Thursday - January 28, 2010
No no no no no no no!
The Democratic-controlled Senate has muscled through a plan to allow the government to go a whopping $1.9 trillion deeper in debt.
Senate Democrats needed all the 60 votes at their disposal Thursday to muscle through legislation allowing the government to go $1.9 trillion deeper in debt.
Democratic leaders were able to prevail on the politically volatile 60-39 vote only because Republican Sen.-elect Scott Brown of Massachusetts has yet to be seated. Republicans had insisted on a 60-vote, super-majority threshhold to pass the measure. An earlier test vote succeeded on a 60-40 vote.
The measure would would put the government on track for a national debt of $14.3 trillion—about $45,000 for every American—and it served as a vivid reminder of the United States’ dire fiscal straits.
The massive increase in the debt limit would allow majority Democrats to avoid another vote until after the midterm elections this fall. New estimates released by the Congressional Budget Office on Tuesday show that the U.S. this year could run a deficit matching last year’s record $1.4 trillion shortfall.
To win the votes of moderate Democrats, President Barack Obama promised to appoint a special task force to come up with a plan for dealing with the spiraling debt.
The current $12.4 trillion debt ceiling is expected to be reached in mid-February.
Torches? Check.
Pitchforks? Check.
Axe handles? Check.
Oil? Boiling. Check.
Posted by Drew458
on 01/28/2010 at 04:50 PM
Filed Under: • Government • Insanity •
• Comments (5)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • Saturday - January 23, 2010
In Cold Blood
h/t to Townhall.com
Maybe you caught the Glen Beck show, maybe you didn’t. But if you did, and it seemed a bit rushed, quite overly parsed, you were right. His 1 hour show ought to have run 4 hours. Or if you visited Glen’s web page entry about Friday’s show, and you wondered a bit about this guy Edvins Snore, then this is for you.
This is the link to Snore’s film, The Soviet Story: Click Here. It’s a 90 minute film, and it will require you to install the Veoh video viewer, available at that link. It takes a few minutes, it’s free, and it’s clean. You may also have to install the proper codec, located over here.
Then you can watch the film. If you don’t understand spoken German and Russian, and if you can’t read Portuguese, you’ll have a bit of trouble; the film is about 80% dubbed in English. So you’ll miss significant parts, though the pictures tell the story. Besides, if you have even a passing familiarity with Spanish or Italian you can get the gist of the sub-titles.
Marxism, Leninism, Socialism, Eugenics are all slices from the same progressivist pie. Rebuild society through class warfare to make a better world for the elites. And at the very core, class warfare doesn’t mean “striving” or “converting” or “changing people’s minds through reason and debate”. It means killing them. In their millions. This film makes that point, and then things get really ugly.
(hey did you see the news? Now Obama wants to turn people against those rotten banks! Tax them! Hate them! Elitist moneybags, ruining our economy! Fire Bernanke! Probably all joooooos!!)
This is a horrific film. It is uncovered history, in the raw. It’s the story, or a story, about how things really were under both flavors of european socialism in the 20th century: International Socialism (Soviet communism) and National Socialism (Nazi Germany). The differences are very, very slight. Both were blood drenched nightmare worlds, criminal enterprises from their very beginnings. Both ideologies were highly congruent, very closely related. Snores has made a film that shows that the relationship was deeper than any of us ever realized; that the death camps began in the USSR, that the NKVD trained the Gestapo, that the Soviets supplied the Nazi war machine with massive quantities of material and food while their own people starved. And when the war was over, it was the Nazis who were the hated war criminals, while the Soviets were the heroes. Even though both had committed the same atrocities. Even though the camps were simply moved to Siberia and continued to function for decades after the war. Even though Stalin ... well, I don’t want to give too much away. All we were ever taught in school was that the two nations had a “non-aggression pact” that lasted until Operation Barbarosa, when they became enemies. All the rest was just swept under the rug, and forgotten. But the truth has been found.
In Russia today, there is a resurgence of nazism. According to Snore, in Europe, all of Europe, today there is still the socialist idea that the lesser people need to be eliminated so that the progressives can progress. There will be no call for justice against the dark horrors of Soviet brutality. Not only are such things not even war crimes in Britain, by law!, but Europe is held hostage to Russian oil and gas. And as Snore says, they really aren’t against the basic idea very much anyway.
When inferior nations are being killed, it cannot be seen as a crime, because it makes way for the more advanced nations to build a better life.
This is nothing new. It goes from Margaret Sanger, to George Bernard Shaw wishing for a “humane poison gas” to nicely murder the undesirables, to the Turkish starvation pogrom in Armenia, to the millions killed by Lenin in the Ukraine, and then to the millions of internal “enemies” killed in the CCCP by him and then millions more by Stalin, to the millions killed by Hitler, to the further millions killed by the Soviet after 1945, through Bill Ayers and his matter of fact awareness of a need for “re-education” camps that would eliminate 25 million Americans, right up to the islamofascists today with their genocide in Darfur and their desire to eliminate first Israel, then the rest of the Western world. All groups who have decided that it is their right to decide what the better form of humanity is, (the answer is ALWAYS “people just like us") and all of them utterly willing to kill millions (of lesser beings “just like you") to achieve that goal. a sangue-frio. In cold blood. And it never works, but they keep right on trying, generation after generation.
This is a European film. The Western hemisphere plays only a very small part in it. So it’s up to you to see any similarities, and then draw your own conclusions.
Watching this might just give you nightmares. Do it anyway.
Oh, and I found it really ironic that several of the ads that pester you at the top of the screen during the first part of the film ( just keep clicking the X when they show up; eventually the thing gives up ) were for russian merchandise and clothing. I followed the link to one, the russianlegacy website. And found pro-soviet and Che shirts for sale. Cuz, like, it’s just fashion man. Chill out. It never meant anything, and like, Stalin and Che are totally cool.
I think I need to punch a hippie. Or a progressive democrat. And then I might have to watch this film again.
Posted by Drew458
on 01/23/2010 at 01:14 AM
Filed Under: • Commies • Crime • Genocide • Government • Insanity • International • Liberals •
• Comments (17)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • Wednesday - January 20, 2010
Holland … a place where your observations about a particular religion lands you in court.
