Good read, article. sm

My cousin, who lives in Alaska, told me about this web site.  It has some interesting articles.  I enjoyed this one - here is the link/url.

http://alaskadispatch.com/tundra-talk/1-talk-of-the-tundra/121-the-world-according-to-sarah.html

• Good read, article. sm - Sharon

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

So are we to assume that because these two recruiters did the wrong thing, and they did, that all recruiters are bad. Maybe you, but most certainly not me.  Incidentally, I didn't see this as preying.  Preying would be them pursuing him.  He went to them several times with false stories and expressed an interest (feigned).   They were not preying on him.  I don't agree with what they did but the Army did the right thing and made no excuses for them.  I have worked with MTs who cheated on their line counts. That doesn't mean all MTs are bad.  Generalizations hurt everyone.  I just don't see it as preying. 

Here is just part of it...

Chicago Annenberg Challenge Shutdown?
A cover-up in the making?

By Stanley Kurtz

The problem of Barack Obama¡¯s relationship with Bill Ayers will not go away. Ayers and his wife, Bernardine Dohrn were terrorists for the notorious Weather Underground during the turbulent 1960s, turning fugitive when a bomb ¡ª designed to kill army officers in New Jersey ¡ª accidentally exploded in a New York townhouse. Prior to that, Ayers and his cohorts succeeded in bombing the Pentagon. Ayers and Dohrn remain unrepentant for their terrorist past. Ayers was pictured in a 2001 article for Chicago magazine, stomping on an American flag, and told the New York Times just before 9/11 that the notion of the United States as a just and fair and decent place ¡°makes me want to puke.¡± Although Obama actually launched his political career at an event at Ayers¡¯s and Dohrn¡¯s home, Obama has dismissed Ayers as just ¡°a guy who lives in my neighborhood,¡± and ¡°not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis.¡± For his part, Ayers refuses to discuss his relationship with Obama. ¡ý Keep reading this article ¡ý    Whittle: Biden¡¯s Hint Steyn: Point of No Return Barone: Obama¡¯s Wish List Sowell: Obama, Con Kudlow: Reagan + Friedman + Keynes Siegel: ¡®Mr. Big¡¯ in the Big City Burke: The Palin Trig-ger Blyth: Crowded Booth Hoopes: Did W. Backfire? Hemingway: Oliver¡¯s Insult Schulz: Obama: Mystery Man on Energy Hanson: An Instructive Candidacy Moyar: 1976 Is Back Coulson: Vouching for Obama Goldberg: Racy Content Lowry: Barack Obama, False Moderate Although the press has been notably lax about pursuing the matter, the full story of the Obama-Ayers relationship calls the truth of Obama¡¯s account seriously into question. When Obama made his first run for political office, articles in both the Chicago Defender and the Hyde Park Herald featured among his qualifications his position as chairman of the board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, a foundation where Ayers was a founder and guiding force. Obama assumed the Annenberg board chairmanship only months before his first run for office, and almost certainly received the job at the behest of Bill Ayers. During Obama¡¯s time as Annenberg board chairman, Ayers¡¯s own education projects received substantial funding. Indeed, during its first year, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge struggled with significant concerns about possible conflicts of interest. With a writ to aid Chicago¡¯s public schools, the Annenberg challenge played a deeply political role in Chicago¡¯s education wars, and as Annenberg board chairman, Obama clearly aligned himself with Ayers¡¯s radical views on education issues. With Obama heading up the board and Ayers heading up the other key operating body of the Annenberg Challenge, the two would necessarily have had a close working relationship for years (therefore ¡°exchanging ideas on a regular basis¡±). So when Ayers and Dorhn hosted that kickoff for the first Obama campaign, it was not a random happenstance, but merely further evidence of a close and ongoing political partnership. Of course, all of this clearly contradicts Obama¡¯s dismissal of the significance of his relationship with Ayers. This much we know from the public record, but a large cache of documents housed in the Richard J. Daley Library at the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC), is likely to flesh out the story. That document cache contains the internal files of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. The records in question are extensive, consisting of 132 boxes, containing 947 file folders, a total of about 70 linear feet of material. Not only would these files illuminate the working relationship between Obama and Bill Ayers, they would also provide significant insight into a web of ties linking Obama to various radical organizations, including Obama-approved foundation gifts to political allies. Obama¡¯s leadership style and abilities are also sure to be illuminated by the documents in question. Cover-Up? Unfortunately, I don¡¯t yet have access to the documents. The Special Collections section of the Richard J. Daley Library agreed to let me read them, but just before I boarded my flight to Chicago, the top library officials mysteriously intervened to bar access. Circumstances strongly suggest the likelihood that Bill Ayers himself may have played a pivotal role in this denial. Ayers has long taught at UIC, where the Chicago Annenberg Challenge offices were housed, rent-free. Ayers likely arranged for the files of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge to be housed in the UIC library, and may well have been consulted during my unsuccessful struggle to gain access to the documents. Let me, then, explain in greater detail what the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC) records are, and how I have been blocked from seeing them. Initially, as I said, library officials said that I could examine the CAC records. I received this permission both over the phone and in writing. The subsequent denial of access came with a series of evolving explanations. Is this a politically motivated cover-up? Although at this stage it is impossible to know, it is hard to avoid the suspicion. I also have some concerns for the security of the documents, although I have no specific evidence that their security is endangered. In any case, given the relative dearth of information about Barack Obama¡¯s political past, there is a powerful public interest in the swift release of these documents.

