Since my blog has moved, I can no longer use Bloggers "Follower" gadget. If you are a part of NetWorked blogs, which includes a Facebook page, you can follow through NetworkedBlogs, and I can follow you back. Please come to my new blog - MaggiesNotebook.com, see the NetworkedBlogs widget in the right sidebar and click follow. I will follow back.
"I learned that in extreme situations when human lives and dignity are at state, neutrality is a sin. It helps the killers, not the victims." Elie Wiesel, Holocaust Survivor who lost his family in the Holocaust - Nobel Prize Author
Socialism - Liberalism Quotation
"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened." – Norman Thomas
Former Illinois governor, Rod Blagojevich, surely didn't think any judge would allow Barack Obama to be subpoenaed in his political corruption trial. The subpoena request has been denied because the court believes Obama had nothing to materially impact the case.
U.S. District Judge James Zagel ruled Friday that lawyers for Blagojevich had not produced sufficient evidence that Obama would have anything material to say on the witness stand.
9. Yet, despite President Obama stating that no representatives of his had any part of any deals, labor union president told the FBI and the United States Attorneys that he spoke to labor union official on November 3, 2008 who received a phone message from Obama that evening....Labor union president took that to mean that labor union official was to be the one to deliver the message on behalf of Obama that Senate Candidate B was his pick.(Labor union president 302, February 2, 2009, p. 7)
12. On November 5, 2008, Blagojevich told John Harris that labor union official “talked to Barack Obama, wants to come and see me.” Blagojevich then told Harris that labor union official “was very explicit with me, “I talked to Barack about the Senate seat. Can I come and see ya? Can I do it tomorrow?’ I said, sure.” (Blagojevich Home Phone Call # 261).
13. A supporter of Presidential Candidate Obama suggested that she talk to the wife of Governor Blagojevich about Senate Candidate B for Senator. (Valerie Jarrett 302, December 19, 2008). Supporter of Presidential Candidate Obama is mentioned in a phone call on November 3, 2008, having offered “fundraising” in exchange for Senate Candidate B for senator (Blagojevich Home Phone Call # 149).
17. President-elect Obama also spoke to Governor Blagojevich on December 1, 2008 in Philadelphia. On Harris Cell Phone Call # 139, John Harris and Governor’s legal counsel discuss a conversation Blagojevich had with President-elect Obama. The government claims a conspiracy existed from October 22, 2008 continuing through December 9, 2008.6 That conversation is relevant to the defense of the government’s theory of an ongoing conspiracy. Only Rod Blagojevich and President Obama can testify to the contents of that conversation. The defense is allowed to present evidence that corroborates the defendant’s testimony.
18. President-elect Obama also suggested Senate Candidate A to Governor Blagojevich. John Harris told the FBI and the United States Attorneys that he spoke to President’s Chief of Staff on November 12, 2008. Harris took notes of the conversation and wrote that President’s Chief had previously worked as Blagojevich's press secretary. Obama agreed of Staff told Harris that Senate Candidate A was acceptable to Obama as a senate pick. (Harris handwritten notes, OOG1004463) President’s Chief of Staff told the FBI that “he could not say where but somewhere it was communicated to him that” Senate Candidate A was a suggested candidate viewed as one of the four “right” candidates “by the Obama transition team.” (Rahm Emanuel 302, p. 5, December 20, 2008). Harris told Blagojevich Obama’s suggestion on November 12, 2008 (Blagojevich Home Phone Call # 539).
19. President-elect Obama was also involved in other senate candidate choices. On December 8, 2008, John Harris’ secretary’s call log noted President’s Chief of Staff called at 10:47 am and wrote “needs to talk to you asap” (Harris 302, February 20, 2009). President’s Chief of Staff told the FBI that he had a conversation discussing the Senate seat with Obama on December 7, 2008 in Obama’s car. President’s Chief of Staff told the FBI “Obama expressed concern about Senate Candidate D being appointed as Senator. [President’s Chief of Staff] suggested they might need an expanded list to possibly include names of African Americans that came out of the business world. [President’s Chief of Staff] thought he suggested Senate Candidate E who was the head of the Urban League and with President’s Chief of Staff’s suggestion." (President’s Chief of Staff, 302, 12-20-08).
