Cindy Sheehan vs Nancy Pelosi
So Cindy Sheehan resigned her fictional post as leading war protester to pursue a new career in politics. She has decided on extorting an impeachment proceeding from Nancy Pelosi by saying basically, “if you don’t do what I want I will run against you in the next election.” I’m sure this has Nancy Pelosi shaking in her Birkenstocks. Right?
I don’t know about anyone else, but I am sure looking forward to this battle. I hope she does run and is competetive. You never know what can happen. Here in New Hampshire an unknown named Carol Shea-Porter was able to un-seat incumbent Representative Jeb Bradley because he took her lightly. This should be fun. Cindy Sheehan can’t be any worse for the country than Nancy Pelosi already is. I can’t wait for the hilarity that is bound to insue.
One thing I already find funny is that in Sheehan’s list of reasons for impeachment one of them is hurricane Katrina. Unbelievable.
This should be fun.
Lesbians to sue Church for Discrimination
A lesbian couple in New Jersey has filed a complaint against a Methodist-owned campground, claiming illegal discrimination because their request for a civil union ceremony on the property was denied.
This is further proof that gays and lesbian couples will not be happy until they have totally destroyed the religious aspect of marriage. It doesn’t matter that they have all the legal benefits, they even want to have the right to marry on church property. Why should the church wed two people that they don’t believe should be married? What right do the courts have in this case? We have been told there is a separation of church and state, even though that phrase does not appear in the constitution. So how can the courts tell a church who they can and can’t marry?
Brian Raum, ADF senior legal counsel, said enforcing the complaint would intrude on the rights of the Methodists as a religious organization.
“The government shouldn’t force churches to violate their own religious principles,” he said. “Private, religious property owners have the right to decide what can and cannot take place on their property.”
This is just the beginning. There are already stories of New Hampshire co-habitating couples ready to sue for equal rights. Also a story of a polygamist ready to sue for equal rights. Where does it stop?
Read the whole story here.
Rep. John Dingell (D-MI) to Propose a Carbon Tax
Regular readers here know my position on man-made global warming. I believe it is a hoax being perpetrated on the people all for the purpose of new taxes and regulations. Let’s face it, the more taxes they take from you, and the more regulations they impose on you, the more control they have on you. They want your money, that’s the bottom line. As I have said before, if it wasn’t about taxes than the leader on the global warming hoax wouldn’t be a politician, it would be a scientist. Scientists are split on the issue, while more and more politicians are falling in line with the scam as they see the money that may be generated.
Then there are the wackos and all their theories about what is leading to global warming, I have posted stories about cow farts, water cooler banning, earth worms causing global warming, bans on lightbulbs, meat eaters causing global warming, Genocide in Darfur being caused by global warming, cats breeding too quickly because of global warming, birth control to curb global warming, and the insanity goes on and on. Just read my posts under the global warming catagory. When you see them altogether you will see how insane these people are. You will also see examples of new tax propositions being floated.These people are being led down the path to more taxation and are willing because they believe it is for the greater good.
You can read here about the latest tax proposal by the chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Representative John D. Dingell of Michigan (a Democrat). He is proposing a carbon tax.
A powerful House Democrat said on Friday that he planned to propose a steep new “carbon tax” that would raise the cost of burning oil, gas and coal, in a move that could shake up the political debate on global warming.
The proposal came from Representative John D. Dingell of Michigan, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee
He claims he doesn’t really want to impose a carbon tax, he just wants to show Americans aren’t willing to sacrifice in order to stop global warming.
RIIIIIIIIGGHHTTT, have you ever met a Democrat that proposed to raise taxes didn’t really want to raise taxes?
But Mr. Dingell, in an interview to be broadcast Sunday on C-Span, suggested that his goal was to show that Americans are not willing to face the real cost of reducing carbon dioxide emissions. His message appeared to be that Democratic leaders were setting unrealistic legislative goals.
“I sincerely doubt that the American people will be willing to pay what this is really going to cost them,” said Mr. Dingell, whose committee will be drafting a broad bill on climate change this fall.
“I will be introducing in the next little bit a carbon tax bill, just to sort of see how people think about this,” he continued. “When you see the criticism I get, I think you’ll see the answer to your question.”
You and I are too self-centered and selfish to sacrifice to save the planet from a crisis that doesn’t exist. Typical liberal condescension, he soooo smart he has to prove to us he is better than us. He is willing to sacrifice and we are not. He knows what is best for us, so know he is trying to prove his point.
But most Democrats are staunchly opposed, saying that a tax would raise the costs of travel, commuting and heating and cooling homes, and that it would be wildly unpopular at a time when voters are already angry about high energy costs. Republicans, they said, would seize on any such proposal as proof that Democrats were bent on raising taxes and increasing the size of government.
