Wash DC lawyers (Politicians) try to make the US Court System manipulate foreign governments to handle oil prices; that more laws can replace more tangiable resources.  Just tell them to bring their own rope to the trial guys.

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSWAT00953020080520?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=22&sp=true

 

Actual House Bill

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c110:3:./temp/~c110HWZZQ5::

 

Proposed Senate Bill (note citations of USC (US Code) for a trial of foreign leaders)

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c110:2:./temp/~c110HWZZQ5::

 

This really hurts our credibility in the world guys, I thought that was YOUR complaint, not mine.

 

This also explains a lot about the closing Guantanimo Bay supporters.

Hello all,                                                   

Our Democrat congress has been hard at work passing laws to restructure us. 

As of 2/17/2009 ALL SIGNALS FOR TV CHANNELS CAN ONLY BE DIGITAL.  This only affects the "Tuner" in the TV and "should" not affect signals between other devices and TV (e.g. Gamecube, VCR, DVD player, etc.).  This means that a TV that is not HDTV (a.k.a. "Digital Tuning Compliant") will not be able to tune in most stations from Antenna//Satellite. 

A converter will be required to keep your old TV working the same way it does now.  This converter is expected by the FCC to cost around $40 each.

This will hit the poor and the elderly who do not pay attention to the news and will have trouble understanding the issue and coming up with the $40 they need to get a converter.  I expect a lot Soap Opera and Wheel of Fortune watchers to revolt.  I will look forward to the election a year from this November.

I direct your attention to the fact that this is set to take effect just under a month after inauguration day (just after Pres. Bush leaves office).

Let's not forget that Pres. Bush signed it
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,124670/article.html 

I don't understand.  Here Bush touts his tax cuts for economic growth, yet turns away from them in trying to fix the economy.  Granted he will disclose more info about what his plan is in the State of the Union Address.  Nevertheless, there has been little press about business, banking, and economic authorities.


Why tax cuts and not economic stimulus?  Here are my list of reasons:

1.) Business leaders are asking themselves 
  "Why would I go to that trouble and cost for a one time payment that will in large part disappear via my training and hiring costs and not really last me long enough to replace this money with sales?" 

A more likely response is "Let's just hire some temp workers to clean up around here and possibly cover for us while we send our regular workers to training seminars."

2.) How will you pay for this? (Tax/fee hikes, at an eminent recession?)

3.) This will give the appearance of a boost before the election and leave us flat after the election (both sides giving a bone to Democrat attack machines)

It will take the better part of a year to succeed, but it will work.  Those in the know can tell you that the surplus under Clinton was due to Reagan tax cuts working over time, not regulating ourselves into prosperity.

Bloomberg has an article to this effect:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=aBOTUGTBFee4&refer=home

Besides, banks are selling their souls overseas to stay affloat.  In time, this will give political muscle where it does not belong.

I have some questions. 

1.) If there is too much fund raising in politics, then why has the biggest fund raiser in politics (Hillary) not taking the lead in any of the votes on the Democratic Primaries?  Was Campaign Finance Refrom a Mistake? 

2.) Could it be that red states are far more sensitive to corruption?  We know that sexual allegations are deadly to Republicans but not Democrats (e.g. Monica and Bill v.s. Larry Craig and IL Candidate Jack Ryan).  This quesiton will be answered by the blue state primaries (especically in New York).  This will be a challenge.  New Hamshire will not be friendly or easy for Hillary, my guess is that she has too much difficulty showing sincerity and acts too much like a sincere machine telling people what she thinks they want to hear.  The problem for her is that she underestimates suspicion of herself and Bill.

Full transcript of Iraq progress hearings  (Click Here)

Why is it that these politicians think that they know better what to do in Iraq? (Click Here)

Why is it reprehensible to change Iraq War policy, watch this youtube video of Democrat Leaders supporting the war over the least 14 years...Click Here to watch DEMOCRAT FLIP FLOPS ON IRAQ

In the past they turned their backs on the Vietnameese people as they were taken over.  You can watch the BBC footage of people fighting each other to leave before Saigon falls to the Vietkong.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_6560000/newsid_6560800/6560885.stm?bw=nb&mp=wm&news=1

If the Democrat leadership wins the next election, this will happen again.  However, consider for a moment how our DEFEAT will be viewed as the old USSR is being reconstructed...
Click Here to read the Economist Magazine story

Putin's government has been busy...
Spying On Britain
Selling weapons to Iran
Encouraging Russian teens to procreate at government expense "For the Motherland"

This is NOT the time to undermind our Troops and show that we don't finish the job to the world.  This is reprehensible and the fear of using troops is going to trigger an invasion of our nation in the next 20 years when antagonistic nations feel that they have weapons and troops enough to beat us.  It seems to me that some are not concerned with this threat and would rather worry about taking credit for more domestic spending that reporters cover much more thoroughly and aggressively.

