Saturday, June 18, 2011
Remember the Tiger Mom noise? O'Rourke gives us the Irish Setter Dad.
Unless there's a lot more to this case, Judge Jose Longoria should be stripped of that robe. Immediately. For spanking? Jeez.
So Obama waives his own rule to appoint someone from a racist organization to a powerful position, and the racist organization has been getting LOTS of money because of it. Just effing wonderful.
A: This is not exactly a surprise, is it?
B: Really makes you feel safe when a hotel has a 'no guns allowed' policy, doesn't it?
C: Hotel safety systems and firefighters do their best: is that up to a bunch of terrorists deliberately trying to burn the place down?
So the EffingBI can't be bothered to actually, y'know, Investigate(like their name says) before sending the ninja-suited door-kickers in? Jeez.
But Hunter hadn't lived at that address for almost two years, while Adams and his family had been living there for more than a year, according to the lawsuit filed by Adams and 10 other family members.
Hunter was still at large at the end of the sweep, and court records show that she was living in Long Beach, Calif., at the time. She returned to Pittsburgh when she heard she was wanted by the police.
“Land… cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes. The provision of decent dwellings and healthy conditions for the people can only be achieved if land is used in the interests of society as a whole. Public control of land use is therefore indispensable….”
Governments must maintain full jurisdiction and exercise complete sovereignty over such land with a view to freely planning development of human settlements….
The founders of this country considered the right to property to be extremely important; transport any of them to now to read this, and they'd ask us why we haven't told this organization to go to hell? And were are our muskets, rifles, powder and ball?
Well, isn't this a fascinating statement from somebody on a SWAT team that recently killed a man guilty of nothing?
Hey, Obama has previously warned us that his plans would cause energy costs to skyrocket; what did those dumbass union reps think, he'd make some exception to cover their jobs and state?
And that's it. For now. Further bitching, yelling and "WTF?!?" later
Friday, June 17, 2011
Here's my formula to Finish the Fight:
1. Shoot until the threat is gone
2. Reload, ‘cuz a full gun is a happy gun
3. Move to cover
4. Scan to see if anyone else needs to be shot
5. Call for help
6. Verify incapacitation. Shoot him again if needed
7. Self-assess. If you see red fluid, you’ve been hit
8. Verify incapacitation again
The priority is shooting until he’s down. Everything else is an after-action. Moving to cover is third and calling for help is halfway down the list.
Lankford: Special Agent Dodson, let me ask you a series of questions, and this will be for several agents. Give me your best guess, and it's going to be just a guess on this. How many weapons do we have in the United States or in Mexico, that are out there, that are a result of "Fast and Furious," that we do not know where they are?
Dodson: Well sir, my best guess estimate at that, and remembering that Fast and Furious was one case, from one group, in one field division.
He went on with numbers, of course (2,500 that BATFE facilitated the trafficking of, with from 300 to 800 since recovered), but today let's look at how Special Agent Dodson qualifiied those numbers: "Fast and Furious was one case, from one group, in one field division." The implication is, of course, that there could be other "Operations Fast and Furious," doing their own "gunwalking."
"I am determined to defeat our enemies," Holder said in his address to the American Constitution Society. "But victory and security will not come easily. And they won’t come at all if we adhere to a rigid ideology, adopt a narrow methodology, or abandon our most effective terror-fighting weapon -- our Article Three [civilian] court system."
"Without civilian law enforcement and Article Three courts, our ability to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat terror plots; to secure actionable intelligence; to enlist international cooperation; and to punish those who have -- and who intend to -- harm Americans would be seriously damaged," Holder declared to considerable applause from the audience of about 700. "We must speak out. And we must set the record straight."
And left-wing lawyers- the kind who volunteer to defend terrorists and enemy combatants- cheer. Big surprise.
He actually seems to believe you can fight a war according to the niceties of civilian courts and law.
No kidding. As to the answer to that,
So let me just ask a question for your supposition, but I think it's a very well educated one. If you only look at the beginning and the end of the dot, isn't the only thing you've proven is that guns in America go to Mexico? Now could that be a political decision? Could that be a decision that basically, we just want to substantiate that guns in America go to Mexico--something we all knew, but would have considerable political impact, as Mexico began complaining about these, and they could say, "Well, yeah--we're even rolling up the straw purchasers." It wouldn't change the fact that Mexicans were dying at the behest of the United States, but wouldn't it ultimately meet a political goal?
