How you say?  By citing John McCain!

Just mentioned in the debates.  Of course everyone knows that raising taxes generates revenue...duh!

This is not going to get McCain any help from conservatives...

From Michelle Malkin who is livebloggin the Dem Debate:

8:32pm Eastern. McManus asks about tax hikes. How will you counter “tax and spend liberal charge.” Obama says Republicans won’t be in a very good position to argue after spending billions. Obama takes on McCain’s Straight Talk Express and uses him as the best argument against conservative policies. Cites McCain’s vote against Bush tax cuts. (Applause).

And so it begins…the Dems using McCain to validate liberal policies.

A bit of short term memory over at Herr Doktors campaign HQ I guess:

"... Randy Gray was not forthcoming about his background, and he was in clear violation of the campaign's code of conduct for volunteers," it said. "No one affiliated with racist organizations would ever knowingly be allowed to have any role with the campaign. Dr. Paul's philosophy of freedom and individual liberty is the antithesis of racism." (Emphasis mine)

Read that again.  Done?  Now look at this:



OOOPS!

Lessee here - that's Herr Doktor on the left.  OH!  That's Don Black in the middle and Black's son on the right.

You know...Don Black - owner/operator of the white "nationalist" site Stormfront!

Oh, and Herr Doktor's campaign took money from the guy - $500.

And David Duke endorses Herr Doktor.

And did I mention the newsletters?

Did I mention this guy?

Be sure to read the link in the first paragraph for all the backstory.

Of course it's good that the RPC "sacked" the guy, but if he was only a volunteer, what does it matter?

Like they say, Herr Doktor doesn't believe in any of that racism stuff; but those racists sure believe in him.

(H/T: Hot Air)

The march towards full blown "alternative lifestyle" indoctrination is well under way in Great Britain.

Here are the tenets of the new British school policies when dealing with those issues in class/school.

From Jawa: (via The Daily Mail) (Follow up from yesterdays post here)

It states that children who call classmates "gay" should be treated the same as racists as part of a "zero tolerance" crackdown on the use of the word as an insult.

Teachers should avoid telling boys to "be a man" or accuse them of behaving like a "bunch of women".

This sort of rebuke "leads to bullying of those who do not conform to fixed ideas about gender", the guidance states.

At the same time, schools should encourage gay role models among staff, parents and governors.

Homosexual staff should be able to discuss their private lives after the consultation with the head teacher.

In advice to gay staff, it states: "School culture and ethos determines how open staff are about their private lives, and you should therefore seek advice and guidance from your head."

The Department for Children, Schools and Families commissioned Stonewall to write the guidance jointly with lobby group Education Action Challenging Homophobia.

It says that pupils aged four to seven should "understand that not all pupils have a mum and a dad" and learn about different family structures.

Advice to teachers of 11 to 14-year-olds states: "Schools should make efforts to talk inclusively about same-sex parents, for example, avoid assuming all pupils will have a "mum and dad".

"When schools discuss marriage, they may also discuss civil partnership and adoption rights for gay people."

In a section on engaging with parents, it asks schools: "Do you talk about 'parents' instead of assuming all pupils have 'mum or a dad'?"

The advice goes on to urge teachers to challenge every derogatory use of the word gay to avert homophobic attitudes.

Examples include "those trainers are so gay", "that pencil case is so gay" or "you're such a gay boy".

One primary teacher quoted in the guidance said: "We hear 'gay' as a term of abuse every single day. The children may not know exactly what it means, but they know they are using it as an insult. That's why we need to tackle it at this stage."

Controversy over the semantics of the word erupted two years ago when the BBC ruled that Radio One DJ Chris Moyles was not being offensive to homosexuals by using the word "gay" to mean "rubbish".

The advice says: "It is important for all staff to challenge pupils, explaining the consequences of using 'gay' in a derogatory way.

"It might be time-consuming at first, but a consistent 'zero-tolerance' approach to such language is central to achieving progress and an environment in which being gay is not thought of as being inferior."