So most Democrats are opposed to it? Why? Not because they are against taxes, but because it would be politically unpopular.
But just let a Democrat win the whitehouse and you can rest assured that these new taxes are coming.
2008, you decide.
Many More Taxes coming to New Hampshire Next Session
Remember when you were in school, and your first assignment was to write an essay entitled “What I Did on My Summer Vacation”? Well the New Hampshire Ways and Means committee will have plenty to write about when they return. Committee chairman Rep. Susan Almy has set up five sub-committees to think up and draft new tax proposals.
Sales tax, income tax, property tax, businesses tax, luxury tax, beer tax, amusement tax, inheritance tax, second-home tax — you name it, many people have been having lots of problems with inheritances, what they do is to contest a will with the use of professional help. Oh, and gambling, too. They’ll all get the treatment this summer and fall. Read more…
The Red Sox, the Red Sox 2007 Yearbook, and Politics
Yes, I am going to tie those three subjects together. With this being a kind of down time in politics, I thought I would let some of my feelings about the Red Sox front office out. Let me first start by giving you the obligitory “I am a huge Red Sox fan, and have been all my life” disclaimer. I love almost all the changes they have made to the ballpark, with exception to Conigliaro’s Corner, it just doesn’t seem to look right out there. They have put a very competitive product on the field every year, and of course finally won the world series in 2004.
It is after this world series win where the politics of the Red Sox front office first came into play. I don’t know how well known this is outside of New England, the chairman of the Red Sox is Tom Werner, who is a television producer and had a little fling with Katie Couric. The Red Sox ownership group also owns part of the Boston Globe and New York Times, two liberal papers. It is rumored that some Boston Globe employees even received World Series rings.
After the World Series victory, Curt Schilling agreed to go on the campaign trail with George W Bush. But with Schilling being a diehard conservative, and a Christian, and the ownership being liberals, they persuaded him that it would be better for his damaged ankle to rest it. He agreed. I have always believed that Curt’s politics was the real reason behind them telling Schilling not to campaign, and not the injury. The next thing you know, the Red Sox owners are making appearences with John Kerry on the campaign trail. Well, Curt finally went to one event and introduced George Bush to an audience on the campaign trail.
Fast forward to 2007. I bought my son the 2007 Red Sox yearbook. In this new yearbook the Red Sox are embracing multi-culturism. They have all Red Sox players pictures taken in front of their home country. I thought it was a pretty good idea, with the signing of Japanese superstar Dice-K, they have players from seven countries.
So we start flipping through the yearbook and the first picture is the manager, Terry Francona, and he is standing behind the American flag.
BUT, one thing really stands out to me. Read more…
Court Throws out ACLU “Domestic” Spying Lawsuit
Today a federal appeals court voted 2-1 to dismiss an ACLU lawsuit against the foreign surveillance program. This is the program more commonly and inaccurately reffered to as the domestic spying program by the main stream media and by the left in general. This is a victory for president Bush.
Here is the whole article from apnews.myway.com:
CINCINNATI (AP) – A federal appeals court Friday ordered the dismissal of a lawsuit challenging President Bush’s domestic spying program, saying the plaintiffs had no standing to sue.The 2-1 ruling by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel vacated a 2006 order by a lower court in Detroit, which had found the post-Sept. 11 warrantless surveillance aimed at uncovering terrorist activity to be unconstitutional, violating rights to privacy and free speech and the separation of powers.U.S. Circuit Judge Julia Smith Gibbons, one of the two Republican appointees who ruled against the plaintiffs, said they failed to show they were subject to the surveillance and therefore do not have standing for their claims.U.S. Circuit Judge Ronald Lee Gilman, a Democratic appointee, disagreed, saying he felt the plaintiffs were within their rights to sue and that it was clear to him that the surveillance program violated the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978.Although the Bush administration said in January the program is now overseen by a special federal intelligence court, opponents said that without a court order, the president could resume the spying outside judicial authority at any time.
The American Civil Liberties Union led the lawsuit on behalf of other groups including lawyers, journalists and scholars it says have been handicapped in doing their jobs by the government monitoring.
Other groups have filed challenges to the program in other courts; this case proceeded the furthest. If the ACLU does not appeal, the case will be sent back to the U.S. district judge in Michigan for dismissal.
It’s very early, but as of right now I am supporting Joe Kenney as the Republican candidate for governor of New Hampshire. I believe, or maybe it’s just hope, that Governor Lynch’s hold on the governor ship is vulnerable. But here is another candidate who is thinking about running for governor:
IS BRUCE BACK?
Maybe. Maybe not. But less than a week after Sen. Joe Kenney of Wakefield, a potential 2008 candidate for governor, held a fundraiser for his political action committee, we’ve confirmed that a familiar Republican name is interested again in the corner office.