Forcelli: I imagine, sir, that it's possible. In this instance, I think it's more just as I said earlier. A case agent had a bad idea; a group supervisor who failed to rein her in; an ASAC who failed to rein in--the chain of command, all the way up, failed.
Issa: But you'd agree that it doesn't meet any criminal goal--goal of prosecuting, the way it was handled?
Forcelli: No, because you can't show the chain of how those pieces of evidence went from Point A to Point B, which you'd need to prove at a trial.
Issa: I hope it was just a terrible mistake.
I've reached the point that I don't believe it was a mistake: they managed exactly what they wanted. Problem is, some people in BATFE with some integrity and honor blew the whistle.
Thursday, June 16, 2011
#1 When pouring or transferring materials, the quantity spilled is directly proportional to either it’s value, hazard, or the degree of difficulty in cleaning it up.
#2 Improve our national marital statistics: Stay out of SWMBO’S kitchen with boolit stuff.
#3 Box o’ Truth rule: Shooting stuff is fun.
#4 Just because others couldn’t do it doesn’t mean you will. Think about it.
#5 The mould will finally start dropping gems five minutes before suppertime.
#6 Don’t argue with stupid people, argue with interesting people who happen to be wrong.
#7 Properly stored ammo doesn't spoil, eat, or increase your rent. So stock up.
#8 You can't shoot straight wheel weights, they have to be made into boolits first.
#9 Hodgdon will discontinue the only powder that ever shot straight in your favorite rifle.
#10 Things go awry when you least expect it, and are particularly deficient in armor plate.
#11 Beware the loose nut behind someone else’s reloading press.
#12. If one accumulates more than 1,000 rifle or 2500 pistol cases of a given caliber, it becomes immediately necessary to purchase a gun chambered in that caliber, along with dies, moulds, sizers, top punches, powder, primers, membership to a public shooting center with a long enough rifle range, ad nauseum.
#13 Your best groups will be multiple, 10-shot ragged holes you made with no witnesses and won’t ever be able to duplicate again with the same gun and load, even when alone.
#14 No matter what you think now, you will never have enough gun stuff. Only the President does, he’s got the four long arms of the military, plus about 2500 ICBMs with the trigger in a suitcase.
Found over at Cast Boolits
In Operation Wide Receiver, Tucson agents allowed the sales of more than 500 firearms to known straw purchasers. Like Gunrunner/Fast and Furious, the operation apparently backfired.
Some firearms in Wide Receive were equipped with RFID tracking devices. In Wide Receiver, it seems the illegal purchasers seemed more than slightly knowledgeable of the way the ATF and how to take their aerial and electronic tracking procedures down.
Knowing the time aloft numbers for virtually all planes used in government surveillance, the buyers had a simple method of getting their purchases across the border undetected. They simply drove four-hour loops around the area.
As surveillance planes were forced to return to base for re-fueling, the smugglers simply turned and sprinted their cargo across the border.
The RFID tags also turned out to be problematic.
Rather than making large enough holes for the tags to be laid out inside weapons, agents force-fit them into the rifles.
That cramming caused the antennae to be folded, reducing the effective range of the tags. And an already short battery life (36-48 hours maximum) meant that should purchasers allow the firearms to sit, the tracking devices eliminated themselves.
This sounds like something out of "The Gang That Couldn't Shoot Straight" but it's not.
To date, Wide Receiver hasn't really amounted to much in the way of interdiction, enforcement or prosecution, despite the huge amounts of surveillance video and audio evidence collected and the millions of dollars expended.
To date, sources tell us the only charges filed in the ongoing investigation are for falsifying Form 4473s. Not much of a return on an investigation that consumed millions of dollars in man-hours and money and placed the lives of law-abiding firearms dealers and their families in jeopardy.
One guy calls it Gunrunner II; I don't doubt Issa and Grassley have been told about it.
Pic from Michelle Malkin
SiH says the CSGV should be ashamed at what they're doing; but that would require they have a sense of honor, or shame, or some integrity.
"So we've had three House Speakers convicted of felonies; why should we change anything?"
One indignant pol even took personal offense when a Herald reporter asked if the guilty verdict would change the culture at the State House.
“What has to be changed on Beacon Hill? Why would you say something like that?” snapped state Sen. Steven Tolman (D-Brighton).
“That’s outrageous. Come on. There are 199 people up here that work their hearts out — 200 people — every single day. I’m insulted,” Tolman said, correcting himself on the total number of legislators.
