konane's Blog

Expecting frozen precip. 

http://wwwa.accuweather.com/radar-large.asp?partner=forecastfox&traveler=1&site=GA_&type=SIR&anim=1&level=state&large=1

A Sainted high profile Deomocrat involved in a help-your-buddy ethics-questionable land deal ......  my, my, my!!!     Thanks for all who voted for a "change" ................... you're not getting your money's worth ....... business as usual higher taxes, man the lifeboats to get through the river of BS.  Nothing has or will change except their table full of chattering teeth winding down to a dead stop now they're elected.

"A deal in the desert for Sen. Reid

A bill he wrote could have affected the friend who sold the land.

Wonder how AlBore and his team of Chicken Little scaremongers will spin this? 

News around here has said there have been massive protest resignations at the Carter Center.  Wonder why????

This article says 'follow the money" which sounds like another Democrat selling us out to Middle East oil $$$$$$$ like Clinton did to Chinese $$$$$$$$$.  Do they consider us mushrooms to be kept in the dark and fed BS or do they consider us modern day slaves to be sold to the highest bidder?

I would also like to see the $$$$$$$$$ trail behind media financing as to who has their hand in the sock puppet moving its mouth telling the world that world opinion of the US is dropping.  FOLLOW THE $$$$$$$$$ doing brainwashing ... but this is one person not buying into the BS.

"A CORRECTION ABOUT OBAMA

Dear Friend,

My abject apologies!  I was wrong in saying that Senator Barak Obama voted against a ban on spouses working for Senators on their campaign or PAC payrolls. 

Obama voted against tabling the bill, not against the bill itself. He was one of only a handful of Democrats that did so (most Republicans backed the reform). 

The attempt to bring the ban to a vote failed last week, but the Senate adopted it last night.
 
Sometimes its tough to follow the twists and turns of Senate votes and, in this case, I messed up.
 
I'll try to see that it doesn't happen again.
 
I've published a front page apology to Obama in The Hill where the column appeared in a print version.
 
Thanks for reading my columns.  I hope you like them.
 
Yours,
Dick Morris "

A 'divine revelation' came to me past couple of days about "global warming" CAUSATION hype as to its only good point .... it creates an environment in which alternate sources of energy can be developed which won't bankroll terrorists via oil money.  Also keeps oil profits out of the pockets of greedy global elitists who seem to believe their acquisition of $$$$$ entitles them to buy the type global government to rule over everyone else.  Case in point oil for money bribes flowing into UN members and their families.

Picked this up via    http://www.drudgereport.com/

THE SUN IS IN A HOTTER BURNING CYCLE WHICH IS HEATING UP OUR ENTIRE SOLAR SYSTEM .... this deliberate omission is the "Inconvenient Truth.'

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=3a9bc8a4-802a-23ad-4065-7dc37ec39adf

Quoted directly from Powerlineblog.com.

"OBAMA’S FIRST BLUNDER

By DICK MORRIS

"January 17, 2006 -- Presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) made his first misstep a few days ago when he joined only a handful of Democrats in opposing a Senate reform banning the increasingly widespread practice of legislators hiring their family members on their campaign or PAC payrolls. Obama has not heard the last of this vote.  Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), who opposes wives cashing in on their husbands’ positions, voted righteously in favor of the reform and will probably use the Illinois senator’s vote against him in the presidential primaries.

When a legislator hires his or her spouse on the campaign or PAC payroll, he is effectively converting contributions to his campaign committee into personal income that flows into the family’s checking account, blurring the line between contribution and bribe.

In the past, senators and House members routinely hired their spouses and other family members on their public payrolls. In the early 1940s, for example, Harry S. Truman hired his wife, Bess, to work on his Senate staff. She got $2,500 a year in salary at a time when senators themselves only earned $8,500. But nepotism on the public payroll is now banned. So inventive congressmen and senators have filled the void by hiring family on their campaign or PAC payrolls.

Hiring family members and paying them with campaign donations is, if anything, more pernicious than doing so with public funds. Where tax money is involved, the sin is against the taxpayer for wasting his funds. But where campaign contributions are involved, the congressman is profiting personally from the largesse of special interest donors. In plain English, that’s a payoff.

