Latest News // Tips

Daily Kos Photochop Depicts Michelle Obama Being Tortured by Klan Members

by Warner Todd Huston ~ May 20th, 2008

-By Warner Todd Huston

Yesterday, Barack Obama began crying again. Someone should remind him… there’s no crying in politics. He has whined that we can’t use his middle name, he has whined when we bring up his close relations with aging hippy terrorists, that we ask aloud about his “spiritual mentor, the racist Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and now he is crying that we are highlighting the anti-American statements made by his wife as she campaigns for him all across the country. So, on Monday he whined “lay off my wife,”. Well, fast on the heels of Obama telling us we can’t use the anti-American statements of his wife as a campaign issue we get the kiddies over at the DailyKos doing their best to “help” Barack Obama by making an image of Michelle Obama hanging from a tree with robbed KKK figures torturing her with a branding iron and claiming that this is the “NEW IMPROVED” GOP strategy. So much for the subtleties and civility that Barack claims he wants, eh?

Even more damning, Kos pulled the entire post off the website, photochopped image of Michelle as KKK victim and all. Little Green Footballs has a great screen shot of the original post, but here is the original photochopped image:

This whole thing of Obama constantly whining that everyone is “attacking” him makes him look like such a weakling. What does he think will happen? As the old saying goes, politics ain’t beanbag. This is a tough fight for all the marbles, not a tea party.

First of all, Barack is seeming like the tiny fellow on the playground that has found out that if he always yells as if he was hurt by someone, he can get everyone else in trouble. This unseemly, spineless whining would be amusing were it not showing to a hostile world that one of our candidates for president can’t take the heat of a campaign, much less the harsh world he’ll meet should he become president. Barack’s weakness reflects on us all and puts us all at risk in a dangerous world, unfortunately.

p>Second of all, Michelle Obama is the one that put herself in the spotlight by loudly campaigning for her husband. This makes her fair game. After all, it isn’t like she is sitting home quietly rooting for her hubby to take the White House while we eeeevil Republicans attack her. It just isn’t sensible that Barack can send this woman out who isn’t proud of her country, that hates the capitalist system and wants people not to send their kids into it, and that thinks her own country is “mean,” yet expects no one to comment on the anti-American garbage she constantly spews on a daily basis. Who wears the pants in that family anyway? It sure doesn’t look like it’s Barack.

Lastly, this is just one more incident to show the distemper and incivility that is de rigueur on leftist sites like the Daily Kos. It isn’t just BDS that has them in a tizzy, it is the entire scene of politics. Their fascist tendency to cast civility and seriousness to the four winds in search of a political win has damaged the Democrat Party far more than anything the conservatives have ever done to them.

Of course, it is a good thing that Kos pulled this disgusting, ignorant diary from his site. But, the sad thing is that there are so many of his members that imagine that putting such hatred up in the first place is no big deal.

Sphere: Related Content

Challenges are Opportunities that Later can be retold as Victories!

by TeddyBear ~ May 20th, 2008

The Grizzly Groundswell Radio Network is challenged today for it’s very existence. The Terms of Service of some of the sites that I saw a great opportunity have been updated to protect their interests, yet blocking our opportunity to create something beautiful with little overhead.

I am afraid, we may have to raise capital to host the Radio Network ourselves. Below is the structure of Plan’s that I had set forth hoping I would only need Plan A, but realizing each successive plan may be needed if and when challenges and barriers are placed before us.

Right now Plan A: looks like it will not be possible unless we can find an upstart online radio site that is in need of talent and such a network that could really put them on the map.