22. However, the defense has a good faith belief that Mr. Rezko, President Obama’s former friend, fund-raiser, and neighbor told the FBI and the United States Attorneys a different story about President Obama. In a recent in camera proceeding, the government tendered a three paragraph letter indicating that Rezko “has stated in interviews with the government that he engaged in election law violations by personally contributing a large sum of cash to the campaign of a public official who is not Rod Blagojevich. … Further, the public official denies being aware of cash contributions to his campaign by Rezko or others and denies having conversations with Rezko related to cash contributions. … Rezko has also stated in interviews with the government that he believed he transmitted a quid pro quo offer from a lobbyist to the public official, whereby the lobbyist would hold a fundraiser for the official in exchange for favorable official action, but that the public official rejected the offer. The public official denies any such conversation. In addition, Rezko has stated to the government that he and the public official had certain conversations about gaming legislation and administration, which the public official denies having had.”10
Blago didn't have a prayer with his subpoena request.
Crist was never one to demigogue, he says, right after he thanks his "God." Crist believes he is the people's choice and that is why he is switching parties to be an Independent - from the Republican party that was just swell not too long ago. Saying he will be with "you," - his supporters for EVAH, we see that whatever the issue might be, Crist will jump the fence to do it, if it will further his career. And by the way, he is talking to his "Father" much more these days, he said - and he didn't mean his biological father.
After Crist's announcement that he was moving to the Independent Party, his predecessor, Jeb Bush said this:
I am not surprised. This decision is not about policy or principles. It is about what he believes is his political self-interest.
About those Republicans who supported him when he was a Republican, but now want their money back, The Lonely Conservative says Crist is offering "pro-rated refunds." How about the money the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) gave him after jumping-the-gun and endorsing him immediately? Perhaps they'll get the message when their donations dry up.
"Do you love freedom? Do you love independence? If the current administration completes the process they are racing to achieve, all of this will be gone! To stop the madness, we must speak out now. BILLBOARDS AGAINST OBAMA is a practical and effective way to join the battle, be seen, be heard, before it's too late."
Three standard messages can be purchased from the group, with prices ranging from $2,500-$3,500 per month. Examples of the vitriolic slogans on offer include "Now It's Personal! America's Coming for You Congress! Vote Liberals Out in 2010!" and "If You're Not Outraged, You're Not Paying Attention."
The owners of the web site told11Alive Newstoday that they would not reveal who they are or where they are based, and that they will only communicate by e-mail. It is unclear whether they are driven primarily by ideology, financial interest or a combination of the two.
Isn't it ironic, that in the name of "civil rights," the civil rights of American citizens are routinely violated, sometimes in the most vile manner, ending in death for some. Here we have Congressman Anthony Weiner (D-NY-9th), saying unequivocally, that Arizona's new illegal immigration law is illegal; a claim for which he has no legal basis. Then he compares the law and the good people of Arizona to Nazism. Weiner, who's father was Jewish, knows exactly what his "Nazi" accusation means. Another despicable politician.
Rep. Anthony Weiner claims Arizona law akin to Nazism (video)
In this video, in 2006 Senator Barack Obama is talking about deporting illegal aliens: "We live in a country of laws. We don't do things based on one person's situation, no matter how painful." (The woman in the video was eventually deported, along with her son.)
Now I join those thinking it is time for Michael Steele to step down from his position as Chairman of the Republican National Committee. This interview puts legals and illegals in the same basket and tries to make them one. Speaking of Arizona's new illegal immigration law, Steele gives the basket a shake and says we certainly do need these people, but who is he speaking of - legals or illegals? Of "those coming to the process legally, the GOP must be "mindful our prior actions and our prior rhetoric...has not been the most welcoming and supportive to those wanting to learn English and get a job. He suggests we get on with the apple pie and singing a few bars of the Star Spangled Banner. What? He eventually mentions the Rule of Law.
