Their constituents:
Pretty soon they won't plant anything at all.
Posted on 01/27/2008 6:57:51 AM PST by Mo1
Liberalism is a mental disease........
:-)
With the IQ of an organic vegetable.
I am suspect of that rumor stopping, Ma make 'em stop talkin bout me website his campaign has set up. I think it has been set up to ward off some specific truths that his handlers fear might come to light.
I hate the mean-spirited and racist aspect he and that angry wife of his have brought to this election. Frankly, it seems to me that it is Obama who keeps injecting race in the campaign. In fact, he seems to be doing everything possible to make race a factor. Hoping to be judged (elected) by the color of his skin not the content of his character (or the lack thereof). The exact opposite of the world MLK dreamed about. Race is Obama's victim card.
Lastly, I love this recent Dennis Miller quote about Obama: ‘’It’s not the color of his skin that concerns me, it’s the thinness of it.’’
I agree. Slow but steady. Drip, drip, drip.
.
Bush made the world a safer place
We may jeer him and tell him to go home, but America's allies continue to benefit from some of George Bush's decisions
Oliver Kamm guardian.co.uk, Tuesday June 17 2008Jimmy Carter was cheered when he visited Newcastle with Jim Callaghan. Bill Clinton was lauded in Northern Ireland. But it is more usual, at least with more consequential holders of the office, for American presidents to be told by European demonstrators to go home.
The postwar history of our continent would be different and less benign if the United States had heeded that message. His office, and the system of collective security from which we benefit, would be justification enough to welcome President Bush's visit to London this week. But there is an additional reason peculiar to the Bush presidency. For all Bush's verbal infelicity, diplomatic brusqueness, negligence in planning for post-Saddam Iraq, and insouciance regarding standards of due process when prosecuting the war on terror, the world is a safer place for the influence he has exercised.
When Bush ran for president in 2000 he was an isolationist advocate of scaling back America's overseas commitments. But after 9/11, he was right in not interpreting the attack as confirmation that America was stirring up trouble for itself. The theocratic barbarism responsible for the attack on the Twin Towers was driven not by what America and its allies had done, but by what we represented. In the words of Osama bin Laden, illegitimately appropriating for himself the mantel of Islam, "every Muslim, the minute he can start differentiating, carries hate toward Americans, Jew, and Christians".
The most fundamental decision in western security policy in the past seven years has not been the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. It has been the recognition that the most voluble adversaries of western society are not merely a criminal subculture, and still less an incipient liberation movement. Rather, they are a reactionary, millenarian and atavistic force with whom accommodation is impossible as well as intensely undesirable.
The grand strategy pursued by the US under Bush has overestimated the plasticity of the international order, but it has got one big thing right. There is an integral connection between the terrorism that targets western societies and the autocratic states in which Islamist fanaticism is incubated. Bush is culpable for much that went wrong after the overthrow of Saddam, but the outlook for Iraq has changed fundamentally owing to his decision to appoint General David Petraeus and pursue a confrontational strategy with al-Qaida in Iraq.
Bush was wrong, in his 2002 state of the union speech, to speak of an "axis of evil" connecting Saddam, Iran and North Korea – not because he overstated these actors' malevolence but because they were not a homogeneous threat. Two of them remain potent and unresolved problems. But little can be accomplished in restraining North Korea's bellicosity without the active support of China, and at least the Iranian regime has faced a united international front in constraining its nuclear ambitions. Whoever succeeds Bush as president will benefit from some decisions well conceived if often badly executed. So will America's allies.
and it is really great.
$4 gas doesn't need to be a drip.........it needs to be said rather loudly. You want $6 gas? Then vote Democrat.
I agree, Annie’s was right on point. The most remarkable thing about the article I posted yesterday is that it was in the Guardian.
Yep, $4 gas is a drip that echos loudly. Of course, Obama says the problem isn’t really $4 gas but that it got there so quickly. He really is a nitwit.
SINCE DEMOCRATS TOOK THE MAJORITY:$1.75 Per Gallon IncreaseWhen the Democrats took over Congress on January 4, 2007, the average price of regular gasoline was $2.33 per gallon. (“Retail Gasoline Historical Prices: Data 3: Regular All Areas Formulations,” Department Of Energy, Accessed 11/28/07)
Hi there, sorry to have run away, but my daughter called just as I hit post and we talked for a long time. I, unfortunately, have to run again, I’ll try to get on later this evening. Hope you are well down there.
Fuel in Europe has always cost multiples of what ours cost.
U.S. politicians are finally catching on that it’s a cash cow. IMHO get used to it.
Alwyas good to see you :) Yes, I should be around this evening. Things have sorta slowed down and I have a little more free time now. Its sweltering down here this week. Last night at 8:15 it was still 90 with a heat index of 96.
IMPERIAL LIQUID MEASURE
1 U.S. gallon = 0.833 Imperial gallon
1 U.S. gallon = 3.785 liters
1 Imperial gallon = 1.201 U.S. gallons
1 Imperial gallon = 4.546 liters
1 liter = 0.264 U.S. gallon
Still, just because Brits and Europeans pay sky high taxes on every drop of gas they buy doesn't mean we have to follow suit.
Energy Guzzled by Al Gore’s Home in Past Year Could Power 232 U.S. Homes for a Month
Gore’s personal electricity consumption up 10%, despite “energy-efficient” home renovationsNASHVILLE - In the year since Al Gore took steps to make his home more energy-efficient, the former Vice President’s home energy use surged more than 10%, according to the Tennessee Center for Policy Research.
“A man’s commitment to his beliefs is best measured by what he does behind the closed doors of his own home,” said Drew Johnson, President of the Tennessee Center for Policy Research. “Al Gore is a hypocrite and a fraud when it comes to his commitment to the environment, judging by his home energy consumption.”
In the past year, Gore’s home burned through 213,210 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity, enough to power 232 average American households for a month.
In February 2007, An Inconvenient Truth, a film based on a climate change speech developed by Gore, won an Academy Award for best documentary feature. The next day, the Tennessee Center for Policy Research uncovered that Gore’s Nashville home guzzled 20 times more electricity than the average American household.
After the Tennessee Center for Policy Research exposed Gore’s massive home energy use, the former Vice President scurried to make his home more energy-efficient. Despite adding solar panels, installing a geothermal system, replacing existing light bulbs with more efficient models, and overhauling the home’s windows and ductwork, Gore now consumes more electricity than before the “green” overhaul.
Since taking steps to make his home more environmentally-friendly last June, Gore devours an average of 17,768 kWh per month –1,638 kWh more energy per month than before the renovations – at a cost of $16,533. By comparison, the average American household consumes 11,040 kWh in an entire year, according to the Energy Information Administration.
In the wake of becoming the most well-known global warming alarmist, Gore won an Oscar, a Grammy and the Nobel Peace Prize. In addition, Gore saw his personal wealth increase by an estimated $100 million thanks largely to speaking fees and investments related to global warming hysteria.
“Actions speak louder than words, and Gore’s actions prove that he views climate change not as a serious problem, but as a money-making opportunity,” Johnson said. “Gore is exploiting the public’s concern about the environment to line his pockets and enhance his profile.”
The Tennessee Center for Policy Research, a Nashville-based free market think tank and watchdog organization, obtained information about Gore’s home energy use through a public records request to the Nashville Electric Service.
The Tennessee Center for Policy Research is an independent, nonprofit and nonpartisan research organization committed to achieving a freer, more prosperous Tennessee through the ideas of liberty. Visit TCPR online at: www.tennesseepolicy.org.
The original part of the Gore's little cottage is seen in the lower part of the photo. It resembled the White House and sits in the middle of a republican enclave called Belle Meade. Not long after the 2000 election, Tipper saw the house, stopped and went to the front door, she introduced herself and asked to see the house..... The House Wasn't On The Market. The people were stunned but what do you do, the wife of the former VP was standing on their doorstep asking to come in and look around (Can you imagine?) They showed her around, she asked if they were intereted in selling it, they said no. She left, called them later that day or the next, said if you were going to put your house on the market, what would be the asking price, they threw out a figure that was nearly double what they'd paid for it about 2 years earlier. She called back and offered them the price they quoted. Since then the Gores have added on rooms at the rear of the house, a pool and made numerous other improvements.
I didn’t think I’ve have to mention that I knew what I was talking about!
HUH?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.