Conspiracy? Rove's useful idiots!

My dad is getting on... he had a lot of ideas and views, when I was young, that started me thinking beyond the box.

But, a few days ago, a side comment about politics and the world situation led him to ask me if I believed in "that theory about 'three guys running the whole world'".

I knew, of course he meant the "Trilateral Commission theory" but I wasnt sure HOW to respond, but some events surely lead you to believe in SOMETHING like that.

The Alito and Roberts' hearings and the decision of John Kerry to try to mount a filibuster 'just on principle' make me wonder.
Appointing Dean as DNC chair, for him to promptly run the finances into near red-ink makes me wonder.

Hell, just letting Kerry open his mouth makes me wonder... never mind he has almost a clean slate of doing nothing in 20 years in the Senate.

Karl Rove couldn't orchestrate it to make Democrats look any more stupid. Or could he?

Hmmm.. have any of YOU ever seen Soros and Rove in the same place, together?

The Murtha Method: "Projecting strength through Strategic Retreat!"

The boards of several war colleges are rumored to be lining up Rep Murtha as a guest lecturer.

Already, though, the Rep has seen his strategic views employed yet again by the UN Peacekeeping Force in CongoU.N. Removes Peacekeepers After Slayings.

By ANJAN SUNDARAM, Associated Press Writer Tue Jan 24, 10:30 PM ET

KINSHASA, Congo - The
United Nations pulled its remaining peacekeepers out of the national park where eight Guatemalan peacekeepers were killed in an apparent gunbattle with Ugandan rebels, a U.N. spokesman said Tuesday.

Hans-Jakob Reichen, U.N. military spokesman for eastern Congo, said the peacekeepers were withdrawn because they had completed a two-week mission to clear Garamba National Park of rebel forces. "It was decided to pull peacekeepers out of the park since any suspected rebels had melted into the jungle," Reichen said.

It's expected that a Headquarters session of the council will ask Murtha how to expand on recent recent UN successes, such as that above.
And these...

Of note is the amazing effect UN had in Liberia's recent unrest...

In Liberia, the UN peacekeeping mission, UNMIL, was dispatched in record time to assist in the implementation of a comprehensive peace agreement. Even before UNMIL’s full authorized strength of 15,000 uniformed personnel was reached, the security situation in the country improved dramatically.Violence and ceasefire violations decreased, and UN peacekeepers paved the way for the provision of humanitarian assistance and for the demobilization, disarmament and reintegration of ex-combatants.

Of course the stationing of several US Navy ships with contingents of Marines aboard, outside Monrovia's harbor, had nothing to do with it.

Cronkite at Pearly Gates Court


Cronkite: Time for U.S. to Leave Iraq

From yer intrepid judgement day reporter on the scene:

Magistrate: "Ah, yes, the famous Mr Cronkhite! We've been waiting for you."

"Lessee what we have here... hmmm.. Personal life, not too bad, for a casual believer, a little excess here and there.. swearing, etc... lust , oh my! You had an active off camera life. Ah, well ... now, influence on others: Oh-oh, Oh my goodness LOOK at the BODY COUNT racked up against YOU!"

Walter: "But.. but.. I never killed ANYONE!"

Magistrate, peering over nose perched reading glasses: "My boy, you're no Hitler or Stalin, for sure... but you are right up there with Attila the Hun in the numbers."

Magistrate reading: "Deaths directly caused by influence of word or event: unnecessary battles - 78,925; Drownings or deaths at sea, civilians escaping oppression - 168,768; Executions or deaths in internment - 56,127....."

Walter, interrupting: "But I'm just a NEWS GUY!"

Magistrate: "Hey...I'm just a judge, here! That's what the book says and it's always proved out."

"Sez here in the border notes, you're the most trusted man in America... didnt you think of that?"

Walter: "Well, sure, but i just offer my opinion.."

Magistrate: "Opinions, like cross words spoken in heat of anger, have consequences, old boy!"

Walter: "But my intentions were good, I meant to save lives..."

Magistrate: "Well, you know what they say about the road to Hell... looks like you're gonna find out, first-hand."

Walter: "Wait.. wait.. don't tell me that Bush actually..."

Magistrate: "Bush.. what's he got to do with it? That's only about your Tet statement."