Personally, I think Wilders is a hero. His mistake, if you want to call it that, was to be openly critical of the ROP.
This is the man who for a time was denied entry to Britain because of his outspoken views. Everyone and including the Dutch apparently, tip toe around muzzies and their religion like they’re walking on eggshells. I guess they are. But there is a solution to this insidious problem.
This is a VERY long article found at European News, and so I’ve cut it and the whole thing is at the link below.
The Wilders trial: Torquemada would be proud
International Free Press Society
By Arthur LeggerAny one who still claims that the trial against Geert Wilders MP, leader of the Party for Freedom (9 seats in Parliament and 27 in the polls), which starts on the 20th of January, is not a political process: get a grip.
Accused by the Dutch ‘Openbaar Ministerie’ exactly a year ago for insulting Islam, comparing the Koran to Mein Kampf and delivering hate speeches, the coming trial against Wilders suddenly got a Kafkaesque and potentially murderous twist. Finally, seven days before his first day in Court, all fangs were out and faces off.
“It is irrelevant whether Wilder’s witnesses might prove Wilders’ observations to be correct”, the ‘Openbaar Ministerie’ stated, “what’s relevant is that his observations are illegal”.
(So it’s come to that has it? The freedom loving Dutch govt. can now prosecute (and persecute) a person for their “observations.")
Unexpected and breaching court procedures the detailed indictment of 21 pages, which Wilders received on the 4th of December and sums up in verbatim all of his Islam and Koran critique in interviews and Fitna, was amended with new accusations of racism against muslims and Moroccans. On top of this, Paul Vellerman, the public prosecutor of the Amsterdam Court decided that the Wilders trial had to be regarded as “an ordinary trial open for public and with a normal procedure, which doesn’t deserve the Department of Justice’s highly secured bunker. His is a normal case and we’ll treat it as such”.
It’s sad to note that Mohammed Bouyeri, the murderer of Theo van Gogh, and Volkert van der Gaag, the assassin of Pim Fortuyn, were tried in this specially designed bunker, but that Wilders has to rely on his personal bodyguards and full metal jacket to ward of terrorists. No safe room for him, which recently secured Kurt Westergaard and his granddaughter, but for months on end the vulnerability of a sitting duck.
The demonized FortuynTo a connoisseur of the classic art of Dutch political murder, revived in 2002 with the assassination of the deliberatedly unprotected and demonized Pim Fortuyn, this twist of fate comes, however, as no surprise. The ‘Openbaar Ministerie’ had to do something. Presented with much aplomb in January, already on the 10th of March it turned out that the case against Wilders had one crucial weak spot: it might not hold in Court.
For in a comparable case the Dutch High Court acquitted a Dutchman of his earlier conviction of ‘Group-insult’ of Muslims. He had been sentenced to jail for hanging a poster in front of his window that stated: “Stop the cancerous growth named Islam”. The High Court ruled that “if one insults a religion, one doesn’t automatically insult its believers”.
Gerard Spong, one of the lawyers who lodged complaints against Wilders, was quick to stress, however, that the case against an MP was far more complex than a poster: “Wilders is certainly not off the hook”. But to most professors in Law the High Court ruling proved that Wilders would win with his hands down. Ybo Buruma, a highly influential professor in Criminal Law at Nijmegen University concluded on the 11th of January 2010 that “the prosecution of Geert Wilders is a very nice exercise, but is utterly pointless for it will not lead to a conviction”.
Traditionally with such a High Court ruling and severe scholarly critique the ‘Openbaar Ministerie’ wouldn’t fail to reconsider and dismiss charges. But already a year ago the Wall Street Journal had immediately grasped that “Muslim-immigration [was] eroding traditional Dutch liberties”, forcing Dutch Law into a radically new course of censorship. Observing that Wilders’ critique of Islam outraged muslims around the globe, the Journal chided: “If freedom of speech means anything, it means the freedom of controversial speech. Consensus views need no protection”.
The Wall Street Journal must have been either clairvoyant or hysterically well informed: Paul Vellerman, Amsterdam’s Court public prosecutor, and Birgit van Roessel, the Court’s second public prosecutor, who’re both heading the trial against Wilders, also both are working for the National Expertise Centre Discrimination. This Centre is the leading organization of the ‘Openbaar Ministerie’ to track down “crimes of expression and speech”. The Centre was responsible for lodging complaints against cartoonist Gregorius Nekschot.
Posted by peiper
on 01/20/2010 at 04:17 PM
Filed Under: • Big Brother • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Daily Life • Euro-Peons • Government • Liberals • Muslims • Religion • RoPMA •
• Comments (2)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • Sunday - January 10, 2010
WELL THIS SURE HAS TURNED OUT TO BE A LOONY TUNE DAY IN THE NEWS … tha-tha-that’s all folks
Roland White
The Times on SundayWhat would you rather see public money spent on:
More grit for the roads, or a new director of service improvement (up to £61,000 a year) at the Local Better Regulation Office (LBRO)?
Answer on one side of recycled paper only please.
The service improvement director will be helping to cut government red tape and unnecessary bureaucracy alongside — among others —
a director of strategy,
a director of delivery,
a director of policy and engagement,
a policy manager (programmes),
a policy manager (strategy) and a senior policy analyst (evaluation).
All of them are working feverishly to cut out government waste. Or at least, any waste that’s not already been cut by the LBRO’s parent body, the Better Regulation Executive. Happy days.
Posted by peiper
on 01/10/2010 at 01:43 PM
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Government • UK •
• Comments (6)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • Unexpected Part Two of, It’s a cool idea to have Loony Tunes themes handy while reading. BIZARRE!
Some few weeks ago I posted another one of those really dumb things that the Brits, in their left wing rush to destroy what’s left of this place, have done.
At the time, I said that things keep getting more bizarre and more stupid and I found that my use of the term, “Things just can’t get any stupider then this” no longer had any meaning. That’s because things do indeed keep getting more bizarre, more politically correct, dumber and stupid without cause or reason. If Gorbal Warming is their new guiding light, then political correctness is their bible with all it’s (pc) ramifications and rules about insults accidental or intended.
