Friday, November 30, 2007
The Liverpool mum of two — convicted of insulting Islam by calling the bear Mohammed — was sneaked out of the capital Khartoum hours after being jailed for 15 days.
Fanatics demanding her execution by firing squad streamed out of mosques after prayers — grabbing machetes, knives and clubs. The hate-filled protesters — whipped into a frenzy by religious leaders — converged on the presidential palace as it emerged Gillian was an INNOCENT victim of a vindictive school secretary.
Pictures of Gillian, 54, were burned as hardline clerics in pick-up trucks chanted through loudhailers: “No one lives who insults the prophet.”
So precisely what did she think would happen in such a country?
She broke the law. One of THE most sacred law of laws. In no way, shape, or form does one disrespect the prophet. Cannot show the prophet's face, cannot say the prophet's name except in all reverence.
Are nations allowed to have their own laws? Should those visiting such nations be expected to follow and prepare to face the full consequences and penalties for breaking said laws?
We like referring to our country as a nation of laws. The Conservatives among us demand that those who commit a crime be punished to the fullest extent of the law. Those who don't like it can find another country to visit.
This is why NO person of good will should EVER work in a moslem nation. Such a person cannot abide by moslem law, cannot in any way agree with moslem law, and oft times is ignorant of moslem law, such as this unfortunate teacher.
The international community has stood behind islam and its laws. Great pains are taken to accommodate islamic culture the world over. You do not hear tell of womens groups protesting the treatment of Gillian Gibbons. None of her sisters has given voice to this tragedy and confronted those howling mobs, so must conclude they agree that she has committed a heinous crime and deserves whatever punishment the people demand.
Not I. I believe a company of Marines should strike Khartoum and strike it hard. Free Ms Gibbons immediately and devil take anyone standing in their way.
Guess that makes ME the better feminist.
CONCORD, N.H. -- "ABC correspondent Kate Snow was ready to push through the crowd and ask Hillary Clinton a question until an aide blocked the path of Snow's sound man as he aimed his boom mike in the senator's direction.
"Sorry, we've gotta go," the woman said, though it was clear that Clinton would be shaking hands for some time.
Moments later, as the Democratic presidential candidate was mobbed by well-wishers, Boston television reporter Joe Battenfeld managed to shout a question -- a meaningless question, truth be told -- about whether she needed to win both Iowa and New Hampshire. Clinton was defiantly bland in response, as if determined that her comments not be used.
"Oh, I don't think about it like that. I'm just thrilled to be competing in Iowa and New Hampshire. . . . There's something very special about the New Hampshire primary. . . . I take nothing for granted. . . . We have wonderful candidates running."
Such is life spent trailing the Clinton juggernaut, where reporters can generally get close enough to watch but no further, as if separated from the candidate by an invisible sheet of glass."
Deja vu all over again. This was precisely the way she ran for office when campaigning for her Senate seat. Sheltered. No touchie no feelie no talkie. The ONLY people allowed close to her were democrat partisan hacks who didn't dare ask any tough questions...EVER.
Remember; this is one dumbass individual who has a difficult time thinking on her feet and will not grant access to an unfettered press.
Just like the royalty we tossed out some 230 odd years back.
*Referring to Mrs. Clinton as Hillary pisses off the local Sheriff here. Sadie Darnell thinks it is disrespectful to call Hillary, Hillary, and when I brought it to her attention that most of the times its simply to distinguish her from that other Clinton named Bill, she stared into space while thinking about, nodded, then walked away mumbling to herself.
The 1858 Remington was one of the major side arms of the Civil War and was the last of the Remington percussion revolvers to be manufactured. This gun features a tapered octagon barrel, steel frame, brass trigger guard, 6-shot cylinder, fixed sights and two-piece walnut grips. R&D Centerfire Conversion Cylinders (sold separately) are for use with steel frame revolvers only.
Caliber: .44, uses .454 diameter ball
Length of Barrel: 8"
- Real metal mini Ammo Can!
- 20 rounds of real Chocolate Bullets!
- Store your REAL AMMO!
- Lockable, Stackable, and Reusable!
- Size: 5" L x 3.5" W x 3.5" H
- Makes a GREAT GIFT!
"Rusty has a set of dress blues and a set of greens with his Sgt.Maj. and hash marks. I don't believe he wore either of these since all his medals etc. are still intact on the dress blues he always wore. I know that Rusty would want some Marine to have these and I don't know how much they cost but if anyone would be interested and come up with a fair price for them I'd like to put them into service.
The blouses are 44 long and it looks like the trousers are 35" waist and 32" long.
I really miss my husband and it is with mixed emotions that I have to go through the things that meant so much to him and part with them but I know he would want me to.
No one will ever be able to fill his shoes, he was a remarkable individual and one great Marine.
Hope you had a great Thanksgiving. Will be in touch,
Sgt. Major Russ (Rock) Rockwell was a Marines Marine. Anyone wishing to contact Mary concerning the dress blues please email me.
Boxer Blocks Impeachment Congressman
California Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer is blocking the nomination of former Republican Congressman James Rogan to the federal bench, due largely to Rogan’s leading role in the impeachment of President Bill Clinton.
Rogan served in the U.S. House from 1997 to 2001, and due to his background as a prosecutor, was selected as one of 13 House managers for the impeachment trial.
“U.S. Rep. Rogan was one of the most enthusiastic backers of impeachment — he thought President Clinton had committed high crimes and misdemeanors,” Boxer’s spokeswoman Natalie Ravitz said.
“The Senate certainly disagreed with that conclusion.”
President Bush nominated Rogan — now a state Superior Court judge in California — a year ago to a seat on the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, and renominated him in January after the new Democratic-controlled Congress convened, the Orange County Register reported.
But Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., does not advance judicial nominees if they do not have the support of their home-state senators, and Boxer and fellow California Democrat Sen. Dianne Feinstein have not committed to supporting Rogan, committee spokeswoman Erica Chabot told The Associated Press.
In addition to Rogan’s role in the impeachment proceedings, Boxer also objects to his conservative positions on gun control, abortion and other issues, according to Ravitz.
White House spokesman Trey Bohn said: “Judge Rogan enjoys broad bipartisan support and we urge the Senate to confirm him.”
Ah hell, Babs. Whats a little felony here and there amongst moonbats, right? So what if Bubba perjured himself and suborned perjury? He was a democrat, that puts him above the law, and how dare anyone try him for crimes only the little people go to jail for?
"The Pentagon’s Iraqi Most Wanted “Deck of Death” playing cards was a huge hit with Americans.
Now, NewsMax.com is raising the ante – with the Deck of Weasels, depicting the 54 worst leaders and celebrities who opposed America and were key members of "The United Nations of Weasels."
This hot new set of playing and informational cards – which will surely be a collector’s item – depicts the enemies of America and Iraq’s liberation in a satirical way while revealing the evidence of their hatred – their own quotes against America!
No doubt the Deck of Weasels will enrage those included – including Michael Moore, Tim Robbins, Jacques Chirac, Barbra Streisand, Teddy Kennedy, Kofi Annan and many more."
Nearly 120 people were arrested and 1,300 guns and imitation firearms seized in a major police crackdown, it was announced today.
Raids in hotspots which account for more than half of Britain's gun crime - Manchester, London, Liverpool and Birmingham - involved more than 1,000 officers yesterday.
The operation seized 10 handguns and £5,900 in cash.