"Fortunately for you, the only one who's gonna get black marks for cuttin' and runnin' in Iraq, is Bush's daddy. Most people knew you were full of it when you blathered on about Iraq, so you get a pass on that"

Magistrate, to bailiff: "Take this one to the down-elevator waiting room. Next!"

Alito, lookback and summary..

Well, It's another case of the Dem's grabbing at straws instead of looking for lifeboats.

Kennedy's carping on CAP made him look even more stupid that he came across in 'Roberts' and now, all the Dems seem to want is to delay the vote until after Dubya's State of the Union.

Maybe they hope for an earthquake jarring open a 'closet' somewhere. The sole criticism remaining is that Alito seems to 'defer to the Executive too much'.

MAybe the key to that is the actual NAMES of the Government branches?!!! It's called the 'Executive' for a reason, dummies! As in "to execute!" or "put into action"!

While the framers put in safeguards against a 'monarchistic' system, they realized that ONE branch had to have the latitude to actually DO SOMETHING, rather than debate about it.
Of course such an idea has become foreign to the Dem concepts of governance. To them, talking about something IS 'action taken'!
All you have to do is read Madam Albright's comments on the Clinton Administration's foreign policy to understand that.

Maurice and LeBron... just one small step apart.


They came from the same places, they knew each other. But what a difference in how they ended up.

Both extremely gifted physically, and athletically. Both smart, to go along with it.

Both received extreme national attention. And advice from all quarters in how to deal with their gifts and talents.

Both accused of relatively small transgressions as they progressed into the national spotlight.

Whoever advised LeBron.. more importantly, the advice he TOOK... made the difference!

Note that Jim Brown advised Maurice..... or rather the sum of that advice ENABLED Maurice. Because he ONLY took the part of the Legend's advice that suited him.

Which is: Maurice had to deal with 'the MAN!' And the MAN was out to get him!

LeBron no doubt got the same advice. But hasnt he dealt with it differently?

Now we have Maurice wanted on a warrant for armed robbery, instead of looking forward to a breakout season as a Broncos running back.

And LeBron practically owning the Cav's franchise.
We can't know whether LeBron will finally succumb to the entitlement mentality that humbled the previous HS to Pro phenom, Kobi Bryant... who also started out well, but was brought down by 'the MAN'.

But now we know that Maurice isnt even going to get the chance... because he started out worrying about 'the MAN' rather than getting his own ducks lined up.

Which is a difference of just 'one small step or decision'.

And defines the meaning of the word 'entitlement', to say nothing of the exact identity of 'the MAN'!

Best Blogger, EVER, in my whole mind!

.. to put things in perspective, is this retired LA Cop blogger:

Brutality was what {Democratic} Mayor Tom Bradley encouraged from LA cops throughout the 1980s. At the time, we couldn?t understand why Bradley?s Police Commission required us to use metal pipes on psychotic arrestees; nor did we know why Bradley forced the LAPD to welcome incompetent applicants, gang members, and drug dealers into our ranks as police officers in the name of diversity. After a while, I found that the more LA cops were viewed as thugs and criminals, the wider the chasm grew between the LAPD and the community we served, and the stronger LA liberals became politically.

Hmmm... not that I REALLY believe in that whole conspiracy thing... oh, wait, that's what I've been saying for years!
- read the whole thing for other significant background

Then, there is This, On War...

Some years ago, my partner and I responded to a domestic violence call. When we met the battered and shaken woman, she described how she was beaten and choked as her adult son stole her money and jewelry. After stripping the wedding ring from her finger, he left her bloody, bruised, and crying on the kitchen floor.

As we completed our report, the son returned. When we tried to arrest him he began to struggle against us. Fueled by PCP and cocaine, the man was almost impossible to control. When my partner and I pulled him onto the living room floor the fight was ON with no rules, no help, and no recourse. We were alone with a deranged man who wanted to kill us.

We were at war.

Don?t hurt my son!

As we grappled and fought with the desperate man, his mother closed in and began to kick, pull, and tug at our arms. She was a nice lady who meant well. She didn?t like violence and didn?t want anyone to get hurt. But by interfering with our attempts to control her son, she endangered herself, her son, and those who had come to protect her.