It said:

“How can ministers who are supposed to lead their flock to Jesus Christ instead lead them to a socialist like Obama? The truth is that most black ministers don’t have a real relationship with God and they are leading their congregations to he11. These blind leaders helped elect their black ‘Messiah’. This ‘Messiah’ happens to be the most left-wing member of the U.S. Senate,” said Rev. Peterson.

I posted above in this thread.  More and more is coming out every day.  Another regime change, only this time with nukes.  Another predetermination of the reaction of Iranian people and another delusion that we will capture the *hearts and minds* of Iranians.  Military officials threatening to resign if this idiotic plan continues to move forward. 

As far as being public enemy #___ (fill in the blank), I'm sure I'm considered one of Bush's *enemies* (any American who thinks he's nuts).  Russia (remember Putin's *soul* that Bush looked so deeply into and what it *revealed* to him) is on the side of the Iranians.  Bush will singlehandedly get the Cold War SIZZLING.  What an accomplishment, in addition to his other *achievements* during his reign as King George!

Americans apparently have no representation in Congress.  They all seem to be paralyzed. 

I'm looking at the bright side.  I think I'll go get about a dozen credit cards and max them to the hilt!  Won't be any creditors or debtors still alive and kicking by the end of the year at this rate!  May as well go out with a BANG!

Sounds to me like you think I am bashing Bush. I am not. Read the whole thing. There is much more.

Two small paragraphs from the article:

"It seems that no matter what Mr. Bush does, he is blamed for everything. He remains despised by the left while continuously disappointing the right.

Yet it should seem obvious that many of our country's current problems either existed long before Mr. Bush ever came to office, or are beyond his control. Perhaps if Americans stopped being so divisive, and congressional leaders came together to work with the president on some of these problems, he would actually have had a fighting chance of solving them."

It's in question and answer format and some truth and examples. I think you will find it interesting.

http://www.ontheissues.org/domestic/Barack_Obama_Gun_Control.htm

Why No Tea and Sympathy?

Hate to be *slamming* guys..Im working this weekend and on break time, Im here *smile*.

Editorials, Including Those at Conservative Papers, Rip Bush's Hurricane Response

By E&P Staff

Published: September 02, 2005 12:30 PM ET

NEW YORK Editorials from around the country on Friday -- including at the Bush-friendly Dallas Morning News and The Washington Times -- have, by and large, offered harsh criticism of the official and military response to the disaster in the Gulf Coast. Here's a sampling.

Dallas Morning News

As a federal official in a neatly pressed suit talked to reporters in Washington about little bumps along the road in emergency efforts, New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin issued an urgent SOS. The situation near the convention center was chaotic; not enough buses were available to evacuate thousands of survivors, and the streets were littered with the dead.

Moments later, President Bush took center stage and talked at length about the intricacies of energy policy and plans to keep prices stable. Meanwhile, doctors at hospitals called the Associated Press asking to get their urgent message out: We need to be evacuated, we're taking sniper fire, and nobody is in charge.

Who is in charge?

Losing New Orleans to a natural disaster is one thing, but losing her to hopeless gunmen and a shameful lack of response is unfathomable. How is it that the U.S. military can conquer a foreign country in a matter of days, but can't stop terrorists controlling the streets of America or even drop a case of water to desperate and dying Americans?

President Bush, please see what's happening. The American people want to believe the government is doing everything it can do -- not to rebuild or to stabilize gas prices -- just to restore the most basic order. So far, they are hearing about Herculean efforts, but they aren't seeing them.