Officers also confiscated six imitation handguns, 1,290 other realistic imitation firearms, three CS gas canisters, a stun gun and four air weapons.
The operation was part of an anti-gang action plan set up by Home Secretary Jacqui Smith in September, shortly after schoolboy Rhys Jones was shot and killed near his Liverpool home.
Ms Smith said: "Getting guns off our streets is a top priority for the Government and the day of action sends a strong message to criminals and the community that weapons won't be tolerated. Even if all we found were mostly toys, the mere sight of a toy could cause grievous harm to an unsuspecting person who doesn't know the difference between imitation and realistic imitation and real."When asked if there were any sentencing differences for possessing imitation, realistic imitation, or real guns, Ms Smith replied that "At this point in time we are considering referring to them as criminals, imitation criminals, and realistic imitation criminals solely for the sake of accuracy but the sentencing will be the same no matter real or not real the guns in question actually were."
Pictured #1: Jacqui Smith, who was "pretty impressed" with the haul of mostly toys.
Pictured #2: The mostly toys.
"Guns don't shoot by themselves — this I know.
Invariably, there is some finger attached to a hand attached to an arm attached to a body and within it a beating heart and a human mind — whether sober or sane, crazed or in pain — that leads to the big boom, crack or bang that sends a bullet or two or three or more hurtling toward the target.
Sometimes it is justified; sometimes not.
Whatever the circumstance, I was stunned to see the gun advertisement on the back cover of an insert in a New Haven newspaper. On the front cover were the words "holiday gift guide" featuring pictures of DVDs, CDs, toys and apparel.
On that back cover, however, was a full-page ad for handguns, complete with list price, sale price and "4 high capacity magazines PLUS $50 cash back with (a) mail-in rebate."
Topping it off was the illustration of a gunslinger sporting a Western hat with two pistols in his hands. But lest we worry, there were these comforting words just above the name of the gun center that placed this festive ad: "Guns for the Good Guys."
Ah, that makes me feel good. Only the good guys will get these guns.
But good guys are not good all the time. And even if they were, there are those bad guys who wind up with the good guys' guns in their hands through thievery or a cold, hard transaction. (Because good guys like money, too — even if the money comes from bad hands)."
Poor Frank is either unaware that the very first gun laws were attempts to disarm uppity blacks, or IS aware and has sold out his people for an all expense paid ride on the liberal gravy train. Western hats. Pistols. Gun ads. They all scare Frank. A lot. Means that an awful lot of people are capable of defending themselves against the robbers and rapists and murderers. Also means that certain people who cannot legally own a firearm might very well be tempted to steal them from those who can. Now dammitall, Frank, it isn't my fault that your folk commit the most crimes and kill one another like its going out of style, but it is your fault if your fear convinces even ONE black man or woman from owning the means to fight back. Shame on you for making me do all the heavy lifting while you bury your head in the sand and play make-believe.
By ROBERT P. FIRRIOLO
"The Monday editorial on the Second Amendment ("An overdue conversation") to the U.S. Constitution was sadly misinformed on both the amendment and the scholarship analyzing it. The overwhelming weight of peer-reviewed legal research has determined conclusively that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms, and not a so-called "collective right" or a right to arm government-organized militias.
The editorial misses the mark by a mile in its attempt to dismiss the "standard model" for Second Amendment analysis as the product of "the lobby for gun makers and gun lovers." Distinguished constitutional scholars such as Laurence Tribe, Alan Dershowitz, Akil Amar, Eugene Volokh, Sanford Levinson and William Van Alstyne all concur in the individual rights view. None of these renowned law professors would ever be accused of carrying water for the National Rifle Association.
With the Founding Fathers on its side, the NRA has never needed to gin up support for the individual rights view. Instead, the NRA has always been content to point to the plain words of the framers that make clear that, as Patrick Henry said, "The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun."
The tiny minority of law review articles advocating for the collective rights view have typically been backed by the gun-ban lobby and have appeared in journals of little note. Tellingly, one of the most notorious instances of academic fraud in recent memory was perpetrated by a historian trying to rewrite history to undermine the importance of personal firearms ownership to the Founding Fathers. In 2000, Emory University professor Michael A. Bellesiles published "Arming America: The Origins of a National Gun Culture," which claimed that gun ownership was rare in American colonial households. When his research was discovered to be not only inaccurate but fraudulent, Bellesiles was forced to resign his professorship and was stripped of the prestigious Bancroft Prize, previously awarded for the book, by the trustees of Columbia University.
The 1939 case of United States vs. Miller may have been the last time the Supreme Court ruled on the meaning of the Second Amendment, but it was not the first time. While the Miller holding has been distorted over the years to suggest a collective rights view, there was no question that the amendment protected an individual right in the century and a half that followed the ratification of the Bill of Rights in 1791. The Supreme Court did not even have occasion to interpret the Second Amendment until 1876, in United States v. Cruikshank.
Cruikshank involved a conspiracy by Klansman to deprive blacks of their civil rights. The Supreme Court stated that "bearing arms for a lawful purpose" is a right that predates the Constitution and is not "in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence." However, it went on to rule that the amendment did not protect people "against any violation by their fellow-citizens of the rights it recognizes." The court only needed to address the question of whether the Second Amendment protected against violations of black Americans' right to keep and bear arms by Klansmen because it first recognized that the right protected was an individual one.
Though several lower courts have misinterpreted Miller to mean that the Second Amendment protects only a "collective right," the Supreme Court never held that it does not protect an individual right, and has suggested otherwise. In United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, a 1990 case interpreting the meaning of "the people" in the Fourth Amendment, the high court observed that "the people" "seems to have been a term of art employed in select parts of the Constitution." "The people" protected by the Fourth Amendment were found to be the same individuals protected by the First and Second Amendments, and to whom rights and powers are reserved in the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.
In its review of the U.S. Court of Appeals decision striking down the District of Columbia's outright ban on possessing functional firearms in the home, the Supreme Court will have the chance to uphold the drafters' intent and rule that the Second Amendment protects an individual right. It remains to be seen if any justices will be swayed by the kind of emotion-laden rhetoric, shoddy scholarship, and revisionist history fostered by the gun-ban lobby and espoused in The Journal News' editorial."
Bravo, well done.
Not that it will convince those who fear firearms, because thats what is all boils down to really. When you consider the fact that majority of half the population is truly afraid of guns, a not insignificant percentile of the remaining half hasn't the nerve to own them, and the true devotees are by and large relative lazy, its a damned wonder we didn't repeal the 2nd Amendment long ago. Pretty fair testimony to those that DO stand tall though.
PRINCETON, NJ -- Republicans are significantly more likely than Democrats or independents to rate their mental health as excellent, according to data from the last four November Gallup Health and Healthcare polls. Fifty-eight percent of Republicans report having excellent mental health, compared to 43% of independents and 38% of Democrats. This relationship between party identification and reports of excellent mental health persists even within categories of income, age, gender, church attendance, and education.
The basic data -- based on an aggregated sample of more than 4,000 interviews conducted since 2004 -- are straightforward.
The differences are quite significant, as can be seen. While Democrats are slightly less likely to report excellent mental health than are independents, the big distinctions in these data are the differences between Republicans and everyone else.
Not surprising. "Independents" are fence-sitting, anal retentive types who'd be rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic for that absolutely perfect view while the ship sank. Democrats are professional victims without core values. Awaiting the next handout and not knowing where one's closest freebie is coming from must be quite stressful.
