Actually, Assange has made his aim crystal clear: justice and a just civilization through transparency of institutions and through a free press. This is solidly in accord with traditional American values. O’Reilly knows this but doesn’t believe it. He thinks Assange is a liar. This doesn’t fly. Read what Assange has to say here and here. He is devoted to reporting truths that are being suppressed and kept secret, and the consistent history of WikiLeaks shows it. It is very implausible that a man would expose himself to vilification and the great dangers that Assange faces without a very strong belief in the higher values that he is passionate about. O’Reilly is afraid, not so much at the internet attacks that he mostly speaks of in the clip, but of what he slips in toward the end. He worries about “terrorists and anarchists” out to “destroy our way of life.” This is a strange fear in many ways. It actually seems to be, for one thing, a fear of liberty and a free press. It reminds me of the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798. That kind of suppression of political dissent was rejected by Americans when they elected Jefferson in 1800. These Acts were widely regarded as unconstitutional. For another thing, it is a fear of change, if that change means greater liberty and a lower degree of government control over people’s lives, as most anarchists want. It’s Bill O’Reilly who is standing up for anti-American values at this juncture.
So, what do you think? Is Julian Assange an Anti-American zealot…. or just an exposer of corrupt Government?
I present and you decide. comments are welcomed here, please.
A Columbia University political science professor that blogs at the Huffington Post was charged Thursday with having a sexual relationship with his 24 year old daughter.
[David Epstein] was arrested Wednesday morning and charged with one count of incest in the third degree at an arraignment hearing on Thursday. According to police, the relationship appears to have been consensual.
Epstein declined to comment when reached on his cell phone Thursday evening.
His wife, Sharyn O’Halloran, chair of the executive committee of the University Senate and a tenured professor, also declined to comment when reached by phone.
The New York Daily News reports, “Epstein, who specializes in American politics and voting rights, has taught at Harvard and Stanford and often is quoted by news organizations.”
Epstein was not a frequent contributor to the Huffington Post, but what he did write was quite liberal.
Lovers necessarily keep or share secrets. Being in a healthy relationship means achieving a certain level of intimacy, where shared knowledge of each others’ weaknesses and insecurities is protected by a bond of mutual trust. Sometimes lovers might do devilish things that outsiders wouldn’t understand, or shouldn’t be privy to, and this is fine. But by and large, what they do is simply no one else’s business.
But imagine that the man in the relationship kept it a secret that he had other women on the side, kids, a criminal record, venereal disease, and basically betrayed his lover in every way imaginable, unbeknownst to her?
Now imagine a third party felt it was their moral duty to reveal it?
No one questions that governments must maintain a certain level of secrecy, including WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who told Time that “Secrecy is important for many things … [but it] shouldn’t be used to cover up abuses.” The entire premise of Assange’s whistleblower organization is this: To what degree is government secrecy justified? And when particular secrets could be damaging to the other partner in the United States government’s relationship — the American people — should these secrets be revealed in the name of protecting the public?
How often does our government use “national security” simply as an excuse to cover up questionable dealings? Reports Time: “in the past few years, governments have designated so much information secret that you wonder whether they intend the time of day to be classified. The number of new secrets designated as such by the U.S. government has risen 75% … . At the same time, the number of documents and other communications created using those secrets has skyrocketed nearly 10 times…”
To say that government must keep secrets is not to say that all government secrets must be kept.
As admitted even by Pentagon officials and Defense Secretary Robert Gates, none of WikiLeaks’ revelations do anything to compromise national security or endanger American lives — but they have wreaked havoc on political life in Washington, D.C. Americans are not supposed to know, for example, that their government bullied and threatened individuals and other governments that might have undermined the Copenhagen climate change summit in 2009. The federal government attempting to squelch anyone who might undermine global-warming dogma? Do WikiLeaks’ conservative critics believe revealing this is a “national security” risk?
Americans are not supposed to know, apparently, that behind the scenes Saudi Arabia has been encouraging the U.S. to take military action against Iran. But if we end up going to war with Iran shouldn’t it be in America’s national interest, and not simply as a subcontractor for another country? Asks Fox News’ Judith Miller: “Why should Americans not know that Arab states, often at the top level, have been urging Washington to take military or other drastic action against Iran, while they publicly oppose such action?”