As the woman screamed and fought, she emboldened her son to resist further. By interfering with those who had come to defend her, our victim had become our enemy. Had Democrats conducted a poll, 100% of the residents would have viewed us as occupiers.

Which brings us to this letter to Senator Pelosi on the GOP 'Bird-Flu Scheme'.

All the corporate greed and avarice, lamentable and outrageous as it is, cannot equal the harm done by the cynical manipulation and exploitation of the disadvantaged in order to gain and retain political power.

Because there are non-political checks on the abuse of corporate power.... there seem to be few on the Jesse Jacksons and Chuck Schumers of the world.

On rejoining the Flock..

After 25 years of non-attendance at any church, save for funerals or weddings, I am starting to look for a church to attend.

I thought I had found the perfect fit, years, ago when my family joined a fairly large Southern Baptist congregation in the larger town down the road. It had everything we were looking for.

It was basically made up of young families, was centered on the Gospel, the officers and pastors non-judgemental in matters of dress or lifestyle or income and emphasized the triumph of faith over the foibles of humanity.

Little or NO time was spent on the politics of the Bible, whether they be literal reading of events or prophecy or taking of chapter and verse meanings.
I think I had better illuminate that:
The ONE topic of continual discussion was submission of the wife to the husband, as the church submits to Jesus as the messenger of God. e.g; NOT equal partners.. but that is itself open to interpretation, as the wife may indeed be the bulwark of the relationship. I saw no reason to use that to deny deacon-ship to a woman member of the Church, for instance.

But here's where it fell down:

Meetings, beside Sunday School and Church on Sunday, on Sunday night, Wednesday night, then some set for Monday night, something else Tuesday evening.. Bible Study or group education in other forms of ministry. Then something specific for Thurday evening.

And often some activity set for Saturdays, be it door to door testimony, or some public service project.

Nothing wrong with all that, surely, yet it ultimately soured me. Why? Because of the constant 'encouragement' of other members and church lay-officers to participate in all these.
One surely can politely beg off.. yet the niggling little hook remains in the conscience. "Am I a good believer and practitioner?".

The good folks down the street and those in the meeting rooms didnt MEAN to do it, but the effect, in my mind, persisted as 'judgement'.

And finally, it became to much to bear and I, sadly, drifted away from all of it. First the midweek activities, then Sunday School.. and, finally, going to Services.

All of this NOT helped by the well-meaning greetings I got when I DID attend.

"We've missed you." is indeed a loaded statement under those conditions. Yeah, yeah.. I can analyse out of the motivation of those words, but still..

And something ELSE! It was at this time that the leadership of the Southern Baptist Convention was taken over by the conservative wing.

Though the best spin was put on intent, I could read between the lines; more literal interpretation of the Bible, emphasis on acts as testimony to faith, less tolerance of non-compliance within the community.

In other words, the newly joined member of my own Church who ran a bar which had been in her family for decades (imagine!) would be prodded to divest of it. Not left to do so of her own volition.
Now, the pastor HAD publicly rebuked her for serving another member who was an alcoholic, and I agreed with that, but it became clear that if you wanted to be a Southern Baptist, at all, you certainly would not drink or smoke.

Caffeine addiction, however, was still tolerated. {Those of you who've been to SBC churches will appreciate that: coffee = 'Baptist Beer')
:)
And the position on school prayer shifted.. the SBC had previously been notable for opposing teacher-led prayer in public schools, and had biblical grounds to do so.

At any rate; now I am looking, again.

And this is what I'm gonna be looking for:

Emphasis on the Gospel and WHY God sent his Son to us.

Proper interpretation of Jesus' sayings; e.g; "I tell you if any man looks at a woman with lust, he has committed adultery..."
- That cannot be used in one Sermon to emphasize the "Good News" over the 'Law', then in the next to cast guilt on fallen believers.

Acknowledge that we do not understand HOW God created us and the Earth. And that it doesnt MATTER, only matters that He DID. i.e.; God created Darwin, too.
Likewise it makes not a hill of beans difference how OLD the Earth is.. maybe God ALSO created carbon isotope decay.

I shouldnt even include this as it's obvious to any bible reader or one raised Protestant; but, anyway, Rome or Pilate did not kill Jesus, Jews didnt kill Jesus, it was WE, in the form of the POLITICAL 'CHURCH', that killed Jesus.