A: Start up an online new media empire recruiting talent and starting with no overhead just blood sweat and tears utilizing free Blog Talk Radio services available to anyone online. Applying the Grizzly Groundswell strategy to it in recruiting and growing. Blog Talk Radio has the numbers we need! The trouble with most of these opportunities we would not own our created product. The Podcast content would be the property of the site. This is not preferable because in intellectual property, ownership is everything.
B: (If A is not possible) Do above but find another service provider to bring the network. Assist in promoting the network and thus garnishing more favor with smaller outfit. All for little to no overhead but still sacrificing ownership of intellectual property. A good trade off?
C: (If A-B is not possible) Find a small Fee based service where we could pool capital and purchase services for 24-7 traditional online streaming network. The trouble with this is that I have found that it may be cheaper to create and host our own for the fee’s others want to charge and their services offered.
D: (If A-C is not possible) Host the whole shebang on my hosting site, buy the software and do the whole 9 yards. This seems to be the Plan I am looking at more seriously, thanks to a great conversation with our very own Dana Hanley. The more I look into this, I agree with Dana, that this is the best case scenario, It just will delay us, and there will be needed a capital drive to secure capital to make this happen. Is this my calling? Are those in the network ready to take this on? Does this need to go non profit or keep for profit? If it goes non profit, my interest level drops off incredibly. So I think, for myself, Non-profit is off the table for options. But, it is a legitimate consideration.
E: (If A-D is not possible) Throw out monetary incentive all together and licensing potential and just do exactly what I did with the Grizzly Groundswell. Make WWW.grizzlygroundswellradio.com a hub and recruit conservative radio shows to display the widget or blog roll. This would be easy, and would assist everyone involved, but honestly, it motivates me very little. The Grizzly Groundswell blog is a success, yet, without the ability to pay for itself or put food on my table, It would be foolish to double my work load in two such endeavors with no monetary incentive. I think us conservatives do enough heavy lifting for our candidates without being compensated. I do not think we need to over extend ourselves no matter how much needed it is.
F: (If A-E is not possible) Screw the Networking idea all together and just create a Grizzly Groundswell Radio Empire surrounding my own talent and ideas on BTR and concentrate on my own business and interests instead of trying to promote or lift up others. Actually this is what I should do, but I am better at lifting others up then just gaining glory and profit for myself only.
G: (If A-F is not possible) Forget Radio, Jump head long into video and create video shorts and Intellectual property to disseminate and communicate my message. This I am going to do regardless of the GGRNetworks success or failure. However, this does make me interested in video. Maybe the idea to limit ourselves to just radio is a mistake. Maybe we should jump into video/audio broadcasting.
Dana had suggested that it is hard to make $5 into $10 when creating a business, and I had to be a smart ass and point out that it is not $5 trying to make $10: It is truly mud pies into $25-250!
So, this is where I am asking you for insight and ideas. If you have a defeatist attitude about this, please keep that opinion to yourself. It is not wanted or welcomed. I am calling out to ask for conservative creative thinking here. While donations are greatly accepted, I am not actually asking for money. I am asking for solutions to this problem.
Here is some of the criteria that I have taken into account and they are truly the foundation for this project and venture:
> The conservative voice needs a platform to be heard, and to find a home and welcoming arms not opposition.

> The Hosts of each show are giving their skills and talent and intellectual property to this effort, they should not also be asked to foot the bill. This really inhibits needed capital, but I really have a hard time asking these great patriots for even more then they already give.

> Ownership is powerful, transforming and essential to a Free America.

> I have a knack for bringing people together

> The New Media is the new frontier to be pioneered and homesteaded. It is worth the hardship to explore, plant and grow crops in it. It is an investment.

:!:There are many others as well, but maybe you can help me come up with others. Now, let’s come up with some solutions.:!: Feel out your networks and contacts. Help me scour the Internet for opportunities and frontiers we have not yet uncovered.

Email me at ggr@grizzlygroundswellradio.com if you have any solutions!

Crossposted from www.grizzlygroundswellradio.com

http://grizzlygroundswellradio.com/archives/17

Sphere: Related Content

‘New Yorkers Are Smarter Than Other Americans’

by Warner Todd Huston ~ May 20th, 2008

-By Warner Todd Huston

Speaking as a Chicagoan, I get my “second city” dander up every time I hear people who live in New York City patting themselves on the back and blathering aloud about how much better they are than the rest of us peons in flyover country. Usually this sort of arrogant bravado is reserved for New Yorkers talking to other New Yorkers, at least, usually seen as the sort of talk one would hear at the corner bistro or what one might encounter listening to what passes for conversation at highbrow dinner parties. So we don’t often see such self-congratulatory nonsense outside local New York media. While it isn’t seen so often in publications that serve the nation, Smithsonian Magazine has decided to give New York dance critic Joan Acocella the platform of their publication to tell us all how cool she thinks New York is and how people there are just naturally smarter and better than everyone else everywhere in the country… if she, a resident of New York City, does say so herself.