And when did conservatives become so protective of Hillary Clinton? What happened to the days of the “Stop Hillary Express,” when right-wing talk radio portrayed the former first lady as Satan and theorized about all the devious ways in which, if in power, she might conspire to bring down the country? When WikiLeaks revealed that Secretary of State Clinton tried to obtain DNA, fingerprints, credit-card numbers, and other private information belonging to United Nations officials, we learned that Clinton’s style was every bit as mafia-esque as her conservative critics once warned. Yet conservatives now attack WikiLeaks for revealing what they once feared. It should also be remembered that the same conservatives now calling for Assange’s head either ignored or were sympathetic to Lewis “Scooter” Libby’s outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame allegedly at the Bush administration’s behest — a revelation arguably far riskier to our national security than anything ever released by WikiLeaks.
But the worst hypocrisy throughout this controversy has been in conservatives reflexively defending the government and attacking WikiLeaks. Since when have conservatives believed that Washington should be able to shroud any action it likes in secrecy and that revealing government’s nefarious deeds is tantamount to treason? Isn’t it government officials who might secretly work for corporate, ideological or transnational interests — and against the national interest — who are betraying their country?
Interestingly, Wikileaks’ founder espouses the traditionally conservative, Jeffersonian view that America’s constitutional structure limits and lessens government corruption. Reported Time: “Assange appears to believe that the U.S. has not become ‘a much-worse-behaved superpower’ because its federalism, ‘this strength of the states,’ has been a drag on the combination of the burgeoning power of the central government and a presidency that can expand its influence only by way of foreign affairs.”
Decentralizing government power, limiting it, and challenging it was the Founders’ intent and these have always been core conservative principles. Conservatives should prefer an explosion of whistleblower groups like WikiLeaks to a federal government powerful enough to take them down. Government officials who now attack WikLleaks don’t fear national endangerment, they fear personal embarrassment. And while scores of conservatives have long promised to undermine or challenge the current monstrosity in Washington, D.C., it is now an organization not recognizably conservative that best undermines the political establishment and challenges its very foundations.
(CNN) – Defying President Obama, House Democrats voted Thursday not to bring up the tax package that he negotiated with Republicans in its current form.
“This message today is very simple: That in the form that it was negotiated, it is not acceptable to the House Democratic caucus. It’s as simple as that,” said Democratic Congressman Chris Van Hollen.
“We will continue to try and work with the White House and our Republican colleagues to try and make sure we do something right for the economy and right for jobs, and a balanced package as we go forward,” he said.
The vote comes a day after Vice President Biden made clear to House Democrats behind closed doors that the deal would unravel if any changes were made.
“Wow did the [White House] mishandle this,” a senior House Democratic Source told CNN. “Breathtaking. Members have major substantive concerns and they should have gently guided people to the finish line.”
Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon said: “They said take it or leave it. We left it.”
Naturally, it is the Democrats of the far left stripe who want to play politics with a bill that will actually help the middle class:
Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly said that “this means we will not bring this [agreement] to the floor as is. It has to be changed.”
Daly would not outline what revisions House Democrats specifically are seeking, but he did say that Pelosi would stand by today’s caucus resolution…
Asked whether Pelosi would bring up the package over the objections of her Democratic colleagues, Miller suggested that wouldn’t happen without further consultions with rank-and-file lawmakers.
“I still think it’s going to go through—why do you think it isn’t?” Frank said in a Thursday interview outside the caucus meeting. “I always knew a majority of Democrats would be against it. I still think they have the votes for it, yeah.” He added that House Democrats simply lacked the ability to have a major impact on the legislation: “I think the notion that the caucus controls legislation is not a good one.”
Frank emphasized that he still opposed the tax-cut bargain but nevertheless thought a vote should be held on the tax package as it currently stands. Speaker Nancy Pelosi will have to decide herself whether to bring the legislation to a vote on the House floor—a decision that many House Dems at the caucus meeting suggested was up in the air. But Frank was convinced that Pelosi would bring the president’s tax deal forward: “I think she will have to, yeah.”
So, at this point, I do not know what is going to happen, nor do I believe the Democrats know either. One thing I will say is this; if the Democrats decide to play partisan politics with this bill and let it and DREAM act bill die — over stupid stuff like ideological purity, the American people, especially the middle class —- like my parents, are going to be very highly ticked at Congress and basically the Democrats will be sealing their own fates come 2012.
Americans, not matter what their political leanings, understand one thing very well. Paying taxes, means losing their own money to the Government. Which in turn means less money of their own to spend, and that makes for a very unhappy constituency. Doing this sort of a bill, over something as idiotic as political ideology or purity is a suicide pact.