So I will not ask, can things get dumber or more bizarre with regard to this article because they most assuredly can and no doubt they will. Until then, I offer you this which isn’t the friendliest thing I can think of doing. It certainly does raise the old RCOB though. Doesn’t it?
Businessman is arrested in front of wife and son ... for ‘anti-gypsy email that he didn’t even write.By James Millbank
Last updated at 10:04 AM on 10th January 2010Paul Osmond who made a comment about a gipsy planning application
A wealthy businessman was arrested at home in front of his wife and young son over an email which council officials deemed ‘offensive’ to gipsies – but which he had not even written.
The email, concerning a planning appeal by a gipsy, included the phrase: ‘It’s the ‘do as you likey’ attitude that I am against.’
Council staff believed the email was offensive because ‘likey’ rhymes with the derogatory term ‘pikey’.
The 45-year-old IT boss was held in a police cell for four hours until it was established he had nothing to do with the email, which had been sent by one of his then workers, Paul Osmond.
But police had taken his DNA and later confirmed they would be holding it indefinitely.
The businessman, who has asked not to be named, was also fingerprinted in the police investigation estimated to have cost taxpayers up to £12,000.
He said two uniformed officers came to his house on a Sunday afternoon and said he would be handcuffed if he did not accompany them to the police station.
His computer and other internet equipment were also seized.
The email, from a computer at his company, was sent last August to a website at Rother District Council, in East Sussex, on which the public can comment on planning applications.
It referred to an appeal by gipsy Linda Smith, who wants to keep a mobile home in an area of outstanding beauty overlooking the Battle of Hastings site.
The email also read: ‘Get a job, get planning permission but more to the point get out of the neighbourhood.’
The businessman, a father of two, said last night: ‘I had a sense of total disbelief. My wife and I decided to tell my 11-year-old son I had to go with the police because I had witnessed a road accident.
‘Even though the officers were fairly pleasant to me, I was informed I would be handcuffed if I didn’t go voluntarily. They then confiscated my computer and my wife’s computer and took them to the police station.
‘I was extremely angry. I was relaxing in the comfort of my home on a Sunday afternoon and then I was in a police car under arrest – all for an innocent comment by a colleague.’
He was driven five miles to Hastings police station.
He said: ‘I have never had any criminal record and try my best to teach my children right from wrong. This was a ridiculously heavy-handed police reaction to what they perceived as a racist comment. I am not the least bit racist and neither is Paul Osmond. The gipsy family concerned did not complain.
‘I did nothing wrong yet ended up in a police cell for four hours with my DNA stored on a criminal database.’
The arrest happened on November 15 and followed a three-year battle by a gipsy family to win planning permission for the mobile home on land outside the town of Battle.
The family bought a field from a farmer, put down a concrete base, and installed the mobile home at the end of a short driveway. Rother Council issued an enforcement notice against the building.
The businessman said he also objected to the council over the location of the mobile home, which is near his property.
He said: ‘It seems I have to get planning permission for everything I do right down to dead-heading the daffodils.
‘It seems they can erect this home with impunity. But I made my objections entirely through the proper channels and I have absolutely nothing against anyone in the gipsy community.’
The case finally ended last week when Mr Osmond, who had been arrested and bailed, was told there would be no further police action. The planning case is continuing.
Mr Osmond, 39, of Icklesham, said: ‘I made it clear to them I am absolutely not racist. I said I was simply registering my objection to this application because it is 200ft from the most important and historical battlefield in the country.
‘I now feel I am not even able to express an opinion for fear of being arrested by the police.
‘One of my closest friends is an Irish traveller and he uses the term ‘pikey’ all the time. This is the ultimate in political correctness going off the scale.’
Sussex Police said they had arrested the businessman over ‘suspicion of committing a racial or religious-aggravated offence’.
After consultation with the Crown Prosecution Service, it was decided to take no further action against Mr Osmond.
Chief Inspector Heather Keating said: ‘Sussex Police have a legal duty to promote community cohesion and tackle unlawful discrimination.
‘We are satisfied we acted appropriately in identifying the owner of the computer used and through this, the identity of the writer of the offending line.’
Police said they would hold the innocent men’s DNA indefinitely, which they said was in line with national policy.
A council spokesman said: ‘As far as we were concerned it was an offensive comment, so we got in touch with the police.’
I have been here over five years now and have never heard the term, ‘pikey.’ I have no idea what it means. Lyndon? Chris E.?
I hate the idea that people also have to “strongly express” the idea that they are NOT RACIST? Like they must prove something on the mere chance that someone in authority will accuse them of heresy and sentence them to the stake for burning. The whole idea and workings of PC and use of the ‘R’ word is nothing short of a 21st century inquisition.
Posted by peiper
on 01/10/2010 at 09:45 AM
Filed Under: • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Daily Life • Government • Jack Booted Thugs • Liberals • Outrageous • PC,BS • UK •
• Comments (7)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • Saturday - January 09, 2010
THE LATEST FROM NASHVILLE FUNNY MAN, RAY STEVENS.
H/T to Jim Miller, who emailed me this Ray Stevens video.
I think BMEWS can handle this.
What a coincidence that he should send Ray Stevens.
Little by little we are trying to clear out those things that just take up space in the house that are no longer needed. We hope we will be able to put the house on the market this summer, providing we have one of those.
Some of the things the wife is finding turned out to be old photos of family going back to the late 1890s. She found photos of her mother age only 14, and her late brother as well.
So how an album of ours got into that box is a mystery. But I’m glad she found this particular photo of Ray Stevens with my old car, in Nashville.
It was taken outside the offices of Warner Bros. Records, and his office was right across the street on Music Row. Every time I drove into Nashville, the Warner Bros. office was my very first stop. I was very big on everything Warner in those days and they had a terrific line up of country acts. I picked up the latest news and mostly records for the station I worked for in Paducah. There were times I got product even before release. In one case, an act signed to the label was also a close friend and he gave me a tape (reel to reel from the studio) of his next release. In other words, it hadn’t even got to the plant for pressing at that point. Those were really the days and I can’t say I don’t miss em. Music Row was almost a real community then. Actually, in very many ways, it was. And I loved it.