It's time for me to speak out.  It is time for all of us to speak out.  I say this not because I am against the war in Iraq.  No, I say this because I know very well what Democrat Administrations do to our military.   There are Antiwar persons in both parties, but they hold a dominant influence in the Democratic National Committee. 
I have yet to hear of funding cuts for the military at Republican fundraisers and conventions, but I struggle not to hear such talk from Democrat lead meetings.

Their is a bitterness and mistrust for our military among many leaders and citizens in modern times. 

I was a toddler when John Kerry stand next to a chickenwire fence pit and throw his medals into it in protest of the Vietnam Conflict, but I watched the video clip.  I watched soldiers tell of how they were spit on and hit with rocks and other objects when they got off the plane to greet their families, but I watched the documentaries.  I listened to soldiers and reporters told how Pres. Johnson tied the hands f his military chiefs of staff right down to minute decisions of targets, ammo, and quantities of soldiers allocated.  I am angry about Vietnam, but not at the presidents involved from both parties.  My issue is with the generals who bit their lips in silence as Johnson and Nixon tried to micromanage a war despite the expertiese of others.

Protesters accuse our soldiers of killing unarmed babies and torturing prisoners, yet blame the same when we are attacked.

President Clinton's administration tipped off the press so that our Navy Seals enocountered a barrage of photographers instead of a successful mission in 1993.  I WILL NEVER FORGET THAT DAY!  Then their was the Mogadishu incident that inspired the book and movie "Black Hawk Down" where under armmed soldiers were killed by mobs that included children throwing grenades and dragged down streets behind vehicles.  Further interviews revealed that many patrols were ordered to go into enemy territory with empty rifles to give the appearance of strength that relied heavily on imagery and reputation.

I watched as 60 Minutes showed soldiers in welfare lines for food.  I watched military office staff on crate pallets borrowed from food deliveries to keep their desks out of water on the floor from leaky roofs.

I spoke with military officers who were ordered to close more bases every year instead of pursuing terrorists around the world.  I know one who will not let her children take candy from Democrats because she is so bitter about the slow death sentence given to the military by anti-miltary politicians.

Now these bitter people are back in power and they are not discreet about their bitterness for military supporters. 

Sen Boxer accused Condoleeza Rice of not being indifferent to war because Sec. Rice has no husband or children.  Then Sen Feingold told how Congress should use the "Power of the Purse" to cut funding for military who are ordered to keep use safe.  I really don't see how cutting funding is supposed to help trigger a withdrawal without a surrender.

This is just a taste of what is to come, and we should express our appreciation to soldiers so that they never doubt our support and perspective in common with them.

According to the London newspaper "The Times", Israel is planning to launch a small number of bunker buster laser guided missles on specific targets in Iran.  These targets are believed to be involved in nuclear research.  The missles are not the world famous Intercontinental Ballistic Missles (ICBM) that produce the stereotypical nuclear mushroom cloud; These are designed to take out underground military installations. 
Nevertheless, Israel does admit that these will be armed with small nuclear payloads and cite the severely Anti-Semitic rhetoric coming out of Tehran that threatens genocide and extinction for Israel.

The Bush administration has met with Israel a number of times in considering how to handle Iran including military action.  Yet, they are not willing to be involved and do not support nuclear action of any kind. 

Read the story here:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2535310_2,00.html

There are fundamental questions to be addressed here that go far beyond "Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Blood for oil" that I hear predominantly from college students and liberal minority activsts I meet.

For example:

1.) If Iran is already going through UN Sanctions, can we name other SPECIFIC non-military options that will be effective beyond the common apprehension for a military approach?  Iran is a theocracy.  They do not need money to market their religion.  Also their clerics forbid involvement with Western Nations, so will medicine and food speak louder than what God wants them to do?