Honestly, I am ashamed of the Democrats at his point. They are doing the same damned thing that the Republicans did with George W. Bush back in 2006. They are following him to the edge of the cliff and jumping off with him, without regard for the Country or the well being of the American people. Not to mention for the well-being of their Party. At this point it is all about egos and ambition. It is insanity and will cost the Democrats for a very long time to come. The President of the United States gave them the best damned compromise that he could get and they are acting like spoiled brats. I am not trying to defending anyone or anybody, least of all the President. However, when I see that polls show that people actually like this Bill, right and left, I just have to wonder, who are these idiots on the hill looking out for?
…until it isn’t any more. An important story for today’s bond investors.
December 9, 2010
By Elliott Wave International
I spent my childhood discussing the stock market at the dinner table. My dad was a stock broker, and he loved to “tell the story” of the stocks he recommended to customers — a story that included critical information about the industry, the products, earnings, and the outlook for the future. Most children might find it dull, but I was mesmerized.
As I got older and talked with friends about investing, I’d light up when the topic was stocks. Who in the world couldn’t get excited about analyzing companies to decide which ones could make you money! When the conversation turned to bonds, however, I would shut down. Bonds? How dull; how utterlyboring. There’s no story to tell, no industry trends to follow. I saw bonds as an interest check every six months, then a return of principal when they mature. BORING.
Over the past few years, I’ve read article after article about investors getting out of the stock market in favor of bonds. I understood the reasons for getting out of the stock market, but the thought of moving into bonds baffled me. Interest rates were very low, and I knew that when the rates started going up, bond prices would go down; a simple inverse relationship. I started investing in the mid-80s, when rates were at the highest point of the past 50 years — who would buy bonds now, when yields are at the lowest levels in half a century? There’s no place for your principal to go but down, I thought.
So I went back and talked with my friends some more, to see if there was something I was missing with these “dull investments.”
Turned out, my friends had moved their money into bonds after they lost over 30% in stocks during 2008. They told me that bonds had gone up in value. I was astonished.
So I started looking into it. They were right! I thought bond yields could go no lower than they were two years ago, yet they did, In turn, that brought the prices — i.e., the principal on their investment — up!
I asked what kind of bonds they got into. “High-yield bond funds,” was the answer. What kind of bonds are these funds invested in? To this question I got blank stares. How long do you plan on staying in these funds? This got the reply I was afraid I’d hear: “Why would we get out when they are so much safer than stocks?” That’s when my new interest in these once boring investments turned to fear — for my friends.
First of all, the simple idea that a rise in interest rates would cause their principal to fall worried me. But my greater fear was that they did not even know what types of bonds they were invested in!
Elliott Wave International’s president Robert Prechter has followed this new investment trend closely in his monthly Elliott Wave Theorist. This quote is from the October 2010 issue:
A fifth consecutive major disaster is developing for investors. History shows that investors have been attracted like moths to a flame to four consecutive pyres: the NASDAQ in 2000, real estate in 2006, the blue chips in 2007 and commodities in 2008. Now they are flitting across the veranda to a mesmerizing blue flame: high yield bonds.
Bonds pay high yields when the issuers are in deep trouble and cannot otherwise attract investment capital. The public is chasing a large return on capital without considering return of it.
Over the past 2 weeks we have seen the market sentiment change three times from extreme bullish to bearish and back to bullish as of today. Normally we don’t see the herd (average Joe) switch trading directions this quickly. Over the past 10 years I found that the average time for the herd to reach an extreme bullish or bearish bias takes between 4-6 weeks in length. It is this herd mentality which makes for some excellent trend trading opportunities. But with the quantitative easing, thinner traded market, and lack of trading participants (smaller herd) I find everyone is ready to change directions at the drop of a hat.
The old school traders/investors who don’t use real-time data or charts, and who dabbled in stock picks, and options trades here and there have mostly exited the trading arena from frustration or losing to much money. This group accounted for a decent chuck of liquidity in the market and was also the slowest of the herd to change directions.
The new school, today’s smaller herd is much more aggressive and quicker to act on market gyrations. I think this is because the only people left in the market are those who make a living pulling money from the market and those who feel they are really close to mastering the stock market. It is these individuals who are using trading platforms with real-time data, charts and scanners to help get a pulse on the market so they can change directions when the big boys do. I feel this is the reason why the market is able to turn on a dime one week to another over the past 8 months… The easy prey (novice and delayed data traders) are few and far between and the fight to take money for other educated traders seems to be getting a little more interesting to say the least.
