*I notice that when Liberals post their opinion columns on the news of the day, they tend to block reader commenting. Dr Michio Kaku opines in the WSJ on 7/27/10---copied on his site---where the comments are closed on 7/27/10 with no comments shown! He's wrong in his opinion of course, and it doesn't take a scientific or political genius to see where he's wrong, nor does it take a genius to know why he won't take criticism. All the time, I come across Liberals who simply won't defend their positions as Liberals or accept criticism of their writings. In fact, some NY Times columnists have drastically shortened the comments allowed at the end of their columns because they were being shown up by the facts being posted.
*According to the AP in June, UK doctors claim that a fetus can't feel pain before 24 weeks. They say 'that nerve connections in the brain are not sufficiently formed to allow pain perception before 24 weeks.' Is that so? I imagine they interviewed aborted babies to find this out? Their opinions are erring on the safe side of life? Are they sure of 24 weeks? What about 23 weeks and 6 days? What about 23 weeks, 6 days and 23 hours? All life feels pain, and don't forget it or make excuses for killing babies in the fetal form.
On a related note, I personally don't think the nerve or thinking connections in the brains of Liberals are sufficiently formed to assist the Liberal in speaking sense. But do we abort them? Of course not. They're almost as smart as babies, and it takes years for their mental aberrations to appear.
*And the apparently brain-dead U.S. Judge Vaughn R. Walker [appointed by Bill Clinton], "who ruled last week that a voter-approved amendment to California's constitution [Proposition 8] that limited marriage to the union of a man and a woman violated the U.S. Constitution" [CNS,Terence P. Jeffrey, August 9, 2010] now claims that his decision was "based that ruling in part on his finding that a child does not need and has no right to a mother...Nor, he found, does a child have a need or a right to a father." That's in the Constitution? He then goes on to quote from a special interest "American Psychological Association (APA)" brochure---but only from those parts in it that support his decision. This man is in a position of legal power! For the good of our Country, overturning his ruling, and his subsequent impeachment and conviction should be quick and painless.
*As noted by Martin Crutsinger of the AP, President Barack Obama appointed a national debt commission to report after the November midterm elections on ways that the federal deficits can be brought under control. Naturally, he won't ask for the report before. It would increase the carnage for the Democrats in midterm elections. Most likely, the report will identify---but downplay---one easy way to cut the deficit: CUT THE SPENDING! I can tell you that for free---I don't need no stinking commission! And also most likely, Obama and friends will ignore it completely or make cuts where they hurt average people most, leaving the fat and pork and paybacks to the Big Unions and other Liberal supporters alone---or actually increasing the latter. That will be accompanied with tax increases all over the place, especially on the rich [with a new definition of rich as earnings of $20,000 a year or more.]
*They're still debating about the so-called 'ground zero Mosque' and whether or not it should be built. The mindless bureaucrats in NYC apparently okayed it [and continue to support it] without appropriate public input. [It seems Liberals in the Clinton era tried to follow polls; Liberals these days do the opposite.] This is a National discussion, folks. Not just for New York City. I'm all for religious tolerance, but this has nothing to do with it. It was Muslims who killed 3,000 people that day in 2001. Islam by nature supports violence and hatred. Islam is decidedly not peaceful. Islam is misogynistic. Islam permits all sorts of lying and cheating to gain its ends. Stop me when I hit a nerve. And what about all this makes it a religion? What is the definition of religion and how does a violent institution such as Islam rate such a category? Didn't the Government create the WACO tragedy because of something like this?