Michael Steele
Republicans have never been unwelcoming to those "assimilating" legally. Shame on Steele, who I have unwaveringly supported, even when he said the Party was racist.
As a Party, we must be proud of standing for the Rule of Law, Had we respected our country's Rule of Law throughout the years, the U.S. would be safer and more economically stable, and the Arizona governor wouldn't be in the news
today.
Recently, as Steele tried to explain away some Republican Committee irresponsible spending, by saying some of the criticism might be be rooted in racism.
Steele is bouncing on and off the Party walls. It's time for him to go. We need a strong supporter of the Rule of Law heading the Party. It will gain us votes, and it is the right and honorable thing to do, in every case, not just illegal aliens.
Michael Steele: Republicans have not helped illegals assimilate (video)
Arizona lawmakers are submitting several changes to the new, controversial Illegal Alien bill, better known as the Illegal Immigration bill. Liberals are crying foul, and are certain that law enforcement in Arizona will gleefully go after anyone looking like an Hispanic, and take every opportunity to force them to prove they are in the country legally. So, some changes have been made to take those accusations off the table...but do we think there is anyway the Left will refrain from yelling "racism?"
U.S. and Arizona flags
Here are the changes the legislature made, which now needs Governor Jan Brewer's approval to become law, courtesy of ABC15.com:
The current law requires local and state law enforcement to question people about their immigration status if there's reason to suspect they're in the country illegally, and makes it a state crime to be in the United States illegally.
One change to the bill strengthens restrictions against using race or ethnicity as the basis for questioning and inserts those same restrictions in other parts of the law.
Changes to the bill language will actually remove the word "solely" from the sentence, "The attorney general or county attorney shall not investigate complaints that are based solely on race, color or national origin."
Another change replaces the phrase "lawful contact" with "lawful stop, detention or arrest" to apparently clarify that officers don't need to question a victim or witness about their legal status.
A third change specifies that police contact over violations for local civil ordinances can trigger questioning on immigration status.
The law's sponsor, Republican Sen. Russell Pearce, characterized the race and ethnicity changes as clarifications "just to take away the silly arguments and the games, the dishonesty that's been played."
Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Phoenix, said allowing immigration-status contacts for civil violations such as weed-infested yards or too many occupants in a residence could spur complaints of racial profiling.
Good grief. Now, and probably always, the police can't ask for verification when a neighbor files a complaint that "too many occupants" are living in a residence" - because it could "spur complaints of racial profiling." God help us.
Oh my, let's get all indignant on the topic of Wall Street and the liberal pursuit of villains to take the blame for choices made by others. Maureen (Moron) Dowd does her level best to support the Democratic party's attempt to shift blame. She pans 'Las Vegas metaphors' used by POLS in chastising Goldman Sachs while ignoring a basic rule designed to remind consumers of the pitfalls in the marketplace - caveat emptor, let the buyer beware.
According to Princeton's Wordnet, caveat emptor is described as 'a commercial principle that without a warranty the buyer takes upon himself the risk of quality.' Does it get any simpler than that?
Sure, let's talk about the greed of Wall Street and the bonuses received by Blankfein and others. Never mind the greed of those who were stung by real estate investments they would never have purchased had they performed the due diligence required.
This is no different than the wailing and gnashing of teeth coming from Enron employees who lost their jobs when that house of cards imploded as well as retirement accounts exclusively or largely built around Enron stock. Though one should never place all their investment eggs in one basket, the meteoric rise of Enron stock enticed the greedy to ignore another simple and common concept. If it seems to good to be true it probably is.