Anyways, enough about the herd already…
It’s been an interesting week thus far with stocks and commodities. The week started with a large gap up only for strong selling volume to step in and reverse direction the following day. It is this negative price action that starts to put fear into the market triggering a downward thrust in the market. During an up trend which we are in now, I look for these bearish chart patterns to form as they tend to trigger more selling the following days which cleanses the market of weak positions. Once a certain level of traders have been shaken out of their positions and are entering positions in order to take advantage of a falling market, that’s when we get the next rally, catching the majority of traders off guard as they panic to buy back their short positions. It’s this short covering which sparks a strong multi day rally and kicks off the new leg up in the market.
Currently we getting some mixed signals. The market sentiment is the most bullish it has been since 2007, just a little higher than the Jan & March highs this year. This makes me step back and think twice about taking any sizable long positions. Any day now the market could roll over. Another bearish signal is the fact that we just had a very strong reversal day for stocks and metals to the down side. That typically leads to more selling.
But if we look at the positive side of things, the trend is still up, this is typically a strong time for stocks as we go into Christmas/Holiday season, also the market breadth is really strong with the number of stocks hitting new highs has really taking off.
SP500 – Daily Chart
Below you can see the reversal candles along with short term and intermediate support levels. Although the market sentiment is screaming a correction is near, we must realize that sentiment can remain at this level for an extended period of time while the market continues to trend. This is one of the reasons why we say “The Trend Is Our Friend”.
I am hoping for a pullback and would like to see market sentiment shift enough on an intraday basis to give us a low risk entry point.
Gold – Daily Chart
A reversal candle is seen as a sell signal or a profit taking pattern. Short term aggressive trades use these to lock in quick price movements. With so many traders watching gold, it caused a flood of sell orders to push gold down today.
Mid-Week Conclusion:
In short, each time we see some decent selling in the market its get bought back up. Today was another perfect example as we had an early morning sell off, then a light volume rally for the second half of the session and a end of day short squeeze during the last 30 minutes. Gold has pulled back to the first short term support level. Because of the large following in gold I would like to see if there will be another day of follow through selling before possibly looking to take a trade.
Let me get this straight, the Anti-Defamation League is demanding that Thomas be punished because she says that she was punished by Jewish groups?
The first to cave was Wayne State, which rescinded, with the ADL’s approval, their “Helen Thomas Spirit of Diversity in Media Award.”
Isn’t diversity such a strength?
Like Rick Sanchez (A White Hispanic), Thomas, an Arab (who looks white, if not Jewish) views herself as a victim group that is more victimized than Jews.
To emphasize this point, Thomas and Sanchez mention that Jews have more political and media power than their groups. Jewish groups with political and media power then demand that the transgressors are punished for such blasphemy.
I shed no tears for their predicament. For all their squabbling, the ADL, Helen Thomas, and Rick Sanchez are all united in their opposition to a majority White America—something that those who think the Jews are the sole source of all our problems should keep in mind.
Now to listen to the Democratstalk, now is a time of doom and gloom for them.
However, I have to make a startling confession; I was actually impressed with part of this presser. No, I am not talking about the part where he called the GOP hostage takers and so forth. :roll:I expected that stuff, heck, he is a Liberal Democrat. What else was he supposed to say?!?
I am referring to the part where President Obama basically told the Democratic Party and the Democratic Party folk in Congress, “Hey guys? If you had done your jobs before the primary election, we could not be in this position; so, put a sock in it and be glad that we got what we got from the other side!” That impressed me greatly. Any leader who is willing to stand up to his own party and tell them to “get bent” has my respect.
I tend to believe that this will be the end of the “nice” Barack Obama and might just be the beginning of the savvy stern leader President Barack Obama. One of the biggest complaints about him, is that he was too soft. The President might just be trying to reverse that image. It can’t hurt. I mean, maybe if he actually showed some leadership. It might just help his poll numbers.
I do not expect much praise from the Neo-Con side of the fence, as they’ve made a cottage industry out of being his biggest critics. However, I do offer it, as I am not nearly as into the smear machine as some.
It was inevitable, just not expected this soon. She had just posted a facebook farewell last night:
Elizabeth Edwards, the political wife whose public battle with breast cancer, coping with marital infidelity and continued advocacy for the downtrodden raised her profile above that of her husband, died Tuesday, WRAL News has learned.
Edwards, 61, died at her Chapel Hill home, where family and friends had gathered in recent days after doctors informed her that her cancer had spread and recommended that she not undergo further treatment.