Yeah, no indication at all that something in the culture of the place needs to change, no sir!
Back to Gunwalker:
After more than two months of back-and-forth between DOJ officials and Issa’s staff, Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich told lawmakers that the department was cooperating and actively working to respond to the committee’s request.
Outraged, Issa held up a piece of white paper with a giant black box of entirely redacted text on it.
“You should be ashamed of yourself,” Issa said to Weich. “It doesn’t take so long if you don’t spend your life redacting it.
“The pages go on like this forever,” he said, referencing the blackened piece of paper. “You’ve given us black paper instead of white paper. You might as well have given us a ream still in its original binder. How dare you make an opening statement of cooperation.”
Because he's a slimy little bastard with no honor. Or sense of shame. My opinion, anyway.
So, if Israel becomes a major oil-producing state... oh, that's got real potential.
Yeah, socialized medicine is just great for older folks, isn't it?
Uncle pointed to some comparisons of self-defense insurance plans
Unrelated to news, took a ride last night and found myself reflecting(after I came out of that left/right curve) on an odd thing about motorcycles: countersteering. If you're not familiar, it means you steer the front wheel in the opposite direction of where you want to go.
If you're tooling down the street in a straight line and give the handlebars a nudge to the left, you will curve right; I once read the physics description of how it works, but I can't remember it(no, it did not give me a headache). Which means, for instance, that if you realize you're a little wide to complete this turn you don't cut the throttle; you actually- for a left curve- put a little more pressure to the right on the 'bars to tighten your turn(I also shifted my weight a bit more to the inside).
This is the kind of thing that took a while to get used to on this bike. You countersteer with any bike, but in fast curves on the Vulcan I mostly leaned a bit; on this bike you have to shift your weight. For most stuff it was described by son as 'kiss the mirror': you lean yourself into the rear-view mirror on the inside of the turn. If you don't, you will not turn as fast. Which can lead to unpleasant meetings with shoulders or retaining walls. The bike's great, just took a bit of getting used to.
Over at Watt's Up,
It is totally unacceptable that IPCC should have had a Greenpeace employee as a Lead Author of the critical Chapter 10, that the Greenpeace employee, as an IPCC Lead Author, should (like Michael Mann and Keith Briffa in comparable situations) have been responsible for assessing his own work and that, with such inadequate and non-independent ‘due diligence’, IPCC should have featured the Greenpeace scenario in its press release on renewables.
Everyone in IPCC WG3 should be terminated and, if the institution is to continue, it should be re-structured from scratch.
And this is about?
Steve McIntyre has uncovered a blunder on the part of Pachauri and the IPCC that is causing waves of doubt and calls for retooling on both sides of the debate. In a nutshell, the IPCC made yet another inflated claim that:
…80 percent of the world‘s energy supply could be met by renewables by mid-century…
Unfortunately, it has been revealed that this claim is similar to the Himalayan glacier melt by 2035 fiasco, with nothing independent to back it up. Worse, it isn’t the opinion of the IPCC per se, but rather that of Greenpeace. It gets worse.
And there are predictions of a big drop in solar activity. OK has now had blizzards two years running(almost a second this past winter, but we lucked out); I'm going to have to buy that snow shovel.
And with that, I leave you for now.
Couple of years back I went to the zoo one fine morning. I was walking past the African lion area- which has a glass-front area like that in the video- when a security guy on a bicycle rode past and said "Watch this!"
He rode along the front of the lion glass and one big female suddenly appeared around a rock, belly-crawled to the front and stared at him. He stopped by me and said the others usually ignored him, but that one would almost always come sneaking down to the glass or the mesh(on the north side) to watch him. Ever seen a cat getting ready to pounce on something moving? Upgrade that look to a 250-pound or so lion and you've got it; she wanted him, bad, and just stayed there, motionless and staring. Hell I know how strong that glass is and it still made me nervous.
So when I see a critter trying to eat a kid on the other side of the glass, and people laughing about it, it bothers me.
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
One of the wonderful bits:
A SWAT officer, Sgt. Bob Krygier, told officials of the sheriff's office who investigated the incident that the raid on Guerena's home was probing "possible drug running, home invasions and potential homicides."
He said "many guns" were found in the house, including the AR-15 that Guerena was holding, another rifle and a handgun. Body armor and a U.S. Border Patrol hat also were found, he said.
"He was well-armed, well armored," Krygier said.
But when asked if Guerena was wearing body armor at the time of his death, he said, "No. ... He basically had a pair of boxer briefs on and that was it."