Why can't we recognize we are doing it, AGAIN!

And MOST important, Jesus was NOT a Socialist and DID NOT advocate for taking from the rich and giving to the poor.. I cannot find ONE reference of him preaching to his flock to lobby Rome for more social programs. He preached good works for the INDIVIDUAL and congregations.

Finally, the Church I select will have some form of Confession..Baptists use the method "Going up". Many mainline churches dropped this LONG ago.. but it is good for the soul to renounce your slips.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -
I suppose I will refine all the above and send it out in form of a letter to local churches, asking the pastor to have the ELDERS respond to it.

We'll see and I am looking forward to it.

And, while I've been thinking along these lines a long time, here's the guy that incented me to do this.

Peace in your heart, first.. at least try!

Murtha: When is it dared to compare?....

Jack Murtha has come out of nowhere in the last months as a spokesman for capitulation in Iraq.

He is given credence, and some respite from outright criticism, because of his record as a decorated Marine Officer. Yet his solution to Iraq is hardly in keeping with any military tactic taught anywhere, unless the strategy is to retreat to "Fortress America"
See 'Powerline' posting

I would like to remind everyone that Benedict Arnold was ALSO a higly regarded and decorated war veteran..

He just didnt think he'd gotten his proper rewards and recognition; and he thought the British would win out, in the end.

So I... this humble Joe-Blow in flyover country... will add Murtha's name to the list that is compared to Benedict Arnold and 'Quisling' in the ranks of those who submit for personal gain and politics.... oh, wait, they ARE the same, arent they!

Situation Planning in the White Flag fortress

"Yep, Jack.. we got them right where we want them. Running our sound bites, and the dumb schmucks in flyover are gonna think they're mean."

" Heh... we can always fall back on context and nuance!"

"Now, it's coming out that after the Iraqi elections, they're going to pull out about 20,000 troops."

"I know, the timing couldnt be better. Either the voter thinks we forced their hand.. or that Dubya's gotta limit his casualties.. either way, win-win."

"But Howard, didnt that General Casey announce that back in July?"

"Sure he did, Nancy.. please try to concentrate, dear... but our boys at the Times and Post and CNN downplayed that, the yokels will never remember it."

"Brilliant!"

"Uh-huh. Even if I do say so, myself. Another Guiness?"

"Brilliant!"

Bush lied, hundreds of thousands died...is, indeed,
true. I must admit it!

But it wasnt THIS Bush.. it was the elder who has to
bear that stigma.

For the history is fresh enough that we know the
withdrawal from boots on ground in Iraq was coupled with
incentives for southern Shia and Northeastern Kurds to
rise in rebellion against Saddam. With the implication
that the US would be supportive of that effort.

Just WHO it was made that promise is unclear, but it
doesnt matter, in the end. Because it was made, and
Saddam killed tens of thousands as a result.

Would the result have been any different if Saddam had
waited for Clinton to take office before invading
Kuwait? We cant know that either... but what we DO know
is that the US in forgoing the chance to take Baghdad,
then, was mindful of our 'allies' opinions' on the
matter. It was certainly Powell doctrine, after all.

We had air cover for those areas, yet Saddam was free to
go in and massacre whole villages. One would think the
CIA or NSA would have people on the ground in there..
certainly we had gained the local Iraqi trust.


But we cut and ran.

And today, there are voices howling for us to do exactly
the same.

The only debate among most of the center/left is:

1. Cut and Run now

2. Cut and run after we make and publish a timetable for
cutting and running.

We hear that Bush 'has no plan'. And evidently that is
so because there are no clearly established 'deliverable
dates'.

That's of note.. suppose our progress in Europe had been
predicate on meeting deadlines in the advance into
Germany?

We would have pulled back from the "Bulge" and,
possibly, we would have been forced to reload troops on
the beaches of Normandy and scuttle back to English
bases.

Plans cannot always be used in war, and certainly not
this war. Seems to me a good plan here would be to base
success on ability of the Iraqi's to defend themselves
against terrorist/insurgents.

Wait, isnt that what we are trying to do? Isnt that the
greatest FEAR of the insurgents?

Else why would they be bombing Police training
academies?