2.) The most crucial question of all is, does Tehran have the wherwithal to make good on its Anti-Western and Anti-Semitic threats?  If we wait long enough what would the worse case scenario be?  Should we just go about our lives and let the Pentagon handle National Security Responses, or did 9-11 and Richard Reid (shoe bomber) teach us that this is insufficient in the 21st century?

I admit that these are loaded questions, but I continue to be astonished at the responses I get.

The actual outcome in 20 to 30 years from this is more comprehensive and severe, than even an Iraq war supporter like me would consider thinkable.  Yet as the groups against Western Powers and Israel continue to organize and gain more technological resources of all types, persons with more than an abstract trust in prosperity will unite as well.  The US and Israel do not attack for oil, but this is a polarizing fixation where persons concerned with wordly welfare will congregate and oppose those devout to Jesus Christ and Israel itself.

Sectarian violence in the Middle East again.  This is far more than a daily occurrance used as an anti-war tool by the American Press.  This fighting goes back for centuries to when and fades with Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in 1978 in Iran. 

The groups first diverged after the Prophet Muhammad died in 632, and his followers could not agree on whether to choose bloodline successors or leaders most likely to follow the tenets of the faith.  This is not an unusual conflict among world religions who are tempted to follow bloodlines over faithfullness.  Lineage plays a heavy roll in many of the religions currently practiced in the world today.  Consider the differences in Pope John Paul and Pope Bennedict playing out now among Catholics worldwide. 

Put another way, we could and should ask ourselves this fundamental question: Is religious leadership an unintended gift to an individual, or a right of a special lineage.  How do you keep your religion from becoming corrupt over time?  How can we find God and stay on course with him?  These questions start as local struggles and over time become endless genocide that spans generations. 

Underestimating this task was the difference between Bush jr in 2003 and Bush sr in 1990.  The threat to the USA was and still is accurate and understood correctly by both presidents and the president between them also.

There is only one hope.  It is not unanimous throughout mankind.  It is God's Holy Spirit answering your personal prayers.  There is only one God, one divine power if you will.  This is the only way to solve this problem, and there will always be groups with different opinions.  Only your personal prayers can guide you, and people will continue to make mistakes.  

Neverthess, there are great works in the world today being accomplished by persons around the world which edify and please God.  So don't throw in the towel on organized religion.  The question is: is this group well intentioned and creative, or inspired and following true commandments of a Living God?  Both produce good works, so that is not good enough indicator. 

Consider instead whether religious leaders foster passion alone, or serenity and contentment in conjunction with the good works and teachings they offer.  No religion is devoid of good works.  Ultimately you will know if you are closer to God, or just more fearful of the world around you. 

When leaders of your group tell you that rebellion against powerful groups is the only way to restore order and the proper flow of money and worldly resources, know that they are not ultimately concerned about a higher power in heaven.  Is hard work the only obstacle to success, or are you asked to remove an obstructive group or person?  Is it control or a group or just clearing your own mind and heart that you make your goal?

If you think that this a topic of religious zealots, promise now that you will throw out your Star Wars videos and not watch the reruns on cable.  Other similar movies with divine destiny in the plot are almost endless: Lord of the Rings, The Golden Child, and the list goes on.  There is always a lead character with a destiny granted by a devine influence or power who will save the day.  Unless you are too young to know of these films and their ticket sales, you will likely agree with me at this point.


SOME EXCELLENT ARTICLES ON UNDERSTANDING SUNNI AND SHIITE MUSLIM RELIGIONS...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,85035,00.html

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/40241_islamsects.shtml

http://hnn.us/articles/934.html

Unless there is some real magic, it looks like the momentum of public opinion is swinging to the left following battle fatigue for Iraq from the American People, most of whom only have living memories of Vietnam.  The Whitehouse bid from the DNC side comes down primarily to two people: Clinton and Obama.

Enter the Obama bombshell admission: Cocaine use as a teenager.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/02/AR2007010201359.html
Don't count him out though.  This is not in giant contrast to his constituents and Democrat voters are not offended as easily as Republican voters.

Now the quesiton is, did Hillary get all of her skeletons out while her husband was president?