I suppose we need to give Acocella a bit of a pass, seeing as how she probably doesn’t know too many people from outside of New York City and, therefore, has a dearth of information by which to measure the rest of us. We should also probably realize that someone at the Smithsonian Magazine had space to fill and since Acocella is considered something of an “essayist,” it might be assumed that she could fill that space as well as any other. And, heck, she HAS to be ultra cool. She’s from New York City, after all. The blind spots all across the board here add up to Acocella and the good folks at the Smithsonian being perfect nominees for the 2008 Helen Keller award for cultural observance.

To start her little space filler, Acocella assures us that in her “experience” many people “believe that New Yorkers are smarter than other Americans.” She then casually assures us that “this may actually be true.” I’m feeling better informed already. What “experience” she bases all this assuredness on certainly is a question that immediately comes to the mind of any reader outside the Big Apple, naturally. One immediately wonders if it is the “experience” that she has talking to other New Yorkers who are as self-congratulatory as she? Most likely. Granted, it’s a bit silly to expect the denizens of any particular city to traipse about their own streets telling each other how stupid they all are, but there we have it; New Yorkers are “smarter that other Americans” in Acocella’s “experience.” It’s as anecdotalish as anecdotal evidence gets, don’t you think?

Acocella does base this arrogance on one idea that almost appears as sensibly grounded, however. She has a theory that New Yorkers are smarter because they are the sort of people who “left another place and came here, looking for something, which suggests,” she posits, “that the population is preselected for higher energy and ambition.” Actually, that isn’t such an implausible thing to believe. It may not necessarily mean they are “smarter,” just that they are more energetic, but at least this is a stab at a logical premise. If Acocella had mined this proposition further, she might have had something. Unfortunately, she went off on another theory that she spent far more time on. This other theory rests on far less superficially sensible grounds.

But I think it’s also possible that New Yorkers just appear smarter, because they make less separation between private and public life. That is, they act on the street as they do in private. In the United States today, public behavior is ruled by a kind of compulsory cheer that people probably picked up from television and advertising and that coats their transactions in a smooth, shiny glaze, making them seem empty-headed. New Yorkers have not yet gotten the knack of this. That may be because so many of them grew up outside the United States, and also because they live so much of their lives in public, eating their lunches in parks, riding to work in subways. It’s hard to keep up the smiley face for that many hours a day.

So, for Acocella, rudeness is to be excused as some wonderful antidote to, what, politeness? She thinks that smiling and having good cheer is only picked up by TV and advertising? This theory, however, doesn’t explain why New York has had the reputation of being boisterous, loud, obnoxious and rude for many decades before TV was ever invented.

In his short story collection “The Voice of the City,” in the story titled “The Defeat of the City,” O. Henry described a character from Manhattan this way:

“In dress, habits, manners, provincialism, routine and narrowness, he acquired that charming insolence, that irritating completeness, that sophisticated crassness, that overbalanced poise that makes the Manhattan gentleman so delightfully small in his greatness. ”

Not the nicest of descriptions and one meant to typify a New Yorker of the time, not specify just this one character. I should remind the reader that O. Henry died in 1910. That was a few years before TV came around if I am not mistaken.

But, the thing that really shows that Acocella doesn’t know much about those other, more stupid Americans she is so sure aren’t as cool as New Yorkers is where she imagined that New Yorkers are just more helpful than other Americans. She says that, “while New Yorkers don’t mind correcting you, they also want to help you,” and she tells us a little tale about her recent visit to the post office.