The ONLY thing the Dems are right about is that "WE"
cannot win this war.
But the Iraqi's can... and we can do everything in our
power to help them do it.

By 'staying the course'... which, to me, sounds like a
'plan'!

Hypocritonia II

Along with the previous notes, I am often amused by the ease in which the 'civilian' Liberal will slip into gay-bashing.

If the gay community is one of the staunchest supporter groups of Liberal causes, then why is it "That's just GAY!" is used so much?

Why is the suspicion that a politician of the right is 'gay' is so often pronounced by a lib commenter?

Because there's still a stigma in being gay... or because he's in the closet? I dont think so.. I think the key is in the use of expletives in particular the 'F' bomb.. while we ALL tend to use that too much, the word itself should only be used in tender moments when you really think about it.

Come to that.. I'm thinking there's too much sexual reference in all political discourse.. maybe hetero's should stay in the closet, as well.

Malkin and the "informed Left"...

One of the striking features of leftist blogs like DailyKos and Democratic Underground is, that the more passionate you are, the more expletives, insults and slurs are thrown into your opinion.

Enough "F-bombs" and SURELY world opinion will be swayed. The second is to cast personal slurs on those who have diametrically opposite views. And, never mind debating the issue, better to attack the messenger... especially if she is a representative of a minority who, by rights, should be on "the side of reason".

Michelle Malkin's had more than her share of these.. after all she should be the poster child of women's Lib, she's the main breadwinner in her household, her husband supports and assists in everything she undertakes; and she's intelligent and witty with a good camera presence. Unfortunately, she's also a Conservative and makes NO pretense of being anything else. And she has kids.

So.. she must be a "yellow whore" who, like a puppet, only parrots her fascist hubby's views... after all she's a woman so it must be hubby that writes all that.
Finally Michelle has had enough: JUST A YELLOW WOMAN DOING A WHITE MAN'S JOB

Good for her.. but it will only inflame the moonbats more... they absolutely HATE being called on their hypocrisy.

Malkin and the "informed Left"...

One of the striking features of leftist blogs like DailyKos and Democratic Underground is, that the more passionate you are, the more expletives and slurs are thrown into your opinion.

Enough "F-bombs" and SURELY world opinion will be swayed. The second is to cast slurs on those who have diametrically opposite views. And, never mind debating the issue, better to attack the messenger... especially if she is a representative of a minority who by rights should be on "the side of reason". Michelle Malkin's had more than her share of these.. after all she would be the poster child of women's Lib, she's the main breadwinner in her household, her husband support everything she undertakes and she's intelligent and witty with a good camera presence... unfortunately, she's also a Conservative and makes NO pretense of being anything else.

So.. she must be a "yellow whore" who, like a puppet, only parrots her fascist hubby's views... after all she's a woman so it must be hubby that writes all that.
Finally Michelle has had enough. JUST A YELLOW WOMAN DOING A WHITE MAN'S JOB

Good for her.. but it will only inflame the moonbats more... they absolutely HATE being called on their hypocrisy.

ICANN! not EUCANN, not UNCANN

Wednesday the UN holds a meeting in Tunis where it seeks to create a platform to wrest control of the Internet Domain system from a small non-profit in Southern California.

While granting that ICANN has been and currently does not, in any way shape or form, base its decisions on world politics or economics, the UN is uneasy at the thought of one country hosting and sanctioning the organization that, in effect, doles out the addresses for the world.

The core issue is, of course, freedom of information and speech.

But the prime mover of the effort to get control away from the US is, interestingly, China. Which, by the way, exerts the greatest effort to LIMIT its own citizens in what they can post and read on the net. Others are Iran and various smaller Asian and middle eastern countries, none of which can be said to exactly encourage unlimited net access for their own.

Naturally, this has become political. And a way to bash Bush.

UN fights US over internet's future
10.11.05
By Rupert Cornwell

At least until very recently, the hand of its host Government in ICANN's workings has been undetectable. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," is the mantra in Washington, and it is hard to disagree.

A UN solution, moreover, contains further dangers, American backers of the status quo argue. The internet has been a tool for free expression and democracy the world over. Ominously, among the countries pressing most strongly for a more internationalised and governmentalised structure are such beacons of liberty as China, Iran and Saudi Arabia, all concerned to limit the flow of information to their restless citizens.