“I’m getting a lot of encouragement to run for governor,” said former Sen. Bruce Keough of Dublin, who ran unsuccessfully in 2002 for the GOP nomination and then opted out of a match against John Lynch, now the governor, last year.
“People are concerned that under John Lynch, the state seems to be drifting like a cork in the ocean,” Keough said. “He seems to be spending most of his time responding to initiatives driven by outside groups, whether it’s the national labor movement, the gay rights movement or the abortion rights movement.
“And I’m going to take a serious look at it,” Keough said. He said that as Presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s state campaign chair, “I’m at a lot of events and see a lot of grassroots activists. But right now, I’m more in the listening stage than the talking stage.’
It seems as though during the last election cycle there were no willing candidates to run against John Lynch as he was at all time highs as far as approval ratings go. Jim Coburn was thrown to the wolves as a sort of sacrificial lamb.
Now it appears to me that there may be several candidates looking to run against John Lynch. I sense discontent in the voters about the direction of the state and have a feeling Republicans could take back the governor’s office. I think the Republicans feel the same way.
I am still trying to find the governor’s approval ratings. Funny, how they aren’t available.
Today the white house fired back at the Clinton’s for their critical comments on Bush commuting the sentence of Scooter Libby. The remarks of Hillary Clinton did seem strange when you consider this list of pardons issued by President Clinton. Hillary should just lay low on this issue, but she has to play to the far left or risk losing votes.
This is some of what Clinton had to say:
Hillary Clinton said in a speech that Bush administration had “elevated cronyism over the rule of law.”
The white house responded today:
“When you think about the previous administration and the 11th hour fire-sale pardons and issues that were provided, commutations on the last day … it’s really startling that they have the gall to criticize what we believe is a very considered, a very deliberate approach to a very unique case,” Stanzel said.
Asked if he was accusing the Clintons of hypocrisy, he said: “It is amazing to me that they can, with what they did on January 20, 2001, they can criticize the president for issuing a commutation … It sort of pales in comparison.”
It’s good to see the white house fight back on this issue, the hypocrisy of the Clinton’s on this is undeniable. As a matter of fact it is extremely brazen on their part. Of course because they are Democrats their pardons were justified. We are not allowed to question them. They are smarter than us, we wouldn’t understand why these people should have been pardoned. But let Bush commute one person and watch the fireworks.
Read the whole acticle here.
Perfume, the Latest Item on the Work Place Hit List
We currently ban smoking in the workplace, and in public places such as bars and restaurants in many states. Trans fats are also on the hit-list by people who are smarter than you, people who will tell you what is good for you and what isn’t.
Once you start down this slope you open the door to people who don’t like something to have it banned. Where will it stop. If you think I am over-reacting, check out this story.
An office worker for the US city of Detroit is suing for her colleagues to be banned from wearing perfume which gives her such severe headaches, nausea and coughing fits that she must leave work.
That’s right, we need to ban perfume in public. This is just incredible. Now someone want’s to tell other people how they should smell. Granted some people may need to be told they smell, but not people wearing too much perfume. This is insane, it sounds like someone setting up a disability claim to me.
Now she is seeking a jury trial to make the city force fellow employees to come to work un-scented, citing disability discrimination laws. She is claiming unspecified damages for “pain, suffering, humiliation and outrage” suffered.
Discrimination? What can I say? This woman is looking to collect a government check in my opinion. Just add another name to the physically unwilling to work list.
What would this country be coming to if the government actually started dictating what someone could smell like at work?
Here is a story I am either too stupid or naive to understand. Maybe both. Apparently humans are using too much of the sun and are not saving enough for the rest of the species we share the earth with. WHAT? I don’t understand.
HUMANS are just one of the millions of species on Earth, but we use up almost a quarter of the sun’s energy captured by plants – the most of any species.
The human dominance of this natural resource is affecting other species, reducing the amount of energy available to them by almost 10 per cent, scientists report.
Are they trying to say we need to stay inside so that plants and animals won’t be deprived of the sun? How are we depriving them of the sun? When I’m outside the sun shines on me and also everything else outside doesn’t it? I truly don’t understand what they are trying to say.
This showed humans used 24 per cent of the energy that was captured by plants. More than half of this was due to the harvesting of crops or other plants.
Now we are using the sun to harvest crops. We are already supposed to give up meat, now we are using too much sun to harvest crops to eat. What are we supposed to do? This is nature, the natural events life. We are not doing anything wrong by going outside. I’m at a loss here.
“Here we are, just one species on the earth, and we’re grabbing a quarter of the renewable resources … we’re probably being a bit greedy.”
A problem evidently, but no solutions offered. Maybe this is a veiled attack on capitalism with that greedy comment.
Someone try to help me understand what they are trying to say.