“Today, we have lost the comfort of Elizabeth’s presence, but she remains the heart of this family. We love her and will never know anyone more inspiring or full of life,” the Edwards family said in a statement. “On behalf of Elizabeth, we want to express our gratitude to the thousands of kindred spirits who moved and inspired her along the way. Your support and prayers touched our entire family.”
May the Lord Jesus Christ be with the Edwards family; and yes, that does include John, in this hour of loss. May the Lord continue to be with them during this Holiday Season.
And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise. (Luke 23:42-43 KJV)
God Bless her, this poor lady had to endure more than any woman, let alone mother should ever have to endure. Mrs. Edwards lost a son, and had an total idiot for a Husband, who could not even remain faithful to her. May She find the peace that she was searching for.
I do truly believe that John Edwards and his wife, before the ugliness and separation; were truly populists. They, unlike many of their Democratic peers, truly believed in the ideals that the Original Democratic Party stood for. That everyone, regardless of color, social stature and wealth status; deserved a fair shot at the American dream. When John Edwards was running, during that primary. I would have voted for him in the Democratic Primary. Instead, I voted, at the time, for “none of the above” which was the choice.
Admittedly, my politics changed, greatly, over the course of the 2008 election season, especially when the Democratic Party began to embrace the monster whom they elected. Obama could not hold a candle to the class, and grace that Elizabeth Edwards and at the time, John Edwards showed. The Edwards campaign coined the phrase “Change” and the Obama campaign stole it and used it for their purposes —- which utterly disgusted me. Thus was one of the biggest reasons why I truly began to reevaluate my stance in politics.
May God Bless the family. I pray for the children. 🙁
If you would like to check out my remembrances from 2009 and 2010, please click here and here.
Cassy Fiano, who’s husband is in active duty service; remembers and points out some disturbing things happening at the Pearl Harbor Memorial:
Today marks the 69 year anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor. The surprise attack shocked the nation and catapulted the United States into World War II. It was, at the time, the worst attack on American soil. 1,178 were wounded. 2,043 were killed. The water itself burned and bodies of the injured and the dead piled up.
As more are more Pearl Harbor survivors and World War II veterans leave this Earth, it becomes more and more of a distant historical event that we no longer honor and no longer remember. Each year, Pearl Harbor gets a little closer to becoming one of those events that we will only know of thanks to a few pages in a history book. The vast majority of survivors are gone now, and when there are none left, who will keep their memory alive? Who will honor the sacrifices of the fallen? Where survivors once fought the Japanese, they’re now fighting time — fighting to keep the memory of their fallen brothers alive, fighting to ensure that we continue to remember and honor Pearl Harbor always.
This summer, my husband and I chose to go to Hawaii for his pre-deployment leave. One of our first stops was at Pearl Harbor and the USS Arizona Memorial. We had the honor and privilege of meeting several survivors before riding out to the watery tomb of the 1177 American heroes killed that day. 33 survivors of the bombing of the Arizona chose to be interred with their shipmates.
[…]
Seeing the names of these heroes was an emotional moment. Far more saddening was the behavior of the people at the memorial. The park ranger on the boat on the way to the remains of the Arizona laughed and joked about partying that weekend. When learning there were service members aboard — my husband, a sailor, and an airman — she said nothing and continued laughing about her weekend party plans. Once we arrived at the memorial, I was appalled at the lack of respect shown. People ran around the memorial, laughing and joking. I couldn’t understand how anyone could treat the tombs of American heroes so callously. It was a warning sign, in my eyes, that too many have stopped seeing the attack on Pearl Harbor as the horrific day that it was, a day that deserves solemn remembrance and honor.
We can still make a choice, though. We can choose to remember the sacrifices of the men who fought valiantly and died with honor in service to their country.
We can remember men like Frank Flaherty. When it became known that the USS Oklahoma was going to capsize and the order was given to abandon ship, Flaherty chose instead to remain at his post with a flashlight, illuminating the way so that the rest of the turret crew could escape. Flaherty perished with the ship and was posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor.
We can remember men like Doris Miller, Navy Cross recipient. On the bridge of the USS West Virginia, Miller refused to leave his mortally wounded captain, despite enemy bombing and strafing and heavy fire. At great risk to himself, he moved his captain to a safer place and then returned to the bridge where he continued to man and operate a machine gun until ordered to leave the bridge.