***

The Washington Times

Troops are finally moving into New Orleans in realistic numbers, and it's past time. What took the government so long? The thin veneer separating civilization and chaos, which we earlier worried might collapse in the absence of swift action, has collapsed.

We expected to see, many hours ago, the president we saw standing atop the ruin of the World Trade Center, rallying a dazed country to action. We're pleased he finally caught a ride home from his vacation, but he risks losing the one trait his critics have never dented: His ability to lead, and be seen leading.

He returns to the scene of the horror today, and that's all to the good. His presence will rally broken spirits. But he must crack heads, if bureaucratic heads need cracking, to get the food, water and medicine to the people crying for help in New Orleans and on the Mississippi coast. The list of things he has promised is a good list, but there is no time to dally, whether by land, sea or air. We should have delivered them yesterday. Americans are dying.

***

Philadelphia Inquirer (and other Knight Ridder papers)

I hope people don't point -- play politics during this period. That was President Bush's response yesterday to criticism of the U.S. government's inexplicably inadequate relief efforts following Hurricane Katrina.

Sorry, Mr. President, legitimate questions are being asked about the lack of rescue personnel, equipment, food, supplies, transportation, you name it, four days after the storm. It's not playing politics to ask why.
It's not playing politics to ask questions about what Americans watched in horror on TV yesterday: elderly people literally dying on the street outside the New Orleans convention center because they were sick and no one came to their aid.

The rest of America can't fathom why a country with our resources can't be at least as effective in this emergency as it was when past disasters struck Third World nations. Someone needs to explain why well-known emergency aid lessons aren't being applied here.

This hurricane is no one's fault; the devastation would be hard to handle no matter who was in charge. But human deeds can mitigate a disaster, or make it worse.

For example: Did federal priorities in an era of huge tax cuts shortchange New Orleans' storm protection and leave it more vulnerable? This flooding is no surprise to experts. They've been warning for more than 20 years that the levees keeping Lake Pontchartrain from emptying into the under-sea-level city would likely break under the strain of a Category 3 hurricane. Katrina was a Category 4.

So the Crescent City sits under water, much of its population in a state of desperate, dangerous transience, not knowing when they will return home. They're the lucky ones, though. Worse off are those left among the dying in a dying town.

The questions aren't about politics. They are about justice.

***

Minneapolis Star Tribune

But whatever the final toll, the wrenching misery and trauma confronting the people of New Orleans is much greater than it should be -- as it is, in fact, for tens of thousands of people along the strip of Mississippi that was most brutally assaulted by the storm. The immediate goal must be to ease that suffering. The second goal must be to understand how we came to this sorry situation.

How do you justify cutting $250 million in scheduled spending for crucial pump and levee work in the Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project (SELA), authorized by Congress in 1995?

How do you explain the almost total lack of coordination among federal, state and local officials both in Louisiana and Mississippi? No one appeared in charge.

***

Des Moines Register

The devastation wrought by Hurricane Katrina was the first practical test of the new homeland-security arrangements and the second test of President Bush in the face of a national crisis.

The performance of both has been less than stellar so far.

Katrina was a disaster that came with at least two days of warning, and it has been more than four days since the storm struck. Yet on Thursday, refugees still huddled unrescued in the unspeakable misery of the New Orleans Superdome. Patients in hospitals without power and water clung to life in third-world conditions. Untold tragedies lie yet to be discovered in the rural lowlands of Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/senator_obamas_

four_tax_increa.html

I confess.  Senator Obama's two tax promises: to limit tax increases to only those making over $250,000 a year, and to not raise taxes on 95% of "working Americans," intrigued me.  As a hard-working small business owner, over the past ten years I've earned from $50,000 to $100,000 per year.  If Senator Obama is shooting straight with us, under his presidency I could look forward to paying no additional Federal taxes -- I might even get a break -- and as I struggle to support a family and pay for two boys in college, a reliable tax freeze is nearly as welcome as further tax cuts.

I found particularly interesting the link within the article to a writing by Edwin Vieira, Jr.  If his suppositions hold true, then we could be in for even more trouble that we had imagined.  He presented a very interesting scenario towards the end of his article.

Unfortunately, those who support Obama will negate this as "not a credible source" before even reading the first article, much less the second.  Vieira's credentials are outlined at the end of the article and are stellar. 

U.S. military was protecting the Hezbollah supporters. Am I really missing it?