Election determines fate of nation
- Thread starter indy_85stariones
- Start date
No! Not at all. I'm not a Yale-y like Kerry and Bush, or a Harvard Business School MBA graudate from Massachusetts like Bush was. My point was on the same hypocracy. Sending out "professor" when it's really "assisant professor" is the same bulls#$@% pretentions those guys use to prop up their supremacy. (It's like my buddy who works at the navy supply school....they try to feed him a line about what's obviously going on in this Iraq mess.)
Did you know that emergency services have been cut? Where are the increased port container inspections, what are we now inspecting 1 in 20 or something ridiculous?
Emergency Services have NOT been cut, the typical response from liberals. Homeland Security has been increased by 14% over last years budget, a cut from the "proposed" pork budget. My son-in-law is in the Coast Guard and they are actively inspecting port containers and ships entering the ports.
-- Homeland Security Funding Cuts by President Bush Fail to Fund Fire Fighter and First Responder Needs http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=27324
A no source link, most likely from the firefighters liberal union.
February 6, 2004 - After ignoring the needs and contributions of the fire service in his State of the Union address, President Bush unveiled a budget that cuts federal assistance to first responders by $800 million. http://www.afdlocal2141.org/bush_budget_slashes_first_respon.htm
Again another pork cut. The budget was actually increased over the 04 budget.
According to President Bush’s 2005 Budget, first responders will see their funding cut by $805 million beginning next year. http://actforvictory.org/act.php/blog/archive/ridge_in_west_virginia
Quoted from an anti Bush web site, a great source!
Firefighters Fuming Over Bush's Budget Cuts http://www.10news.com/news/2828978/detail.html
This is a cut in GRANT money, not anyone's budget.
President Bush's new budget would not devote enough money to domestic security, senators said Monday, noting big cuts in funds for firefighters, police and others who would respond to a terrorist attack.
These are quotes from Feb 04, and from Joe Lieberman, a democrat who has now endorsed President Bush. Having been a police officer there has always been enough money for anything we requested. I can give examples of the waste if grant money which again this is.
FOX NEWS
"A stunning 30 percent cut ... for first responders http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,110891,00.html
THINK MAN THINK, DON'T JUMP OFF A CLIFF BECAUSE W TELLS YOU TO JUMP!!![/QUOTE]
It would seem to me that he is thinking and others are acting like sheep....baaaa
Emergency Services have NOT been cut, the typical response from liberals. Homeland Security has been increased by 14% over last years budget, a cut from the "proposed" pork budget. My son-in-law is in the Coast Guard and they are actively inspecting port containers and ships entering the ports.
-- Homeland Security Funding Cuts by President Bush Fail to Fund Fire Fighter and First Responder Needs http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=27324
A no source link, most likely from the firefighters liberal union.
February 6, 2004 - After ignoring the needs and contributions of the fire service in his State of the Union address, President Bush unveiled a budget that cuts federal assistance to first responders by $800 million. http://www.afdlocal2141.org/bush_budget_slashes_first_respon.htm
Again another pork cut. The budget was actually increased over the 04 budget.
According to President Bush’s 2005 Budget, first responders will see their funding cut by $805 million beginning next year. http://actforvictory.org/act.php/blog/archive/ridge_in_west_virginia
Quoted from an anti Bush web site, a great source!
Firefighters Fuming Over Bush's Budget Cuts http://www.10news.com/news/2828978/detail.html
This is a cut in GRANT money, not anyone's budget.
President Bush's new budget would not devote enough money to domestic security, senators said Monday, noting big cuts in funds for firefighters, police and others who would respond to a terrorist attack.
These are quotes from Feb 04, and from Joe Lieberman, a democrat who has now endorsed President Bush. Having been a police officer there has always been enough money for anything we requested. I can give examples of the waste if grant money which again this is.