Then there is the instinctive dislike of America's Republican establishment for the UN and all its works. On the arch-conservative editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal this week, Norm Coleman, the Republican senator for Minnesota, wrote of a possible "digital Munich" in Tunis.

"The internet faces a grave threat," warned Coleman, who has built his political career in Washington on UN-bashing. "We must defend it ... we cannot allow the UN to control the internet."

- Roger Cornwell, originally in the UK Independent which is certainly 'progressive' (currently same as 'anti-US') in its world view.

What he sees as UN bashing, some might see as simply trying to eliminate the demostrated pervasive corruption within. But that doesnt matter in the Progressive view... it's the thought that counts!

Here's another article on it

"I am torn about this, as I suspect many Internet law experts are. On the one hand, basic principles of international law suggest that a common carrier essential to commerce in all nations should be internationally controlled," said Frank Pasquale, a professor at Seton Hall Law School in Newark, New Jersey.

"On the other hand," Pasquale added, "many of the countries most eager to impose international control also have bad records on free speech issues, political prisoners."

The so-called World Summit on the Information Society was originally conceived to address the digital divide - the gap between information haves and have-nots - by raising both consciousness and funds for projects. {italics mine}

Instead, it has centered largely around Internet governance: oversight of the main computers that control traffic on the Internet by acting as its master directories so Web browsers and email programs can find other computers.

And there we have the nut of the issue! The original agenda was, in itself, over a REALLY tough problem to solve. But the NEW agenda is pretty damn straightforward... all these tinpots can agree that the US is the bad guy. So let's haggle over ways to get some of his power neutered.

And, once that is done, the UN can put fees and kickback mechanisms in place that will help fund the former.

Here's a test on who should run the DNS...
* Which of those countries trying to get/retain control would have allowed the Internet to proceed as it has?
* Which of those countries has more people trying to get INTO it, than trying to get OUT?

Not to mention which country invented it in the first place.

Revisiting Global Warming, Junk Science and 'nattering nabobs of negativism'..
The Liberal Left environmentalists say, 'Let them eat Cake'!

Since the beginning of the 'Industrial Revolution' and probably back to the dawn of recorded time, we have had those chicken-little doom and gloomers who trumpet the warning that mankind is on the brink of self-destruction.

Now enter "Global Warming". And the fascinating conundrum that we are destroying ourselves with burning of fossil fuels.
While the jury is still out on our ability to influence natural forces, let's just assume that we are having some small effect on the increase in atmospheric CO2.

So.. What to do about it?!!!

The common concensus in the eco-religion is "Use less, Buy Less, Produce Less."

Well, if you do all those, then the world economy takes a hit.. a BIG hit! And when the economy takes a hit, the employment rate goes down, if you have nothing to produce, you certainly dont need people to produce it. Of COURSE, though, consumption and usage WOULD automatically go down.. because without wages, there's no buying and a lot less usage.

Of course that won't be a problem if all governments adopt economic central planning and production.. and isnt THAT convenient! Because then you have adopted the Marxist model despite its long, and without exception, track record of failure.

When you attempt such by governmental fiat, political concerns inevitably rear their ugly heads.

When I was a kid, the USSR periodically released 'new' evidence that Russian Scientists had actually invented everything from the telephone to the auto to radio to the airplane. Which was treated derisively by the west. But let's look at the background facts, suspending disbelief... They MIGHT have been telling the truth.

So let's ASSUME that is so..certainly there IS a lot of brain-power in Russian society.

Why weren't these marvelous Russian inventions put into common usage? Because it wasnt in the interest of the Czar and, later, the Commissariat to let the 'masses' have them. If I have to explain WHY that is so, you wont believe me anyway.

Which gets us back to the aforementioned non-productivity model - to wit: what we have now is "good enough".

Another buzz-issue is the development of new technologies.. sounds good, but the USUAL proposal is that we be taxed to develop those technologies, for their own sake.

Never mind that all definitive advances in any field have been by means of private effort and endeavor... and yes, that EVEN includes most of NASA's space program by-products. Teflon wasnt invented in NASA labs... I dont recall if 'Tang' was or not.

If I recall correctly they were invented by private concerns to meet NASA specs.