It adds: "Schools need to make it clear to pupils that homophobic comments are as serious as racist comments, and homophobic incidents are as serious as other forms of bullying."

Teachers should use every curriculum subject to nip discriminatory attitudes in the bud.

English lessons for teenagers, for example, could focus on the emotions of the gay Italian soldier Carlo in Captain Corelli's Mandolin.

As Jawa says it seems now Homosexuality is now a race and "homophobia" is racism.

Heh.

Good stuff and uplifting as well.

Servicemembers nationwide looking for jobs in their off-duty hours need look no further than a troop-support group based in southern California.

"We help citizens and businesses to thank our current military, veterans, and their spouses by posting their job opportunities ... on our free military job posting and search Web site," said Mark Baird, president of Patriotic Hearts.

Every military base in the United States is listed on Patriotic Heart's "HirePatriots.com," Web site, which gives troops and employers across the country a way to connect in their own neighborhoods.

Thousands use the site to search for employment, Baird said, adding that HirePatriots.com also hosts job fairs to support those who serve and have served in the U.S. military and their family members.

Additionally, the Web site publishes an online magazine, which includes articles and advice for military job seekers, as well as its own "Top Patriotic Employers," Baird said.

"(Those are) businesses that are currently seeking to hire those with military experience," he said.

The group's effort to support the nation's men and women in uniform doesn't stop with helping them find employment. The group also offers assistance to military couples who might be experiencing marital issues. 

"Patriotic Hearts also provides romantic, all-expense paid, military marriage enrichment weekends with personal counseling sessions," Baird said.

"(The weekends also include) group meetings with renowned marriage speakers and authors to help current and veteran U.S. military married couples."

Patriotic Hearts is a new supporter of the America Supports You program, a Defense Department program connecting citizens and companies with servicemembers and their families serving at home and abroad. 

"Our hope is that our (affiliation with America Supports You) will strengthen our ability to continue serving those who serve us so well and honorably," Baird said.

By Samantha L. Quigley
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Jan. 30, 2008 

Related Sites:
Patriotic Hearts <http://www.patriotichearts.org>
America Supports You<http://www.americasupportsyou.mil/>

First, some misinformation:

Andrew Wetzler, director of the Endangered Species Project at the liberal Natural Resources Defense Council, testified that polar bears "stand on the brink of extinction."

"Threatened by a combination of factors ranging from toxic contamination to oil and gas pollution, but most importantly global warming, polar bears are seeing the sea-ice habitat on which they depend disappear at an alarming rate," he said.

"There is now overwhelming scientific agreement that sea-ice loss in the Arctic threatens polar bears with extinction," Wetzler added.

Now some stupidity from Senator Moron Barbara Boxer:

"It is a sad statement on the health of the planet when such a majestic species as the polar bear could be lost due to human activities," she added.

Boxer said that because of global warming, two-thirds of the polar bear population may be headed towards extinction by 2050.

Side Note:  Ummm, if only two thirds of a species is gone (leaving one third) how is that extinction exactly?  Senator Boxer?  Hmmm?

Extinction Definition: no longer in existence; "the extinction of a species".

I would call you stupid Senator, but you are a liberal and it would be redundant.

End side note.

And finally common sense and the endgame: (emphasis mine)

But Inhofe said "listing the bear as a threatened species is not about protecting the bear but about using the Endangered Species Act to achieve global warming policy that special interest groups can not otherwise achieve through the legislative process."

By listing the bear, he said, the scope of the law would allow for development to be blocked anywhere in the country if it could contribute to global warming.

"The bottom line is that the attempt to list the polar bear under the Endangered Species Act is not based on any current polar bear decline but is founded entirely on computer climate models and predictions that are fraught with uncertainties," he said. "Unfortunately, the bear is being used as a back door to climate change regulation."

Well said Senator Inhofe.  Well said.