There is, of course, a certain hypocrisy in the Senate action since very few senators, in fact, hire their families on their payrolls. It is, though, widely practiced in the House of Representatives, where 30 members have their families on their payrolls. But senators are much less likely to do so. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), who voted “present” on the reform, hired her son, Douglas, a lobbyist, to manage her PAC, paying him $130,000 over a four-year period. Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman, then a Democrat, hired his son, Matthew, for $34,000 and his daughter, Rebecca, for $36,000 to work on his 2004 presidential campaign.

So the congressional ethics reform of 2007 boils down to this: The House banned the use of corporate jets but the Senate did not, even though senators are more likely to avail themselves of the luxury than is the average House member. The Senate banned hiring family members but the House did not, even though House members are far more likely to hire their significant others to work for them.

Obama’s inexplicable pro-nepotism vote may have been cast in sympathy with Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-Ill.), whose hiring of his wife, Sandi, to work on his campaign prompted an FEC ruling allowing the practice. Jackson might be afraid that the Senate action will catalyze a similar reform in the House, which could cut way back on his disposable family income.

But whatever the reason for his vote, Obama has screwed up.  The public will not take kindly to a senator who pledged to clean up the political process voting to allow wives to be hired with special-interest campaign funds.

The FEC required, in allowing the practice, that the contract for the services of the family member contain the language customarily used between campaign committees and consultants.  The FEC also ruled that any payment to a family member in excess of the fair market value of the services would be considered to be a “personal use of campaign funds.”

But, as usual, the FEC has missed the point. Any payment from campaign money to a spouse is, in fact, an appropriation of campaign funds by the member of Congress for his own personal use, however camouflaged or disguised. The Senate was right to ban the practice and the House should follow suit. "
http://www.dickmorris.com/

Mulled this over a few days before deciding to post.  Found it funny, still do but I have a 'Gary Larson' sense of humor which some may not appreciate.

Anyway this video is NOT PC, contains something OFFENSIVE to EVERYONE so if you're looking to get offended you've found heaven one click away.

For you real people, enjoy!!!         

"Spiders on Drugs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHzdsFiBbFc&eurl

Wow, I love bloodletting in the PARTY TERRORISTS OPENLY SUPPORTED. 

As the dust settles people will see exactly what comprises today's Democratic party ........... exactly what I've been posting on my blog .....  the far left socialist faction which hijacking the heart of it back in the early 90's has left the American people twisting in the wind for another round of Marxism redux.  Marxism never worked the past several implementations,  but they intend to try it one more time.

"THE COMING DEMOCRATIC PARTY CIVIL WAR

By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN

"January 11, 2006 -- Iraq is not the only place that is threatening to dissolve into the anarchy and bloodletting of a civil war.  It’s about to happen to the Democratic Party.  Reacting to Bush’s planned “surge” in troop strength, the Democratic leaders in Congress, savoring their victory, are contemplating taking only symbolic steps to protest Bush’s war policies, a timidity that will highly displease their leftist boosters.  The liberal activists who funded and impelled the Democratic victory in 2006 did not focus on winning a Congressional majority so that it would take merely symbolic action.  Symbolic action would have been appropriate for a minority party, but the backers of a party in the majority expect something more.
 
So the Democrats are about to form their customary firing squad – a circular one – and begin again the battles that ripped their party apart in the late 1960s.  The battle lines are the same:  The New Left vs. The Party Establishment.  Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid are about to squander their credibility with their supporters on the left by failing to cut back – or cut off entirely – funding for the war.

The Democratic Party’s left wing is not to be trifled with.  It is a massive force, fully mobilized, and led by aggressive online organizations such as Moveon.org.  It has plenty of political leaders – like Ted Kennedy and John Kerry – who are more than willing to articulate fundamental differences with the Party’s Congressional leadership and are not shy about doing so.

The Congressional leaders’ plan is to give Bush all the rope he needs to hang himself by increasing troop strength in Iraq.  They are deeply skeptical about whether more soldiers will accomplish anything besides increasing casualties.  But they are not about to take the rap in front of the American people for seeming to sell out our troops by cutting their funding and forcing the Administration to retreat.  Nor are they ready for a constitutional confrontation with the Commander-in-Chief over his wartime powers.  So, instead, they are going to hold hearings during which a parade of former generals will voice their misgivings and air their disagreements, past and present.  It will be like one of Bob Woodward’s books enacted on a Congressional stage.

But this theater is not going to appease the left.  They did not elect Democrats to Congress so they could hold hearings.  They expect laws not shows.  Their frustration will become increasingly apparent as the Cindy Sheehans of the world react to the increased troop commitment in Baghdad.  The left will launch campaigns of civil disobedience, public marches and protests, online petitions, and the like.  It will be the 1960s all over again.

