Sheryl Crow has decided that the best way to stop global warming is to pass limitations on how much toilet paper may be used per sitting. Thank God we have such intellectuals in Hollywood and the music industry to guide us through our lives and to tell us what is good for us.
Just remind me not to shake her hand if I ever meet her.
From the article:
Crow has suggested using “only one square per restroom visit, except, of course, on those pesky occasions where two to three could be required”.
“I propose a limitation be put on how many squares of toilet paper can be used in any one sitting.”
So, who would decide which occasions would warrant two squares?
That is not the only paper product she proposes doing away with:
Crow has also commented on her website about how she thinks paper napkins “represent the height of wastefulness”.
So how does she propose doing away with napkins? You won’t believe this, but here is her solution:
She has designed a clothing line with what she calls a “dining sleeve”.
The sleeve is detachable and can be replaced with another “dining sleeve” after the diner has used it to wipe his or her mouth.
You read that right, a removable sleeve to wipe your mouth on with a clean sleeve to replace it when your done. All these years I have been telling my children to stop wiping their mouths on their sleeves. To use a napkin. If only I had known they were saving the planet.
Won’t purposely dirtying clothes that will then need to be washed lead to more water usage? Wouldn’t that be bad for the planet?
These global warming alarmists are getting more crazy every day. We need to put an end to this hoax before they pass legislation that will tax us to death.
New Tape shows Hillary Clinton may have known about her Campaign Finance law violation
One under-reported story is the fact that Hillary Clinton is being sued for campaign fraud.
Now, why don’t we here anything about this on the main stream media? We know why, but doesn’t this sound like a story that should be all over the news? If Hillary was on the other side of the isle, her name would already have been dragged through the mud. She would be presumed guilty, not innocent. You only have to look as far as Tom Delay to see the double standard here. Tom Delay hasn’t gone to trial yet and you hear people on the left say he should be in jail. He had to step down and couldn’t run for re-election.
Now new tapes have come out that show that she did know about it.
If the Clinton’s are so smart, when are they going to stop getting caught on tape with their indiscretions?
For a previous article on the story, click here.
I don’t care what your position on the war is, this is unacceptable. Protesting is one thing, but this is altogether different. To not have the decency to let loved ones bury a hero who died for our country in peace is disgraceful.
Thankfully one man from Kingston stepped up and started a counter-protest to help the family of the fallen soldier say goodbye to their loved one in peace.
This man, Pat Langois, is from my town, and I can’t tell you how proud I am of him. Thank you Pat.
This group of protesters is known as the Westboro Baptist Church, and they have been protesting soldier’s funerals for several years now.
From the article:
The group uses extreme language and Biblical references to claim that a variety of events — from the death of soldiers in Iraq to, most recently, the Virginia Tech shootings — are God’s punishment for America’s tolerance of homosexuality.
This quote from someone else who confronted the protesters:
McGillicuddy, who lives in East Hampstead, was among several who confronted the protesters, and found herself the target of one woman’s hate. “She was saying that all the deaths were my fault, and negative stuff about God. Like God wanted death and that it was our fault this was happening and we were godless and we’re going to burn in hell.”
“No, I think it’ll be you,” McGillicuddy finally told her before walking away, shaken.
If you want to protest the war, I have no problem with that, It’s guaranteed in the constitution. But to protest at a funeral has to be about the most vile thing a group can do to protest. The only thing that comes close to that is this, and this still pales in comparison.
Civil Unions coming to New Hampshire on January 01, 2008
You can read about it here.
Governor Lynch has finally taken a stand on a tough issue. Up until now he has focused on keeping his approval ratings sky high by passing legislation that had wide public approval. This is the first controversial issue he has taken a side on, now we will get to see what happens to his approval ratings.
This is from the New Hampshire Union Leaders most recent poll:
When the poll closed early yesterday afternoon, 1,753 people had participated in the survey, with 934 or 53.3 percent against legalized civil unions and 819 or 46.7 percent in favor.
New Hampshire is split almost down the middle on this issue, with a majority opposed to civil unions.
Although he has finally taken a stand, he hasn’t said whether he will sign this bill in his office behind closed doors or hold a public signing ceremony in the Executive Council office. He knows this signing is unpopular with half of his constituents, so he will probably sign it quietly and hope nobody notices.
Heading to Cooperstown
Well, the wife and I are taking the boys to Cooperstown to see the baseball Hall Of Fame this weekend. So I won’t be posting again until Monday. It’s going to feel good to get away from the real world for a couple of days, without watching any news and reading no newspapers, just the wife and kids. I could use the break.
The boys are very excited as we have never been there before. I always have wanted to go, but being a lifelong Red Sox fan, I thought it would remind be of all the great players I saw growing up, that always managed to come up a little short. Since 2004 my boys interest in the Sox has grown and we can’t wait to see the memorabilia from the ’04 World Series.