FOX NEWS
"A stunning 30 percent cut ... for first responders http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,110891,00.html
THINK MAN THINK, DON'T JUMP OFF A CLIFF BECAUSE W TELLS YOU TO JUMP!!![/QUOTE]
It would seem to me that he is thinking and others are acting like sheep....baaaa
Another Liberal misinformation. The COPS program was a failure. We had a "downtown" office paid for by COPS grants for over four years, it was three blocks from the local police station and sat empty of personnel for three years. There was a computer and desk there, nothing else. But hey, your tax dollars paid for it. COPS was a fad that even I took part in and failed. I am surprised that you failed to mention Midnight Basketball. Here we were paid overtime to play basket ball with local hoodlums late at night....babysitters! Where were their parents?
Again here we are talking about cuts from a proposed 29 million department budget. And from the same article: "Because of the financial crunch in the city, which is attributed to a decrease in state revenue sharing and rising health care costs for current employees and retirees, we have to reduce our expenditures," Doyle said. "Eighty percent of our budget is related to labor." Can we try some honesty and quit blaming the Bush budget for every cities budget shortage?
Here is some information on Kerry's supporter George Soros and drugs. You make the connections:
Russian Official Says Beslan Rebels Were Addicts
By C. J. CHIVERS nytimes
OSCOW, Oct. 17 - Forensic analysis of the remains of 31 militants who seized a public school in Beslan last month has determined that all of them were dependent on drugs, a senior law enforcement official said in a statement reported Sunday by Russian news agencies.
The official, Nikolai Shepel, the deputy prosecutor general of Russia's southern federal district, also said blood tests had found very high levels of heroin and morphine among a majority of the attackers who died as the siege ended, "which indicates that they were long-term drug addicts and had been using drugs permanently while preparing for the terrorist attack," according to the Interfax wire service.
"These conclusions help us look at the Beslan tragedy from a new angle," he said.
The statement was not the first of its kind here. As terror attacks have emanated in recent years from the war in Chechnya, many Russian law enforcement officials and politicians have said those who plan the attacks use hard drugs to coerce suicide bombers or to induce in the bombers a semi-alert state that assists them in fulfilling their grim assignments. Pro-separatist Web sites have dismissed the claims as Russian propaganda.
In an interview last year with the newspaper Vremya Novostei, Akhmad Kadyrov, who later became the president of Chechnya, said that suicide bombers were people "filled with various psychotropic drugs." (Mr. Kadyrov was assassinated in a bomb blast this year.)
Such claims have typically been used to explain the condition of female bombers with tactically simple missions - carrying a bomb into a crowd and depressing a button to detonate it - and not to describe experienced guerrillas, who perform more complicated and long-running tasks.
The hostage-takers in Beslan were said by survivors and Russian authorities alike to have demonstrated proficiency in several military skills, including scouting their target, swiftly rigging bombs into a network that could be detonated electrically and organizing a defense against assault. Mr. Shepel said Sunday that some of them were now believed to have been suffering from withdrawal during the siege.
Further details of Mr. Shepel's statement and of the forensic analysis behind it were not available on Sunday.
Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company | Home | Privacy Policy | Search | Corrections | RSS | Help | Back to Top
_____________________
Domestic Issues
George Soros Touts Kerry and Drug Legalization
by Don Feder
Posted Oct 1, 2004 HUMAN EVENTS
Former HHS Secretary Joseph Califano calls him the "Daddy Warbucks of drug legalization." He's "been a blemish on the face of drug policy and prevention for years," says Calvina Fay of the Drug Free America Foundation.
One of the wealthiest men in America, he's used his personal fortune (estimated at $7 billion) to fund drug legalization and pro-euthanasia campaigns.
He has compared the Bush Administration to the Third Reich. He's the piggy bank for most of the anti-Bush 527s. Like giggly cheerleaders in the presence of the star quarterback, Democrats go limp at the mention of his name.
He's George Soros, a man with a mission: to defeat George Bush and deconstruct Western society.
On October 5, Soros will begin a 12-city tour to bolster the sagging Kerry campaign. He's written a pamphlet--with the snappy title, "Why We Must Not Re-Elect President Bush"--that's being mailed to two million voters, and launched a new website, GeorgeSoros.com, where he laments: "I have been demonized by the Bush campaign."
But Soros has his fans.
Soros' Fan Club
Last month, a group of Democratic congressmen sent him a mash note straight out of junior-high study hall. ("Can we meet in the gym after school?" pant! pant!).