Biden spoke in front of a crowd of approximately 100 at a Seacoast Media Group forum Thursday, which focused on the Iraq War and foreign policy. When an audience member expressed fear of another war with Iran, he said he does not typically engage in threats, but had no qualms about issuing a direct warning to the oval office.
“The President has no authority to unilaterally attack Iran and if he does, as foreign relations committee chairman, I will move to impeach,” said Biden, which was followed by a raucous applause.
Biden said he is in the process of meeting with constitutional law experts to prepare a legal memorandum saying as much, and intends to send it to the President.
When resident Joel Carp asked Biden why not impeach now given what has already been done, Biden said it was a valid point but might not be constitutionally valid and potentially counterproductive. A case for impeachment must have clear evidence, he said, and blame should be directed at the right parties.
“If you’re going to impeach George Bush, you better impeach Cheney first,” said Biden, which also received applause.
Biden said the best deterrent to prevent preemptive military action in Iran is to make it clear, even if it is at the end of his final term, action will be taken against Bush to ensure “his legacy will be marred for all time.”
Uhhuh. Just like it marred Bill Clinton's legacy. This may come to a surprise to you, Joe, but the only opinion politicians care about are the ones offered by their own party. Clinton committed felonies and remains a rock star, and were a moonbat such as yourself to launch an attempt at impeachment it'd be considered something of a badge of honor.
Anyway, we're going to give the Israeli's all the help they need to take care of Iran, Joe, so stop fussing over precisely who it is that is going to bomb them.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Michelle Malkin Lists The Democrap Plants
Really should have been a dead giveaway that such goofy looking people had to be moonbat plants.
.45 Colt Redhawk
The Ruger® Redhawk® is now available in the versatile and historic .45 Colt caliber! From the black powder loads of the early days of the American West to the lightest-loaded Cowboy Action Shooting loads and powerful hunting cartridges of today, the .45 Colt has been a favorite of American shooters for 125 years.
In response to shooter demand, the large-frame Ruger Redhawk, with its triple-locking cylinder, fully adjustable white outline rear sight and red ramp front sight, is now available in the recently introduced 4" barreled Redhawk. This double action low maintenance satin finish stainless steel revolver wears a one-piece rubber Hogue® Grip that provides sure handling and reduction of perceived recoil; and its shorter barrel makes it a pleasure to carry afield.
Left-Handed Ruger M77® Hawkeye® rifles
Ruger M77® Hawkeye® rifles, with their sleek new styling, shooter-requested features, and crisp LC6™ Trigger, are now available in select calibers in a standard length left-handed action. The ejection port, extractor, bolt handle, and 3-position manual safety are all located on the left side of these true left-handed rifles. No compromises have been made to their legendary Ruger reliability and ease of operation.
Other Ruger Hawkeye features included on the left-handed rifles include a softer red rubber recoil pad that provides more effective recoil reduction, Mauser-type controlled feeding, a powerful claw extractor, and free Ruger patented scope rings. The design of the patented steel floorplate, now bearing the distinctive Ruger logo, provides easy unloading and eliminates accidental "dumping" of ammunition.
The new left-handed Ruger Hawkeye rifles are available in .270 Win., .25-06 Rem., .30-06 Sprg., 7mm Rem. Mag., and .300 Win. Mag.. A Hawkeye African in the potent .375 Ruger is also available. All models feature slimmer American walnut stocks with extensive cut-checkering and hammer forged barrels with a handsome Hawkeye Matte blued finish.
.327 Federal Magnum SP101 Revolver
Ruger® has partnered with Federal Premium to introduce a new revolver cartridge designed to deliver .357 Magnum ballistics out of a .32-caliber platform - and with 20-percent less recoil. Ruger will offer the .327 Federal Magnum in the SP101 double-action revolver with a 3-1/16-inch barrel length and six-shot cylinder. The satin finish stainless steel gun features an adjustable rear sight and one-piece rubber grip with durable synthetic inserts.
Through the use of advanced powders and new high quality bullets, Federal Premium Ammunition has taken the often underpowered .32-caliber platform and beefed it up to achieve .357 Magnum velocity. Due to the smaller diameter cartridge, shooters get an additional round in their revolver - six shots as opposed to the traditional five-shot cylinder offered in 38-Special and .357 Magnum small frame revolvers.
The Ruger SP101 in .327 Federal will also shoot .32 H&R Magnum, .32 S&W and .32 S&W Long cartridges - giving shooters four caliber options and a great, versatile product for hunting, target shooting and personal defense applications.
.327 Federal Magnum ammunition will be available in three loads: Federal
Premium 85-gr Hydra-ShokTM JHP (1335 fps muzzle velocity in 3-1/16" barrel),
American Eagle® 100-gr SP (1435 fps muzzle velocity in 3-1/16" barrel) and
Speer 115-gr Gold Dot® HP (1335 fps muzzle velocity in 3-1/16" barrel).
I'm going to take a long hard look at the 4" Redhawk in 45 Colt. Thats if I can find a gunshop that will carry one. I've no need for a 327 magnum at this time, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't be fun to own and shoot one.
Kucinich suggests Ron Paul as a running mate
Acworth, N.H. -- "Call it the liberal-libertarian ticket, where left meets right and Democrat Dennis Kucinich picks Republican Ron Paul to be his vice president.
Kucinich, the Cleveland congressman running in a longshot bid to become president, suggested it himself Sunday.
"I'm thinking about Ron Paul" as a running mate, Kucinich told a crowd of about 70 supporters at a house party here, one of numerous stops throughout New Hampshire over the Thanksgiving weekend. A Kucinich-Paul administration could bring people together "to balance the energies in this country," Kucinich said.
Well then. They'd be sure to win, actually. Besides every nutjob in America, they'd garner the vote of every last drunk who thought it'd be way cool to vote for the two strangest men in the country.
"China's last-minute cancellation of a U.S. Navy visit to Hong Kong was not the result of a misunderstanding, the Chinese Foreign Ministry said Thursday, adding that ties had been "disturbed and harmed" by Congress' honoring of the Dalai Lama and U.S. arms sales to Taiwan.
Spokesman Liu Jianchao denounced an earlier report from Washington that said Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi told President Bush the incident was a misunderstanding.
But Liu offered no concrete explanation as to why China barred the aircraft carrier USS Kitty Hawk and its escort vessels from entering Hong Kong harbor for a planned Thanksgiving visit.
"The report is not in line with the facts," Liu said at a regular news briefing.
He refused to elaborate, but his negative characterization of U.S.-China relations appeared to indicate that Beijing had canceled the visit deliberately in order to register its displeasure over U.S. actions, as it has occasionally with previous Hong Kong port calls.
Liu said "erroneous" actions on the part of the U.S. had "disturbed and harmed" relations.
He pointed to the U.S. Congress' awarding its highest civilian honor to the Dalai Lama last month. Though the Tibetan spiritual leader is lauded in much of the world as a figure of moral authority, Beijing demonizes the monk and claims he seeks to destroy China's sovereignty by pushing for independence for Tibet."
What awful people.
"A new study by the Center for Immigration Studies, based on the latest Census Bureau data, shows the number of immigrants in America, both legal and illegal, has swelled to a record 38 million this year – making one of every eight U.S. residents an immigrant.
The new numbers indicate the highest level in more than eight decades – with a third of those being illegal aliens.
One third of immigrants are on some form of welfare, costing states nearly $20 billion a year, the study claimed, adding that efforts to legalize the spiraling number of illegal aliens will only increase the amount of uneducated, uninsured legal immigrants burdening America’s welfare rolls.
