Posted by: The Elephant Owner in Health Care,video on August 31st, 2009
Share on FacebookIt’s not a racial comment. It means green on the outside, red on the inside.
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in Common Sense on August 31st, 2009
Massachusettes is getting close to change the law so that a Democratic governor can appoint a Democrat to replace Ted Kennedy. The law they are changing is the law Democrats created just a few years ago to deny a Republican governor the ability to appoint a senator had John Kerry won the race for president (Whew…we dodged that bullet). In Massachusettes, laws are only as good as the current situation.
We have seen this movie before.
In New Jersey, the race for Senator needed tweeking. Scandal was jepordizing the election of the incumbant senator, Robert Torecelli. With Torecelli reeling, the chances for a Republican taking the spot was very real. No problem. Laws and rules are only for Republicans. Torecelli dropped out of the race and the Supreme Court of New Jersey allowed Democrats to change the election rules to allow former Senator Lautenberg to run in his place. Lautenberg won and New Jersy should be ashamed of themselves.
But all that takes a back seat to the grand daddy of them all. Remember when the Supreme Court in Florida changed the election rules in an attempt to change the outcome of the 2000 Presidential election. Established rules were changed by the robe clad elites simply because the election was close and Al Gore had a chance to win if he could control the re-count process…kind of like Al Fraken just did. Minnesotans should be ashamed of themselves.
How can we have any clarity in the law if the rules can be changed to accomodate the powerful?
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in corruption on August 30th, 2009
In defending cybersecurity law that would give the President sweeping new powers, Senator Rockefeller (D) says,
We must protect our critical infrastructure at all costs…
This is from the same radical party that tells us that we must respect the civil liberty of terrorist because our ideals are so important. So when Rockefeller says “at all costs”, he has limits. The cost stops at the water’s edge.
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in Common Sense on August 30th, 2009
Why do we need “a civilian national security force that is just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded” as the military?
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in Obama Administration,video on August 29th, 2009
How devastating can a nation with a limited nuclear arsenal or terrorist with a single nuke be to a great nuclear power like the United States? The answer is very devastating. All it will take is two nuclear warheads launched straight into the air and detonated at 200 miles to wipe out our way of life.
You may wonder how? A nuclear explosion gives off a pulse of electromagnetic power called the EMP. This EMP causes a surge of electricity and can wipe out electronic equipment anywhere in the line of sight. Two cargo ships, one in the Atlantic and one in the Pacific could launch nuclear warheads several hundred miles straight up into the air destroy the electrical grid throughout the country. At first would think that we were having a black out, but soon you would learn of the thousands of planes that had fallen from the sky. Next you may find that your car no longer starts and your water no longer flowed. Hospital equipment (including the backup systems) would all be down. Your local grocery store only has about 2 days worth of food.
Hunger and chaos would follow.
Our government is aware of this threat. They have project that 2/3 of the population will die within the first year following an EMP attack. That is 200 million people. Maybe that is why Republicans and Democrats agree that nuclear weapons must not fall into the hands of terrorists or states sponsors of terror.
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in The War on Islamic Radicals on August 29th, 2009
Watch the video (h.t. to Michelle Malkin)
Now,I don’t know all the details, but obviously the cop acted stupidly.
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in free speech on August 29th, 2009
From our enlightened European allies
The Met Office has caused a storm of controversy after it was revealed their £30million supercomputer designed to predict climate change is one of Britain’s worst polluters.
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in Global Climate Change on August 29th, 2009
The Bill of Rights provides for the right to privacy from unwarranted government searches. It was this Constitutional freedom that the Burger court used as a pretext to take the rights away from states as it pertains to regulating abortions.
From About.com: Roe v. Wade was decided primarily on the Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution, a part of the Bill of Rights. The Court’s decision in this case was that the Ninth Amendment, in stating that “the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people,” protected a person’s right to privacy.
Read more…
So my question is about ObamaCare and the right to privacy. If the government is allowed to advise doctors on what is the proper and cost effective way for particular ailments, then the government will need some way of overseeing the doctor patient relationship. I just don’t see any way around this. If they don’t , their cost cutting measure will be ineffective.
