Jimmy Carter:
"Too many Jews" on Holocaust council
Former president also rejected Christian
historian because name sounded 'too Jewish'

TEL AVIV – Former President Jimmy Carter once complained there were "too many Jews" on the government's Holocaust Memorial Council, Monroe Freedman, the council's former executive director, told WND in an exclusive interview.

Freedman, who served on the council during Carter's term as president, also revealed a noted Holocaust scholar who was a Presbyterian Christian was rejected from the council's board by Carter's office because the scholar's name "sounded too Jewish."



He has gone truly mad.......



The First value is antisemitism?

I was not aware that hating Jews was an American value.

via-worldnetdaily

The state of our union


Some highlights of the speech.

This rite of custom brings us together at a defining hour – when decisions are hard and courage is tested. We enter the year 2007 with large endeavors underway, and others that are ours to begin. In all of this, much is asked of us. We must have the will to face difficult challenges and determined enemies – and the wisdom to face them together.

----------------------------------------------------

For all of us in this room, there is no higher responsibility than to protect the people of this country from danger. Five years have come and gone since we saw the scenes and felt the sorrow that terrorists can cause. We have had time to take stock of our situation. We have added many critical protections to guard the homeland. We know with certainty that the horrors of that September morning were just a glimpse of what the terrorists intend for us – unless we stop them.

--------------------------------------------------------

Our enemies are quite explicit about their intentions. They want to overthrow moderate governments, and establish safe havens from which to plan and carry out new attacks on our country. By killing and terrorizing Americans, they want to force our country to retreat from the world and abandon the cause of liberty. They would then be free to impose their will and spread their totalitarian ideology. Listen to this warning from the late terrorist Zarqawi: “We will sacrifice our blood and bodies to put an end to your dreams, and what is coming is even worse.” And Osama bin Laden declared: “Death is better than living on this Earth with the unbelievers among us.”

---------------------------------------------------------


This is not the fight we entered in Iraq, but it is the fight we are in. Every one of us wishes that this war were over and won. Yet it would not be like us to leave our promises unkept, our friends abandoned, and our own security at risk. Ladies and gentlemen: On this day, at this hour, it is still within our power to shape the outcome of this battle. So let us find our resolve, and turn events toward victory.

-----------------------------------------------------------

For America, this is a nightmare scenario. For the enemy, this is the objective. Chaos is their greatest ally in this struggle. And out of chaos in Iraq, would emerge an emboldened enemy with new safe havens... new recruits ... new resources ... and an even greater determination to harm America. To allow this to happen would be to ignore the lessons of September 11th and invite tragedy. And ladies and gentlemen, nothing is more important at this moment in our history than for America to succeed in the Middle East ... to succeed in Iraq ... and to spare the American people from this danger.

This is where matters stand tonight, in the here and now. I have spoken with many of you in person. I respect you and the arguments you have made. We went into this largely united – in our assumptions, and in our convictions. And whatever you voted for, you did not vote for failure. Our country is pursuing a new strategy in Iraq – and I ask you to give it a chance to work. And I ask you to support our troops in the field – and those on their way.

------------------------------------------------------

Global Warming Hype Update

A broad spectrum of ideas is the last thing Al Gore wants. He recently canceled an interview with Denmark’s largest newspaper Jyllands-Posten, apparently because the paper would also publish the views of global warming skeptic Bjorn Lomborg.

Avoiding contradictory views is a priority for Gore, who is standing on thinner ice than any polar bear. His grand scheme to remake human civilization would make the average person 30% poorer by 2100, and cost $553 TRILLION over the next century. People might start to wonder if it’s worth it, once they consider that Gore’s threatened 20-foot rise in sea level is exaggerated by a factor of 20, that his tale of global warming causing malaria in Nairobi is simply a lie, that only 2% of Antarctica has actually gotten warmer over the last 35 years, that global warming would save 10 times more lives than it would end in the UK, and that the computer models they use to invent scary scenarios could just as easily prove that the world is turning into a lump of Velveeta.

via- The wide awakes

In the past three-hundred fifty hours of the Democrats first one hundred hours, we have seen them scrap rules designed to prevent entrenched committee chairmen, rules designed to make it more difficult to raise taxes, place back in charge of committees men who caused the public outcries of the early nineties, and generally rub in the noses of the American people all those acts that caused the people to throw them out in 1994. One would not be surprised to soon learn about a check kiting scandal.

So it should come as no surprise that the Democrats are set to redo one of their worst acts -- not because it is bad per se, but because it so manifestly flies in the face of the clear meaning of the Constitution that we must wonder if the Democrats really even care about the Constitution. Under a proposal put forward by Majority Leader Hoyer, the Democrats are set to allow delegates from American territories to vote on legislation on the floor of the House.