We can remember men like William Turner, awarded the Bronze Star. Stationed at the Ewa Marine Corps Air Station, he jumped into the rear cockpit of an airplane with a fellow Marine, Master Sergeant Peters. Both men used the rear machine guns to fire at attacking Japanese planes, and despite being wounded, managed to shoot down one of the enemy planes. Private Turner ultimately died of the wounds he received that day on December 12th.
We can choose to let their memory fade away. Or we can choose to honor their valour, their bravery, their sacrifice.
Remember Pearl Harbor. Remember the men who fought and died 69 years ago today.
An alternative headline would be “What I hate about White Christian Conservatives.” I saw this, and first thing I thought was, “does this old man ever get out of his house and into the real world?”
Now, at first, I wanted to just say this guy was being a straight up racist. However, I do not know that to be a fact. I think it is more of that stuffy old white Conservative Christian stupidity that the Republican right is known for.
The nominees to receive the most prestigious awards in the music industry, the Grammy Awards, were just announced. Among the five nominees for Record of the Year is a song titled “F— You,” with the F-word, of course, spelled out and pronounced.
Here are the song’s opening lyrics:
“I see you driving ’round town
With the girl I love and I’m like,
F— you!
Oo, oo, ooo
I guess the change in my pocket
Wasn’t enough, I’m like,
F— you!
And f— her, too!”
The next lyrics add the S-word:
“I said, if I was richer, I’d still be with ya
Ha, now ain’t that some s–t? (ain’t that some s–t?)
And although there’s pain in my chest
I still wish you the best with a
F— you!
Oo, oo, ooo.”
And shortly thereafter, the N-word:
“I pity the fool that falls in love with you
(oh, s–t, she’s a gold digger)
Well
(just thought you should know, n—-)
Ooooooh.”
Dennis Prager is, of course, referring to this video here:
This video and song, of course, is about a young man, who has a crush on a young girl; who, of course, could care less about him. As someone who knows a little about that whole thing. I believe Dennis Prager needs to relax a little and maybe lighten up.
But wait! It gets better!
Quote:
It is also worth noting that the video of this song includes children who appear to be under 12 years of age and all the performers are black — a point I will address later.
I have long believed that MTV has done more damage to America’s young people than any other single institution. I am referring to the music videos, in which most images or scenes are shown for less than two seconds and thereby numb kids’ minds, and to the sexual imagery and sex talk that permeate the music videos and much of the rest of MTV programming.
But while MTV should be singled out for the damage it has done to America, the music industry in general has been equally guilty.
How does a song replete with expletives, whose very title is “F— You,” get nominated for a Grammy Award as Record of the Year?
The answer is that the music industry, from producers to artists, is largely populated by people who regard social and cultural norms as stifling. Their professional lives are dedicated to lowering that which is elevated, destroying that which uplifts, and to profaning that which is held sacred.
There is no better explanation for “F— You” being nominated as Record of the Year. It has little, if any, redeeming moral, social or artistic (to the extent that this word retains its original meaning) value. The lyrics are as vapid as they are obscene; the video further degrades that part of black life that is already too lacking in elevation; and there is the participation of children in a profanity-filled video.
For most of American history, a child who used such words was punished by his parents, and society instinctively knew how important it was not to expose children to obscenities. Today, adults in the music industry reward children for participating in videos laced with obscenities.
Nor is the nomination of “F— You” as Song of the Year an aberration. Two of the other four nominees are rap “songs” whose lyrics are also vile.
12 year old children!
Black kids saying “F— You!”
What’s next?
Your little 12 year old white daughter being gang raped by a group of wild black man? Horrors! 😯
Please. 🙄
I think Dennis Prager needs to relax and loosen up a little and realize that not everyone in American, including most black people are not out to get every Conservative White girl in America knocked up. Prager might also want to put away the Klan uniform, that decade ended long ago.
You say, “Hey! I thought you were a Conservative!?!?!”
Well, I am; albeit more of a fiscal Conservative, a libertarian-minded person. I find the good majority of social Conservatism to be downright hypocritical. Bristol Palin being a perfect example, not to mention her screwball Mother. (UGH!)
In closing, I believe if Dennis Prager spent more time fighting to define what the Republican Party is supposed to stand for; like trying to move it away from the George W. Bush warmonger Neo-Conservatism that it has been ensconced in since 2000 and back to the traditional Conservative, which is represented by sites like this one here. Then Prager might be doing something. Until then, he his just blowing Hot Air around and acting a bit like a Religious Holier than thou as well. Which, in all honesty, is doing nothing for the Republican Party. Well, except for making them look like total idiots to Independent thinkers, like myself and the rest of the Country.