My car had Warner cartoon characters painted all over it and was a sight to see. Elmer Fudd with his shotgun on one side facing aft and on the other, Bugs Bunny running away. And of course the Warner logo on the back and sides as well. It was painted free for me, by one of my radio listeners. When people who don’t know me too well ask me where I was born, I usually tell em, Paducah, Ky. In a way, I was.
Posted by peiper
on 01/09/2010 at 09:17 AM
Filed Under: • Government • Health-Medicine • Humor • USA •
• Comments (4)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • Thursday - December 31, 2009
Nasty Deal for GMAC
This doesn’t seem to be much of a news item, but the federal government just injected another pile of cash into GMAC, and then took it over. So the feds own yet another bank/lending institution now.
GMAC to Get Another $3.5B in Aid From Treasury
A GMAC spokeswoman declined to comment on any potential government action but said, “GMAC has been conducting a strategic review of its business and evaluating options to address the challenges in its mortgage operation.” The spokeswoman said GMAC wants to prepare itself to repay the U.S. government.
The willingness by the U.S. Treasury to deepen taxpayer exposure to GMAC reflects the troubled company’s importance to the revival of the auto industry. The company was told to raise additional capital as part of government-led stress tests of large banks conducted earlier this year. The tests were to determine whether firms would need more capital to continue lending if the economy deteriorated in 2009 and 2010.
GMAC has only filled a portion of its capital hole and, unlike other banks that participated in the stress tests, has been unable to attract much capital from private investors. The Treasury said earlier this year that it would make as much money available to GMAC as needed to fill its capital hole and projected the firm would need another government infusion of as much as $5.6 billion.
GMAC’s capital needs have turned out to be somewhat less than originally envisioned, in part because impact from the bankruptcies of General Motors Corp. and Chrysler Corp. was not as severe as federal regulators originally projected.
Ok, here’s the part that I don’t get, the part that rather looks like arm twisting thuggery to me. But what do I know, right? Before this latest cash infusion, Uncle Sugar had fattened up GMAC’s coffers to the tune of 12.5 billion. For this gift of our money, the feds took 35% ownership. Basic math: $12.5B / 35% = $357,142,857.14 for every percent ownership. Now the feds are going to drop in another lump sum, a relatively “piddling” little $5.6 billion, and then they’ll own 56%? Less than half as much infusion but way more than half as much new ownership? Only $266,666,666.67 per percent? Huh? That doesn’t seem right. It’s not like the feds bought up most of the outstanding stock shares that had fallen in value, is it? This doesn’t seem right to me. But then, the federal government owning both the means of production and the banking industry doesn’t seem right either. I’m just one of those simple minded Conservatives.
Auto finance company GMAC got a new majority owner late Wednesday when the federal government announced it was assuming a 56 percent stake in the company with $3.8 billion in aid.
It was the third bailout for GMAC, which had previously received $12.5 billion in direct federal aid and other support. The government already had a 35 percent stake in the company. GMAC had requested an additional $5.6 billion in federal aid in November.
The Treasury Department announced that it also would hold about $14 billion in loans the bank may eventually have to replay. The government will appoint four of GMAC’s nine directors.
GMAC is the primary lender for dealers of General Motors and Chrysler vehicles. It converted to a bank holding company last year to qualify for federal bailout funds.
Posted by Drew458
on 12/31/2009 at 03:14 PM
Filed Under: • Finance and Investing • Government •
• Comments (2)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • Wednesday - December 23, 2009
Harry Reid Saves Your Guns
Yes, you read that right. Harry Reid has set you free. Well, for today anyway.
Health Bill Excludes Guns as Health Threat
Guns could no longer be considered a threat to health under health care reform if Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s compromise passes.
Really.
In all the the deal making and tinkering to win support for the bill, Reid added a provision to prevent the Secretary of Health and Human Services from collecting data on guns and ammunition in households, and using it in any relation to health care.
It also bars insurers from taking into account the risks guns might pose to people’s health in setting premiums or offering rebates to people with healthy lifestyles. For instance, if someone were to find people in houses with firearms were more likely to suffer gun injuries, that could not be used to set premiums, sort of like barring the use of pre-existing conditions.
This is, of course, to protect gun owners’ rights in health reform.
Here’s the provision:
”(c) PROTECTION OF SECOND AMENDMENT GUN RIGHTS.—
”(1) WELLNESS AND PREVENTION PROGRAMS.—A wellness and health promotion activity implemented under subsection (a)(1)(D) may not require the disclosure or collection of any information relating to— ”(A) the presence or storage of a lawfully possessed firearm or ammunition in the residence or on the property of an individual; or ”(B) the lawful use, possession, or storage of a firearm or ammunition by an individual.
”(2) LIMITATION ON DATA COLLECTION.—None of the authorities provided to the Secretary under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or an amendment made by that Act shall be construed to authorize or may be used for the collection of any information relating to— ”(A) the lawful ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition; ”(B) the lawful use of a firearm or ammunition; or ”(C) the lawful storage of a firearm or ammunition.
”(3) LIMITATION ON DATABASES OR DATA BANKS.—None of the authorities provided to the Secretary under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or an amendment made by that Act shall be construed to authorize or may be used to maintain records of individual ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition.
”(4) LIMITATION ON DETERMINATION OF PREMIUM RATES OR ELIGIBILITY FOR HEALTH INSURANCE.—A premium rate may not be increased, health insurance coverage may not be denied, and a discount, rebate, or reward offered for participation in a wellness program may not be reduced or withheld under any health benefit plan issued pursuant to or in accordance with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or an amendment made by that Act on the basis of, or on reliance upon— ”(A) the lawful ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition; or ”(B) the lawful use or storage of a firearm or ammunition.
”(5) LIMITATION ON DATA COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS FOR INDIVIDUALS.—No individual shall be required to disclose any information under any data collection activity authorized under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or an amendment made by that Act relating to— ”(A) the lawful ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition; or ”(B) the lawful use, possession, or storage of a firearm or ammunition.”.
Read between the lines people. What this means is that such a concept - guns are a threat to your health - had ALREADY BEEN IN THE BILL. And was removed by Reid, as a small sop to the NRA or to Democratic Senators from pro-gun states.
Do you really think this provision is going to stay removed? Look at the BS over the Public Option. In. Out. In. Out. Here again gone again. Pay no attention to the little man behind the curtain.
Search warrants are a thing of the past, thanks to the Patriot Act and other bits of “necessary” “emergency” legislation. You no longer have the right to private property thanks to the Kelo decision. What makes you think that you have the right to private possessions? Don’t forget that YOU are a suspected terrorist, you right wing gun owning zealot. The climate bill demands government inspectors to come to your home looking for bad insulation and leaky pipes. You think such an inspection isn’t part of the health bill? Only because we haven’t found it yet.
And notice how the language keeps referring to “lawful” ownership and possession. In other words, NONE OF THIS APPLIES to “unlawful” possession. And We The Government suspect YOU of unlawful guns (hey, we had an anonymous tip) ... therefore it’s Jackbooted Thugs At 3am Time.
The left never stops. They will use anything and everything to try and disarm the people. And they will never let up. Unlike the Republicans, who value getting home early for Christmas more than trying to stop this major train wreck of a bill.
[ funny thought - if this stays in, then the “lawful” concept could be extended. To also cover other lawful things like smoking, drinking lots of booze, and eating too many Twinkies. Which means no person could be hit with higher health insurance premiums due to their lawful behavior. ]
Posted by Drew458
on 12/23/2009 at 12:52 PM
Filed Under: • Government • Guns and Gun Control • Health and Safety • Jack Booted Thugs • Liberals •
• Comments (1)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • Tuesday - December 15, 2009
I understand the reasoning which isn’t bad. Parents face ban on smoking in front of children.
Tricky subject here. On the one hand, nobody wants a govt. sticking their nose into the private home. But, coming from a background and an age when smoking was the norm and smokers weren’t made to feel like outcasts, I have to say my early habit that lasted 21 years and ended in a tumor might have been avoided had things been a lot different back then. Maybe if my mom weren’t a smoker. Or aunts and uncles and family gatherings where most adults happily lit up.
Maybe I wouldn’t have lost a brother to lung cancer. Those thoughts do trot through my mind. There have been a number of times over the years when something came up and my immediate thought has been, I have to share this with Dave. And suddenly realize I can’t. Or, wish I could share this. He’d get a kick out of it. Smoking was grown up, it was portrayed as somewhat glamorous and who didn’t want to be that.
So I understand the govt. watch dogs trying to step in and halt the process. Sometimes education isn’t enough or it’s ignored altogether. So I understand.
But at the same time, it makes me nervous. It is intrusive. Catch 22 for someone like me who has always believed that The End Justifies The Means.
Yeah well, now I have to stop and think about that. Maybe it should be the end sometimes justifies the means.
How about booze? Now there’s a topic for ya. Kids see their parents drinking and some kids even see their parent a bit on the tight side, if the papers are to be believed. Just where should the line be drawn to help ppl and especially a younger generation? What other bad habits can a govt. find within a family?
(article shortened, see the link below for all)
A ban on parents smoking in front of their children is being considered by the Government.
By Andrew Porter, Political Editor
Stopping parents lighting up at home, or in cars, if they are with their children will form part of an aggressive new anti-smoking campaign to be launched by ministers this week.
The Government will also announce it plans to go ahead with a ban on all advertising on tobacco packaging. That measure would mean in future cigarettes could only be purchased under the counter in packets. They would be marked only with government health warnings.
At the heart of the drive is a new commitment to halve the number of adults who smoke by 2020. The current Department of Health target, which they claim to be on target to meet, is to reduce smoking prevalence to one in five people by next year.
To reduce that to one in 10 a series of measures designed to stop young people taking up the habit will be unveiled.
Central to it will be an aggressive marketing campaign that aims to persuade parents to stop smoking in front of impressionable young children.
Other measures will include:
- a commitment to continued real-terms increases in tobacco duty to keep the price of cigarettes rising;
- more stringent implementation of guidelines on smoking in films and television programmes;
- new controls on the marketing of tobacco accessories;
- further investment in accessible and effective NHS “stop smoking” services; and
- imposing a total ban on smoking and the sale of cigarettes within the London 2012 Olympic site.
A similar ban on parents smoking is in place in several American states and cities. Other US authorities have made smoke-free cars and homes a condition of allowing people to foster children.
In Britain, calls to ban parents smoking in cars have been led by Professor Terence Stephenson, President of the Royal College of Paediatric Health.
He said recently: “Why on earth would you light up in your car whilst your children are sitting quite happily in the back? On the assumption that you wouldn’t pass the packet round and invite the kids to light up, why make them breathe tobacco smoke at all?
“You can’t inflict this on your colleagues at work any more. Why should we treat our children’s health as a lower priority than our employees?”
Labour will be accused by some of introducing more “nanny state” rules.
Prof Stephenson added: “If you act to make people safer, you get accused of introducing the nanny state. If you let people make their own decisions, you get accused of neglect.
“It’s extremely sensible, common sense - but is seen by some as too draconian and the trickling of nanny state rules again.”
GO HERE FOR MORE ON THIS SUBJECT
Posted by peiper
on 12/15/2009 at 01:40 PM
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Government • Health and Safety • Nanny State • UK •
• Comments (14)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • Friday - December 04, 2009
A number of words about Switzerland from the Conservative Voice of Europe
I was led to this site via Europe News.
The guy writes exceptionally well BUT .... I know it’s a serious subject and I do find it interesting except it’s so darn long. So I haven’t posted all of it here. In fact, I can’t read all this at one sitting on line and am going to print it out. But what I have read is well worth my trouble. I think you will be interested in what he has to say as well.
The site is The Brussels Journal, which calls itself the Conservative Voice of Europe.
SWITZERLAND: THE GOVERNMENT -VS- THE PEOPLE
Brussels Journal 3 December 2009
By George HandleryGeorge Handlery about the week that was. Even in small countries, major trends can unfold early. About noble leaders and their reluctant peons that refuse to follow.
International protest and its use to the tottering local leadership. Security, fear and freedom. Radicalization as a face saving device. Immigration then and now. Imported prejudices, failure and the allegation of discrimination.