This injects a certain drama into our public life. The other day I was in the post office when a man in line in front of me bought one of those U.S. Postal Service boxes. Then he moved down the counter a few inches to assemble his package while the clerk waited on the next person. But the man soon discovered that the books he wanted to mail were going to rattle around in the box, so he interrupted the clerk to tell her his problem. She offered to sell him a roll of bubble wrap, but he told her that he had already paid $2.79 for the box, and that was a lot for a box—he could have gotten a box for free at the liquor store—and what was he going to do with a whole roll of bubble wrap? Carry it around all day? The clerk shrugged. Then the man spotted a copy of the Village Voice on the counter and laid hold of it to use it for stuffing. “No!” said the clerk. “That’s my Voice.” Annoyed, the man put it back and looked around helplessly. Now a woman in line behind me said she’d give him the sections of her New York Times that she didn’t want, and she began going through the paper. “Real estate? You can have real estate. Sports? Here, take sports.” But the real estate section was all the man needed. He separated the pages, stuffed them in the box and proceeded to the taping process (interrupting the clerk once again). Another man in line asked the woman if he could have the sports section, since she didn’t want it. She gave it to him, and so finally everything was settled.

This little moment of human interaction, while interesting, even a tad heartwarming, is not something that one would never see in any big city — or any small one for that matter — anywhere in the U.S. I have certainly witnessed such displays of helpfulness repeatedly in the Windy City. I have also seen it in Cincinnati, Ohio (where I was born as it happens) and other large cities I’ve visited. I’ve seen it in the middle of nowhere America, too.

But, to Acocella, because some citizen went out of his way to be helpful to another citizen in the Big Apple, why that must say something special about New Yorkers. Absurdly, she seems utterly unaware that such a display might say something about America, or even just people in general. Instead Acocella uses her anecdotal evidence to suggest that such a thing could only happen in New York. Well, I can agree to a certain degree that what we have here in Acocella’s piece is something that can only happen in New York. The arrogance to imagine that such a scene can ONLY happen in New York and nowhere else is pretty peculiar to New York, it seems. At the very least it seems peculiar to Joan Acocella.

This whole episode reminds me of the story of another New Yorker that was so caught up in her New York “experience” that she couldn’t see outside that bubble. In 1972, New York Times critic, Pauline Kael, is quoted as having been utterly amazed that Richard Nixon won election to the White House. How he got all those votes flummoxed her because, as she is supposed to have said, she didn’t know anyone who voted for the man. It may be apocryphal but it is indicative of the enclosed little world in which some New York illiterati live, a world that it might seem our Miss Acocella inhabits.

So, to Acocella, New Yorkers may seem “smarter,” more “helpful,” more “energetic,” she may think they “know better” then the rest of us and she just might think New Yorkers are all around better than the rest of us poor shlubs out here in the great cultural desert we call the United States, but its a bit hard to take her opinion seriously because one gets the feeling that, like the erstwhile Pauline Kael, she never met any of the rest of us to be so sure of her neighbor’s superiority. But on one thing she is wholly correct. The rest of us in the US do think New Yorkers “seem rude.” Unfortunately for her fellow New Yawkers, Acocella doesn’t give us any compelling reason to revist that assumption.

(Photo credit: www.charlierose.com)

Sphere: Related Content

Appeasing Hitler ‘Not Unreasonable’?

by Warner Todd Huston ~ May 20th, 2008

-By Warner Todd Huston

In an effort to back up Obama’s gaffe that he’ll “talk” to anyone, even terrorists, as if diplomacy in and of itself was a cure all, editorial writer Bruce Ramsey of the Seattle Times has made a gaffe of his own that, in essence, makes the claim that negotiating with Adolf Hitler was perfectly reasonable even as each concession given to him by Europe’s prewar powers obviously gave him every reason to be brave enough to start WWII. Ramsey seems to be trying to justify the appeasement of Hitler in order to give Barack Obama the cover he needs to make his inexperience and naiveté seem less detrimental to his presidential ambitions.

Ramsey is worried, he says, about the “continual reference to Hitler and his National Socialists, particularly the British and French accommodation at the Munich Conference of 1938.” He feels that it was completely reasonable to cave in to Hitler in those days prior to the war.

What Hitler was demanding was not unreasonable. He wanted the German-speaking areas of Europe under German authority. He had just annexed Austria, which was German-speaking, without bloodshed. There were two more small pieces of Germanic territory: the free city of Danzig and the Sudetenland, a border area of what is now the Czech Republic.