And to this day, most 'new' environment friendly technology work is being done in the private sector... yes, there are a multitude of academic grants but they tend to produce only the proven concept, it's up to industry to make them feasible and affordable.

So let's say that there is promise there... but it's not enough. How about stepping back and looking at the BIG PICTURE?!!!

First let's address 'population control'... the liberal-eco-wacko promotes this as key.

Well, it's indisputable proven fact that the wealthiest, developed societies produce the fewest offspring and the poorer 'subsistance' societies produce the most offspring. We neednt go into 'why', it's a fact and needs no provenance.
- EXCEPTION BEING: the rich in feudal societies, but that's another issue.

Second, every kid that has ever read Science Fiction knows that all life on this planet is 'carbon-based'. Since CO2 is the current issue, shouldnt we then look at how to fix MORE carbon from CO2?
If plants take in CO2 and exude O2, then lets grow more plants! This, of course is where the environmentalists have a point.. to wit: the reduction in rain-forest area.

THIS is where the global effort needs to focus. Stop demolishing the Amazon and other tropical areas. How hard can that be!
Uh, except for populist politics, of course. The poor Brazilian peasant doesnt want to hear that he has to give up his subsistant slash-and-burn living... how's he going to support his 12 kids?!! Get my drift, here?

But the BIG PICTURE bottom line is this:
The warmer it gets, the longer the growing season, the more green leaves there are, the more CO2 is converted.
And the warmer it gets the higher the evaporation rate in the oceans, the more water vapor suspended in the atmosphere, the more rainfall, the more water for plants to grow. The more plants grow, the more carbon is fixed.

And you will note that those plants release the same water they take in; once they use it to fix the carbon and produce O2, they release it back into the atmosphere.

So, while the main worry of global warming is an excess of seawater, might the ANSWER ALSO be in that?

Picture a genetically modified edible plant that thrives in saline.. like, say, kelp does.. and picture 'sea-farms' on the coast of Saharan Africa.

More O2, less CO2, more food, more water vapor released, more rain, more tillable land, more plant-crops, more ... well I'm sure you have some imagination.

Stealing childhood.. further regimentation of kids at play!

Is it any wonder that more and more kids are having weight problems... and rebelling at authority once they get into their teen years? Not when you think about incidents such as this article in the London Telegraph



Nursery children must stay inside to protect neighbour's rights

A nursery has been forced to keep youngsters indoors after a council threatened it with legal action following a complaint about the noise its children made.....
For 50 years children have gathered at the Memorial Hall in Locks Heath, Hants. But the future of the Jigsaw Nursery is in doubt after a nearby resident, Jim Habens, objected to the noise coming from a new outside play area built with donations from parents.

Mr Habens, 60, who runs a bed and breakfast from his bungalow, said: "I have complained because I have human rights as well as anyone else."

Sally Pratt, the co-supervisor at the nursery, which opens four days a week and caters for 70 children aged between two and five, said the reduction in facilities caused by the threat of enforcement could lead to it receiving a poor Ofsted report.

She said: "We have had ongoing problems with the gentleman in the bungalow for some time, saying the children are being a nuisance. The chairman of the hall and myself went to see him in the summer and we complied with everything he asked for.

"But within a couple of weeks we received a letter telling us the environmental health had been called in."

Her colleague Amanda Adams said: "Mr Habens has plagued us with complaints about the children, but it is just them laughing."
..
Brian Bayford, the borough councillor with responsibility for environmental issues, said: "It is unfortunate when it's just one neighbour. But if anyone is causing a noise nuisance, and it is unacceptable or above a certain limit, this is the process.

"Laws get made and it is the responsibility of the council to take action on that."

Exactly! "Laws get made" and selfish people become "Mr
Grinch" and take advantage of them, never mind how many are the losers!

War History: We saved them, but they might not think it's worth it...
Hitler, Saddam; Germany, Iraq; Europe and Middle East MSM coverage..

"We have swept away {the Dictator}, but a great many {in the occupied areas} feel that the cure has been worse than the disease."
({} = my edits)

How often have we heard this out of the MSM? Well, way back in 1946, to be precise... PLEASE read the links in that post for the whole article!