Since 2000, more than 10 million immigrants have entered the U.S., more than half of them illegally, according to the CIS. With no change in U.S. immigration policy, another 15 million immigrants will likely arrive in the next 10 years.
“The last seven years have been the highest period of immigration in American History,” says the report’s lead author, Dr. Steven A. Camarota. “The roughly 1.5 million immigrants arriving each year have a very significant effect on American life.”
Mark Krikorian, executive director of the CIS, tells Newsmax that the deleterious effects of continued immigration, include “an increasing burden on taxpayers to subsidize a 19th century workforce imported into a 21st century society; further displacement and wage reductions for the low-skilled and teen-age American workers who are the chief competitors of illegal immigrants; and continued slowing of technological innovation in the fields where immigrants are concentrated due to the artificial flooding of the low-skilled labor market and consequent reduction of incentives for businesses to mechanize and use labor more efficiently.”
The impact is being felt most pointedly in a handful of states. California, Florida, Texas, New Jersey and Arizona are bearing the brunt of immigration increases both legal and illegal, the CIS study found. California’s 10 million immigrants alone make up 27 percent of the nation’s total immigrant population.
“Some 75 percent of immigrants settle in ten states,” Krikorian tells Newsmax. “But Americans in other states are not immune to the effects of mass immigration. The consequences for security, sovereignty, assimilation, and government spending are national problems. In other words, every state is now a border state, every town a border town.”
A third of all U.S. immigrants come from Mexico, making it the top country of origin followed by China, India, the Philippines and Vietnam. Almost 60 percent of the Illegal aliens entering the U.S. come from Mexico.
The numbers portend a major shift in American demographics. More than 72 percent of native U.S. residents are white, 13 percent are black, 10 percent are Hispanic and 2 percent are Asian. But among the burgeoning immigrant population, over 48 percent are Hispanic, 23 percent are Asian, 21 percent are white and 7 percent are black.
Camarota, research director at the CIS, a Washington think tank that favors immigration restrictions along with improved services for legal immigrants, says immigrants now make up one in every five school-age children in America. Immigration accounts for all of the increases in public school enrollment nationwide over the past 20 years, the CIS reports.
In places such as Los Angeles County and New York City, the children of immigrant fathers make up nearly 60 percent of the school-age population.
On top of that, a quarter of these immigrant children live in poverty and a third lack health insurance, something Camarota says “creates enormous challenges for the nation’s schools, healthcare system and physical infrastructure.”
In fact, the study found that 17 percent of immigrants and their children live below the poverty line – with income of less than $20,000 per year for a family of four - some 50 percent higher than the poverty rate for native U.S. residents.
Many immigrants do ultimately find a better life here. But the study reveals that even those who have been in the U.S. for more than two decades are more likely than native residents to live in poverty, lack health insurance and use the welfare system.
Camarota points out that the numbers indicate the reason for the high rates of poverty and welfare among immigrants is a lack of education, “not their legal status or unwillingness to work.”
More than 31 percent of adult immigrants have not completed high school, compared to just 8 percent of U.S. natives. Since 2000, immigrants have boosted the overall number of workers who lack a high school diploma to 14 percent.
Camarota’s findings on the quality of life for uneducated immigrants shows that attempts at so-called amnesty for the current population of 12 million illegal aliens would prove costly and provide little benefit.
“Immigrants who have legal status, but little education, generally have low incomes and make heavy use of welfare programs,” the CIS report states. “If we decide to legalize illegal immigrants, we should at least understand that it will not result in dramatically lower welfare use or poverty.
“Those who advocate such a policy need to acknowledge this problem and not argue that legalization will save taxpayers money or result in a vast improvement in the income of illegal aliens,” the report continues. “Legalized illegals will still be overwhelmingly uneducated and this fact has enormous implications for their income, welfare use, health insurance coverage, and the effect on American taxpayers.”
Of the estimated 12 million illegal aliens in the U.S., nearly 7 million have jobs. Illegal immigrants earn an average of $46,000 per household annually compared with $67,000 for native families, the CIS study shows.
“A central question for immigration policy is whether we should allow in so many people with little education — increasing job competition for the poorest American workers and the population needing government assistance,” says Camarota. “Setting aside the lower socio economic status of immigrants, no nation has ever attempted to incorporate nearly 38 million newcomers into its society.”
America has, of course, traditionally been a nation of immigrants. But the CIS report points out that the immigrant population now accounts for a large share of the increase in the overall U.S. population. During the first decade of the last century, the 3.2 million additional immigrants accounted for just 20 percent of the total increase in the U.S. population. The 6.8 million immigrant increase in the last seven years equals 34 percent of U.S. population’s rise in that same period.
“Whatever one thinks of contemporary immigration, it is critically important to understand that its effect on America represents a choice,” Camarota says. “Selection criteria can be altered, as can the total number of people allowed into the country legally. With illegal aliens accounting for nearly one in three immigrants, their effect on the nation by themselves is now very large.”
True to the CIS charter, Krikorian stresses that there “ is no excuse whatever for intolerant attitudes toward legal immigrants -- we admitted them according to the rules established by our elected representatives, and we must, and will, continue to embrace them as Americans in training.
“Even illegal immigrants must be treated humanely as they are detained and returned to their homes,” Krikorian says. “But future legal immigration is a different question -- mass immigration is simply not compatible with the goals of a modern society and should be minimized to the extent possible.”
The highlighting is mine. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
That or learn spanish. Here's a better breakdown, unfettered by politically correct omissions:
Among the report’s findings:
# The immigrant population (legal and illegal) reached a record of 37.9 million in 2007.
# Immigrants account for one in eight U.S. residents, the highest level in 80 years.
# Overall, nearly one in three immigrants is an illegal alien. Half of Mexican and Central American immigrants and one-third of South American immigrants are illegal.
# Since 2000, 10.3 million immigrants have arrived — the highest seven-year period of immigration in U.S. history. More than half of post-2000 arrivals (5.6 million) are estimated to be illegal aliens.
# Of adult immigrants, 31 percent have not completed high school, compared to 8 percent of natives. The share of immigrants and natives with a college degree is about the same.
# 33 percent of immigrant-headed households use at least one welfare program, compared to 19 percent for native households. Among households headed by immigrants from Mexico, the largest single group, 51 percent use at least one welfare program.
# The poverty rate for immigrants and their U.S.-born children (under 18) is 17 percent, nearly 50 percent higher than the rate for natives and their children.
# 34 percent of immigrants lack health insurance, compared to 13 percent of natives. Immigrants and their U.S.-born children account for 71 percent of the increase in the uninsured since 1989.
# The primary reason for the high rates of immigrant poverty, lack of health insurance, and welfare use is their low education levels, not their legal status or an unwillingness to work.
# Of immigrant households, 82 percent have at least one worker, compared to 73 percent of native households.
# Immigrants make significant progress over time. But even those who have been here for 20 years are more likely to be in poverty, lack insurance, or use welfare than are natives.
# There is a worker present in 78 percent of immigrant households using at least one welfare program.
# Immigration accounts for virtually all of the national increase in public school enrollment over the last two decades. In 2007, there were 10.8 million school-age children from immigrant families in the United States.
# Immigrants and natives have similar rates of entrepreneurship — 13 percent of natives and 11 percent of immigrants are self-employed.