Will Roe vs. Wade be at risk if privacy is thrown to the wind in order to pass ObamaCare?
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in Common Sense on August 29th, 2009
What good could come from a Justice Department that is overly political? From Power Line Blog
For the past year federal officials have investigated possible criminal charges against New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson and other state officers. The investigation looked into the allegation that Richardson’s administration had steered a lucrative contract to a prominent political donor in a so-called “pay to play” scenario. The investigation has concluded without charges.
According to the AP
e decision not to pursue indictments was made by top Justice Department officials, according to a person familiar with the investigation, who asked not to be identified because federal officials had not disclosed results of the probe.”It’s over. There’s nothing. It was killed in Washington,” the person told The Associated Press.
So the CIA needs to be investigated AGAIN, while this goes untouched. Andy McCarthy comments:
If you’re a CIA interrogator who used harsh interrogation techniques authorized by the Bush administration to obtain life-saving intelligence from terrorists, and professional line prosecutors — after laboriously scrutinizing your conduct — decided there was no criminality, Attorney General Eric [Holder] will unleash a new prosecutor to investigate the case yet again, seven years after the fact.
But if you’re a high-profile Democrat pol who helped Barack Obama get elected, the Holder Justice Department’s political appointees will reach out from Washington to kill a corruption investigation begun only last year by professional line prosecutors and a grand jury in New Mexico.
This highlights that the Democrats claim to be for the little guy is nothing but a slogan.
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in corruption on August 28th, 2009
Congressman Rogers, please stop making sense. Your scaring people (Democrats who see their dreams shrivel up in the light of day).
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in Health Care,video on August 28th, 2009
Charles Rangel should be in serious trouble. It has been revealed that the man who leads the committee to write our tax code failed to report income from a Harlem building he sold. According to the NY Post, he failed to report $1.3 million dollars in “outside include”. (LINK)
How much corruption from a fellow Democrat can they take in Washington? So far the limit has not been reached.
When Republicans find corruption and scandal in their party, they cut their losses and rid their party of offenders…maybe too quickly sometimes. The Democrats never admit to anything and excuse offenses that can no longer be denied. How long can that last?
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in corruption on August 28th, 2009
Mark Lloyd is the “diversity officer of the FCC”. He is a radical who invokes Saul Alinsky in his push to nationalize the media. He is a big fan of Hugo Chavez.In his radical book, Prologue to a Farce: Communications and Democracy in America, Lloyd explains his ideas on transforming media in America. Here’s a little creepy snippet:
For those who think any or all of these recommendations might infringe on the free speech rights of broadcasters, Lloyd says his concern is not the “exaggerated” concerns over the First Amendment.
By himself, this guy would be considered a ineffective crack pot. Unfortunately, he has found many sympathizers in the current administration. This crew needs to be monitored. Unfortunately, our crack journalist seem to be asleep at the wheel.
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in free speech on August 28th, 2009
Windmills in the Texas panhandle could be delayed or denied by the Lesser Prairie Chicken.
Developers are scouring the sagebrush and grasslands of potential turbine sites for the ground-dwelling chickens, E.ON chief development officer Patrick Woodson said. Once plentiful in the southern high plains, the bird now has a high priority for listing under the Endangered Species Act, a move that will affect where as much as $11 billion in turbines can be built.
Developers of green energy (and green jobs) are running into some of the same road blocks that conventional power companies face. These obstacles are expensive and delay work on alternative sources. If we want to get those shovel ready green jobs going, then we will need to relax regulations…particularly onerous regulations like the Endangered Species Act.
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in Alternative Energy on August 27th, 2009
The Democrats will seek any advantage no matter how low in the gutter they have to go to get it. They are using the death of Ted Kennedy to push socialized medicine. They can’t win this argument on the merits. First they tried to sneak it through. Then they tried to silence and intimidate their opponents. Now they are going for an emotional response.
Posted by: The Elephant Owner in Congress on August 26th, 2009