(H/T:  CNSNews)

On American soil.  In California.  So says the city of Berkley. 

If your eyes are prone to exploding from your head, be warned.



From Michelle Malkin:

Members of the Berkeley City Council showed their opposition to a Marine Corps recruiting office in Downtown Berkeley last night.

Council members supported the two resolutions-one supporting anti-war protests and the other criticizing military recruitment practices-citing opposition to the war in Iraq, deceptive recruitment practices and the right to protest.

“By taking a stand against recruitment we are protecting the health and safety of our youth,” said PhoeBe sorgen, a member of the Berkeley Peace and Justice Commission. “I see the protest as taking a proud and courageous stand.”

Code Pink, a national anti-war grassroots organization, will be granted a parking spot for their regular Wednesday afternoon protests and will not need to apply for a sound permit for the next six months, under one resolution.

The other resolution more directly criticizes the presence of the center in Berkeley. The city manager was directed to send a letter to the U.S. Marine Corps saying they are “uninvited and unwelcome intruders” in the city.

In addition, the city attorney has been directed to investigate whether the city’s anti-discrimination laws can be enforced at the center, based on the military’s consideration of sexual orientation in hiring.

Marine recruiters did not return calls for comment yesterday.

The other initiative is forging ahead:

Local activists have proposed an initiative for the November 2008 elections that would require military recruiting centers to acquire a special use permit.

“The Marines ought to have better sense than to come here,” [Councilwoman Betty] Olds said.

I am not a Marine, I'm in the Air Force.  I do have some family members who were former Marines (one Uncle who died at Iwo Jima in WWII and won the Silver Star).  But these folks are my comrades in arms and this is absolutely disgraceful.

It is also an outrage!

Let your voice be heard!  Follow the link and give them a piece of your mind:

***
Here’s the Berkeley City Council page.

***

or "How to not let watching the Superbowl KILL YOU!"

Yep.  You read that right!

In the "are these people completely off-their-nut?" department, we are privy to a set of rules from some nanny-stater about how we can better enjoy, and SURVIVE, our Superbowl experience this year.

First your spew warning. 

...You may now continue.

From Fox News:

(emphasis mine) She said that means:

— Take medications as prescribed.
— Avoid tobacco smoke and fatty meals.
— Get plenty of sleep the night before.
— Don't over-exert yourself physically.
— If you drink alcohol, limit yourself to one drink for a woman and two for a man.
— Try "not to get too angry with the refs."

Now this idiot "Doctor" has obviously NEVER watched a football game, let alone a Superbowl in her entire life.  And she has also never, ever, know anyone who has watched a football game or Superbowl in their entire life.

There is nothing sacred anymore.  We can't even have a Superbowl without some interventionist trying to have us "be healthy."

I for one refuse to comply and will be consuming copious amounts of adult beverages and eating all sorts of not-so-good for me foodstuffs.

Lighten up already.

And if any Giants OR Patriots fans do fall over dead from heart attacks, would that be such a bad thing?  : )

Jihadis may be using these platforms as an intel gathering tool. 

If you know any military folks, pass it along.  (Good info for anyone who has these types of pages to keep in mind as well.)  This info is from the British Army, but the information could be applied to US (or any other Coalition) forces as well.

From an OPSEC (Operations Security/Unclassified) e-mail alert.

By Gordon Thomas

LONDON - In an unprecedented New Year “high priority” warning, MI5, Britain’s Security Service, has asked British troops to remove all personal details they posted over the Christmas period on the social networking websites Facebook, MySpace and Friends Reunited.

MI5 Internet analysts discovered al-Qaeda operatives had been monitoring the sites to gather details that could be used to launch terror attacks.

The MI5 analysts have seen that many thousands of servicemen and women had posted personal details on those websites and had included news of their careers, pictures of themselves in uniforms and details of past postings.