# Recent immigration has had no significant impact on the nation’s age structure. Without the 10.3 million post-2000 immigrants, the average age in America would be virtually unchanged at 36.5 years.
“While there are still many unanswered questions about the circumstances, one fact is undeniable: Sean Taylor’s tragic, untimely shooting death is the latest example that in America no one is safe from the scourge of gun violence."
How's about "...in America no one is safe from the scourge of criminals."?
Or..."No one in America is safe from the scourge of criminals, so all men should be armed and ready to protect their property and loved ones."?
The TRUE fact of the matter is, Sean Taylor is dead because a home invader had a weapon far superior to his. Thats it. End of story. Bad guys will always have deadly weapons. The Brady Bunchers know this, of course they do. Fanatic nanny's yes but no one is THAT dumb. Blaming the criminal is politically incorrect, and as long as liberal politicians have the police in their hip pocket all of us are forced to live under draconian laws that hinder our ability to protect ourselves and our families. And thats precisely where they want us. Fearful and beholding to them for our very existence.
And they don't care how many dead body's must be climbed upon to preach their messages.
*Call is Slim-Frame if "short" is too difficult to imagine, but GLOCK says "Short" and I'll stick with it until told otherwise. (Attention to detail is a good thing)
More news as it arrives.
PS: Word also has it that the entire GLOCK line will feature Short-Frame versions for wee-hands to better grasp.
"Spanish scientists have unearthed what could be Europe's largest dinosaur boneyard, finding the remains of 65-foot plant-eaters never before discovered on the continent.
The paleontologists believe they have found eight different species amid the 8,000 fossils discovered so far.
The range of species they are finding at the 80-million-year-old site and their state of conservation is virtually unparalleled in Europe and challenges long-held beliefs about the way in which dinosaurs became extinct.
"This is completely beyond what we expected to find," Francisco Ortega, co-director of the excavation, told The Times. "This represents a huge leap in our understanding of the Upper Cretaceous [period]."
Dozens of experts are working around the clock to excavate the site. It was discovered in June during construction work for a new high-speed rail link between Madrid and Valencia.
Paleontologists, who kept the discovery under wraps, have until the end of November to remove the skeletons of several hundred dinosaurs before the diggers move back in.
Okay, to figure this all out first off you've got to stop paying attention to the giant meteor theory. Way too many species of animals survived and there are way too many holes in the big rock from space scenario. "Everything indicates that the dinosaurs were enjoying great evolutionary vigor when they suddenly disappeared," said José Luis Sanz, the co-director of the dig. Ortega said the find should help shed light on the extinction of the dinosaurs in Europe and whether they also died out as a result of the huge meteorite that struck modern-day Mexico."
"Everything indicates that the dinosaurs were enjoying great evolutionary vigor when they suddenly disappeared," said José Luis Sanz, the co-director of the dig.
Ortega said the find should help shed light on the extinction of the dinosaurs in Europe and whether they also died out as a result of the huge meteorite that struck modern-day Mexico."
In your gut you know damned well that all of the large dinosaurs were killed off by alien hunting party's and once the bigger predators were gone mammals finished off the easier prey.
State has one of the fastest-growing immigrant populations.Mexicans, si.
30% of Florida's immigrants are illegal, report finds
So tell us something we DIDN'T know.
Florida is one happy family reunion for Cubans, and Miami in particular was voted the city with the worst road rage and it isn't because of the retirees. But one of the many reasons these illegals are a royal pain in the ass. I cannot speak firsthand about Texas, but having been to southern Florida quite often I can say without hesitation that these people are animals plain and simple. The illegals, I mean. I'm never in the mood to go all politically correct but this isn't a case of disliking a group of people just-because. There DO happen to be folk I cannot stand being around, and smelly, dirty, slovenly, ignorant, rude, obnoxious, foreigners who can't speak a lick of English are prime examples. No, I'm not talking about your average NY'er, but the spanish-speakers of the Miami/Fort Lauderdale area. The construction trades WOULD take one helluva big hit were these beasts to be deported, and you all know about the whingy, whiny, fruit picker organizations that weep for ever-more wetbacks to keep them living high on the hog.
Tough shit. Grow some stones, learn to walk upright, and start doing the right thing. The liberals aren't going to be able to shelter you and your odious illegal workers forever, you know. Sooner or later a Conservative Congress is going to be on the same page as a Conservative President, and Operation Wetback will begin anew. Right now there are enough liberals running things and we all know how much they adore their pets but the American people are tuning in like never before and the new media (that's us) isn't going to let this go.
I give it 10, 15 years tops before the Japanese come out with an illegal immigrant robot to do the work other machines won't do, but begin weeding the beaners out now, advertise how swell you are for not hiring criminals, and watch the business take off as people begin using your products/services in droves.
"...Until now, the '08 Democratic contest has been a referendum on Hillary: The basic decision facing voters has been: Would you vote for her? The Clintons need to get people thinking about whether they like her rivals any better.
Negative ads would do the trick - but at a price: By attacking an opponent, they'd concede that Hillary isn't inevitable. That would give Obama (or John Edwards, should they decide to aim at him instead) added credibility - and perhaps more access to funding and contributions.
Historically, such considerations have never deterred the Clintons - who are always ones to anticipate their adversaries' strength rather than to belittle it.
How will they do it?
Their favored method of getting out negative material about their foes is to hire private investigators to dig up dirt, which they then release through feeds to friendly journalists.
Consider the Lewinsky scandal. When Linda Tripp got to be a danger, the Clinton people released her Pentagon personnel file to Jane Mayer (then a reporter for The New Yorker). A federal judge later reprimanded two Clinton operatives for this violation, and the government had to pay Tripp more than $600,000 - but the damage was still done.
Meanwhile, Clinton staffer (and Hillary favorite) Sidney Blumenthal peddled the line that Monica was a stalker to journalist Christopher Hitchens. And White House operatives told ABC News' Linda Douglas of incoming House Speaker Bob Livingstone's infidelity scandal before it was made public.
In the '92 presidential campaign, the Clintons openly disclosed their use of private detectives to dig up ammunition on women who had accused the presidential candidate of having affairs with them, disclosing that they paid detective Richard Palladino over $100,000 in campaign funds. But, of late, they avoid such embarrassing disclosures by hiding their detective bills in their legal expenses.
The likeliest theme of the Clinton attack will be Obama's inexperience. They'll seek to portray him as naive and way over his head in a world of terrorists and threats. But the risk here is that a woman is normally seen as weakest in the military/national security arena, so Hillary might find it difficult to make the issue work for her.
A better choice might be to argue that her political experience (i.e. in defeating the GOP "attack machine") makes her the better candidate for the November election. With the Democrats anxious for victory, using Obama's politeness and gentility against him could be an effective strategy.
She would, in effect, suggest that he is too nice to beat the Republicans - an accusation she can be confident nobody will ever make about her."
Takes a slime to know a slime, so Dick is most likely spot-on. And thats always been a problem when dealing with the Clintons. Thinking as they do. Felons and debauchers and thieves are not wired like normal people and can get away with far more than the average person. Thats how con men make a good living. Twisting the truth into tightly woven knots that are impossible to unskein.
"For the record, then, here's what Clinton really had to say about the Iraq war.
"We've got the power, we've got the juice. We should do the job," he told students at the University of Florida in an April 2003 speech.
Later that month, Clinton declared in St. Louis: "Saddam is gone and good riddance" - adding: "Bush has done the right thing in removing Saddam Hussein from power."