As long as the Democratic Party could be counted upon to represent the left on Iraq, protests against the war were channeled through the political process and were aimed at electing a Democratic Congress.  But now that the Democratic leadership has, in the eyes of the leaders of the left, “betrayed” them, look for protest to overflow the bounds of partisan politics and go into the streets.

One can expect candidates in the Democratic primaries to run to the left seeking to capitalize on the frustration of peace activists at the passivity of the Party’s Congressional leaders in the face of Bush’s determination to add to troop strength committed to Iraq.  Moderate candidates like Barak Obama, John Edwards, and even Hillary Clinton may find themselves outflanked by those more willing to run to the left like Al Gore and John Kerry. 

Until now, we have had a two-party system in our post 9-11 debates.  Now a new entrant is in the field: The New Left."

http://www.dickmorris.com/

"Barak Hussein Obama-Who is he?
By Ted Sampley
U.S. Veteran Dispatch
December 29, 2006

After only being a U.S. Senator for a couple of years, Barak Hussein Obama, Democrat Senator from Chicago, has managed to catapult himself to the status of a messiah in the Democrat Party. The result is that, ever since, he's been walking on water toward the White House.

Obama says after his visit with friends and family in Hawaii during the 2006 year-end holidays, he'll announce if he's going to run for president in 2008.

Bets are that he will.

Who is Obama and what has he done?

Independent columnist, Andy Martin (Out2.com) says he believes Obama is a political fraud who "lied to the American people."

Martin says Obama may be a threat to the Jewish community because he is a closet Muslim.

"I feel sad having to expose Barack Obama," says Martin, "but the man is a complete fraud. The truth is going to surprise, and disappoint, and outrage many people who were drawn to him. He has lied to the American people, and he has sought to misrepresent his own heritage.

"Obama's life story is vastly different from the one he portrays. My point: if he will lie about his mother and father, what else is he lying about? Can we expect 'bimbo eruptions?'

"Fiction: Obama stated in his Convention speech: 'My father … grew up herding goats.' The 'goat herder' claim has been repeated endlessly. It is a lie.

"Fact: Obama's grandfather, Hussein Onyango Obama was a prominent and wealthy farmer. His son, Obama's father, was a child of privilege, not privation. He was an outstanding student, not a herdsman.

"Fiction: Obama was given an 'African' name.

"Fact: Obama is a Muslim who has concealed his religion. I am a strong supporter of the Muslim community, and I believe Muslims have been scapegoated. Obama has a great opportunity to be forthright.

"Instead, he has treated his Muslim heritage as a dark secret. His grandfather was named 'Hussein.' That is an Arabic-Muslim, not African, name. Hussein was a devout Muslim and named his son, Barack Senior, 'Baraka.' Baraka is an Arabic word meaning 'blessed.' Baraka comes out of the Koran and Arabic, not Africa.

"Barack Senior was also a devoted Muslim, and also chose a Muslim name for his son, our own Barack Obama, Junior. Again, his name was an Arabic and Koranic.

"Fiction: Obama Senior was a harmless student 'immigrant' who came to the United States only to study.

"Fact: Obama was part of one of the most corrupt and violent organizations in Africa: the Kenyatta regime. Obama's father ran back to Kenya soon after the British left. It is likely Obama's father had Mau Mau sympathies or connections, or he would not have been welcomed into the murderous inner circle of rapists, murderers, and arsonists. I believe Obama's secret shame at his family history of rape, murder and arson is what actualizes him. Our research is not yet complete. We are seeking to examine British colonial records. Our investigation to date has drawn on information on three continents.

"And what about Obama's beloved Kenyan brothers and sisters? None of his family was invited to Boston to share his prominence. Are his relatives being kept in the closet? Where are they? More secrecy, more prevarication.

"It is time for Barack Obama to stop presenting a fantasy to the American people. We are forgiving and many would still support him. It may well be that his concealment is meant to endanger Israel. His Muslim religion would obviously raise serious questions in many Jewish circles where Obama now enjoys support," Martin said.

Debbie Schlussel, a conservative political commentator, columnist, was more pointedly critical about Obama's Islamic connections, she wrote on her blog, debbieschlussel.com/, "while Obama may not identify as a Muslim, that's not how the Arab and Muslim Streets see it.