Oh.My.God! The desperation of the Palin-Bots is becoming almost laughable.
You might think Hollywood liberals would embrace it as a feminist Cinderella success story: The teen mom, seduced and abandoned by a two-faced cheater, gets a once-in-a-lifetime chance at a nationally televised dance competition
I got news for you Mr. Robert Stacy McCain, you Neo-Naziturncoatfuck. Bristol Palin MORE THAN WILLINGLY spread those legs and those twat lips for Levi Johnson. Anyone, and I mean ANYONE who believes anything other than that, has got their head planted square in their ASS! …or at the very LEAST is some sort of Sarah Palin Fan boy or possibly….or more than likely both! 🙄
Jesus freaking H. Christ on a freaking Crack rock! The stupid on the right is becoming SO very hard to bear anymore! 🙄
Julian Assange poses a clear and present danger to American national security. The WikiLeaks founder is more than a reckless provocateur. He is aiding and abetting terrorists in their war against America. The administration must take care of the problem – effectively and permanently.
The recent WikiLeaks document dump is the latest example of Mr. Assange’s dangerous behavior. His release of more than 250,000 U.S. diplomatic cables, many of them containing classified information, is a major blow to our foreign policy. The essence of diplomacy – especially that of a great power – is the ability to conduct negotiations and hold talks in secret. Foreign leaders will not be willing to engage in sensitive discussions with American emissaries if their words are going to be splashed across the front pages of the world’s newspapers. Officials in autocratic and Islamist states often risk their lives to cooperate with Washington, usually by providing vital information or advice. They now face a further disincentive to help us: The U.S. government can no longer guarantee the privacy and secrecy of their discussions.
American diplomacy has been crippled. So has our ability to conduct the war on terrorism. For example, the cables cache reveals that the United States is working closely with Yemen’s dictator, Ali Abdullah Saleh, in launching drone strikes against local al Qaeda bases. Al Qaeda has spread to Yemen. Its insurgency is growing. Yemen risks becoming what Afghanistan was before Sept. 11, 2001: a vast sanctuary for jihadists. Mr. Saleh insists that Yemeni public opinion – insular, xenophobic and increasingly Islamic – will not support the U.S. military presence on domestic soil. Hence, he says the pretense must be maintained that Yemen is firing the missiles, not America. This pretense has been shattered – and with it, perhaps, a key ally in the struggle against al Qaeda. Mr. Assange is helping chase the American infidel out of Yemen’s desolate deserts.
[………]
The United States is paying a severe price for Mr. Obama’s negligence. This is the greatest diplomatic crisis since the late 1940s, when communist agents in the U.S. government provided atomic secrets to the Soviet Union. The world is witnessing the absurd, almost surreal spectacle of the American superpower standing helpless in the face of a lone hacker. Her diplomatic secrets are no longer safe; her allies and friends are being betrayed; and her cyber-enemies are free to roam with impunity. America is no longer feared or respected.
Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. vows that he is looking into possible criminal charges against Mr. Assange. It is too late for tough talk. At this point, we are beyond indictments and courts. The damage has been done; people have died – and will die because of the actions of this puerile, self-absorbed narcissist. News reports say the WikiLeaks founder is hiding out in England. If that’s true, we should treat Mr. Assange the same way as other high-value terrorist targets: Kill him
Okay, here is the question that I feel the need to ask. Are we going to kill someone every time some whistle blower decides to speak out and expose some corruption in Government? Because if that is where we are headed, that is a slippery slope we can never recover from. Like anyone else, I am for open Government, I am also for seeing elected officials held accountable. However, if the United States Government and more importantly the United States Military is being put at risk, then by all means, arrest this guy and put him away.
I have no idea what Julian Assange‘s motivation is; whether it is conspiracy theory, politics or if he is just a pompous ass. But the idea of KILLING someone, just because decide to release some confidential information is not something, as a Conservative; who believes in rule of law and not Governmental treachery, that I can support. Because once you unleash that monster onto the American and World Wide Community, it cannot be stopped.
I would think that Jeff Kuhner would be a bit smarter than that. However, when you are working for a paper that basically was a cheerleader for the Bush Administration during the lead up to and during the Iraqi Invasion, one can expect only so much.
Well, I submitted this entry to Reddit and as I expected, it was voted down. What I did not expect is this, click the picture bigger:
Nice. 🙄
I wonder if the owners of Reddit would be willing to stand behind those sort of comments?