And just days after Bush's controversial State of the Union Address that year, Clinton said: "It is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted-for stocks of biological and chemical weapons."
What's more, Bill Clinton made a direct link between 9/11 and Iraq: In a 2004 Time interview, the former president stressed that because of 9/11, Bush had an obligation to move against Saddam:
"That's why I supported the Iraq thing," he said. "There was a lot of [weapons] stuff unaccounted for . . . When you're the president, and your country has just been through what we had, you want everything to be accounted for."
Clinton's aides now insist that he really did oppose the war - his public statements notwithstanding - but considered it inappropriate to publicly go against a sitting president.
So why not just keep his mouth shut?
With him, of course, that has never been an option.
First he lies, then he swears to it.
It's getting tiresome."
Good grief but the man lied under oath so of course he'd have nary a qualm being disingenuous while campaigning for his dreadful wife. If any two people deserved one another...but thats a different story.
Read my lips. A. Liberal. Doesn't. Know. What. The. Truth. Really is. No one with deep rooted core values could sway in the wind like these cretins do.
Whenever something is one-sided its commentary, not art. All well and good but not in a government funded institution. They promise to begin featuring the likes of Teddy Kennedy and Bill Clinton, but don't hold your breath for mugshots of GENUINE lawbreakers.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
PROVIDENCE — "Sgt. Robert Boehm, Providence police armorer, knelt down and squeezed off four shots from a .40-caliber Smith & Wesson semiautomatic pistol into a special firing chamber set up in the garage of the Public Safety Complex.
As he did so, U.S. Senators Jack Reed and Sheldon Whitehouse, Mayor David N. Cicilline, other officials and news reporters watched with their fingers in their ears for protection against the reverberation.
When the sergeant was done, he fished out of an attached heavy-duty plastic box the shell casings that had been flung free of the pistol when the bullets exploded from those casings. And he handed them off for examination of their distinctive markings by the officials and reporters under a stereomicroscope placed on a table in the auditorium of the building.
The view through the microscope — the illuminated percussion cap on the end of a casing — was shown on a large screen, and inventor Todd Lizotte explained the display..."
Yes. Microstamping raising its ugly head again.
Just another way to price the casual owner out of the gun market by making ammunition too expensive. Among many other things. All bad. All liberal.
Damn but don't you just despise these people?
"Police believe a man trying to break into an Indio home was shot dead after a struggle for a gun with the home's owner.
Authorities said the break-in happened just after 1:30 Monday morning at a home in the Indian Palms Country Club on Hamilton Court.
Officers believe 31-year-old Genaro Munoz broke into the home. That was when the homeowner inside was awakened by the intruder.
He confronted Munoz but was shot in the foot.
After a struggle, the homeowner got control of the gun and shot Munoz several times killing him.
Police believe other suspects may have been involved and fled the scene.
The homeowner was treated at JFK Hospital. No charges have been filed against him for the shooting death."
Kudos to the homeowner for having the guts to jump a man with a gun. Evocative in some ways of that instance a few months back when a physicians house was taken over by gunmen. But with a far heroic and happy ending. He watched as they raped and murdered his wife and daughter.
This MAN took the beaners gun away from him then killed him with it.
"The decision of the Supreme Court to determine the constitutionality of the District of Columbia law banning hand guns in D.C. homes will have far reaching implications concerning gun ownership throughout America."
"There's nothing that indicates thus far that there's some kind of involvement on the victim's part," said Parker, adding it was "more like a random event."
Police have no suspects in the fatal shooting.
"We have no reason to think this was anything other than a burglary or a robbery involving an intruder," Parker said.
Police are still investigating, however, a possible link to a Nov. 17 break-in at Taylor's home, in which police said someone pried open a front window, rifled through drawers and left a kitchen knife on a bed."
Sweet mother of pearl. Week or so before someone broke in and killed him, someone else (?) had broken in and left a threatening message by way of a knife on his bed.
And the shooting appears random to them?
Sounds to me like he was warned and then killed for not heeding the warning. The Miami-Dade police just might want to check on this because its happened before. They can even look it up.
PAHOKEE, Fla. — Two Palm Beach County sheriff's deputies who had tried to stop a stolen vehicle on a rural road in the Everglades were killed when they were struck by a fellow deputy's patrol car early Wednesday. The driver of the patrol car was injured, authorities said.
Scores of officers combed the region looking for two suspects in the car theft, and later said they arrested one man.
The deputies, described as very close friends, had put spikes on a road that punctured the stolen car's tires. But when they ran to remove the spikes from the road they were struck at about 1:45 a.m. by a canine patrol vehicle that was pursuing the car thieves, Sheriff Ric Bradshaw said.
"They probably did not estimate the K-9 was coming at the speed that it was," Bradshaw said at a news conference.
"You're talking about a road that is absolutely pitch black," he said.
"Everybody involved in this was doing their job. They were doing it the right way but this is a dangerous job," he said."
Way to go, asshole. Everyone was perfect, no mistakes were made, so expect this to happen time and time again, correct?
What continues to tick me off about law enforcement. Rather than owning up to a cluster fuck they pretend that oopsies are all part of a days work. But let a civilian screw the pooch and they're more than willing to point fingers and push for negligent homicide.
Its called a double standard. Coming from the hired help no less.Who should be held MORE, not LESS accountable.
by Ann Coulter
"Last week, in an article titled "Walking a Tightrope on Immigration," The New York Times made the fact-defying claim that the illegal immigration issue poses a risk for Republicans who appeal to voters "angry" about illegal immigration. (This is as opposed to voters "angry" that they spent good money buying a copy of The New York Times.)
In support of this assertion, the Times was required not only to ignore the stunning defeat of this year's amnesty bill, but also to proffer provably absurd evidence. I dearly hope Democratic politicians continue to look to the Times as an accurate barometer of voter sentiment.
In addition to secret polls showing that "the majority of Americans" support "a path to citizenship for immigrants here illegally," the Times cited election results from 1994 and 2006 that directly contradict this thesis.
First, the Times raised former California Gov. Pete Wilson's "precipitous slide" in the polls after he supported Proposition 187 in 1994, which denied most taxpayer-supported services to illegal immigrants.
The problem with this example is that Proposition 187 was wildly popular with California voters.
Times reporter Michael Luo seems to be referring to the Times' own prediction of catastrophe for Proposition 187 -- not actual election results.
One week before Californians voted on Proposition 187 in 1994, B. Drummond Ayres Jr. reported in the Times that there had been "a sharp falloff in support for the proposition."
He said Hispanic-Americans, Asian-Americans and African-American ministers were coming out strongly against Proposition 187 and that "this outcry, along with the increasing opposition being voiced by liberals, civil libertarians and assorted national political figures" was having an effect.
And then Californians voted.
Proposition 187 passed in a landslide with a nearly 20-point margin -- a larger margin than Wilson got, incidentally. It was supported by two-thirds of white voters, half of black and Asian voters, and even one-third of Hispanic voters. It passed in every area of California, except San Francisco, a city where intoxicated gay men dressed as nuns performing sex acts on city streets is not considered unusual. In heavily Latino Los Angeles County, Proposition 187 passed with a 12-point margin.
I'm no campaign consultant, but I think Wilson's support for an off-the-charts popular initiative probably didn't hurt him.
In fact, here on planet Earth, about the safest thing a California politician could do would be to wildly, vocally support Proposition 187. But in New York Times-speak, politicians are walking a dangerous "tightrope" if they dare to defy a slight majority of San Francisco voters!
