About Me

Name: Catmman
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Mississippi: Restaurants can't serve Obese?

Now I'm all for getting those who are morbidly obese to stop shoving twinkies down their throats, but this is completely ridiculous.

From the Smoking Gun:

Mississippi legislators this week introduced a bill that would make it illegal for state-licensed restaurants to serve obese patrons.  The bill, which is likely dead on arrival, proposes that the state's Department of Health establish weight criteria after consultation with Mississippi's Council on Obesity.

For a copy of the bill and for more info, follow the link above.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Best CCR Cover Video EVAH!

This is absolutely awesome!  If you like CCR (Creedence Clearwater Revival), and the song "Looking Out My Back Door", you'll love this video.

Enjoy!

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Hiring Criminals/America Haters as Advisors

I thought the good Doktor and his supporters, the Paulbots, were striving for something different in Washington?  I've been told time and again by the Paulbots that Herr Doktor isn't like other politicians - he's a Doktor.

It seems he may have picked up some bad habits somewhere between not reading or writing those racist newsletters and delivering babies.  He's hired a scandal ridden bride taker/criminal as a policy advisor?  Herr Doktor has also made several other hires.  One a hate/blame America firster who also doesn't like Israel.

Go figure.

Anyway for some background, head over to the Lone Star Times.  First lets look at the "former CIA analyst" who shares Pauls view of the world (and Israel BTW.)

In other Ron Paul related news, former CIA officer Phillip Giraldi has joined the campaign as a policy adviser. Congratulations to them both.

Why would Paul want to listen to Giraldi?

What attracted Giraldi to the Paul camp?

While we await an official answer, here are some excerpts from
a column by Giraldi that appeared last June on “The Huffington Post,” long known as a bastion of Republican intellectual ferment.

Here's some food for thought about this guy: (emphasis added by Lone Star)

And then there is Iran, which is really about Israel because Iran does not actually threaten the United States.
The Iran agenda includes pre-emptive military action if necessary and the implicit deployment of tactical nuclear weapons to destroy Tehran’s alleged weapons program, both issues that should make even the most hardened politician pause. But all the leading candidates have unflinchingly completed their obligatory obeisance to Israel and its principal lobby AIPAC. All have sworn to defend Israel to the last dead American soldier if that should become necessary though not a single one has bothered to make a coherent argument why that should be so beyond the usual assertions about terrorism, which, incidentally, have themselves been carefully crafted by Israel and its lobby to justify the “special relationship.” The rest of the world sees it all somewhat differently. Israel is engaged in a brutal occupation that is clearly visible on satellite television nightly. Its repression of the Palestinians is enabled by the United States. If the candidates actually believe that the United States should go to war for Israel no matter what Israel does, perhaps they should say so unambiguously. Ignorance of the negative consequences of the U.S.’s writing of a blank check for Israel, which fuels much anti-American sentiment and terrorism, should not be acceptable.

Now remember, Herr Doktor gets away with having the racists and bigots support him because he "has never said any of those types of things" right?  But this guy is out in the open about his feelings about the US.  And Paul hired him to his campaign as an advisor.  And he would also most certainly have some position in Herr Doktors administration. 

Like minds as they say....

Now about this guy Doug Bandow.  This is what Herr Doktors campaign says about him:

Doug Bandow is a political writer and the Robert A. Taft Fellow with the American Conservative Defense Alliance. He has been widely published in leading newspapers and periodicals, and is the author of several books – including, most recently, Foreign Follies. Mr. Bandow served as a special assistant to President Ronald Reagan and as a senior policy analyst in the 1980 Reagan for President campaign.

This is what the first paragraph about this guy in Wikipedia says:

Douglas (Doug) Bandow
is a former columnist with Copley News Service and former senior fellow at the Cato Institute. He resigned in 2005 due a scandal involving payments for columns from lobbyist Jack Abramoff and wrote about it in the Los Angeles Times. He served as a Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan and as a Senior Policy Analyst in the 1980 Reagan for President campaign. He is also a columnist for Antiwar.com.