1. Small country, major issue. Normally, Switzerland is not of much interest to the international reader. Already by standing falsely accused of having invented the cuckoo clock, she is automatically downgraded. The neglect can also be attributed to her size, a functioning system – a juicy crisis brings attention.
Not being on the map is also the consequence of her ability to keep out of armed conflicts. Switzerland did not even need to be liberated in WW2! Some myths shatter on Swiss reality.
Effective armed neutrality invalidates a peacenik thesis that arms lead to war. Per capita Tell’s land has a huge army – 600,000 in WW2 out of 4.5 million. Reflecting her industrialization and armament industry, it is largely self sufficient and excellently equipped to exploit the best defense positions nature can provide.
Complete the achievements with Switzerland‘s top rating regarding the quality of life and the top earned per capita GDP coupled to being a leading financial center. In the case of a landlocked and no-resources country, this should not be the case. Besides bank secrecy – which is a settled issue and gone by now – Switzerland is currently getting perplexed attention because of the consequence of her direct democracy.
On a regular basis, the unique system enables the people to perform executive functions. The voter can make laws and invalidate legislative action. Therefore, if you want to know what the “people” want, then you might find out by consulting the results of the numerous referendums and initiatives. The people’s uncensored voice expressing its real opinion is a good indicator of what comparable societies would say if they would be able to speak up.
The latest, and internationally widely commented, Swiss initiative forbade the erection of further minarets. Expressly not effected are existing structures and new temples as well as the exercise of any religion.
To the surprise of all, the initiative passed in what is rated here as a landslide. The decision went against the will of the executive, the legislature, all but one of the political parties, the churches, the economic and social elites, “business,” the media and, belatedly, the Vatican. Why “surprise”? Opinion surveys predicted rejection. That teaches us right away something about surveys in general.
People give PC responses to surveyors who are themselves PC. This is what makes surveys into useful weapons in the hands of those who can afford them. More important is another insight. It suggests that the governments, parliaments and the elites of western democracies might not quite express the will of those they claim to represent.
Additionally, thanks to the media control of the political class, real public opinion does not always equal what little people are made to think by pundits that have the power to determine what proper views must be.
Now, “the day after”, Europe’s governments and institutions condemn the vote’s result and the voters who “committed” the outrage. Amnesty International finds that the Swiss voted “against religious freedom”. “Scandalized” France’s Foreign Minister bemoans the same – while his government forbids burqas. Those veils express in textile what the minarets say in stone.
(Oddly, with eight times the population, France has 5 minarets and 500 mosques while Switzerland has four minarets.) Indeed, governments and the governing elite’s shock and outrage might have a simple reason. It flows not from principle but reflects interest. They attack the frightening precedent created by the Swiss because the political classes fear their own peoples. Just take a fresh opinion survey from Germany. There 70% (sound too high to the writer) of the “barefooted” would vote – if their system would let them – the way the Swiss have.
GOOD TO KNOW: THE FINAL CHAPTER IS NOT YET WRITTEN
The defeated leadership chides the voters about their mistake. In addition, the disavowed local political class tries to assert itself against its recalcitrant people. One way to do that is to encourage international pressure to demand that the new law not be implemented. The minaret-builders are not idle either. Emboldened by the angered local elite, they will ultimately turn to international courts – such as the one that forbade the display of crosses in Italian schools – demanding that religious freedom be protected. Naturally, that bold and principled pronouncement will limit itself to Switzerland as representing Europe. So as to avoid insult, the decision will ignore Middle Eastern states or Taliban ruled areas.
2. A sign of the times. A friend has submitted a letter to the editor. Without mentioning the minarets, the note raises questions regarding demonstrators that protested the vote’s result. He was advised that, in the interest of his own safety and the careers of his children (one is married to a Muslim), he should desist. While the fears moving him seem to be exaggerated, the man wrote to the paper requesting that his submission not be published.
It is not conceivable that, had he supported the after-the-fact demonstrations or “minarets for all”, anyone would have discovered a risk implied by turning to the Editor. The case suggests two points to be made here. 1. Without security there is no freedom. 2. Fear cancels out liberty.
Posted by peiper
on 12/04/2009 at 05:44 AM
Filed Under: • Editorials • Government • History • Immigration • International • Media-Bias • Muslims • Politics •
• Comments (0)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • Monday - November 16, 2009
Citizenship lessons to teach children respect for worms AND insects too. Don’t step on bugs kids.
So I guess if during the season when they are active, if your kitchen or some other part of the house suddenly experiences an invasion of ants, the thing to do is either politely ask the ants to leave, or else carry them outside.
Or, you could threaten them with an ASBO. Ants might be smart enough to be frightened by that, but I don’t think spiders would buy it.
I think they’re gonna have to make a special case with regard to boys whose natural inclination might be to step on almost anything that crawls.
But not to worry. The way things are working out here now, maybe in another generation the engineers will have more boys thinking like girls with regard to crawlies and won’t go near em.
Citizenship lessons to teach children respect for wormsI love you, Mr Worm: By age seven children will have learnt not to stamp on ‘mini-beasts’
Marie Woolf, Whitehall Editor
The Times
Good citizenship is not just a question of respect for one’s fellow humans, it seems. The government has decreed that children should be taught not to hurt a fly.
New curriculum guidance says citizenship classes should pay due regard to the wellbeing of what it calls “mini-beasts”, including bees, ants and worms.
The classes are part of the “animals and us” section of the primary school citizenship curriculum. It says children can become “active citizens” by learning that “other living things have needs and they have responsibilities to meet them”.
By the age of seven pupils should have learnt that “humans have a responsibility to ensure the wellbeing of animals, including mini-beasts” and will have been told rules for “behaviour in areas where animals live”: for example, “not stamping on insects”.
Related LinksThe model lessons, which are not compulsory for schools, have been drawn up by the Department for Children, Schools and Families.
Children are also taught that it is against the law to leave dogs in cars on a hot day or to disturb fledglings in nests.
Rhiannon Pursall, a beetle expert at the Royal Entomological Society, welcomed the move. “A lot of children do not recognise insects as animals. They stamp on ants and torture spiders, but they wouldn’t kill a cat or a dog,” she said.