“Those details in the hands of al-Qaeda operatives offer invaluable information,” Evans warns.  “We now know al-Qaeda is using hundreds of false accounts to access the personal pages of many service personnel listed on regimental forums on the site,” states the MI5 document.

As an indication of the danger on New Year’s Eve, one MI5 analyst uncovered the names of 954 servicemen on the Royal Marines network on Facebook and another analyst found on MySpace no fewer than 127 names of Royal Anglican Regiment soldiers.

“Many of the soldiers gave their full names, dates of birth, home towns, names of family members, girlfriends or wives, the locations of where they had served and photos posing with colleagues and weapons.”

“That kind of detail,” warns the MI5 “is pure gold to terrorists. It can enable them to plot an attack as never before, and not only on targets in the field, but against the families of those soldiers.”

Last year, MI5 uncovered a plot to kidnap a British Muslim soldier who had recently returned from service abroad and to behead him on the Internet.

“The United Kingdom remains a target for al-Qaeda’s home-grown Islamist activity. Attacking soft targets causes maximum casualties and fear,” reveals the report.

Citing the attack on Glasgow Airport last summer, the document adds: “Most recent incidents of vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices were the work of educated men who knew how to use information intelligently.

“The truth is that in 2008 al-Qaeda will continue to recruit extremists to conduct suicide attacks both in Britain and abroad, as well as recruiting sympathizers prepared to assist by providing accommodation, transportation and funding,” concluded the warning from Jonathan Evans.

But even as he had penned it, there came the huge embarrassment of learning that the new head of the Joint Intelligence Committee – the head of all British intelligence who acts as the link between MI5, MI6, GCHQ and the government – had posted his intimate details on Facebook.

Far from hiding himself from the scrutiny of terrorists, Alex Allen, 56, had used the website to list his home phone number, address and names of family friends, and his hobbies: cycling, card games and sailing. On his Facebook entry, Allen, who took over Jan. 1 as head of JIC, revealed he is a fan of the 1970s American band the Grateful Dead and likes to windsurf on the Thames.

Hours after a call from Evans, the red-faced Allen had taken down his Facebook revelations. But almost certainly not before they had been noted by one of the Islamist terrorists Evans had warned about.

Teachers told not to assume children have heterosexual parents.

This AND McCain saying he's the "conservative leader" (with 36% of a vote)? 

Hell hath officially frozen over.

Possible spew alert at the end.  From The Daily Mail: (emphasis mine)

Teachers should not assume that their pupils have a "mum and dad" under guidance aimed at tackling anti-gay bullying in schools.

It says primary pupils as young as four should be familiarised with the idea of same-sex couples to help combat homophobic attitudes.

Teachers should attempt to avoid assumptions that pupils will have a conventional family background, it urges.

It goes on to suggest the word "parents" may be more appropriate than "mum and dad", particularly in letters and emails to the child's home.

When discussing marriage with secondary pupils, teachers should also educate pupils about civil partnerships and gay adoption rights.

The guidance - produced for the Government by gay rights group Stonewall - will be formally launched today by Schools Secretary Ed Balls.
 
After those last two words, I couldn't read anymore...

For more follow the link.

The Goracle fails in television, just as he does in his AGW alarmism (as well as politics).  Naturally the argument will be that "it isn't about the money it's about the message, the movement!"

Yeah.  A big brown steamy bowel movement...

BTW, if it isn't about the money, why take a $1M salary from a company which is almost bankrupt?  I thought corporatism was also evil?

Might as well kick him when he's down, it's Al Gore after all!

From Newsbusters: (via the Financial Times)

The company, whose website and television broadcasts feature stories about politics, technology and other subjects designed to appeal to younger viewers, said it would use the proceeds from its IPO to pay down debts and fund a business expansion, according to a prospectus filed on Monday.

Current said it took in more than $63m in revenues last year, an increase of 58 per cent from the year before, with most of the revenues coming from so-called “affiliate fees” paid by cable and satellite companies to carry Current’s television content. Advertising accounted for about $9.9m in sales last year.