To quote Article 1, Section 2 of the United States Constitution,

" The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several states "

This is Con Law 101 -- the word "state" has a peculiar and special meaning. Delegates from territories of the United States do not meet the qualifications to be a Representative.

The last time the Democrats tried this same maneuver, in 1993, the New York Times called it a "shameless political tyranny," citing the same section of the Constitution we just cited for why it is a bad idea.

Democrat Contradictions on the War in Iraq

By Congressman Jeb Hensarling


Earlier today, I called on Speaker Pelosi and Democrat leaders in Congress to clarify contradictions in regard to their position on the war in Iraq. Specifically, I was speaking about their resolution that states: “it is not in the national interest of the United States to deepen its military involvement in Iraq, particularly by escalating the United States military force presence in Iraq.”

Just last week, Speaker Pelosi told ABC News that Democrats will not cut off funding for America’s troops. Now, her Democrat majority is declaring that President Bush’s plan to move forward in Iraq is "not in the interests of the United States." How can the Democrat majority choose to fund something that they believe is against the interests of the United States? If they do not support America’s mission in Iraq and choose to attack it publicly, they should at least have the conviction to vote that way. Second, as the majority in Congress, they must offer a plan that they feel IS in the interest of the United States.

As the majority party, they control the votes and they must offer something more than just political criticism of the President. That is not to say that the President is above criticism - he is not. People have legitimate questions and concerns about our future in Iraq, and we must address them.

But right now, Speaker Pelosi and the Democrat majority in both chambers of Congress are telling families of American servicemen and women that "we don’t believe this will work, but we will send your children to Iraq anyway." I believe that military families deserve better, our troops deserve better, and frankly you deserve better.

There is no doubt that a lot of good people have different feelings about the proper way forward in Iraq. And there is no doubt that we all have the right to discuss those feelings and ideas. But to move forward, I think that Speaker Pelosi and the Democrat majority must explain these contradictions that send mixed messages not only to our nation, our military and our allies - but our enemies as well.

Global warming hoax update


Climate scientists feeling the heat
As public debate deals in absolutes, some experts fear predictions 'have created a monster'

Climate scientists might be expected to bask in the spotlight after their decades of toil. The general public now cares about greenhouse gases, and with a new Democratic-led Congress, federal action on climate change may be at hand.

Problem is, global warming may not have caused Hurricane Katrina, and last summer's heat waves were equaled and, in many cases, surpassed by heat in the 1930s.

In their efforts to capture the public's attention, then, have climate scientists oversold global warming? It's probably not a majority view, but a few climate scientists are beginning to question whether some dire predictions push the science too far.

"Some of us are wondering if we have created a monster," says Kevin Vranes, a climate scientist at the University of Colorado.

Vranes, who is not considered a global warming skeptic by his peers, came to this conclusion after attending an American Geophysical Union meeting last month. Vranes says he detected "tension" among scientists, notably because projections of the future climate carry uncertainties — a point that hasn't been fully communicated to the public.

The science of climate change often is expressed publicly in unambiguous terms.

For example, last summer, Ralph Cicerone, president of the National Academy of Sciences, told the U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce: "I think we understand the mechanisms of CO2 and climate better than we do of what causes lung cancer. ... In fact, it is fair to say that global warming may be the most carefully and fully studied scientific topic in human history."

Vranes says, "When I hear things like that, I go crazy."

via-Houston Chronicle

"I'm in, and I'm in to win,"

Bill sure looks thrilled about it!

It's all Bush's fault!

Thanks mostly to political environment, we’ve all been mired in a debate over whether Iraq is in a state of civil war or not. What should be a cold assessment of truth on the ground in Iraq has, like every single aspect of the war, become politicized. If you describe the situation in Iraq as a “civil war,” it’s taken as an implied or direct criticism of President Bush more than your opinion of the actual state of play in Iraq. If you resist calling it a “civil war,” you’re usually seen as an apologist for the Bush administration and its policies.

Why everything has to revolve around Bush is a mystery to me. Making everything about him trivializes the war and personalizes it to the point that real policy debate becomes impossible. It makes our politics petty and hinders our ability to see reality for what it is and learn to adjust to it. It’s childish, but it’s where we are as a country.

read on here- HotAir

So much for the new tone!

They are so bitter and hateful.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- In a critique the White House labeled as "poisonous," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi charged Friday that President Bush is wading too deeply into Iraq and said it should not be "an obligation of the American people in perpetuity."