Just a thought, but is Antiwar.com a new conservative website?  Uh, no.  It's a blatantly anti-american swill site.  And this guy writes for it.  Did I mention that so does Herr Doktor?

As to the scandal?

Bandow resigned from Cato on December 15, 2005, after admitting he accepted payments from Abramoff — in return for publishing articles favorable to Abramoff's clients over a period of approximately ten years. He has referred to these activities as "a lapse of judgment," saying that he accepted payments for "between 12 and 24 articles" over a period of years. He stepped down after BusinessWeek Online contacted the Cato Institute to probe news of possible payments. He typically received on the order of $2000 per article.[

Now I wondered if this is the same guy, but the corresponding info from both Herr Doktors campaign and the Wiki entry (about working for Reagan and the timeframe) seem to point that it is.

So here we have Herr Doktor - "The Only Man Who can Save America" making campaign hires:

1.  A ex-CIA guy who dislikes Israel and thinks America (under the bidding of the Israel lobby) are the cause for all the evil and sorrow in the know universe.  Who writes for a leftist, bash america site (The Huffington Post). 

2.  A guy who took bribes for making Abramoff look good.  Over a period of ten years.  Who also thinks America is the problem.  Who writes for a blatantly anti-american site (Antiwar.com).

So Herr Doktors campaign is chock full of America haters, blame America firsters, and anti-war wackos and has more than it's share of (at the very least) borderline anti-semites.  On top of that I guess you could add a bit of good old fashioned cronyism (in the sense that all these guys just don't seem to care very much for the US) and would undoubtedly have positions as stated earlier in Herr Doktor's administration. 

Then throw in a dash of good old fashioned criminality and scandal and there you have it - a bunch of Washington insider anti-american pukes not fit to wipe a decent Americans butt.

I thought you Paulbots out there were supporting something different? 

Let's recap:  Herr Doktor has been exposed as a hypocrite with his stance on earmarks (he'll request them and spend the money before he votes against them); he cavorts with the blame America first crowd and 9/11 truthers (though he has "disavowed' any belief in trutherism, his continued carousing with Truthers like Alex Jones probably belie his true feelings) and he HAS stated he did think there were coverups by the government on the investigation BTW; racists and bigots like David Duke and Don black have endorsed him and donated money to his presidential campaign (which he refused to return - he can't control who sends him money ya know); he knew absolutely NOTHING and NEVER READ ANY of those racist, hate filled and bigoted newletters (not once in ten years) and has "no idea" who wrote anything in those same newsletters (though his family benefitted financially from those newsletters to the tune of over $900K a year); AND he has failed to win ANY state primary or caucus (though he DID win a lot of straw polls and spammed telephone and internet polls); AND has no chance of getting the nomination of the Republican party...

Oh, and Herr Doktors favorite word so far in any debate is EMPIRE!!!

WHEWWWW!  That's just the stuff I can remember off the top of my head! 

Of course when Paul finally crashes and burns, you Paulbots and America Haters can always go vote for Hilldog.  Seems you, Herr Doktors and his advisers are more in line with the lefts way of thinking anyway.

(HT's:  LGF, Lone Star Times)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Greatest LED Road Sign of All Time!

Video.  Somebody, somewhere, deserves  a billion, kajillion dollars and a big ole sloppy wet kiss for this one!

"Monica Lewinsky's ex-boyfriends wife for President?"  Just one of many.

You are going to LOVE IT!

"This is a huge LED sign belonging to Interstate AC Service in Nashville, TN.
This sign overlooks I-40 westbound as it approaches downtown Nashville."



(H/T: Jawa)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Britain Puts Gun in Mouth, Pulls Trigger

"Don't Teach Patriotism in Schools."

Great Britain throws in the towel.