Add to that, if you want to note something telling... and estimated 'more than 1000' US servicemen and civilian contractors die in Germany, most from fragmented hold-outs, in year immediately following end of war.

- - - -- -
Further thinking points:

10,000 allied casualties, about 2500 killed on D-Day, alone... what if CNN were covering it 'live'.... Or Fox, for that matter?

Imagine Geraldo standing in the shelter of the cliffs, ducking and bleating about the carnage.

Remember how GREAT his coverage in New Orleans? His talk of 'stacked bodies' and rapes and murders in the Superdome?

Sheep, Sheepdogs, tribes etc...


{Pettyfogger note: I have read this entry several times and it increasingly comes across as a blather of mind-ramble. Thus I saved it and will edit and post it later when I achieve a readable form}

Libby Must go to Trial!

An unattributed opinion piece in USAToday,
Bush, Cheney can't let Libby go to trial
claims that the Bush Administration “can’t afford to let Libby got to trial” because all the ‘machinations of pushing to invade will come to light’.

Testimony in a trial likely would show that Bush, Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld were hell bent to invade Iraq, reasons be damned. When their phony cover that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction was blown, they hunkered down against anyone who told the truth about their trickery.
Joseph Wilson, a former ambassador, did that. So, possibly coached by his boss Cheney, Libby told reporters that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, worked for the CIA.

It's evident from reading this bilge WHY it's not signed, because it's based on fact NOT proven or in evidence... just on DailyKos and DU talking points.

And that's why it needs to go to trial.

point: It will explain why Libby testified to one set of facts on how he learned Plame's involvement while his notes show otherwise; see my "Telephone" post, below.

point: it will explain how the investigation started in the first place. This may prove embarassing to the anti-Bush cadre in the CIA

point: It may settle the contention that Cheney PUSHED CIA into justifying the WMD existence. Could it be that Cheney merely went to Langley to find out WHY there was disagreement on the issue?

point: It may settle the issues on why Wilson was selected, when he had little experience in that field; and why he didnt have to sign a non-disclosure agreement, which would have prevented him from publishing without CIA approval; and why he didnt have to file a written report.
All those being normal practice under the circumstances.

point: Wilson would be called to testify and would have to explain why his own verbal debriefing shows that Saddam's agents tried to meet with the Niger Minister of Interior.. and he would have to testify on his understanding of the Minister's cryptic "I didnt respond because I knew what it was about"

It's time for the Administration to 'go nuclear' on all these unsupported 'attack points'; just as Delay going to trial will expose the Texas Dem's hypocrisy and dirty tricks, so will a Libby trial.

And good lawyers would get all these issues admitted into testimony, as they point to motivation and lead to the charges at hand.

Delay going Nuclear?

When rape is inevitable.... goes the old saying.

So far Tom Delay and DeGuerin are doing exactly what I had hoped for: Setting up for a trial in which the Dems find they have a sabre-tooth tiger by the tail.

So far he has refused to plea-bargain down to a misdemeanor and gotten the trial judge (A move-on.org contributor) recused. Which will leave Ronnie Earle no choice but to either ask for the charges to be dropped or proceed with a really weak case.
I predict Earle's next move will be to attempt to put off going to trial, and Delay wont want that either. It will be refused.
Then Earle will actually cite 'possible new evidence' needing depositions, once the trial is started.

Of course, ol' Ronnie MIGHT just retire and dump the case off to a subordinate. Damage control, as it were.

Then he will ask for the charges to be dropped; 'in the interest of public confidence in their elected officials'
I cross my fingers that Delay will refuse to allow the case to be dropped... and I think there's precedent for him to force it through.

While there is no doubt that the INTENDED SPIRIT of the law has been broken, it will come out that the statute was intentionally designed that way. For the benefit of Democrats, and not Republicans.
And to salve what the Dems see as their idiot electorate.

There's ample evidence on file that the Texas DSC has done exactly what Delay is accused of... thus, if the trial proceeds to verdict, the grounds for a civil case against Earle will be laid, if not actual criminal charges of malfeasance.

Before libs protest this projection; they should answer this question. If this is indeed the bright shiny jewel in Earle's career crown, WHY would he offer the plea-down?

Hmmmmm? Thought so.

One more case in a long line of GOP Rope-a-Dopes! We can always hope so, anyway.