"He had GUNS! He had BODY ARMOR!! Well, except for being in his underwear, but HE HAD IT!!!"
These miserable fuckers have already admitted they found NOTHING illegal in the house, so they keep throwing crap like this out.
* The first e-mail from March 10, 2010, to Operation Fast and Furious Group VII Leader David Voth indicates that the two most senior leaders in ATF, Acting Director Kenneth Melson, and Deputy Director Billy Hoover, were “being briefed weekly on” Operation Fast and Furious. The document shows that both Melson and Hoover were “keenly interested in case updates.”
* A second e-mail from March 12, 2010, shows that Deputy Assistant Director for Field Operations William McMahon was so excited about Fast and Furious that he received a special briefing on the program in Phoenix – scheduled for a mere 45 minutes after his plane landed.
* A third – and perhaps the most disturbing – e-mail from April 12, 2010, indicates that Acting Director Melson was very much in the weeds with Operation Fast and Furious. After a detailed briefing of the program by the ATF Phoenix Field Division, Acting Director Melson had a plethora of follow-up questions that required additional research to answer. As the document indicates, Mr. Melson was interested in the IP Address for hidden cameras located inside cooperating gun shops. With this information, Acting Director Melson was able to sit at his desk in Washington and – himself – watch a live feed of the straw buyers entering the gun stores to purchase dozens of AK-47 variants.
I can't remember, did Melson every tell Congress he didn't know about this, or 'didn't know the details'? If so, this is proof he lied.
And Holder claiming 'he just heard about it a couple of weeks ago' when he first testified?
The House Oversight Committee has released interviews with four ATF agents indicate that a top official in the Department of Justice may have lied to, or at the least misled, Congress on a controversial operation that put guns in the hands of Mexican drug cartels, one of which was used to kill a Border Patrol agent. Ronald Weich, an Assistant Attorney General under Eric Holder, assured Congress in writing that the ATF and Department of Justice “made every effort” seize all illegally-purchased weapons. However, the ATF agents testifed that the ATF and DoJ deliberately allowed hundreds of such weapons to cross the border as part of Operation Fast and Furious:
Dodson said he was told “the U.S. Attorney is on board, and it was Mr. [Emory] Hurley, and they say there is nothing illegal going on.”
There's no way, with this, Holder can pretend he never knew about this(at least not honestly); to claim he didn't when one of his Assistant AGs and the US Attorney knew...
Got a friend with an old .41 rimfire derringer; he'll freak, as the only ammo he has is the remaining ten or twelve rounds from a long-ago box. The kit with the dies is a bit expensive, but it would mean actually being able to shoot some of the old stuff.
Damn, there was a beautiful old .32 rimfire rifle at a show a while back...
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
Amuse yourself. Read the Pajamas article including the links, and then read the CNN article. The scale of journalist fraud they are promoting in service to the White House's gun control agenda is breathtaking.
And some further on this
Monday, June 13, 2011
The Kuwaiti female activist begins by insisting that "it's of course true" that "the prophet of Islam legitimized sex-slavery." She recounts how when she was in Mecca, Islam's holiest city, she asked various sheikhs and muftis (learned, authoritative Muslims) about the legality of sex-slavery according to Sharia: they all confirmed it to be perfectly legal; Kuwaiti ulema further pointed out that extra "virile" men—Western synonyms include "sex-crazed," "lecherous," "perverted"—would do well to purchase sex-slaves to sate their appetites without sinning.
Here's a particularly interesting excerpt from her taped speech on the rules governing sex-slaves:
A Muslim state must [first] attack a Christian state—sorry, I mean any non-Muslim state—and they [the women, the future sex-slaves] must be captives of the raid. Is this forbidden? Not at all; according to Islam, sex slaves are not at all forbidden. Quite the contrary, the rules regulating sex-slaves differ from those for free women [i.e., Muslim women]: the latter's body must be covered entirely, except for her face and hands, whereas the sex-slave is kept naked from the bellybutton on up—she is different from the free woman; the free woman has to be married properly to her husband, but the sex-slave—he just buys her and that's that.
She went on to offer concrete suggestions: "For example, in the Chechnyan war, surely there are female Russian captives. So go and buy those and sell them here in Kuwait; better that than have our men engage in forbidden sexual relations. I don't see any problem in this, no problem at all."I wonder if she'll be denounced as 'misinterpreting the words of Mo(bees pee upon him)?