We live in an era when you do not change national borders for these sorts of reasons. But in 1938 it was different. Germany’s eastern and western borders had been redrawn 19 years before-and not to its benefit. In the democracies there was some sense of guilt with how Germany had been treated after World War I. Certainly there was a memory of the “Great War.” In 2008, we have entirely forgotten World War I, and how utterly unlike any conception of “The Good War” it was. When the British let Hitler have a slice of Czechoslovakia, they were following their historical wisdom: avoid war. War produces results far more horrible than you expected. War is a bad investment. It is not glorious. Don’t give anyone an excuse to start one.

After all, Ramsey says, Europe didn’t want a war, so just giving in to Hitler was not an “unreasonable” reaction to Hitler’s demands. So, since the rest of Europe couldn’t have realized how ruthless and evil Hitler was, their actions were just fine with Ramsey. If it was fine back then, he obviously imagines, it should be fine today. Since we cannot know the future, he seems to be saying, always caving in to tyrants just in case they won’t turn out to be tyrants should be just fine.

This also seems like Obama’s message.

Ramsey worries that calling people a Hitler damages any chance to “talk” to them. Ramsey says, “but who else is a Hitler? If you paste that label on somebody it means they are cast out. You can’t talk to them any more.” But, the only reason someone can legitimately be cast into a Hitler category is because of their actual actions, rhetoric and policies. Ramsey names Milosevic, Hussein, and Ahmadinejad in his piece as if calling them a version of Hitler is unwarranted. But, each of these men have committed crimes against humanity that warrant such a tag being placed on them. These are (and were) evil, evil men. Why does Ramsey discount their actual crimes so easily?

Also, it should be recalled that Hitler and the men that Ramsey seemed to think deserve the benefit of the doubt have all made their intentions quite clear previous to any action taken. As John Ray over at stoptheaclu.com reminds us:

They were ignoring evidence that they did not want to see. As far back as Volume I chapter 4 of Mein Kampf, Hitler had made clear his intention to grab for Germany the territory of other nations. But people just did not want to believe that he really meant it.

Obama has made claims that Ahmadinejad would be one of the people he’d “talk” to. Yet, Ahmadinejad has made it quite clear that he intends to kill as many Americans and Jews as he can.

Is THIS the sort of person that Ramsey and Obama think they can negotiate with?

In any case, as far as Ramsey goes, he obviously was hit pretty hard over the weekend for his simple-minded analysis because he substantially changed what he originally wrote. Still, even the new, altered version of his original post fails the common sense test. Negotiating with people who have repeatedly announced their desire for genocide and wide spread warfare, destruction, and empire building just isn’t a reasonable idea. And appeasing their lust for power and death is an even worse one.

Sphere: Related Content

Union’s ‘Secret Pact’ With Employers, Other Unions Raises Eyebrows

by Warner Todd Huston ~ May 20th, 2008

-By Warner Todd Huston

As president of the Services Employee International Union (SEIU), Andy Stern has presided over a union that has grown impressively while at the same time just about every other union in the country has diminished in size and power. Some might think this a tremendous victory for president Stern. But how he has achieved this feat is certainly a matter of concern for everyone, a concern that should cast a pal over this claimed victory.

Question: do unions have a reputation of being transparent with their members? Well, unions in America certainly have the reputation of being run by the worker, for the worker, so transparency is an ideal they all claim to live up to, for certain — graft, embezzlement, mob infestation and corruption aside.

So, why has the SEIU been making secret pacts with other unions as well as employers, the natural enemy of unions? Andy Stern says that it is all in the pursuit of growth. His detractors in the ranks say that his is a growth-at-any-cost effort that places them all at a disadvantage.

Why, Stern has even made secret deals with employers, the full details of which are not being made public even to his own membership. He has made deals that stipulate that the SEIU will give up the right to go on strike. In return, the employers agree with the union which of their plants and businesses will be “allowed” to be unionized as well as how many employees will be organized with the employer making a pact of non-interference of the process.