Congressmen Barney Frank (Mass.), George Miller (Calif.), Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), and several of their colleagues planted a big wet one on the Bambino of Bush-bashing, writing: "We admire your dedication to the ideals of an open and fair society, and we appreciate your willingness and ability to draw lessons from your considerable economic success in the private sector of how we can best proceed with public policies that promote economic growth and social equity both here and in the world." They all but ended it with You big, billionaire stud-muffin, you!
The billet-doux expressed shock at the "McCarthyite attacks made on you by some American politicians." This was a reference to House Speaker Dennis Hastert, who has noted that Soros is both the principal funder of the independent anti-Bush effort and the deep pockets of drug legalization.
Lear-jet Utopian
Since Democrats are the beneficiaries of millions from this Lear-jet utopian, they have a responsibility to, at the very least, disassociate themselves from his pro-drug agenda, Speaker Hastert suggested.
This elicited the predictable cries of McCarthyism--which usually means, "you're exposing us, and we don't like it." In fact, Hastert's logic is unassailable.
Soros plays Saudi banker to the Democrats' 527 jihad, including the Big Four of Hate Bush independents--America Coming Together, Campaign for America's Future, MoveOn.org and Joint Victory Fund--ACT alone has received more than $10 million from the currency manipulator in the past two years.
Soros also has pumped tens of millions into medical fraud marijuana legalization initiatives, needle-exchange programs and think tanks promoting "decriminalization" and so-called "harm reduction" (teaching kids how to use narcotics "safely").
He's the financial angel of The Marijuana Policy Project, The Drug Policy Foundation, The Lindsmith Center, the Andean Council of Coca Leaf producers, and the Drug Policy Alliance (which has received $8.5 million from Soros since 2001). Bob Weiner, spokesman for Gen. Barry McCaffrey when he was President Clinton's Drug Czar, said of Soros' Lindsmith Center: "I'm sure Lindsmith's desire to take us into nihilism and chaos and jam our hospital emergency rooms with more users has some useful purpose."
Euthanasia Advocate
He's also the Angel of Death. In the 1990s, Soros provided $15 million as start-up capital for Project Death in America, a grant-giving group that funds campaigns for euthanasia and doctor-assisted suicide.
Soros likes to say that he "puts money where his mouth is." He has no shortage of either.
Soros charges that George W. Bush "feels he was anointed by God" [after September 11] and is "leading the U.S. and the world toward a vicious cycle of escalating violence," there's hardly an issue on which he doesn't have an opinion. Generally, the Hungarian-born financier sounds like Barbra Streisand on drugs.
Here are some vintage G.S. rants:
"When I hear Bush say: 'You're either with us or against us,' it reminds me of the Germans." This is not a reference to Kant and Schopenhauer.
The comments of Bush, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Atty.Gen. John Ashcroft on the need to fight an aggressive war on terrorism "are the views of extremists, not adherents to an open society."
Having the chutzpah to blame the U.S. and Israel for the rise of global anti-Semitism, Soros has said: "There is a resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe. The policies of the Bush Administration and the Sharon administration contribute to that."
Soros is a dyed-in-the-wool root-causer, "The war on terrorism cannot be won by waging war. Correct the grievances on which terrorism feeds"--which, one assumes, include poverty, what Soros considers Israel's beastly treatment of the poor Palestinians, racial-profiling of Muslims and the drug war.
Soros applies the same surrender logic to society's struggle against mind-altering, soul-annihilating substances: "The war on drugs is doing more harm to our society than drug abuse itself." Moreover, since "substance abuse is endemic in most societies...the war on drugs cannot be won." Then how explain the experience of the Reagan years, when anti-drug spending and prison sentences for pushers went up, and drug use declined dramatically.
Despite the euphemisms to which he is addicted ("decriminalization," "harm reduction," "medical marijuana," etc.), in his book, Soros on Soros, G.S. let the syringe out of the bag: "I'll tell you what I would do if it were up to me. I would establish a strictly controlled distribution network through which I would make most drugs, excluding the most dangerous ones like crack, legally available."