Current, which was founded in 2002 but has yet to turn a profit, said its television broadcasts, which feature a combination of professional and user-generated content, reach more than 51m households in the US, UK and Ireland.

Current’s net loss last year was $9.7m, an increase over 2006, but less than the $14.2m loss it recorded in 2005.

Mr Gore, who founded Current in 2002 with Joel Hyatt, a lawyer and Democratic party supporter, earned just over $1m from the company last year.

So basically the Goracle wants the public to waste its money by continuing to pay the salary of an executive whose company hasn't made a dime in six years?

Of course 'greenies' and wacko enviro-nazis (and leftists) will pay. 

But I can't wait for this to go the way of Air America.

The Goracle can always blame his failure on global warming right?

The Ron Paulbot cries of languish echo throughout the land!

From Science:

Smoking a joint is equivalent to 20 cigarettes in terms of lung cancer risk, scientists in New Zealand have found, as they warned of an "epidemic" of lung cancers linked to cannabis.

Studies in the past have demonstrated that cannabis can cause cancer, but few have established a strong link between cannabis use and the actual incidence of lung cancer.

In an article published in the European Respiratory Journal, the scientists said cannabis could be expected to harm the airways more than tobacco as its smoke contained twice the level of carcinogens, such as polyaromatic hydrocarbons, compared with tobacco cigarettes.

The method of smoking also increases the risk, since joints are typically smoked without a proper filter and almost to the very tip, which increases the amount of smoke inhaled. The cannabis smoker inhales more deeply and for longer, facilitating the deposition of carcinogens in the airways.

"Cannabis smokers end up with five times more carbon monoxide in their bloodstream (than tobacco smokers)," team leader Richard Beasley, at the Medical Research Institute of New Zealand, said in a telephone interview.

"There are higher concentrations of carcinogens in cannabis smoke ... what is intriguing to us is there is so little work done on cannabis when there is so much done on tobacco."

"Dude.  You just don't nyknow whaut iss lahke, yuh nyknow?  Free yuh mannd dude."

Heh.

(H/T: Ace)

How many of you are tired of having to vote against someone as opposed to voting for your principles?

For all of us contemplating McCain.  Good stuff.

From Mychal Massie: (excerpted from WorldNetDaily)

I am a conservative, but I'm not an ideologue – nor is my vote governed by fear. That is to say, I will not vote for a Republican nominee to whose positions I am vehemently opposed and/or whom I do not trust, just to keep Obama or, more likely, Clinton out of the White House.

Fear is a powerful motivator that can be used to coerce well-intentioned persons, groups or even the entire nation into making incredibly poor decisions – and the Republican National Committee is not above using same. The idea that I must abandon my moral compass and vote for a candidate I could not find more objectionable – in order to shut out a liberal candidate who bears little or no substantive difference to the one I voted for – is offensive to me.

Voting, in my opinion, is one of the most important acts of citizenship an American can perform. The value of that act should not be taken lightly or under duress.

As my grandmother used to say, "No good is no good," to which I add, my voting for one "no good" over another "no good" doesn't make same less "no good." Thus, as I have been forthright in stating from the beginning, I plan to write in the name of my choice, devil be damned, if Democrats win in the meantime. I survived Carter and Clinton. I can endure whomever and whatever they come up with this time, including the certainty of their punitive tax increases.

I am well aware that many will disagree with me for an avalanche of reasons – that said, so be it. The battle lines must be drawn somewhere. I believe the future of our party depends on it. The party cannot continue in the state of decline it now experiences. Where are the substantive differences that set us apart during the Reagan years? How offensive it is to his memory and to the movement he set in place when we hear liberal Republicans and/or Republican charades claim to be in the image of Ronald Reagan.