Pelosi said Bush "has dug a hole so deep he can't even see the light on this. It's a tragedy. It's a stark blunder."

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino retorted that Pelosi's comments were "poisonous," referring to the portion of Pelosi's statement that asserted Bush is rushing new troops there and betting that Congress won't cut off funds once they're in battle.

"It's certainly not in keeping with the bipartisan spirit and civility that the Democrats pledged and that we looked forward to," Perino said. "Speaker Pelosi was arguing in essence that the president is putting young men and women in harm's way for tactical political reasons. She's questioning his motivations rather than questioning his policies."

Have they ever even read the constitution?

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Democratic leaders in Congress lobbed a warning shot Friday at the White House not to launch an attack against Iran without first seeking approval from lawmakers.

"The president does not have the authority to launch military action in Iran without first seeking congressional authorization," Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., told the National Press Club.

I believe in the constitution. I believe that our founding fathers knew what they were doing.
I do not believe in an evolving "living" constitution.
The president is the commander in chief.
The founding fathers knew that you could not conduct foriegn policy and make decisions about war by committee.
The Democrats treat the constitution like a list of suggestions.
THe constitution is not a suicide pact and Even Bush is throwing it out the window.
THe judiciary has no power when it comes to intercepting enemy communications during wartime. The 4th admendment has nothing to do with the conduct of the president during wartime.

The Great Global Warming Hoax Update

"I've always loved self-described experts. A person named Dr. Heidi Cullen that apparently hauls in a paycheck from cable TV's the 'Weather Channel' caused quite a stir by suggesting that any meteorologist that disagrees with her personal stance on global warming should be stripped by the American Meteorological Society of their Seal of Approval. "

via-The National Ledger

This is the left taking another jackbooted step toward fascism.
Anyone who disagrees with them must be muzzled, banned, arrested, impeached and made fun of. Al Gore refuses to appear with any scientist who disagrees with him. they cannot debate the issue because they have huge holes (bigger than the one in the ozone which is getting smaller!) in their argument. And now Nancy Pelosi is going to form another committee to look like they actually care.

Must-watch dispatches on UK Mosques...

If you think that the war against the west is something
that Bush invented or caused, this should open your eyes.

This investigation into Britain's mosques, by Channel 4's respected Dispatches programme,has revealed worrying evidence of just how rife Islamic extremism is among Muslim preachers.

The undercover TV inquiry, conducted over ten months, reveals some religious clerics urging their congregations to start preparing for jihad (holy war) against infidels or non-Muslims. Another is caught on camera telling families to hit their daughters for not covering their heads with the veil or hijab.

via-conservative blog therapy

“I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.’... I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character... And if America is to be a great nation this must become true.”

—Martin Luther King, Jr.

Historian Shelby Steele observes, “There is an awful lot of conservative sentiment in black America, but at the moment, the party line is ruthlessly enforced.” Indeed, those who followed Martin Luther King when he was speaking of freedom, like Jesse Jackson, tolerate no dissension from their liberal ranks now. They have abandoned King’s dream, and aligned themselves with political and social agendas obsessed with color at the expense of character.

Black conservatives of national stature, like Clarence Thomas, Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powel, Ward Connerly, Michael Steele, Jesse Lee Peterson, Alan Keyes, Don Scoggins, Alvin Williams, Ken Blackwell, Thomas Sowell, Star Parker and Walter Williams are routinely castigated by Jackson, et al., as “Uncle Toms” and “puppets.” Yet these are the men and women following the call of King.

Federal deficit drops like a rock!

I thought Bush's tax cut would increase the deficit?
NOT!
Just like when Reagan did it the revenues increase when taxes are cut.
I just do not understand why the Dems cannot grasp this basic economic fact.
We are still increasing spending at an alarming rate but at least the revenues are increasing faster than they can spend it.
So what does Pelosi and her gang suggest?
Thats right, reverse the tax cuts that are fueling the increase in revenues!

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The federal deficit has improved significantly in the first three months of the new budget year, helped by a continued surge in tax revenues.

In its monthly budget report, the Treasury Department said Friday that the deficit from October through December totaled $80.4 billion, the smallest imbalance for the first three months of a budget year since The budget year ends Sept. 30.

Tax collections are running 8.2 percent higher than a year ago while government spending is up by just 0.7 percent from a year ago. Last year's spending totals were boosted by significant payments to help the victims of the Gulf Coast hurricanes.

In defense of a brave man.

The unreason of his detractors.

A must read. We can learn alot from history. Unlike Ted Kennedy who can only see Vietnam and defeat this essay actually looks at a useful comparison in history.
Instead of figuring out how to lose we need to be looking at ways to win.
However hard it may be.