And the Democrats think this guy is the greatest thing since Michael Moore. They rush to accept his soft money. They fawn on him for his supposed "dedication to the ideals of an open and fair society." They defend him against "McCarthyite attacks."
At the same time, they doggedly refuse to take a position on his demented advocacy of extremist measures.
Does Barney Frank really believe Israel is responsible for Jews being beaten in the streets of France? Does Rahm Emanuel want to give Grandma a lethal injection? Is John Kerry in favor of legalized dope--the kind you smoke, as opposed to the kind who say they'll vote for him?
Hey, Democrats, can you say accountability?
Mr. Feder is the author of Who's Afraid of the Religious Right? (Regnery) and A Jewish Conservative Looks at Pagan America. He was a syndicated columnist for the Boston Herald from 1983-2002 and is currently a talk show host on WROL, 950 AM in Boston.
_________
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Washington Times
www.washingtontimes.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Russian Official Says Beslan Rebels Were Addicts
By C. J. CHIVERS nytimes
OSCOW, Oct. 17 - Forensic analysis of the remains of 31 militants who seized a public school in Beslan last month has determined that all of them were dependent on drugs, a senior law enforcement official said in a statement reported Sunday by Russian news agencies.
The official, Nikolai Shepel, the deputy prosecutor general of Russia's southern federal district, also said blood tests had found very high levels of heroin and morphine among a majority of the attackers who died as the siege ended, "which indicates that they were long-term drug addicts and had been using drugs permanently while preparing for the terrorist attack," according to the Interfax wire service.
"These conclusions help us look at the Beslan tragedy from a new angle," he said.
The statement was not the first of its kind here. As terror attacks have emanated in recent years from the war in Chechnya, many Russian law enforcement officials and politicians have said those who plan the attacks use hard drugs to coerce suicide bombers or to induce in the bombers a semi-alert state that assists them in fulfilling their grim assignments. Pro-separatist Web sites have dismissed the claims as Russian propaganda.
In an interview last year with the newspaper Vremya Novostei, Akhmad Kadyrov, who later became the president of Chechnya, said that suicide bombers were people "filled with various psychotropic drugs." (Mr. Kadyrov was assassinated in a bomb blast this year.)
Such claims have typically been used to explain the condition of female bombers with tactically simple missions - carrying a bomb into a crowd and depressing a button to detonate it - and not to describe experienced guerrillas, who perform more complicated and long-running tasks.
The hostage-takers in Beslan were said by survivors and Russian authorities alike to have demonstrated proficiency in several military skills, including scouting their target, swiftly rigging bombs into a network that could be detonated electrically and organizing a defense against assault. Mr. Shepel said Sunday that some of them were now believed to have been suffering from withdrawal during the siege.
Further details of Mr. Shepel's statement and of the forensic analysis behind it were not available on Sunday.
Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company | Home | Privacy Policy | Search | Corrections | RSS | Help | Back to Top
_____________________
Domestic Issues
George Soros Touts Kerry and Drug Legalization
by Don Feder
Posted Oct 1, 2004 HUMAN EVENTS
Former HHS Secretary Joseph Califano calls him the "Daddy Warbucks of drug legalization." He's "been a blemish on the face of drug policy and prevention for years," says Calvina Fay of the Drug Free America Foundation.
One of the wealthiest men in America, he's used his personal fortune (estimated at $7 billion) to fund drug legalization and pro-euthanasia campaigns.
He has compared the Bush Administration to the Third Reich. He's the piggy bank for most of the anti-Bush 527s. Like giggly cheerleaders in the presence of the star quarterback, Democrats go limp at the mention of his name.
He's George Soros, a man with a mission: to defeat George Bush and deconstruct Western society.
On October 5, Soros will begin a 12-city tour to bolster the sagging Kerry campaign. He's written a pamphlet--with the snappy title, "Why We Must Not Re-Elect President Bush"--that's being mailed to two million voters, and launched a new website, GeorgeSoros.com, where he laments: "I have been demonized by the Bush campaign."
But Soros has his fans.
Soros' Fan Club
Last month, a group of Democratic congressmen sent him a mash note straight out of junior-high study hall. ("Can we meet in the gym after school?" pant! pant!).
