hate crime.
If Don Imus was black. Would there have been any controversy? Of course not. And he didn’t even use the N-word. He just made a stupid observation using language that some people, in some circumstances MIGHT find offensive. I can’t count the number of times I’ve heard girls, white and black, call each other ho and laugh about it.
The only reason white people can’t say the word is because the black activist community is struggling to find anything that they can point at to prove that racism is still a scourge on society that requires your donation to fight. In other words, white people saying the word nigger keeps Al Sharpton in business. That should be reason enough to stop using it.
Rappers sing it, comedians shout it and people use it every day…but if you’re white and conservative you better back off. It’s a trap.
I decided I can’t stand Rush
I have gotten to the point I can not stand listening to Rush Limbaugh any longer. The same rhetoric is repeated over and over. I’m not a liberal and can no longer call myself a conservative if the leading conservative is sounding so pathetic. Wednesday he went on and on several times in his broadcast about how stupid the Demorcrats are for not wanting to get even for the beheadings and loss of soldiers we have had in Iraq. We were never in Iraq to get even for current events, if we are there for that reason we will always be there since there will be a never ending supply of events to get even for. It would be impossible to have those current events had we not gone there in the first place, first grade logic. He sounds completely ignorant, and this is who we choose to represent us on a world stage. He calls himself El Rushbo for crying out loud, how much more juvenile and happy hour bar mentality can you get than that? He makes us look like a bunch of redneck idiots. Last week his comments about 1% of the the population paying the majority of taxes was just plain stupid, duh Mr. Limbaugh 1% has the majority of income. I don’t begrudge them having it, but I definitely am not concerned they are taxed on it. It isn’t going to matter if they start taxing our capital gains because we are not making millions like Rush Limbaugh therefore we will not have any capital left to tax.
Middle income hard working people are struggling to keep their homes, go to work and pay daycare because prices have gotten out of control and the best our most paid attention to spokesperson can come up with is calling a presidential nominee lord messiah over and over and over and over and over. We are not living in times where we can look at the poor and say oh well they should have worked harder it’s their own fault because we are becoming them and it’s not our fault. Could the man come up with some real solutions rather then a constant parade of what he believes is wit in running down others.
My end of Rush came in his commentary about a woman this week who wrote a letter to her Senator saying we need to prioritize. He spent alot of his show ridiculing her on the order she put her priorities, food being third on the list. What he doesn’t realize with his millions is that food can come third, it’s called taking the hamburger out of the spaghetti, it’s one of the few places have left where we can cut back and save a couple of bucks. I realized then he is so completely out of touch with us and what is going on because he is not us, he does not even have to consider what is going on out here because he is protected from it all with his wealth. Then it dawned on me, he is just a high paid entertainer, nothing more. He has been telling us what we want to hear for years and I’m ashamed to admit I listened and I went with it because my calf was fat and life was good. Now it’s starting to unravel and it’s not going to matter who gets into the white house. The reality is the cost of living has gone up by over 60% in eight years and it’s not going to come down, it never has and never will. And it will be a very long time before income catches up again. This is where we are and we had better come up with something better than pointing fingers, calling names, and listening to commentary of leaders or shall I say entertainers who in reality couldn’t care less about us.
WANT TO SEE YOUR FUTURE?
IN A FORETELLING OF WHAT HIS ADMINISTRATION WILL LOOK LIKE, IF HE WINS, BARAK OBAMA NOW HAS THE LARGEST CAMPAIGN STAFF OF ANY PRESIDENTAL CANDIDATE, EVER! THAT OF COURSE DOES NOT INCLUDE THE LIBERAL MEDIA.
AL GORE NEEDS SOME TIME IN A SMALL PADDED ROOM!
HOW MANY CARBON CREDITS WILL IT TAKE TO SHUT AL GORE’S MOUTH? I AM WILLING TO SELL A KIDNEY TO MAKE A CONTRIBUTION. GORE’S CLIMATE CRISIS IS COMPLETE AND PURE NONSENSE. NOW THE GUY WITH THE BIGGEST ELECTRIC BILL IN THE VOLUNTEER STATE IS SAYING THAT DRILLING OFFSHORE EQUATE’S TO INVADING IRAQ?