Continue reading »

Sphere: Related Content

Yes, Barry, Michelle Obama IS an Issue

by Winged Hussar 1683 ~ May 20th, 2008

Michelle Obama’s Thesis Underscores Barack Obama’s Black Identity Politics

If they [Republicans] think that they’re going to try to make Michelle an issue in this campaign, they should be careful, because I find unacceptable the notion that you start attacking my wife or my family. –Barack Obama

Sorry, Barry, your wife is an issue in this campaign just as Hillary Clinton’s spouse is an issue. The thesis that your wife wrote during her senior year at Princeton reinforces our perception that you are into Black identity politics if not outright Black Nationalism, and are therefore totally unfit to lead a multiracial and ethnically diverse nation like the United States.

 Politico.com has a .pdf copy of Michelle Robinson Obama’s thesis in sociology. The content is entirely consistent with Barack Obama’s Black identity politics, if not outright Black Nationalist politics, as described in Dreams From My Father, as well as Michelle Obama’s statement that she is proud of our country only when her husband, who can’t be bothered to show respect for our National Anthem, is running for President. It is no surprise that efforts were made to conceal this thesis from the public until after the election

    Earlier in my college career, there was no doubt in my mind that as a member of the Black community I was somehow obligated to this community and would use all of my present and future resources to benefit this community first and foremost. My experiences at Princeton have made me more aware of my “Blackness” than ever before.Michelle LaVaughn Robinson [Obama], “Princeton Educated Blacks and the Black Community,” page 2 

     

 “Would use all of my present and future resources to benefit [the Black] community first and foremost” are not the words of a person who should be First Lady for a multiracial and ethnically diverse nation like the United States. While many of us have probably written things in our early 20s that we might repudiate in our 40s and 50s, Michelle Obama’s lack of pride in our country indicates that she still stands by these words. More importantly, they are entirely consistent with Barack Obama’s Black identity politics and even Black Nationalism.

Continue reading »

Sphere: Related Content

Democrats Use Fake Wikipedia To Attack McCain

by Warner Todd Huston ~ May 19th, 2008

-By Warner Todd Huston

Wikipedia imagines itself as the voice of the people, a voice that ultimately will find truth restored to public information and education. One wonders how the creators of Wikipedia would take the misuse of their signature idea when partisan political parties make a fake “Wiki” solely to attack their political opponent? This is exactly what the Democrat Party has done with a fake Wiki created to act as an attack platform against John McCain. Worse, this effort isn’t even a real Wiki because the pages cannot be altered by registrants like a true Wiki can.

Many are already aware of the bashing that the official and original creation of Wikipedia has taken from many quarters. Wikiepedia, the “biggest multilingual free-content encyclopedia on the Internet,” can be altered by any registered visitor and is supposed to dynamically represent the combined knowledge of many millions of people instead of the canned scholarship of a select few. Unfortunately, the fact that it is so easily alterable by just anyone who happens upon the site, the veracity of the entries can be highly suspect. But, in essence, it is supposed to offer the possibility that truth will out in the long run.

Naturally, the Democrat Party “Wiki” has such untruths as making the claim that “McCain Said US May Stay In Iraq For 100 Years,” making it seem as if McCain was advocating for war in Iraq to continue for 100 years, so with that sort of “truth” presented, it won’t be much to expect facts to be included in this “Wiki.”

Still, the usage of the Wikipedia idea to act specifically to present propaganda is quite a slap in the face to those who created Wikipedia, isn’t it? But, perhaps they won’t mind if the propaganda site fits their OWN political bent, eh? After all, for most leftists, the ends always justify the means. Morality is fungible.

Sphere: Related Content

Uh Oh. AL Gore has some splanin to do

by Stix1972 (R-IL) (VRWC) ~ May 19th, 2008

Manbearpig Yes, of course we all know about the “consensus” over Manpbearpig.  But it looks like more and more scientists are debunking that and now at least 31,000 signatures are being put on a petition denouncing the theory of  Manbearpig. But do not tell AlGore his Royal “pain in the ass Prince Albert in a can” Charles about this because the Goracle wants the next genereation to be one of those great generations of heros that will save the Earth from the Burning Ring of Fire, and Prince Chuckie says we got 18 months to live.

Cross posted at Stix Blog and Fort Hard KNox

H/T to Hoosier Army Mom

Bet you won’t see this on CNN tonight!  The Mainstream Media chooses what they want you to know, and it will be no different on this. 