I explained as to why I called Helen Thomas what I did. Not because she was an Arab, but because of what she said, and this is the sort of hate that I get in return? I find it appalling that Reddit would allow such hate on their site. Unbelievable. 😯
So, the next time some idiot liberal tells you that the Republican Party is the party of hate — show them this blog entry, please.
Also, please note; this is not the first time this has happened to me. This is just the first time that I have chosen to go public with it. There have been times, when I have writing positive stuff about Conservatives, only to have it voted down. However, I have written stuff critical of Sarah Palin and Republicans and had it voted up. That my friends is bias and it needs to be stopped at Reddit, Period.
I put that headline up there intentionally, because Helen Thomas IS a Arab dog in my humble opinion. Anyone that would make an asinine comment like the one that she made, is a damn dog in my opinion.
Striking a defiant tone, journalist Helen Thomas, 90, said today she absolutely stands by her controversial comments about Israel made earlier this year that led to her resignation. But she stoked additional controversy with new remarks, claiming that “Zionists” control U.S. foreign policy and other American institutions. The local Jewish community strongly condemned her remarks.
“I can call a president of the United States anything in the book but I can’t touch Israel, which has Jewish-only roads in the West Bank,” Thomas said. “No American would tolerate that — white-only roads.”
Thomas, who grew up in Detroit the daughter of Lebanese immigrants, was in Dearborn today for an Arab Detroit workshop on anti-Arab bias. The Free Press asked her about her comments, which critics have said were anti-Israel.
“I paid the price for that,” said Thomas, a longtime White House correspondent. “But it was worth it, to speak the truth.”
“The Zionists have to understand that’s their country, too. Palestinians were there long before any European Zionists.”
Thomas claimed that “You can not say anything (critical) about Israel in this country.”
In a speech that drew a standing ovation, Thomas talked about “the whole question of money involved in politics.”
“We are owned by propagandists against the Arabs. There’s no question about that. Congress, the White House, and Hollywood, Wall Street, are owned by the Zionists. No question in my opinion. They put their money where there mouth is…We’re being pushed into a wrong direction in every way.”
Using this flea bag old biddy’s logic, Helen Thomas herself is indirectly responsible for 9/11. What am I talking about? Helen Thomas is a Arabic woman, she is Palestinian; so were the men who hijacked those planes on 9/11, so that makes Helen Thomas indirectly responsible for the terrorist attacks on 9/11. After all, if we are going to go the collective route and blame everyone for everything, why not blame Helen Thomas for 9/11?
In case, your one of those slow people; what I just wrote was sarcasm. Because it is, in fact, that stupid. But Helen Thomas has all that covered:
In the interview, Thomas talked about the problems that Palestinians face, saying that “Arabs are not terrorists.“
Which is quite funny, because it is the Arab Muslims that are doing the acts of terrorism —- not Jews, not Hindus, not Buddhists, not Christians; but Arab Terrorists. What Helen Thomas is referring to is the fact that a good majority of Americans believe that ALL Arabs are terrorists. There is a reason for this perception, it is because the majority of peace loving Muslims in America and abroad steadfastly refuse to stand up against those who choose to engage in terrorism, and chose to take a extremist stance on the Koran. Now, there is a defense for that, and I know what it is; it is because if these peace-loving Muslims abroad do speak up, they could be killed by those who are taking the extremist position.
There is a solution to that problem —– numbers. That’s right numbers. There is an old saying, “There is strength in numbers.” Peace-loving Arab Muslims in mass numbers need to rise up and take their Religion back from these cold blooded killers who have hi-jacked a Religion away from those who simply want to practice their religion in peace. Which is why the good majority of Muslims migrate here to American, so that they can do just that.
Now I could go on about what Helen Thomas has said, but I have to honestly ask myself. Is she worth it? The smart answer is no. Helen Thomas is just asking for the attention. I will not give it to her. She went on about the Iraq War, and repeated the liberal talking points about that war. Which is to be expected by her; as she herself, a liberal.
I called Helen Thomas an Arab dog, because that is what she is acting like — a Dog. This is not to say that I actually believe that ALL persons of Arabic decent are Dogs, as I do not. I believe that there are respectable persons of Arabic decent; I also believe that there are racist Anti-Semite Arabs as well. Helen Thomas is quite obviously one of those. Thus the reason why I called her an Arab Dog.
[David Epstein] was arrested Wednesday morning and charged with one count of incest in the third degree at an arraignment hearing on Thursday. According to police, the relationship appears to have been consensual.