Josh Trevino, founder and former Director here, has written an elegant article assaying what it might actually take, in his view,

to pacify Iraq. It is obvious that Josh has given serious, informed and analytic thought to the matter, and his conclusion is a grim and portentous one indeed. He thinks it would take an effort of the complexity, determination, and ruthlessness as great as that undertaken against the Boers by the British at the turn of the 20th century. This consummate act of imperialism, requiring all the above qualities in abundance, succeeded in, as Josh puts it, “slowly ground[ing] into submission” an insurgency of guerillas.

Josh’s essay (or at least the segment dealing with the Boer War, for there is much more to it) has an unmistakably clinical edge to it. It is, in the older parlance, an effort of “scientific” reason. As such, it is not averse to making shocking discoveries. It aims at an answer approaching the character of “objective”: what would it actually take to put down a guerilla war waged among civilians?



via-redstate

The face of evil?

The left thinks that the president is the focus of evil in the world.
Does this look like an evil man?

Tears run from the eyes of U.S. President George W. Bush during a ceremony in honor of Medal of Honor winner Marine Cpl. Jason Dunham in the East room of the White House in Washington, January 11, 2007. Cpl. Dunham was killed when he jumped on a grenade to save fellow members of his Marine patrol while serving in Iraq. REUTERS/Jim Bourg (UNITED STATES)

Straw Poll

The Way Forward

Very presidential.
Bush layed out what needs to be done,
Like when I tell my son he has to clean his room.
The response from the left is the same reaction I get from my 9 year old.
"It's too hard!"
They whine and moan and stomp their feet.
They say we should leave.
Leaving Iraq = failure.

"Failure in Iraq would be a disaster for the United States."

"Fellow citizens: The year ahead will demand more patience, sacrifice, and resolve. It can be tempting to think that America can put aside the burdens of freedom. Yet times of testing reveal the character of a Nation. And throughout our history, Americans have always defied the pessimists and seen our faith in freedom redeemed. Now America is engaged in a new struggle that will set the course for a new century. We can and we will prevail.

We go forward with trust that the Author of Liberty will guide us through these trying hours. Thank you and good night."

read the whole speech here via-Drudge


Dick “US Troops Are Nazis” Durbin is speaking now, and he's making an impassioned address to give Iraq back to the Iraqis. He's doing a good job in delivering the speech, but he is avoiding the question of what happens when we leave. He argues on one hand that the Iraqis are in the middle of a "civil war", but then says that the Iraqis will suddenly unite to govern themselves when we leave. That implies that the only dispute in Iraq is the presence of American troops, a ludicrous suggestion.

Headline



# It is an extremely ineffective anti-poverty measure. It does not help the poor, low-income workers. Most minimum wage workers do not need government assistance. Less than one in five live below the poverty line, and the average family income of a minimum wage earner is almost $50,000 a year. The majority of minimum wage workers are between the ages of 16 and 24, and over three-fifths work part time.

# Many will lose their jobs because as it gets more become more expensive to hire workers, companies hire fewer of them. The bulk of research on the minimum wage confirms that the minimum wage costs jobs. Some workers may get a raise while others lose everything.

# Those most likely to lose their jobs are the especially vulnerable workers that the increase is intended to help, because a higher minimum wage makes hiring unskilled workers particularly unattractive to businesses. Employers will not hire low-skilled, inexperienced workers for $7.25 an hour when they can hire more-skilled and experienced workers at the same rate. The minimum wage puts the workers who most need to gain experience and skills at a disadvantage.

# Research shows that higher minimum wages do not reduce poverty rates or improve the lives of low-income workers -- low wages are not a primary cause of poverty. Most poor Americans do not work for the minimum wage -- most poor Americans do not work at all, for any wage. Over three-fifths of individuals below the poverty line did not work during 2005, while only 11 percent worked full time, year-round. Families are not poor because they earn low wages but because they do not have full-time jobs. If at least one parent in every poor household worked full-time year round, the child poverty rate in the United States would plummet by over 70 percent.

This is just one of Madame Pelosi’s proposals. The rest are just as badly thought-out and will in every case do more harm than good. To get an idea of just how foolishly demagogic and dangerous they are, take a look at Heritage’s monumental study “The 100-Hour Agenda: The New Congressional Majority’s Uneven Proposals. It’s all there.

Impeach on the beach

The anti war crowd is so lovably cooky!
And they have no idea just how silly they are.






















A blogger named Zombie (who infiltrates these nutjobs has a great
photo essay about the whole event.
See it here



They even started to spontaneously were tinfoil on their heads!


via- zombietime