Sunday, June 12, 2011
“He reported it to the police and they just said they couldn’t track anyone down and there were no witnesses,” said Ansar Ahmed Ullah, a local anti-extremism campaigner who has advised Mr Rahman. “But there is CCTV in that street and it is lined with shops and people.”
...Police also had CCTV images of a second unidentified Muslim youth posting the stickers at a local railway station, but refused to release the pictures for several weeks.
So in Britain you've got cameras everywhere, with the excuse/reason "It's for public safety, clearing crimes," etc. But they won't use the video if it's a PC attacker; "Screw the victims, the criminals might call us names."
Which means the radical types are using these "We must be seen as politically correct, no matter the cost" attitudes to negate any actual value to the constant surveillance, and to advance the creation of Londonistan. Wonderful, isn't it?
You deliberately let illegal gun sales go through.
You deliberately let(maybe assist) the bad guys in smuggling them to Mexico.
When they TURN UP AT CRIME SCENES you say you're using that data to build a case.
Really? ON WHO, you lying bastard? A cartel chief who's in MEXICO and they already know he's smuggling drugs and ordering murders? Do you actually think saying 'I'm from BATFE and I have a warrant for your arrest!' is going to be the magic phrase that puts him in jail? For real?
I’m not addicted to oil. I’m addicted to being able to drive into town on my own schedule. I’m addicted to being able to haul home a week’s worth of groceries with two little kids in tow without having to wait for the fucking bus with eighty pounds of filled plastic bags in my hands. (That’s disregarding the fact that I live out in the sticks, and the nearest bus stop is four miles away, which is one hell of a hike with the aforementioned two little kids and week’s worth of groceries.)
I don’t give a shit what kind of substance I have to put in the tank of the minivan to feed that particular addiction. I don’t care about oil. If my minivan ran on distilled cow piss, I’d fill up with distilled cow piss. If they ever come up with an electric minivan that goes the speed limit on the Interstate, accelerates to highway speeds in less time than a geologic epoch, and doesn’t need to be recharged every fifty miles with electricity that comes from a coal-powered plant anyway, I’ll gladly buy one of those and deep-six the old combustion engine.
Ah, but in Happy Unicorn Land you wouldn't be allowed to live out there(unless you're a gummint-approved organic(i.e. 'spreading the e. coli around' farmer); you'll be forced to wait for that Enviroweenie-Approved Public Transport or use a bicycle; and all the electricity will be coming from windmills and biomass(i.e. 'burning wood') and such truly royal methods of generation.
Or so they tell us.
While I agree that many meat eaters can be obnoxious, inconsiderate and self-righteous in celebration of their carnivorousness, there is an equally pernicious sentiment among vegetarians that needs to be called out: the false notion that a vegetarian or vegan diet is actually good for you. Like the meat eater who needs to acknowledge the harm they're meting out as a consequence of their dietary choices, the vegetarian needs to acknowledge the fact that their diet is far from ideal.
You'll notice he glosses completely over the fact that lots of vegetarians and vegans are so effing self-righteous about not eating meat that you can't stand to be in the same room with them; no, their only real fault is 'not acknowledging their diet isn't ideal'. This line, for instance:
A vegetarian's choice to avoid meat for ethical or environmental reasons is truly noble. They are willing to sacrifice their own health in order to mete out as little harm as possible. I bow down to these people in deep and profound respect.
I have yet to meet a vegetarian or vegan who even pretended they thought they were 'sacrificing their own health'; the ones I've known truly believed they had not only the morally-correct choice in food, but that it was wonderful for their health. Even when they were going downhill.
A while back daughter found this link and sent it to me: dedicated vegan who ran into real health problems and started eating meat. You want to know why I so dislike lots of vegans, and call bullshit on that 'sacrifice their own health' line above?
UPDATE: Thank you all for your comments, I never expected this post to get so much attention. However, I do not have the time nor the desire to continue moderating comments. Some of you have been amazingly supportive and have shared many thought provoking ideas, and I really appreciate that. Unfortunately, others have made threats against me and my family and that I cannot tolerate. So, thank you all very much for reading my post but I am going to be turning off the comments. I hope you can understand.
Yeah, True Believers don't like apostates, do they? 'Sacrificing their own health' my heat-rashed ass.