WHAT THE NEW YORK TIMES DOESN’T WANT YOU TO READ
New York Times Op-Ed editor, David Shipley, a former Clinton advisor, has refused to accept an editorial written by John McCain. Just one week after publishing an Obama Editorial outlining the candidate’s Iraq policy, McCain’s rebuttal was refused publication by the paper because the editor wanted it changed to “mirror” Obama’s editorial. Whatever that means.
Since the New York Times doesnt’ want you to read it, and it’s available through the Drudgereport, here is McCain’s unedited piece.
In January 2007, when General David Petraeus took command in Iraq, he called the situation “hard” but not “hopeless.” Today, 18 months later, violence has fallen by up to 80% to the lowest levels in four years, and Sunni and Shiite terrorists are reeling from a string of defeats. The situation now is full of hope, but considerable hard work remains to consolidate our fragile gains.
Progress has been due primarily to an increase in the number of troops and a change in their strategy. I was an early advocate of the surge at a time when it had few supporters in Washington. Senator Barack Obama was an equally vocal opponent. “I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there,” he said on January 10, 2007. “In fact, I think it will do the reverse.”
Now Senator Obama has been forced to acknowledge that “our troops have performed brilliantly in lowering the level of violence.” But he still denies that any political progress has resulted.
Perhaps he is unaware that the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad has recently certified that, as one news article put it, “Iraq has met all but three of 18 original benchmarks set by Congress last year to measure security, political and economic progress.” Even more heartening has been progress that’s not measured by the benchmarks. More than 90,000 Iraqis, many of them Sunnis who once fought against the government, have signed up as Sons of Iraq to fight against the terrorists. Nor do they measure Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki’s new-found willingness to crack down on Shiite extremists in Basra and Sadr City—actions that have done much to dispel suspicions of sectarianism.
The success of the surge has not changed Senator Obama’s determination to pull out all of our combat troops. All that has changed is his rationale. In a New York Times op-ed and a speech this week, he offered his “plan for Iraq” in advance of his first “fact finding” trip to that country in more than three years. It consisted of the same old proposal to pull all of our troops out within 16 months. In 2007 he wanted to withdraw because he thought the war was lost. If we had taken his advice, it would have been. Now he wants to withdraw because he thinks Iraqis no longer need our assistance.
To make this point, he mangles the evidence. He makes it sound as if Prime Minister Maliki has endorsed the Obama timetable, when all he has said is that he would like a plan for the eventual withdrawal of U.S. troops at some unspecified point in the future.
Senator Obama is also misleading on the Iraqi military’s readiness. The Iraqi Army will be equipped and trained by the middle of next year, but this does not, as Senator Obama suggests, mean that they will then be ready to secure their country without a good deal of help. The Iraqi Air Force, for one, still lags behind, and no modern army can operate without air cover. The Iraqis are also still learning how to conduct planning, logistics, command and control, communications, and other complicated functions needed to support frontline troops.
No one favors a permanent U.S. presence, as Senator Obama charges. A partial withdrawal has already occurred with the departure of five “surge” brigades, and more withdrawals can take place as the security situation improves. As we draw down in Iraq, we can beef up our presence on other battlefields, such as Afghanistan, without fear of leaving a failed state behind. I have said that I expect to welcome home most of our troops from Iraq by the end of my first term in office, in 2013.
But I have also said that any draw-downs must be based on a realistic assessment of conditions on the ground, not on an artificial timetable crafted for domestic political reasons. This is the crux of my disagreement with Senator Obama.
Senator Obama has said that he would consult our commanders on the ground and Iraqi leaders, but he did no such thing before releasing his “plan for Iraq.” Perhaps that’s because he doesn’t want to hear what they have to say. During the course of eight visits to Iraq, I have heard many times from our troops what Major General Jeffrey Hammond, commander of coalition forces in Baghdad, recently said: that leaving based on a timetable would be “very dangerous.”
The danger is that extremists supported by Al Qaeda and Iran could stage a comeback, as they have in the past when we’ve had too few troops in Iraq. Senator Obama seems to have learned nothing from recent history. I find it ironic that he is emulating the worst mistake of the Bush administration by waving the “Mission Accomplished” banner prematurely.
I am also dismayed that he never talks about winning the war—only of ending it. But if we don’t win the war, our enemies will. A triumph for the terrorists would be a disaster for us. That is something I will not allow to happen as president. Instead I will continue implementing a proven counterinsurgency strategy not only in Iraq but also in Afghanistan with the goal of creating stable, secure, self-sustaining democratic allies.