The initiative went to Carter-appointed U.S. District Court Judge Mariana Pfaelzer, who issued a permanent injunction and then, in a series of decisions, found the initiative unconstitutional. Her rulings were still on appeal when Democrat Gray Davis became governor and dropped the appeals. Everyone remembers how popular Gray Davis was! (First governor in California history to be recalled.)
The crown jewel of the Times' pathetic attempt to marshal evidence for its thesis that Americans want more, not fewer, illegal aliens choking our roads, schools and hospitals also included this gem: "J.D. Hayworth, a hard-line incumbent Republican representative in Arizona, lost his race in 2006, as did Randy Graf, a member of the border-enforcing Minuteman group, who also ran in Arizona."
How many times do we have to disprove this canard?
As with Hillary's position on driver's licenses for illegals -- and B. Hussein Obama's entire campaign -- the Hayworth-Graf example works better when no follow-up questions are allowed. For example:
Q: Did Hayworth's and Graf's opponents campaign against them on illegal immigration?
Q: Were there any other issues on the ballot that year that might tell us if it was Hayworth's and Graf's positions on illegals that led to their defeats?
A: Si! Oops, I mean, yes -- why, yes there were! The very election that the Times cites as proof that anti-illegal sentiment is a loser at the ballot box also included four measures that passed overwhelmingly: (1) a measure to deny bail to illegal aliens, (2) a measure that would bar illegals from being awarded punitive damages, (3) a measure that would prohibit illegals from receiving state subsidies for education or child care, and (4) a measure to declare English the state's official language.
Whatever Arizona voters didn't like about Hayworth and Graf, it wasn't that they were too tough on illegals.
My theory is that Hayworth and Graf lost because the multitudes of Times reporters losing their jobs due to the Newspaper of Record's plummeting circulation have recently moved to Hayworth's and Graf's districts. (This is what's known as a "brain drain" in those districts.)
My theory -- like the Times' theory -- is supported by no evidence. But unlike the Times' theory, mine is not specifically disproved by other evidence such as common sense, an everyday observation of my fellow man, and also those four anti-illegal immigrant measures passing in landslides in the very same election."
Its a known fact that common sense is anathema to liberals because they live for one thing and one thing only. To be paid attention to. At the bottom of the loon totem pole we find the kos-kids, Clintonesque Mini-Me's who've come to realize that making an ass of oneself at least gets people to notice. The middle is chockablock with aging hipsters clinging to the premise that they still have what it takes to rule the world, especially when stoned, and the top of the midden rests the Clinton, Edwards, Carter, Obama, Schumer, and Pelosi types who've made it there by fooling the bottom tiers into believing they can make a difference. Not a GOOD difference, just a different difference. Good people don't kill baby's, disrespect America, despise the Constitution, and expect money for nothing and chicks for free.
"She called 9/11 widows "witches," but rabid right-wing pundit Ann Coulter doesn't like people heckling her with nasty notes or hurling insults outside her house.
The sassy blond Republican booster has successfully petitioned Florida officials to remove her name and address from county property records so critics can't find her.
The conservative darling took steps to shield her whereabouts after someone hand-delivered a threatening note to her Palm Beach home in March.
The 45-year-old best-selling author took the note to the cops demanding an investigation."
The NY Daily Snooze would be rallying around one of its pet loons were they to have done something similar, but anything to take a jab at Ann, ya know.
When someone threatens a liberal they're described as stalkers, but with Ann they're merely "critics".
Can't make this shit up.
PS: Those witches WERE witches, and I can't wait for Ann's rebuttal, but in the meantime check this out:
November 28, 2007 -- "THE publisher of Sen. Ted Kennedy's autobiography won't likely recoup his $8.5 million advance unless the 75-year-old Democrat finally tells what really happened in 1969 at Chappaquiddick, where Kennedy's car went off a bridge, drowning campaign worker Mary Jo Kopechne.
But Jonathan Karp, head of the Twelve imprint at Hachette Book Group USA, isn't worried. Karp told Page Six yesterday, "When we met with Sen. Kennedy, he assured us he would be candid."
Kennedy, who didn't report the Martha's Vineyard crash to police for many hours, eventually pleaded guilty to leaving the scene of an accident and was given a two-month suspended jail sentence.
Asked if Kennedy would come clean on the scandal, conservative author Ann Coulter quipped: "He'll cross that bridge when he comes to it . . . If he does talk about Chappaquiddick, I believe he'll have to forfeit his advance under the Son of Sam laws."
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Obama Slams Hillary on Bill Experience
On the campaign trail in rural, western Iowa, presidential hopeful Barack Obama has gone out of his way to belittle Hillary Clinton's experience as first lady, according to an ABC News report.
"I think the fact of the matter is that Sen. Clinton is claiming basically the entire eight years of the Clinton presidency as her own, except for the stuff that didn't work out, in which case she says she has nothing to do with it," Obama said.
Referring to his relationship with his wife, Michelle, Obama said, "There is no doubt that Bill Clinton had faith in her and consulted with her on issues, in the same way that I would consult with Michelle, if there were issues." He added, "On the other hand, I don't think Michelle would claim that she is the best qualified person to be a United States Senator by virtue of me talking to her on occasion about the work I've done."
And she has yet to face a Republican taking on the above as well as her liberal bent.
Gonna be FUN watching the witch sink.
LIBERTY TWP. - "A widely performed school play has been canceled by Lakota officials after a recent meeting with a local NAACP official.
The internationally acclaimed play - Agatha Christie's "Ten Little Indians" - was to be performed by students at Lakota East High School this weekend.
But Gary Hines, president of the local NAACP branch, recently complained to Lakota officials that the play, based on Christie's 1939 mystery novel, was inappropriate for a school production.
Hines said the book's original title and cover illustration used for its initial publishing that year in England was a racial slur toward blacks and included a cover illustration of a black person and a hangman's noose.
"The original title was 'Ten Little (N - - - - - -),' and it is important to say that because that was the actual title," Hines said Monday.
The title of the international bestseller was widely changed after 1939, and school theater productions in America have performed the murder mystery play as either "Ten Little Indians" or "And Then There Were None" for decades since.
Hines claims that a lack of racial diversity among Lakota's students and teachers allowed the play to be chosen despite the history surrounding its original title.So let me get this straight; the play isn't about racism, has not a racist word or idea in it, but because it once had a different title the show can't go on?
Lakota "officials"? Precisely how spineless and gutless did you set out to be?
PS: The only place you'll find the original "10 Little Niggers" referred to, is in the UK. Damn how I do hate when they've the stones to call a spade a spade.
2nd Amendment isn't absolute: Allow reasonable gun-control laws
"But there is no need for the court to choose, because even if the Second Amendment is regarded as creating an individual right to own firearms, it is surely not an absolute liberty. It seems obvious that the government can keep people from having particularly dangerous weapons, such as assault rifles, and keep those with criminal records from having guns. Just as free speech has never been regarded as absolute, nor should an individual right to bear arms be seen as precluding all government regulation."
You know, I kind of agree with you, Professor Chemerinski. so how's about we try something? Words should have consequences this is true, but like what you'd have the government do with firearms, I'd suggest we give a try with words as well.
Before you print one more word, one syllable, one letter even, I'd like you to send it to me first. This way I could have a look to see if its dangerous stuff. If in my opinion it is, then to publish those words we'd have to set up some sort of licensing procedure, and in your world any license is a good license so I suppose you'll go along with this without much of a fuss. If everything meets with my approval, you get the license to exercise your 1st Amendment rights and this is only fair because it isn't an absolute right, now is it?