Unfortunately, you will believe this is actually happening.

Duct tape required for the following readingWARNING: Your head may explode!

Patriotism should be avoided in school lessons because British history is “morally ambiguous”, a leading educational body recommends.

History and citizenship lessons should stick to the bare facts rather than encouraging loyalty to Britain when covering subjects such as the Second World War or the British Empire, the Institute of Education researchers said. Teachers should not instill pride in what they consider great moments of British history, as more shameful episodes could be downplayed or excluded. 

Three quarters of teachers felt obliged to tell students about the danger of patriotism. The survey suggested neither pupils nor teachers wanted patriotism endorsed by schools. 

The report criticises the current drive to use citizenship lessons as a way of promoting pride in being British and developing a sense of belonging. It said: “To love what is corrupt is itself corrupting, not least because it inclines us to ignore, forget, forgive or excuse the corruption. And there’s the rub for patriotism.

“Are countries really appropriate objects of love? Loving things can be bad for us, for example when the things we love are morally corrupt. Since all national histories are at best morally ambiguous, it’s an open question whether citizens should love their countries.”

(All above excerpted from the Times Online.)

From this:



To this it seems:



In Britain you can teach homosexual indoctrination - it's now part of the curriculum.  Multiculturalism is rampant (only when it come to Muslims however are they to be sensitive and understanding.)

But there must be no mention of patriotism, love of country, or the values which drove your nation to fight evil in the world - can't have that.

After seeing stuff like this, it's no wonder the jihadis think they can win.  All they have to do is wait around and watch us destroy ourselves from within.

(H/T: Hot Air)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Yes when it might win, No when it failed

W/Video.  How is that for a principled stance from the presumptive Republican frontrunner?

This is basically McCains stance on immigration "reform".  He has been pressed on this, most recently in the debate the other night, but let's really analyze what McCain said (or didn't say).

From Ace: (edited for language)

We thought he flip-flopped. He sure seemed to flip-flop from his Meet the Press "Straight Talk" that he would sign an amnesty were it presented to him.

But it's worse than that -- he evaded while sticking to his guns.

Now, when I heard this, I too thought he said he wouldn't vote in favor of his own comprehensive stuff were he president.

But listen to what he actually says: He only says he would not vote for it because it wouldn't come to a vote in the first place. He repeatedly refuses to answer the question, even put to him three times by two different questioners, simply asserting that it won't come to a vote.



Via Kausfiles, with a transcript, except that transcript is wrong.

Kausfiles reports McCain as saying "No, it would not" (meaning the bill wouldn't come to his desk) when in fact McCain says "No, I would not" sign it.

But he's right on the actual point, because McCain's "No, I would not" is immediately followed by the claim that he woudn't ever be in that position because it woudn't pass:

No, I would not, because we know what the situation is today. The people want the border secured first. And so to say that that would come to the floor of the Senate -- it won't. We went through various amendments which prevented that ever -- that proposal.

He's still saying he'd sign the f'ing thing if it comes to his desk!

So the little b'tard is telling us he "gets it" that we want border security first, and he promises to give that to us --
unless 60 Senators pass a version of McCain-Kennedy without border security first, in which case, f border security, he's signing it into law.

So his "promise" on "securing the borders" first isn't a promise at all -- it's a prediction only, a prediction that the American people and the Senate will force him to "build the gd fence" before he can sign an amnesty bill.

But if that changes -- if we lose more Republican votes in the Senate, which is likely -- and if they present him his bill without that border-security-first, he is telling us:
I will sign it, as I have made no promises about my own actions, only predictions about the likely actions of others.

There is more, much more analysis on this.  If you think this bill couldn't get to his desk, think again my friends.  Scroll down for the full from Ace.

Also a link on Brownback switching his vote from yes to no.

Remember this stuff folks.  All it could take is a couple of Republican losses in either or both houses and last years amnesty could sail through to a McCain signature.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive