I find this article extremely interesting. The possibilities are so broad that it almost boggles the mind. It would seem that the only truly untouchable law would be those that the Supreme Court has declared constitutional. That would prevent anyone from trying to ignore Roe vs Wade, hopefully we can get that particular ruling overturned, but some of the laws that are being put in place by the EPA could be voided.
I am sure that Barack Obama would find this so wrong, though! They do seem to have some trouble seeing the possibilities of their actions. This truly points out that elections have consequence.
- Dr. Thomas Woods on Nullification 2-13-11 (weekendidaho.com)
I love finding stories like the one I have linked to below. God‘s work is amazing in everything, but this just goes to show that the world is in his hands and that we have been given every thing that we need. It is a shame that the deniers will always try to find a way to discredit His works, but to those with the eyes to see, the evidence is clear.
I give thanks to the Lord for the blessings that He has given us. I give Him praise and glory, in His wonderful Son’s name. Amen
The virus, dubbed “Organic Lake Virophage” or OLV, was discovered in the Organic Lake, a 6,000-year-old body of saltwater in eastern Antarctica. Researchers found its genome hidden in sequences of local Phycodnaviruses–giant viruses that basically live in the lake and attack algae. Evidence suggests these two viruses have been swapping genes and co-evolving, and it looks like the OLV actually depends on the Phycodnaviruses for, well, its dinner.
What’s more, although the OLV turns out to be the predominant virophage in the area, scientists believe there may be other virus-eating viruses lurking in the depths.
- ‘Virus-eater’ discovered in Antarctic lake (nature.com)
- A Sputnik moment for virus-infecting viruses [Thoughts from Kansas] (scienceblogs.com)
- Antarctic lake hints at a world of virus-attacking viruses | Not Exactly Rocket Science (blogs.discovermagazine.com)
Give war a chance! I heard someone say that phrase after Mr. Obama’s speech on Libya and it just hit me like a club. That is the most disturbing phrase that I have ever heard. It’s like saying that if this doesn’t work out, then we will try something else. How insane is that! What are you going to try next? Peace? In the meantime, thousands of people are going to die. Some of them would have died anyway, but you can not escape the fact that missles fired by our side, and bombs dropped by our side, kill. They do not discriminate between the good guy and the bad guy. They don’t discriminate between children, women, and men who are trying to kill them. How in the world can we pretend that we are trying to save lives by destroying them. And how in the world can Barack Obama claim that it is in our interests to do so.
Libya is unstable, but we made it more so! Our President should either shut up or put up! If we are in Libya, then we should finish the job. Quaddafi is not going to go quietly, what would he have to gain? He is going to have to be forcibly removed and if we are not willing to do that, we should not have gotten involved in the first place.
And if this is just a short term experiment on Barack Obama’s part, what is the goal? Are we going to keep bombing and dropping missles until we have none left or the country itself is destroyed? And if it is so important to save lives in Libya, what about the other countries in the Middle East and Northern Africa? Are they any less important? Is it the oil that he is protecting? Is that the reason that other countries are not as important to us? If that is the reason Mr. Obama owes it to the country and the world to make that clear. If he thinks that this will brings us any more respect he is probably delusional. How can anyone in the rest of the world truly believe that we are doing this for humanitarian reasons? When we have so little regard for the violence in countries like Iran, or Syria? How does Barack Obama decide who is worth saving?
And then what if Quaddafi doesn’t leave and isn’t killed? When we leave, what will he do? Does Barack Obama seriously believe the man will not search every home and kill every man, woman and child that belongs to a family that rebelled against him. Perhaps I am just naive, but it seems as if we are setting the country up for a blood bath.
Edward Luttwak has a very good argument for “Give War a Chance”, but his premise is based on having an objective and being in it to finish it. The difference we have with Barack Obama and the Libya intervention is that he has stated from the outset that he does not intend to finish the job!
If Mr. Obama is going to war, he needs to have an objective and it must be a war worth winning! It must not just be bomb a country for a few weeks or a few months and then let the country go to whatever force that is able to take control. If we let forces that are friendly to our enemies have power when we could have prevented it, we are in the process of cutting our own throats!
- al Qaeda swipes ‘surface to air’ missles from Libyain Arms Depot (yourdaddy.net)
Mr. Obama says that what drove him to make the decision to go to war over Libya was the danger the people were in, but why not Syria? Or Tunisia? Or any of the other states that are erupting violently in the Middle East and North Africa? And if you apply that principle, where and when do you stop? How can you protect the people if you are not on the ground? And if the President has the right to go into any conflict simply because the people are in danger, does that make him the Emperor of the world? How will he decide who should live and who should die? Who gave him that right?
If violence were to erupt in the United States would Barack Obama get together a coalition of other countries, such as Eqypt or Saudia Arabia, and put down the people of this country? When you start a process such as this, what is to stop someone with evil intent from carrying the process all the way to the end?
Good evening. Tonight, I’d like to update the American people on the international effort that we have led in Libya – what we have done, what we plan to do, and why this matters to us.
I want to begin by paying tribute to our men and women in uniform who, once again, have acted with courage, professionalism and patriotism. They have moved with incredible speed and strength. Because of them and our dedicated diplomats, a coalition has been forged and countless lives have been saved. Meanwhile, as we speak, our troops are supporting our ally Japan, leaving Iraq to its people, stopping the Taliban’s momentum in Afghanistan, and going after al Qaeda around the globe. As Commander-in-Chief, I am grateful to our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, Coast Guardsmen, and their families, as are all Americans.
For generations, the United States of America has played a unique role as an anchor of global security and advocate for human freedom. Mindful of the risks and costs of military action, we are naturally reluctant to use force to solve the world’s many challenges. But when our interests and values are at stake, we have a responsibility to act. That is what happened in Libya over the course of these last six weeks.
Libya sits directly between Tunisia and Egypt – two nations that inspired the world when their people rose up to take control of their own destiny. For more than four decades, the Libyan people have been ruled by a tyrant – Moammar Gaddafi. He has denied his people freedom, exploited their wealth, murdered opponents at home and abroad, and terrorized innocent people around the world – including Americans who were killed by Libyan agents.
- Obama Finally Explains What We’re Doing In Libya (businessinsider.com)
A friend told me today that Sarah Palin was 10,000 times better than Barack Obama (thank you HM) and she was so right. When you listen to Sarah, you know where she stands. There is no dithering, with one thing one day, and another the next. She doesn’t have to get a committee together that maybe she will agree with. She knows what she believes and she doesn’t hesitate to tell you if she is asked.
She knows who our friends are, and she knows who are enemies are. She doesn’t try to appease our enemies in order for them to think better of us.She knows that it doesn’t matter if they like us or not, what is important is that they know that we are strong and will not tolerate threats to us or our friends. She knows that showing weakness endangers everyone and that it is better to be respected and feared.
More Quote of the Day Honorable Mention, Part 242
“Did Palin Zone Out on Obama and Israel? Nope… An on-line discussion at Politico about her comments was headlined on its homepage as concerning ‘Palin’s idiotic comments about Israel.’ So how ‘idiotic’ were they? The correct answer is not very… Far from stupid, these remarks are actually very much to the point about the willingness of this administration, and some of its predecessors to pressure Israel to make concessions when the real obstacle to peace is what it always has been: the Palestinians‘ unwillingness to make peace or to give up terrorism… If Palin thinks of it in terms of zoning, it may be because, unlike Obama, she takes it for granted that Jews have the right to be in their own country and build wherever it is legally permissible to do so. Twice in his first two years in office Obama picked very nasty and public fights with Israel’s government over the building of homes in existing Jewish neighborhoods in Jerusalem. These arguments were not only an unprecedented attack on Israel from an American president on the issue of Jerusalem. They were both unnecessary and had the effect of making peace negotiations with the Palestinians less likely. So when you look at it from that perspective, maybe it’s Obama and not Palin who has been the ‘idiotic’ one when it comes to Israeli building policies.”
MariaS at Dodo Can Spell:
“I absolutely love her stance on Israel… No wonder the hard-Left hates her the way they do …. she’s going to push their faces into the dust at every opportunity… much to our eternal entertainment.”
Mendy Ganchrow, M.D. at Ganchrow World View:
“As I wrote previously, I did not believe Sarah Palin was a credible candidate for President. Last nite she was on Fox with Greta,and I have to say that both Sheila and I were truly impressed with her demeanor. She just returned from India and Israel. It was not just her views in Israel that I felt comfortable with, but her whole approach to Libya and leadership. She has matured since the hectic days of the campaign. If she runs she will be a formidable candidate.”
- Palin excoriates Obama over Israel (politico.com)
- Is Sarah Palin ready to lead America? (wdednh.wordpress.com)
- Palins Outspoken Support of Israel Makes Her the Anti-Obama We Need (genomega1.wordpress.com)
Whether you were on the same side of the political spectrum as Geraldine Ferraro or not, one thing that you could always say for her, was that she didn’t inject meanness into what was often a dirty game. She was respected and she earned that respect with everything that she did. For those who took the opportunity to try to portray her as a racist during the 2008 campaign, they hurt a wonderful woman who never deserved the treatment that she got. I liked her a lot and appreciated her honesty and forthrightness. She will be missed and she was well loved.
On the Passing of Geraldine Ferraro
My family and I would like to express our sincere condolences to the family of Geraldine Ferraro. When I had the honor of working alongside Geraldine on election night last year, we both discussed the role of women in politics and our excited expectation that someday that final glass ceiling would be shattered by the election of a woman president. She was an amazing woman who dedicated her life to public service as a teacher, prosecutor, Congresswoman, and Vice Presidential candidate. She broke one huge barrier and then went on to break many more. The world will miss her. May she rest in peace and may her example of hard work and dedication to America continue to inspire all women.
– Sarah Palin
When are the Jewish American’s who supported Barack Obama going to wake up and realize that he and his administration hate Israel even worse that they hate the United States. Every step that they take is in the direction of destroying both Israel and the U.S. I can not believe that they have any doubts. If they do they are going to get a very rude awakening in the next few months. The forces in the Middle East and Northern Africa, are rapidly moving into position to attack Israel and whether the U.S. actively helps them or not, I do not believe that they will do any thing to help Israel. And the destruction will be on the hands of all those who stood by while they were threatened and that includes those American Jews who are so blind that they choose not to see.
via Randy’s Right
American Thinker has a great article about “What does Presidential Mean?” They are discussing Presidential in regards to Sarah Palin, But I would like to ask the same question in regards to Barack Obama. Have the actions and words of Barack Obama been Presidential?
The Constitution lays out the legal requirements for President so I won’t go over them here. If you don’t know them I recommend getting a small copy for yourself, they are available all over the internet. I am talking about the attributes that most people consider to be Presidential.
One of the very first attributes has to be connectivity and Barack Obama does have that with a good deal of the population. Another has to be an ability to communicate, again Barack Obama has that. Next would have to be the ability to understand the issues, that one is a question mark. I am not sure whether Barack Obama doesn’t understand the issues, or whether he simply doesn’t care. That is one issue where Obama really fails on. Another is love of country, Obama really falls down on this one, he is the only President that we have ever had that appears to actively hate the country.
That last attribute is the very one that disqualifies Barack Obama from being Presidential. That puts everyone in the country at risk, and the primary job of the President of the United States is to protect the country. In every chance that Mr. Obama has had to do something to improve the status of the country itself or the people within the country, he has chosen the opposite path. So in asking the question of whether Barack Obama is presidential, my answer has to be no. But that is just a personal opinion, if there is some other explanation for the actions of Barack Obama, I would love for someone to take the time to give that explanation. Do you think I am right? Do you know of any other President that actively hated the country? What do you think is Presidential?
Having sorted through the flotsam and jetsam for the last year of what those who scorn Sarah Palin have to say, I’d like to offer a little down-home, Nebraska fly-over country armchair musing.
Let’s address the “pundits” first. They fall into three classes; first you have the Roves and the Gingriches, the big guns no longer in power. They’re on the wane — Gingrich is nearly irrelevant and Rove is hanging on through the grace of the Fox Powerbrokers. He’s like the incest born offspring on display at the carnival sideshows of my youth. Parade him out; wring what juice is left in his continence as his notoriety evolves from architect to anachronism.
Next in the pecking order are the elitist “blog” by-liners, spewing left-handed compliments as justification for conservatism — a dime a dozen, and not worth the cost of a candle to shine the light on their “do over” mentality.
Last of course, and the group I belong to, the actual class of people so minor as to be only found pathetically seeking recognition or redemption for votes of elections past.
All have something to say about Palin, while most don’t have a clue as to what she represents, or are incapable of critical analysis. These scornful voices emanate from those who simply do not understand what lies in the hearts and minds of people such as Sarah Palin. What many of us do understand is simply that we do not care who is President; we care who is “Presidential.”