Throughout history, madmen and dictators have harmed far more people with words than any of my guns have, just look at Hitler's order to KILL THE JEWS as proof. So lets get off the pot here and begin a permit procedure for these dangerous weapons. Still won't allow you to say any damned thing you well please, so have a care, Professor. Muck it up and just like felons and guns, you lose the right to ever speak in public or write anything ever again.
Feeling any different about all of this prior-restraint stuff, Professor?
Thanks to The War on Guns.
Massachusetts Proposal Would Outlaw Spanking
"Kids out of line? Spanking might not be an option in Massachusetts if a proposal takes hold in the state legislature.
The proposal, submitted by a nurse, would ban corporal punishment, including spanking, in all cases for children under 18 unless it is to save them from danger. Parents would face charges of abuse or neglect, according to The Boston Herald.
A hearing and debate is scheduled in the State House on the measure Wednesday, the paper reports.
Democratic state Rep. Jay Kaufman introduced the measure on behalf of the nurse, but isn't taking a position on it.
“He does recognize and understand the concern many would have on legislating parental rights,” said Sean Fitzgerald, Kaufman’s chief of staff, the Herald reports. "But the problem is the boundary is often overstepped. The right to hit should never be the right to hurt.”
Having never in my life laid hand to a child...well, thats a lie because as a child I most certainly must have swung at other children but anyway...it isn't for me to say how parents should discipline their kids. To be honest I wouldn't know how to administer corporal punishment to a child and the mere thought is sort of scary but I guess its supposed to be. Figures that it'd be some goody-two-shoes nursie type that would presume to tell people how to act at home.
Same old deal with lefties. Some people overdo it so all people have to be legislated into submission because they are incapable of deciding for themselves whats right and wrong.
So if you spank your kids the government will send armed men to your house and kill you if you disagree.
Cops: McDonald's Workers Attacked by Cross-Dressers
MEMPHIS, Tenn. — A troublesome trio of transvestites allegedly laid siege to a Memphis McDonald's restaurant Sunday night, sparking a brawl with the restaurant's crew, according to reports.
Police said they were working on a more detailed description of three men dressed in drag who came into a McDonald's restaurant and started swinging.
Restaurant employee Martez Brisco was working the drive-through window when he reportedly got into an argument with the suspects. When Brisco ignored them tapping at the window, they came in.
"They come to the window, 'Tap, tap, tap.' I'm still ignoring them," Brisco told WMC-TV. "I guess that just pissed them off worser."
The transvestites allegedly struck the manager with a tire iron, and when he swung back, the drag queens took off their stiletto boots, removed their earrings and prepared to attack. The manager, Albert Bolton, was covered with scratch marks after suspects clawed him with their fingernails.
Bolton grabbed a pot of scalding french-fry grease and hurled it at his attackers. One of the cross-dressers then smacked Bolton with a wet floor sign, sending him to the hospital in an ambulance, WMC-TV reported.
Before driving off, the three attackers smashed the drive-through window."One of them looked like that guy running for President, I think," Brisco added, "Ron Paul or something like that, and its no wonder lots of people are not going to vote for the guy..."
Pictured: Cross-dresser mistakenly identified as Congressman Ron Paul.
"Two of the Navy's top admirals said Tuesday that China's refusal to permit a U.S. aircraft carrier to make a Thanksgiving port call at Hong Kong was surprising and troubling.
"This is perplexing. It's not helpful," Adm. Timothy Keating, commander of U.S. Pacific Command, told reporters in a videoteleconference from his headquarters at Camp Smith, Hawaii.
"It's not, in our view, conduct that is indicative of a country that understands its obligations as a responsible nation," he said, adding that he hopes it does not indicate a lasting blockage of port visits.
The USS Kitty Hawk, which has its home port near Tokyo, was forced to return early to Japan when Chinese authorities at the last minute refused to let the warship and its escort vessels enter Hong Kong harbor.
Keating said that by the time the Chinese acted, hundreds of family members of sailors aboard the Kitty Hawk had already flown to Hong Kong from their homes in Japan to join in the port visit.
Asked about seeking an explanation from the Chinese, Keating said he had heard nothing from Chinese military authorities and that it would be a matter for the State Department to pursue. He said he did not expect the Chinese to apologize. Adm. Gary Roughead, in his first Pentagon interview since becoming the chief of naval operations eight weeks ago, described the Chinese action as disruptive.
"That was surprising and not helpful," Roughead said. "The Kitty Hawk had been planning to go in there and it was disruptive to many people's plans."
Roughead, who was commander of U.S. naval forces in the Pacific before he replaced Adm. Mike Mullen as chief of naval operations on Sept. 29, said he was even more troubled by China's refusal, several days before the Kitty Hawk incident, to let two U.S. Navy minesweepers enter Hong Kong harbor to escape an approaching storm and receive fuel. The minesweepers, the Patriot and the Guardian, were instead refueled at sea and returned safely to their home port in Japan, he said.
"As someone who has been going to sea all my life, if there is one tenet that we observe it's when somebody is in need you provide (assistance) and you sort it out later," the admiral said. "And that, to me, was more bothersome, so I look forward to having discussions with the PLA navy leadership," he said, referring to the People's Liberation Army.
Keating made a similar point. He called the denial in the case of the minesweeping ships "a different kettle of fish for us — in some ways more disturbing, more perplexing" than the Kitty Hawk case because the Chinese action violated an unwritten international code for assisting ships in distress.
Keating said he still plans to visit China in mid-January to discuss, among other things, ways to strengthen U.S.-China military relations.
Roughead said China's actions would not stop the U.S. Navy from seeking future port visits to Hong Kong.
"Hong Kong remains a very welcoming place for our sailors to be when they get there and it remains one of the world's great cities where sailors for centuries have gone, and it's still part of the draw of why young men and women choose to do what we do. It will remain a port of interest," he said."
The highlighted paragraph says all that need be contemplated. The Chins find themselves a barbaric country having great difficulties assuming the guise of a responsible, modern nation. Because they are not a responsible, modern nation, and no amount of trade monies can magically make it so. A house of cards awaiting the slightest jolt to topple, a nation playacting at freedom and democracy while firmly rooted in the 5th Century. Sound familiar? Oil money has hoisted Arabia by its bootstraps, foregoing the normal run of events that leads a people to modernism. Tyrannical dictatorships with their feet planted firmly in the past, neither entity can be welcomed into the brotherhood of civilization until their people can call themselves free. At least Arabia has contributed something to the growth and prosperity of humankind, albeit not lately, but China has never bequeathed the world anything of worth, and please now, the fortune-cookie Sun Tsu proclamations of all things painfully obvious doesn't count.
Of course they still don't know how to act. Believing otherwise in instances such as the rhubarb over our aircraft carrier being denied entry into Hong Kong bespeaks a lack of sophistication rivaling that of the Chinese themselves.
|Which Discworld Character are you like (with pics)|
|You scored as The Librarian|
|You are the Librarian! Once a |
wizard, now an
(due to an unfortunate magical
you refuse to be turned back
fora few reasons:
In this form, it's easier to reach
the shelves and hold more
strength of five men
makes people return their
books on time;
life's great philosophical
questions boil down to
when do I get my next
banana? You say ook but
are usually understood
Thanks to Dad's Deadpool blog