"In Arab culture and under Islamic law, if your father is a Muslim, so are you. And once a Muslim, always a Muslim. You cannot go back. In Islamic eyes, Obama is certainly a Muslim. He may think he's a Christian, but they do not."

Is a man Muslims think is a Muslim, Schlussel asked on her blog, " a man we want as President when we are fighting the war of our lives against Islam? Where will his loyalties be?

"Is that even the man we'd want to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency, if Hillary Clinton offers him the Vice Presidential candidacy on her ticket (which he certainly wouldn't turn down)?"

Obama was born Aug. 4, 1961, in Honolulu, Hawaii, the son of Barack Hussein Obama Sr. of Nyangoma-Kogelo, Siaya District, Kenya, and Ann Dunham, of Wichita, Kan.

Obama senior met his wife, a white woman, when he was a student attending the University of Hawaii. Obama junior was born in Hawaii.

When he was two-years old, Obama's parents divorced and his father returned to Kenya, where he eventually served as a senior economist in the country's Ministry of Finance.

When Obama was six, his mother, an atheist, married Lolo Soetoro, an Indonesian Muslim and moved to Jakarta, Indonesia. Obama's half-sister, Maya Soetoro was born after the family moved to Indonesia.

Soetoro enrolled his stepson in one of Jakarta's Muslim Wahabbi schools. Wahabbism is the radical teaching that created the Muslim terrorists who are now waging Jihad on the rest of the world. Obama later attended a Catholic school in Indonesia.

At age 10 Obama was sent back to Hawaii to be raised by his white maternal grandparents and to attend the prestigious Punahou Academy.

He attended Occidental College, followed by Columbia College and Columbia University.

After Obama's parents divorced when he was two, he spent only one month with his father before his father's death in a vehicle wreck when Obama was 20.

After college, Obama entered Harvard Law where he was elected president of the Harvard Law Review. He received his law degree in 1991 and moved to Chicago where he took a job with a civil rights law firm.

Obama was elected to the Illinois State Senate in 1996. He lost in a bid for the U.S. House of Representatives in 2000 and was elected to the U.S. Senate in 2004.

Obama says he is a Christian with "deep faith rooted in the Christian tradition." He is a member of Trinity United Church of Christ of Chicago, which on its web site declares to be a "congregation which is Unashamedly Black and Unapologetically Christian" and "an African people" who "remain 'true to our native land,' the mother continent, the cradle of civilization."

Trinity United Church of Christ adopted a "Black Value System" which pledges allegiance "to all Black leadership who espouse and embrace the Black Value System" and a "personal commitment to embracement of the Black Value System."

According to ontheissues.org, Obama has proven himself to be a nearly perfect leftist democrat. He is pro-abortion, anti-gun, against ban of same-sex marriage, against teaching family values in public schools, against ban of flag burning, against privatizing Social Security, against the death penalty and three strikes laws, for hiring more women and minorities, for increased funding for health care and for campaign finance reform.

He believes in the separation of church and state - except when he campaigns in black churches.

Who is Barak Hussein Obama?

Many Democrats are promoting him in the media as the Democrat's best hope for winning the White House in 2008.

Referring to Obama's 2006 year-end visit with friends and family in Hawaii, Obama's half-sister, Maya Soetoro, recently stated: "He's going to make his decision here and announce it to us. Then he's probably going to officially announce his decision once he returns."

The Associated Press reported that Obama is expected back in Washington, DC the first week of January 2007."

http://www.usvetdsp.com/dec06/obama_muslim.htm

Source Debbie Schlussel

By Debbie Schlussel

"Many months ago, readers began asking me whether Barack Obama is Muslim. Since he identifies as a Christian, I said, "no," and responded that he was not raised by his Kenyan father.

But, then, I decided to look further into Obama's background. His full name--as by now you have probably heard--is Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. Hussein is a Muslim name, which comes from the name of Ali's son--Hussein Ibn Ali. And Obama is named after his late Kenyan father, the late Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., apparently a Muslim.

And while Obama may not identify as a Muslim, that's not how the Arab and Muslim Streets see it. In Arab culture and under Islamic law, if your father is a Muslim, so are you. And once a Muslim, always a Muslim. You cannot go back. In Islamic eyes, Obama is certainly a Muslim. He may think he's a Christian, but they do not.