And this from the Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler:

My principles are mine, they’ve remained unchanged through Hell and high water, and I’m not about to abandon them for they are what I am. Without them, I am nothing. They are not for sale to the highest bidder, much less are they to be discarded in the face of adversity. They are mine, and nobody can take them away from me. I can only lose them by throwing them away myself, and were I to do so, I would be worth less than the basest cur on the planet.

I stated pretty much the same thing last week here.

I restate my first sentence again:  how many of you are tired of being told we need to vote against someone as opposed to voting for your principles?

This is the mistake some on the right are making.  Conservatives are governed by their principles and will stay home to make a point.  Conservatives research the issues, we research the candidates, we look to the future and the long term consequences of our votes, etc.  We, unlike liberals, are not governed simply by a hatred of someone as the left hates Bush for example.  Now this may seem contradictory since we're "hating" McCain, but it is not just a unreasonable "dislike".  McCain has trouble with the conservative base precisely because of how he has treated the base and conservative principles.  That behavior has been explained numerous times and doesn't need to be reiterated here.  If you are a conservative, you know what I'm talking about.

Conservatives are tired of having our fear played upon.  Mr. Massie states in his post that he survived Carter as well as Clinton.  This is a fundamental point.  We will survive another leftist as well, though it will be extremely unpleasant.  But we are a principled lot and aren't unwilling to walk through the fire IF we can save our Party and it's fundamental principles.

For a majority of conservatives, McCain is going to have to walk through fire to get our votes - he has shown us time and again he is unwilling to do that for us.

THIS is why we feel the way we do.

(H/T: AIR)

How many of you have used the line "you Paul (insert descriptive here) need to move out of your parents basements..."

Just perusing the RPF seeing what kind of stuff is there after Pauls BIG 3% in Florida and ran across this thread:

Just got into another argument with my mother.

Now the implications of this title are LEGION right?!  : D

But the following thread response is true - I swear to God!

Here's the opening:

So tired of all of this, it's pretty draining.

The new issue of Time magazine came, big 'ole John McCain cover. I flipped through it, and made a comment about how it seemed every issue she got had pages and pages of articles on the candidates, except for Paul.

I then went on to say how blatantly obvious the MSM blackout of Ron is, and she angrily told me "Ron Paul's been in Time magazine, they're not ignoring him."

Needless to say, I had to leave the room.

Sorry, had to rant. It can be really tiresome, especially when it comes to your own family.

And here - the response:

From AlbermarleNC0003: (emphasis added is mine)

When I moved out of the basement, the arguments stopped. Now, we speak civilly on the phone twice a month.

Heh.

Audio.  It starts out innocently enough.  It goes and goes and goes.  You need to listen to the whole thing for the full effect.  It will take about 11 minutes to get to the meat.  Then Hold on.

This from Hot Air:

Now, lest anyone think that I’m advocating the current system, income tax and all, I’m not. I’m not a fan. But I don’t think Paul has the answers, and he comes off as a crotchety old man who is in over his head on every issue. He doesn’t even know who wrote his newsletter, or so he claims, so why should anyone believe him when he says what he says about taxes? Or foreign policy or anything else. If you’re not a racist yourself but you can’t manage to keep your personal newsletter from devolving into a racist cesspool, you can’t or won’t disavow the various miscreants who are publicly supporting you and you’re happy to accept donations on a day that your supporters chose to explicitly celebrate a long-dead terrorist, you ought not be handed the keys to the executive branch of the US government. Ever. Sorry. No number of discrete ideas that sound good on paper but would never survive Congress can overcome all that.

Sums it up pretty well I think.

He says that Romney laughing a bit at Ron Paul just lost his vote from him.  After his rant, I would submit Romney never had it to begin with.

He could have put some Trutheriness in there though to round out the crack-pot stew.

I'm glad he keeps getting banned.  Too bad he hasn't much respect for fellow bloggers.

He deserves the famed Rounds Out! Atomic Cannon of Justice!


To you dear Paulbot spammer.  You have your own blog set up somewhere else.

How about sticking too it?