From:  The National Press Club Online

10:00 AM  OISM (News Conference)
Description: MEDIA ADVISORY: Dr. Arthur Robinson (OISM) to release names of over 30,000 scientists rejecting global warming hypothesis.Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM)

Who: Dr. Arthur Robinson of the OISM

What: release of names in OISM “Petition Project”

When: 10:00am on Monday May 19

Where: Holeman Lounge at the National Press Club, 529 14th St., NW, Washington, DC

Why: the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) will announce that more than 31,000 scientists have signed a petition rejecting claims of human-caused global warming. The purpose of OISM’s Petition Project is to demonstrate that the claim of “settled science” and an overwhelming “consensus” in favor of the hypothesis of human-caused global warming and consequent climate damage is wrong. No such consensus or settled science exists. As indicated by the petition text and signatory list, a very large number of American scientists reject this hypothesis.

It is evident that 31,072 Americans with university degrees in science — including 9,021 PhDs, are not “a few.” Moreover, from the clear and strong petition statement that they have signed, it is evident that these 31,072 American scientists are not “skeptics.”

Following the Press Club event, Dr. Robinson will host a lunch briefing on the Hill. Interested parties may join him in the Environment and Public Works hearing room, 406 Dirksen at noon for lunch on Monday May 19.

Please indicate whether you will attend the lunch by emailing audrey@advocacyink.com with your contact info and affiliation.

Sponsored by:Oregon Institute of Science & Medicine

 

 

Also posting :

The American Thinker

Sphere: Related Content

Attrition Through Enforcement: Seems To Be Working

by johnsblogs42 ~ May 19th, 2008

Well the results are starting to come in Arizona. And they numbers are not looking to be in favor of pro-illegal immigration groups. It’s literally beginning to look like the dissenters of the anti-illegal laws just may end up with the “egg on their face” in the end. Simply put, illegals are fleeing Arizona.

Just a short while back, the Arizona populace decided they had had enough with their skyrocketing budget problems brought on by the extra costs of illegal immigration. And they decided to do something about it. Their Democrat Governor, Janet Napolitano has seen fit to veto pretty much anything that came across her desk that frowned upon illegal immigration. So the populace went around her and got it on the ballot anyways.

The result? 70%+ of Arizona voted in favor of tightening AND enforcing illegal immigration laws. This essentially became the “Attrition through Enforcement” ideal that many across the nation who are against illegal immigration actually want. Yeah, it’s true. Most in America DON’T want the “round’em up and move’em out” that is usually one of the only two options provided in “the polls.” The other being a “let them all stay,” which really isn’t an option at all. When given the third choice of “making life difficult causing them to leave voluntarily,” a significant portion of the country opts for that.

The sad part is, I live in California. Which is exactly where many of these illegals flock to. “Sanctuary cities,” like San Fran and LA are an illegals goldmine. And it’s estimated that 1 out of 10 illegals departing Arizona is a felon. So way to go there Mr. (ex-gangmember turned ACLU defense lawyer who flunked the BAR exam four times before finally passing, just to defend gangmembers in court against the LAPD) Villaraigosa. Just be Mr. Open-Arms to more crime. As if LA didn’t have enough of a crime problem already.

The effects of the Attrition laws can be seen throughout the state. Their unemployment rate has dropped about 0.4% in a matter of only a few months. Commute times which were apparently becoming a problem there in Arizona, have begun to dwindle. Cities sanitation problems, with litter being strewn about has receded as the crowds of day-laborers are no longer loitering about the Home Depot lots. This has also begun to have a marginal effect on the surrounding desert regions. Social programs are no longer dolling out the amounts of welfare and the like they once were, saving the state money.

And lastly, no one even showed up at the beginning of the month for the recent “march for illegals” rally.

Does your state have a budget problem? The $2 billion deficit that Arizona WAS facing, is likely to balance itself out shortly with the amount of funding being spared. Perhaps other states might want to follow suit.

http://hoopyfrooddude.blogspot.com/2008/05/attrition-through-enforcement-seems-to.html

Sphere: Related Content