Congressmen Barney Frank (Mass.), George Miller (Calif.), Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), and several of their colleagues planted a big wet one on the Bambino of Bush-bashing, writing: "We admire your dedication to the ideals of an open and fair society, and we appreciate your willingness and ability to draw lessons from your considerable economic success in the private sector of how we can best proceed with public policies that promote economic growth and social equity both here and in the world." They all but ended it with You big, billionaire stud-muffin, you!
The billet-doux expressed shock at the "McCarthyite attacks made on you by some American politicians." This was a reference to House Speaker Dennis Hastert, who has noted that Soros is both the principal funder of the independent anti-Bush effort and the deep pockets of drug legalization.
Lear-jet Utopian
Since Democrats are the beneficiaries of millions from this Lear-jet utopian, they have a responsibility to, at the very least, disassociate themselves from his pro-drug agenda, Speaker Hastert suggested.
This elicited the predictable cries of McCarthyism--which usually means, "you're exposing us, and we don't like it." In fact, Hastert's logic is unassailable.
Soros plays Saudi banker to the Democrats' 527 jihad, including the Big Four of Hate Bush independents--America Coming Together, Campaign for America's Future, MoveOn.org and Joint Victory Fund--ACT alone has received more than $10 million from the currency manipulator in the past two years.
Soros also has pumped tens of millions into medical fraud marijuana legalization initiatives, needle-exchange programs and think tanks promoting "decriminalization" and so-called "harm reduction" (teaching kids how to use narcotics "safely").
He's the financial angel of The Marijuana Policy Project, The Drug Policy Foundation, The Lindsmith Center, the Andean Council of Coca Leaf producers, and the Drug Policy Alliance (which has received $8.5 million from Soros since 2001). Bob Weiner, spokesman for Gen. Barry McCaffrey when he was President Clinton's Drug Czar, said of Soros' Lindsmith Center: "I'm sure Lindsmith's desire to take us into nihilism and chaos and jam our hospital emergency rooms with more users has some useful purpose."
Euthanasia Advocate
He's also the Angel of Death. In the 1990s, Soros provided $15 million as start-up capital for Project Death in America, a grant-giving group that funds campaigns for euthanasia and doctor-assisted suicide.
Soros likes to say that he "puts money where his mouth is." He has no shortage of either.
Soros charges that George W. Bush "feels he was anointed by God" [after September 11] and is "leading the U.S. and the world toward a vicious cycle of escalating violence," there's hardly an issue on which he doesn't have an opinion. Generally, the Hungarian-born financier sounds like Barbra Streisand on drugs.
Here are some vintage G.S. rants:
"When I hear Bush say: 'You're either with us or against us,' it reminds me of the Germans." This is not a reference to Kant and Schopenhauer.
The comments of Bush, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Atty.Gen. John Ashcroft on the need to fight an aggressive war on terrorism "are the views of extremists, not adherents to an open society."
Having the chutzpah to blame the U.S. and Israel for the rise of global anti-Semitism, Soros has said: "There is a resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe. The policies of the Bush Administration and the Sharon administration contribute to that."
Soros is a dyed-in-the-wool root-causer, "The war on terrorism cannot be won by waging war. Correct the grievances on which terrorism feeds"--which, one assumes, include poverty, what Soros considers Israel's beastly treatment of the poor Palestinians, racial-profiling of Muslims and the drug war.
Soros applies the same surrender logic to society's struggle against mind-altering, soul-annihilating substances: "The war on drugs is doing more harm to our society than drug abuse itself." Moreover, since "substance abuse is endemic in most societies...the war on drugs cannot be won." Then how explain the experience of the Reagan years, when anti-drug spending and prison sentences for pushers went up, and drug use declined dramatically.
Despite the euphemisms to which he is addicted ("decriminalization," "harm reduction," "medical marijuana," etc.), in his book, Soros on Soros, G.S. let the syringe out of the bag: "I'll tell you what I would do if it were up to me. I would establish a strictly controlled distribution network through which I would make most drugs, excluding the most dangerous ones like crack, legally available."
And the Democrats think this guy is the greatest thing since Michael Moore. They rush to accept his soft money. They fawn on him for his supposed "dedication to the ideals of an open and fair society." They defend him against "McCarthyite attacks."