And Obama has a "born-again" affinity for the nation of his Muslim father, Kenya, and his Kenyan sister. (Although Kenya is largely Christian, it has a fast-growing Muslim population that has engaged in a good deal of religious violence and riots against Christians. And Kenyan courts will apply Sharia law, when the participants are Muslim.) Wrote Turow:

Obama's father died in a traffic accident in Nairobi in 1982, but while Obama was working in Chicago, he met his Kenyan sister, Auma, a linguist educated in Germany who was visiting the United States. When she returned to Kenya in 1986 to teach for a year at the University of Nairobi, Obama finally made the trip to his father's homeland he had long promised himself. There, he managed to fully embrace a heritage and a family he'd never fully known and come to terms with his father, whom he'd long regarded as an august foreign prince, but now realized was a human being burdened by his own illusions and vulnerabilities.

So, even if he identifies strongly as a Christian, and even if he despised the behavior of his father (as Obama said on Oprah); is a man who Muslims think is a Muslim, who feels some sort of psychological need to prove himself to his absent Muslim father, and who is now moving in the direction of his father's heritage, a man we want as President when we are fighting the war of our lives against Islam? Where will his loyalties be?

Is that even the man we'd want to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency, if Hillary Clinton offers him the Vice Presidential candidacy on her ticket (which he certainly wouldn't turn down)?

NO WAY, JOSE . . . Or, is that, HUSSEIN? "

"TAKING DAY OFF FOR FOOTBALL COSTS DEMS CREDIBILITY

By DICK MORRIS

Source email from http://www.dickmorris.com/

January 10, 2006 -- House Democrats lost considerable credibility yesterday when their opening session was cancelled so that members could attend the Ohio State-Florida State football game.

This is not a joke.

It is, however, a blunt metaphor for how genuinely out of touch the members of Congress really are. How many other Americans do you suppose were given the same perk? A day off because of an evening football game? And how many school kids would like to have time off to watch their own favorite teams? What kind of message is the House leadership sending?

Is it that they don’t get how bad it looks, or that they don’t care?

Their record has been dismal. Last year, the House and Senate worked an average of about two days a week for their salary of $162,500. Nice work if you can find it. Responding to well-deserved criticisms, the new House majority leader, Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), with great fanfare, promised a five-day work week. But that was just talk. When it was the Republicans who were scheduling the eight-day month, Hoyer was outraged. But now that the Democrats control the calendar, he considers a football game to be a legitimate excuse for a vacation day. As he said in reference to the new House minority leader, John Boehner (R-Ohio), “There is a very important event happening Monday night, particularly for those who live in Ohio and Florida. In the spirit of comity, and I know if Maryland were playing, I would want to be accommodated, and I want to accommodate my friend, Mr. Boehner.”

Apparently Mr. Hoyer is not familiar with the disdain that American voters feel for members of Congress. A mid-December Gallup poll showed that 74 percent of Americans disapproved of the job that Congress was doing. Hoyer is certainly doing his best to keep those negative poll numbers.

And there won’t be a five-day work week at all in January. The Martin Luther King holiday falls next week and the Democrats and Republicans are holding respective retreats during the following two weeks. The Democrats are planning a day of speeches in two weeks, including one by Bill Clinton. Hey folks, ever think about doing this on a weekend?

So the promised “five-day” work week starts on Tuesday at 6:30 and ends at about 2 on Friday — more like a two-and-a-half-day work week.

And that might not even happen if there’s another important football game.

Meanwhile in the Senate, while Sens. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), Susan Collins (R-Maine) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) fight for an independent watchdog to enforce lobbying laws, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) insists that hearings must first be held on the issue. This is hardly a new idea. It’s been proposed for years and makes sense. We’ve seen how little policing of lobbyists has been done — witness Jack Abramoff and his cohorts. Requiring hearings is just another stalling tactic. And, in any event, Reid is the last person who should be in charge of designing the self-policing of lobbyists. For years, his three sons and son-in-law made millions by lobbying for Nevada interests — often working out of his Senate office. Only when the press called attention to the practice did Reid bar the boys. Talk about the goats guarding the garbage! Sen. Obama spoke of “institutional resistance” to the watchdog provisions. That institutional r
 esistance has led to serious lobbying transgressions that must be stopped.

If the Democrats want to stay in power, and if Congress wants to win the support and trust of the American people, they’d better start thinking about how their actions resonate with the average voter. Looks like it’s already time for new Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to use her “mother-of-five voice” and turn things around in the House. As for the Senate, let’s hope the new members speak out and force real and necessary reforms. This time the country is watching. "