“The younger that children can learn about caring for insects the better. If they can grasp the idea that insects are just as important as animals, that would be fantastic.”
Andrew Rosindell, the Conservative animal welfare spokesman, said it was important that schools had a sense of proportion. “All creatures great and small have their place in the world, but I hope children learn that swatting a mosquito is not as serious as inflicting pain on a puppy,” he said.
A spokesman for the Qualifications and Curriculum Development Agency, which drew up the guidelines, said insects were included because it was “important that young people develop an awareness of the responsibilities that flow from human relationships with the natural world”.
It added: “The loss of individual organisms, however small, may have unforeseen consequences for a whole habitat.”
Posted by peiper
on 11/16/2009 at 01:02 PM
Filed Under: • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Daily Life • Government • Nanny State • Stoopid-People • UK •
• Comments (2)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • Thursday - November 12, 2009
THERE’S PATHETIC, AND THEN THERE’S PATHETICALLY SCHTUPID. THIS IS EVEN BEYOND THAT.
WHYADUCK. (The Marx Bros.)
Well now this is so beyond the fringe that I will make no comment on it. The story will, as you’ll see, speak for itself.
Here’s one comment however from the comments section to give you some idea of the article ahead.
How pathetically stupid can these council idiots get? The bread that was given to the ducks was eaten and therefore would not attract rats, only more ducks. Where was the evidence--sorry it was eaten by the ducks!
- John GROVES, Shropshire UK, 12/11/2009
Mother caught feeding ducks fined £75 for littering (but warden says her toddler son can as he’s too young for a ticket)
By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 12:34 PM on 12th November 2009A mother has been fined £75 for feeding ducks in a park with her toddler son.
Vanessa Kelly had taken 17-month-old Harry on his weekly visit to the to feed ducks when she was approached by a council warden.
She put away the bread as soon as the warden told her duck feeding was not allowed in the park, in Smethwick, Birmingham.
A mother has been fined £75 for littering after she was caught feeding the ducks with her toddler sonBut the warden pulled out a hand-held computer and issued her with a fine for littering.
Miss Kelly, who was in Smethwick Hall Park at 4pm on Tuesday, claims she was then told by the warden that her son could carry on throwing the bread ‘as he is too young to prosecute’.
She said: ‘I had Harry on my hip and a bag of bread in my hand and we were both throwing crumbs to the ducks as the warden approached.
‘I didn¹t think anything of it and certainly didn’t think we were doing anything wrong, which is why I was surprised when she stopped me.
‘She explained that it was banned because it could attract vermin, and I said it was fair enough and fastened the bag. I couldn¹t believe my eyes when she then pulled out a little computer and started to issue a ticket.
‘To be fined £75 for taking your child to feed the ducks is an absolute disgrace. I will be fighting this fine all the way.’
The 26-year-old, from Oldbury, Birmingham, said that although there was a sign in the park warning of the dangers of ‘overfeeding’ the birds there were no signs warning that people could be fined.
Sandwell Council today defended handing out the fine to Miss Kelly for dropping bread, claiming it attracts rats.
Miss Kelly has now made an official complaint to the authority.
Posted by peiper
on 11/12/2009 at 09:19 AM
Filed Under: • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Daily Life • Government • Health and Safety • Jack Booted Thugs • Stoopid-People • UK •
• Comments (3)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • Tuesday - November 10, 2009
Tired of reading how 1984 is here? Well, State to ‘spy’ on every phone call, email and web search
Picked up the morning paper from the floor today and the front page headline caught me cold. Kinda like being slapped in the face by a wet fish.
If not that then something close to it. I think this is scary and if passed will cause many to become a wee bit paranoid. Not the bad guys cos their moto is always, What? Me worry?
I don’t think I have to worry about where I’ve been on line but the idea of snoopers just isn’t comfortable. And as for emails. Well, and I only just thought of this now. I suppose I could end up on some radar somewhere due to things I’ve written to friends on various topics. I am NOT as you folks know, a pc person at all. But given the world we live in today, which is not at all a world I like and I doubt you do either, I suppose things I write in emails might raise some concerns in some ppl. Why hell, I’ve even had some BMEWSers come down on me like a ton of bricks so I can imagine what the authorities might think.
Oh well, at my age .... What? Me Worry? (hmmm maybe I shouldn’t have said that last one)
Every phone call, text message, email and website visit made by private citizens is to be stored for a year and will be available for monitoring by government bodies.
By Richard Edwards, Crime Correspondent
Published: 7:00AM GMT 10 Nov 2009All telecoms companies and internet service providers will be required by law to keep a record of every customer’s personal communications, showing who they have contacted, when and where, as well as the websites they have visited.
Despite widespread opposition to the increasing amount of surveillance in Britain, 653 public bodies will be given access to the information, including police, local councils, the Financial Services Authority, the ambulance service, fire authorities and even prison governors.
They will not require the permission of a judge or a magistrate to obtain the information, but simply the authorisation of a senior police officer or the equivalent of a deputy head of department at a local authority.
Ministers had originally wanted to store the information on a single government-run database, but chose not to because of privacy concerns.
However the Government announced yesterday it was pressing ahead with privately held “Big Brother” databases that opposition leaders said amounted to “state-spying” and a form of “covert surveillance” on the public.
It is doing so despite its own consultation showing that it has little public support.
The Home Office admitted that only one third of respondents to its six-month consultation on the issue supported its proposals, with 50 per cent fearing that the scheme lacked sufficient safeguards to protect the highly personal data from abuse.
The new law will increase the amount of personal data that can be obtained by officials through the controversial Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA), which is supposed to be used for fighting terrorism.
Although most private firms already hold details of every customer’s private calls and emails for their own business purposes, most only do so on an ad hoc basis and only for a period of several months.
The new rules, known as the Intercept Modernisation Programme, will not only force communications companies to keep their records for longer, but to expand the type of data they keep to include details of every website their customers visit, effectively registering every online click.
The powers that be tell us that,
Oh that is reassuring. I don’t believe it though. I really don’t.authorities will not be able to view the contents of these emails or phone calls, they can see the internet addresses, dates, times and identify recipients of calls.