There is insufficient evidence to suggest that Det. Tisch was trying to mislead the judge involved. It does describe what appears to be a pattern of possibly drug-related activity, but that is not sufficient to establish probable cause. Det. Tisch does provide background information on how drug traffickers commonly operate, but that too does not establish probable cause. Det. Tisch does try to make those involved appear to be a criminal and suspicious as possible, but he does this by often leaving out inconvenient, even contradictory details such as the fact that Jose was arrested years earlier and the charges were dropped. I am still mystified why any judge would issue a warrant based on this affidavit unless he merely scanned it instead of reading it. If that was the case, it might appear to be competent.
If this is, in fact, a valid copy of the actual affidavit, Vanessa Guerena’s attorney is a happy man today.
If you're not mad as hell after the above, wait'll you get to the transcript of the 'interview' of Vanessa Guerena; my one excerpt from that:
NOTE: Det. Pruess has told her that she can’t get out of the room, and that she is not allowed to leave. This means that she is under arrest. Again, contrary to what people see on TV, if you don’t wish to speak with the police, you can refuse and leave at any time. If they don’t allow you to leave, you are under arrest. There is no other interpretation. The police have no authority to put you in a room and hang onto you—or to otherwise detain you--as long as they please unless they arrest you. He says that “by law” she’s not allowed to leave. That’s nonsense. He’s lying to her. He also says that he has to read her Miranda. As I’ve pointed out, there is no reason to read Miranda to anyone unless they are under arrest and you are asking them questions that you intend to use against them in court. The legal term is “custodial interrogation.” The police do not mirandize witnesses; it’s not necessary. Am I exaggerating? Did the detective misspeak? The transcript continues after Pruess read Miranda to her and says:
Disgusting. From beginning to end.
What Rep. Charles Rangel(Corrupt Dirtbag-NY) considers a defense for Weiner:
Weiner did pick up support from U.S. Rep. Charles Rangel, a New York Democrat who was censured by the House last year for ethics violations.
Rangel suggested that other members of Congress had done things more immoral than Weiner.
Rangel said Weiner "wasn't going with prostitutes. He wasn't going out with little boys."
Got that? "We've got worse people(including himself) here! At least he wasn't raping little boys!" is what Rangel considers a good defense.
And some of the racist idiocy coming out of our Department of Justice:
In a letter dated February 7, 2011, DOJ Senior Attorney Barbara Thawley informed the City of Dayton the DOJ rejected the written portion of the Dayton examination: “The United States has determined that the City’s proposed use of the written examination violates…the Civil Rights Act of 1964…because it has a statistically significant disparate impact upon African-American candidates…” The letter closed by threatening court action. A subsequent letter on February 17, 2011, suggests the written exam be used as a “pass-fail” screening device, which the DOJ described as a “compromise.”
The DOJ also objected to the use of a written test in general for firefighter applicants. “With regard to the writing portion for firefighter, it seems unusual to me. I have never seen a fire department give a writing test to entry level firefighter applicants. From what I know about the job, it seems very unlikely that an entry level firefighter would have to do much writing,” wrote Ms. Thawley. “All of our firefighters are either EMT or paramedics and do a lot of report writing,” responded Giselle S. Johnson, Secretary and Chief Examiner, Civil Service Board.
What the FUCK kind of idiots do we have running DoJ? I would submit that this also tells you something more about the 'affirmative action' assholes: they helped screw up the schools so you've got kids graduating without what used to be considered basic reading, writing and arithmetic skills, and then claim that a test isn't fair because the victims of the school destruction can't pass it.
So why does the Archbishop of Canterbury speak as if it was obvious that we should treat people who can work, but won’t, in the same way as we treat those who are truly in need?
I don’t mind bishops intervening in our national life. That’s what they are for. I like having them in the House of Lords to remind us of the foundations on which our country stands. But they are not there to act as reinforcements for the Liberal Democrats. They are there to remind us that we are at heart a Christian nation and people.
They should stand up for lifelong marriage, denounce the lax treatment of wrongdoers and the neglect of their victims, condemn public drunkenness, defend unborn babies against those who wish to kill them, stand in the way of stupid and unjust wars, and of selfish cruelty of all kinds. But they really have to get out of their heads the idea that the Welfare State must be unconditionally defended.
For it is the hard-working poor who pay for it, and who see their near neighbours living lives of shameless idleness on their money. And they also watch criminals profiting by their crimes, and getting away with it.
Romney keep making me want to ask "And the advantages of him over Obama are what, exactly?"
Hey, Mitt, you gun-loathing, socialized-medicine politician, look at this
Get the idea?
Logo from Chicago Boyz
Sounds like something that needs to be passed.