On the downside, we picked the weekend of the first meeting between Sox and Yanks to go away. That’s okay, we will manage to see how it turns out while we are gone.
The sox have their pitching rotation set up perfectly for this series, and the Yankee bats are hot, so it will be very interesting to see how things go in this series.
So, I hope everyone out there has a good weekend. I will see you again in writings shortly.
The opinion piece below appeared in the New Hampshire Union Leader.
When I read it I felt compelled by the emotion I felt to post it. I was disturbed by it, and at the same time it felt good to know this procedure will no longer be performed.
Warning: The article contains a graphic description of a partial birth abortion from a nurse who witnessed it.
This description was used by Justice Anthony Kennedy when writing for the majority in the supreme court’s verdict to uphold the ban on partial birth abortions.
Here is the piece:
THE U.S. Supreme Court yesterday approved the ban of a spectacularly horrifying procedure doctors use to kill perhaps tens of thousands of unwanted American babies each year. It is a tiny but significant legal victory for the voiceless victims of America’s thriving abortion industry.
The court ruled that the federal partial birth abortion ban of 2003 was constitutional because it eliminated only one procedure that could be used to kill and extract an unborn baby and that doctors concerned about the health of the mother could use alternative methods.
Roughly 130,000 American abortions each year are performed after the first trimester. These typically consist of dismembering the baby and removing him or her body part by body part, or delivering the baby up to the head then puncturing the skull and removing the brain, collapsing the head so it can pass through the cervix.
The court upheld Congress’ ban on the second procedure.
Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the 5-4 majority, included this nurse’s description of the procedure:
“Dr. Haskell went in with forceps and grabbed the baby’s legs and pulled them down into the birth canal. Then he delivered the baby’s body and the arms — everything but the head. The doctor kept the head right inside the uterus . . .
“The baby’s little fingers were clasping and unclasping, and his little feet were kicking. Then the doctor stuck the scissors in the back of his head, and the baby’s arms jerked out, like a startle reaction, like a flinch, like a baby does when he thinks he is going to fall.
“The doctor opened up the scissors, stuck a high-powered suction tube into the opening, and sucked the baby’s brains out. Now the baby went completely limp . . .
“He cut the umbilical cord and delivered the placenta. He threw the baby in a pan, along with the placenta and the instruments he had just used.”
That is what for years has passed for an acceptable medical procedure, conducted on thousands of helpless, innocent infants each year.
But no longer. Thank God, no longer.
Is this how Harry Reid supports the troops? By telling them they have lost, that they can’t win?
He continues to show no faith in our troops:
“I believe … that this war is lost, and this surge is not accomplishing anything, as is shown by the extreme violence in Iraq this week,” Reid told journalists.
Not even half of the additional troops that make up the surge have been deployed and already Harry Reid has surrendered. This is exactly what out enemy has been waiting to hear. He has been sitting there waiting for a major bombing to kill a large number of people so that he could use the occasion to proclaim defeat. Yesterday’s bombings gave him the event he had been salivating for.
“I believe the war at this stage can only be won diplomatically, politically and economically.”
Isn’t this the exact policy that was carried out throughout the ’80’s and ’90’s and that led to September 11th? Now we have a president with the resolve to fight terrorism, but not the people willing to go along with him.
Political Cartoon- The new Iwo Jima
Supreme Court rules in favor of Partial Birth Abortion Ban
As everybody has heard by now the supreme court has ruled in favor of the ban on partial birth abortions. While pro choice advocates are going to portray this as the start of the repeal or Roe vs. Wade, and the beginning of the end to a woman’s right to choose this isn’t quite the case.
According to the above article:
The law bans a method of ending a pregnancy, rather than limiting when an abortion can be performed.
So you can see from the excerpt above this ruling bans a specific method of abortion, nothing else.
This form of abortion, if you can even call it that, requires labor to be induced until the baby’s head is birthed and then crushing the skull. This is barbaric, and disgusting. It’s not a point of a woman’s right to choose in her third trimester. If a woman’s life is in jeopardy in the third trimester, why can’t they perform a c-section and save both the baby and the mother? She must have wanted the baby or she wouldn’t have waited so long.
Why is it if a baby is only half birthed it is not life, but if the rest of the baby was birthed it would be?
Also from the article:
Abortion opponents say the law will not reduce the number of abortions performed because an alternate method – dismembering the fetus in the uterus – is available and, indeed, much more common.
You can dismember a baby in the womb that if it were birthed would live? What is happening in this country where we fail to protect the most innocent of all, the children?
All the presidential candidates have weighed in and they fall right in line where you would expect. Hillary, Obama, and Edwards don’t agree with the ruling, while McCain, Romney( who was for abortion before he was against it), and Guiliani were all in favor.
This is a small victory for the pro-life side, but will be portrayed as a sweeping defeat by the pro-choice crowd.