All the articles I've read about Islam in the mainstream [Liberal] media only discuss the 'good' things, or the things that seem to parallel real religions. Haven't those authors actually read the Koran? Such authors always leave out the call to arms to spread the 'religion' by the sword [something nearly accomplished in 8th century Europe had it not been for Charles 'The Hammer' Martel stopping it], killing the infidel, misogynist, dangerous and unnecessary female circumcisions, 'honor' killings, beheadings, bombing and gassing of the Western 'infidels' and other delicacies that turn the stomach. This isn't the 7th Century, folks. We the people aren't the slaves and criminals that Mohammed gathered together way back then. The Koran is based on his rambling thoughts supposed to be 'recorded' by his loyal followers. Liberals don't want to hear anything negative about Islam. Christianity? Yes. Judaism? Yes. Conservatives? Absolutely---especially if it isn't true. And most of the negatives for the latter three religious or philosophical disciplines are created out of nothing by many in the media---and in Congress and the White House by others of the Liberal persuasion.
The government under Obama seem either afraid of, or supporting of Islam. And that's an extremely dangerous position for the Country.
I oppose the building of a mosque, cultural or terrorist recruiting center or whatever you want to call it near ground zero. I oppose building it in New York or any other State. We don't need more propaganda nor another place to recruit militant Muslims. It's not religious tolerance, it's public safety. Our Country, our freedoms, our peaceful existence must be preserved. Do we need another 9/11 before you Liberals wake up? Are you going to 'tolerate' us down the tubes to destruction?
*Meanwhile, back in Washington. "The Obama administration forecasted the 2011 deficit---which begins Oct. 1---will remain above $1 trillion for a third straight year, rising to $1.27 trillion. And Obama predicts the deficits over the next decade will total $8.5 trillion." And naturally, the Democrat's solution is to raise taxes and cut tax deductions. They don't study history, so it doesn't occur to them that drastic spending cuts are the order of the day. Left to itself, the free market system will correct and bring the economy back. Government bailouts and overspending only make matters worse. This is proved by history. How to get out of a recession? CUT TAXES! And isn't this spiraling deficit that our children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren etc. have to pay over and above the artificially high tax rates a form of child abuse? Sounds like it to me, and Obama should be called on the carpet because of it. After all, he wanted to be in charge.
* David Patten wrote on August 6: "Signs are growing that the administration's inner circle of economic advisers — once hailed as the "dream team" — appears to be cracking under the pressure of yet another dismal jobs report and reports of dissension within the White House ranks over what to do about the stagnant economy." Surprise!
*You'd hope that by this time in life, these weenie Liberals would have studied history. All their crazy anti-people solutions to problems have been shown by history in this Country and others to not work. This is fact. Their solutions just make bad situations worse. As Casey used to say, 'You can look it up." Liberals continue to believe, despite proof against it, that any problem can be solved by throwing money at it. Economic problems? Bail outs. Raise taxes. Reduce the Federal incoming finances. Unemployment problems? Extend unemployment payments instead of forcing people to actually find work. Never promote the business climate for job creation. Increase welfare. And yet, the Liberals keep trying these failed ideas and then blame the Republicans and Conservatives when they won't work to save the economy made disastrous by their policies. Isn't this something of a definition of mental illness for such Liberals?
The best thing for the economy is to reduce taxes, and then leave the free market system alone to correct itself. No company is too big to fail!!! Wherever there is failure, there will be new companies filling the niches left open. It's always been true in our economic system. Send the Democrat/Liberals on a trip to a desert island where they can't do us any more harm.
*Doesn't President Obama know that President Bush and his administration are out of office? They did not create the current economic problems. Their policies may have hastened the natural cycle of recessions, but Obama and the Democrats have turned the situation into a catastrophe! And they try to solve their problems by throwing more fuel into the fire! Mr Obama, you are not running for election now, so stop with the phony blame game! Be a leader. Or will you try to run for re-election by blaming everything on Bush? Yes, that Bush from four years ago.
*According to the AP and My Way, the House recently approved the expenditure of $600 million to pay for more unmanned drones and 1,500 more agents for surveillance along the US/Mexican border. This would be good news, except that the administration isn't providing any money for actually preventing illegal immigration or returning the successful border jumpers to Mexico. It just wants to watch them come over, give them US rights and expensive welfare and medical, and try to get them to vote for the Democrats. This is not 'protecting' our borders, only watching the crimes continue so as to facilitate further crimes against America.