Do you?
Posted by peiper
on 11/10/2009 at 05:45 AM
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Government • UK •
• Comments (6)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • Monday - November 02, 2009
OH POOR ME. I WORK SO HARD AND PUT IN SO MANY HOURS AND I’M NOT MAKING ENOUGH.
I doubt much if even the liberals here would have used his example, pc as they are. I’m particularly PO’d BIG TIME not just because this politician said something dumb. They manage to do that everyday no matter the party they belong to. What has me seeing red (again) is my previous and sad post on the death of that brave soldier. That poor fellow wasn’t making a quarter of what his representatives were making while CHEATING on their expenses.
The bastards were caught red handed and the maddening thing about so much of what they did is, much of it was legal because THEY MADE THE RULES! Some are refusing to pay back any money, some are paying back a portion, and many are crying the blues claiming they are being picked on.
Not all of them were cheating to be sure. Lets be very clear on that. But you should hear the excuses and arguments many are making in an attempt to mask what they did or else make what they did appear on the up and up. But this story today really set me off in light of that soldier’s death.
Maybe he should be sent to fight this war in that benighted place, on the same money the SSgt was making. Yeah. We can all see that, right?
It is NOT his making a comparison with the Holocaust that set me off to be honest. I don’t think he meant it the exact way it’s been taken. I think
I understand his theory, while I think he was pretty darn foolish to use that example. . No ... what bothers me so much is his complaint with regard to what he was paid as an MP and his gripe about hours worked and pay received being equal to “minimum wages.”
Tell that to the late Sgt., subject of my last post.
Cameron rounds on Tory MP for comparing expenses ‘witch-hunt’ with Nazi persecution of the Jews
By Claire Ellicott
02nd November 2009The MP who compared the clampdown on expenses with the Holocaust was ordered to say sorry today.
In an astonishing outburst, Tory MP David Wilshire said the “witch-hunt” against cheats was akin to the politics that “led to Hitler’s gas chambers”.
His remark was branded “offensive and unacceptable” by Tory leader David Cameron who told the Spelthorne MP to withdraw it.
Mr Wilshire paid a total of £105,000 from his expenses into Moorlands Research Services, a firm owned by him and his girlfriend Ann Palmer.
The MP used his office expenses to write to all his constituents in Spelthorne, Surrey, defending his claims.
The two-page letters were printed on Commons notepaper and sent using taxpayer-funded envelopes funded by his office expenses.
When one constituent wrote back, Mr Wilshire replied: ‘The witch hunt against MPs will undermine democracy.
‘It will weaken parliament, handing yet more power to governments. Branding a whole group of people undesirables led to Hitler’s gas chambers’.
The Commissioner for Standards is expected to investigate whether he broke Commons rules that forbid MPs from entering into arrangements that ‘may give rise to an accusation’ of profiting from public funds.
The MP’s latest controversial comments come less than a month after he infuriated David Cameron by comparing his salary to the minimum wage.
He provoked fury by complaining about his salary and long hours in a Westminster meeting with trainee journalists.
He told them: ‘I work 60 to 70 hours a week some weeks. When you look at what I earn, it comes dangerously close to working out as the minimum wage.’
Mr Wilshire paid £3,250 of his office allowances to his own firm over a period of three years.
He claimed that the money was used to pay other suppliers for posters and office products.
The arrangement was highly unusual. Most MPs submitted receipts for office costs directly from suppliers and claimed them back.
The constituency offices of senior Conservative MP David Wilshire in Staines, Surrey. Mr Wilshire said his company was used to pay ‘suppliers’ for office services such as printing
Moorlands Research Services was never registered with Companies House. Mr Wilshire said the firm closed down last year.
Before that, details of his involvement with the company had been included in his entry for the Regis-ter of Members’ Interests.
Mr Wilshire insisted he had done nothing wrong and had not personally profited, calling the claims against him ‘deeply hurtful and unjustified’.
He said the arrangement had been approved in writing by the House of Commons Fees Office, the body accused of nodding through questionable claims for hundreds of MPs.
btw .... That’s another thing that I have heard quite a bit of. The MPs saying when all is said and done, they aren’t making all that much considering the hours they work. OK. Maybe so. But is anyone holding a gun to their collective heads and forcing them to become MPs? Don’t think so.
Posted by peiper
on 11/02/2009 at 12:25 PM
Filed Under: • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Government • Corruption and Greed • UK •
• Comments (1)
•
Trackbacks (0) •
Permalink • Five Most Recent Trackbacks:
Amazing aerial images taken by daring Allied pilots on secret missions during WW 2
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Hookers and Booze
peiper over at Barking Moonbat EWS found some absolutely kickass aerial photos from WWII. I grabbed this one because I’m a big fan of the movie A Bridge Too Far.…
On: 11/23/09 03:14
Clear Thinking and Straight Talk
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at baldilocks
Let Them Fight or Bring Them Home Read all of it--and tell every American you know to do so. (Thanks to BMEWS) UPDATE: The author of the above blog is…
On: 10/02/09 08:29
A Box With Four Sides
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Macker's World
See, Afghanistan was worth saving. I can't say the same about Pocky-stawn, especially since it possesses nuclear weapons and no thanks to North Korea, China, and AQ Khan. So they…
On: 05/07/09 01:37
Display it with pride
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Macker's World
Take a look at the sidebar and click on the "DHS Certificate" shown. You'll see what Crappy Nappy thinks of those who believe in Limited Government and Constitutional Rights. Therefore,…
On: 04/19/09 10:25
A Bad Time To Call
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Conservatism Today
Drew at Barking Moonbat Early Warning System was in a foul mood as he took a call from a guy with the Republican party while he was doing his taxes…
On: 04/14/09 05:46
DISCLAIMER
THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.
Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:
It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.
- Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
- Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
- Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
- Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere
THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.
Copyright © 2004-2008 Domain Owner
Oh, and here's some kind of visitor flag counter thingy. Hey, all the cool blogs have one, so I should too. The Visitors Online thingy up at the top doesn't count anything, but it looks neat. It had better, since I paid actual money for it.
RSS 2.0 
Atom 