At the same time, they doggedly refuse to take a position on his demented advocacy of extremist measures.
Does Barney Frank really believe Israel is responsible for Jews being beaten in the streets of France? Does Rahm Emanuel want to give Grandma a lethal injection? Is John Kerry in favor of legalized dope--the kind you smoke, as opposed to the kind who say they'll vote for him?
Hey, Democrats, can you say accountability?
Mr. Feder is the author of Who's Afraid of the Religious Right? (Regnery) and A Jewish Conservative Looks at Pagan America. He was a syndicated columnist for the Boston Herald from 1983-2002 and is currently a talk show host on WROL, 950 AM in Boston.
_________
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Washington Times
www.washingtontimes.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey Bryan, just keep on commenting and posting your opinions. Diversity of opinion is a good thing, and in mainstream US politics no one's beliefs are right or wrong. In this election, it is so evenly split, it's clear that there is no right or wrong, only opinion about what is best. If the polls were showing an 80% - 20% split, one could probably argue differently.
I have never followed the unwavering "party line" philosophy. For the most part, I care only a little if the candidate is Republican or Democrat. It's more about his intentions, past voting record and/or actions that I look at. I have always voted a split ticket and suspect that I always will.
I have never followed the unwavering "party line" philosophy. For the most part, I care only a little if the candidate is Republican or Democrat. It's more about his intentions, past voting record and/or actions that I look at. I have always voted a split ticket and suspect that I always will.
I would much rather have this as my list of supporters:
Open letter signed by 24 Olympians and Professional Athletes:
http://www.georgewbush.com/News/Read.aspx?ID=4008
"I have never followed the unwavering "party line" philosophy. For the most part, I care only a little if the candidate is Republican or Democrat. It's more about his intentions, past voting record and/or actions that I look at. I have always voted a split ticket and suspect that I always will." And this is true of me as well.
Open letter signed by 24 Olympians and Professional Athletes:
http://www.georgewbush.com/News/Read.aspx?ID=4008
"I have never followed the unwavering "party line" philosophy. For the most part, I care only a little if the candidate is Republican or Democrat. It's more about his intentions, past voting record and/or actions that I look at. I have always voted a split ticket and suspect that I always will." And this is true of me as well.
George Soros only wants one thing and has been wiggling his way into the UN for some time now.
King of the World
![[pray]](/images/smilies/icon_smile_pray.gif "Pray [pray]")
George I
John Kerry appears to only be one of the sheeple that follow Soros and would probably do anything that Soros or the UN asked of him. It's scarry to think who would be the actual president of the U.S. if Kerry is elected this fall.
The more I learn about either John Kerry or George Soros, all I can do is![[V]](/images/smilies/icon_smile_disapprove.gif "Disapprove [V]")
and vote against Soros/Kerry/Edwards for president.
King of the World
George IJohn Kerry appears to only be one of the sheeple that follow Soros and would probably do anything that Soros or the UN asked of him. It's scarry to think who would be the actual president of the U.S. if Kerry is elected this fall.
The more I learn about either John Kerry or George Soros, all I can do is
and vote against Soros/Kerry/Edwards for president.
LOL.
Well, the Republicans kinda want to have it both ways. They want us to believe we're under imminent threat of attack from something more than a law enforcement problem ("Bin Laden Determined To Attack USA" was the title of the report delivered to Bush's ranch a couple months before 9/11). And at the same time, they want us to believe we are safer under their leadership. They've got themselveS into a rhetorical pickle. FEAR FEAR FEAR FEAR FEAR...no, with us you're SAFE SAFE SAFE SAFE SAFE.
Well, the Republicans kinda want to have it both ways. They want us to believe we're under imminent threat of attack from something more than a law enforcement problem ("Bin Laden Determined To Attack USA" was the title of the report delivered to Bush's ranch a couple months before 9/11). And at the same time, they want us to believe we are safer under their leadership. They've got themselveS into a rhetorical pickle. FEAR FEAR FEAR FEAR FEAR...no, with us you're SAFE SAFE SAFE SAFE SAFE.