Conveniently, Dowd also ignores the role of many politicians steering Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, banking regulators and other government entities toward real estate disaster. A long history of accommodating the notion that everyone should own a home whether they can afford it or not led to 'no docs' loans and banking interests scurrying to unload bad mortgages they would not have produced on their own.
While POLS 'grill' Goldman Sachs in the US Senate and call for 'Wall Street reforms' take a look at Fannie and Freddie now and tell me anything has changed. As for those facing foreclosure since taking a mortgage they cannot afford or others lured by greed during the recent real estate 'bubble' POLS advocating more bailouts for bad decisions should be retired in November 2010.
It's about time people begin taking responsibility for their own failures. Crying foul when you end up on the losing side of a transaction and expecting others to take the blame is childish. Some forget that transactions on Wall Street between buyers and sellers are a zero sum game. For each transaction there is a winner and a loser. Someone posts a gain and someone posts a loss. Get over it or get out.
This bill, to put Puerto Rico on the road to deciding to become our 51st state, seemed to come out of nowhere, and it is not easily understood. The bill to give Puerto Rico the right to "self-determination," was passed today as a non-binding resolution in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Puerto Rico
Puerto Rico already has the right to "self-determination." Any time Puerto Rico wants to become a state, they can vote and then appeal to Congress for statehood. Today's non-binding vote is preparing for something bigger, but since no one is talking about it, we don't know the agenda. Now that the House has passed the bill, it moves to the Senate for approval. If Puerto Rico votes to be a U.S. state, it has to go back to Congress for a final vote.
Since 1952 when their Commonwealth status was established, Puerto Ricans have voted four times on the issue of statehood and each time have voted to retain their Commonwealth, and not become a state, in 1967, 199, 1998 and 1991. I believe it is accurate to say the question of statehood is required to be voted on at specific times.
There is a lot of talk that the questions presented to the voters will be different this time, that one option will not be available, which will make the outcome different than in the past, and which will probably result in a vote to become a state. I can't verify that - as I said, it's complicated.
So, while the gut reaction yesterday, by conservatives, was this quiet vote in our House was to bring millions of Democrat voters into Liberal voting booths, and the cost of millions of low income residents would be an tremendous burden on our already suffering economy.
So, if that is the case, why would some of our most Conservative House members vote for the bill? Are the people died-in-the-wool, committed Democrats that will vote by thousands and give Liberals a permanent or majority, or are there a fair share of Conservatives on the Island? I don't know the answer, and suspect we have much more to learn.
Glenn Beck mentioned Puerto Rico's "Progressive Party," yesterday, and that has scary connotations for a Conservative, but are their "progressives," the same as our "progressives?" From what I can cobble together, the Republican Statehood Party split after the 1967 vote, when statehood was voted down. The split brought the New Progressive Party, which I believe also wants statehood, along with the current Republican Party which leads the current government. Stay tuned and if you have an opinion, let me know.
The PR situation is even worse
than we know. Just last month the RINO governor of PR declared all
their birth certificates as invalid. The citizens now have to reapply
for new birth certificates. The fraudulent excuse he gave was that
identity theft was rampant. How convienient that he did this right
before a vote of the people for statehood would occur. Could it
possibly be because they voted it down three times before? Could he
possibly be stacking the deck so they can defeat the will of the people
by not allowing them to vote? Could it possibly be that he is also
opening the door for millions of illegals to now apply for free birth
certificates? I think it is possible.
He is one of the worst
RINO's than we have ever seen here in the states. He supports
everything obamacorn is about and is vocal about it. He wants to help
obama get a second term, and this is all part of his plan.
I
cannot believe that I am the only one talking about this...
In
March 2010 Puerto Rico declared all their birth certificates
invalid!!!!!
Voter fraud & illegals get free birth
certificates. You betcha.
Source: House Clerk: Republicans (39) Voting "Yea" for Non-Binding Puerto Rico Democracy Act
Bartlett, Roscoe (MD)
Biggert, Judy (IL)
Blackburn, Marsha (TN)
Brown-Waite, Ginny (FL)
Buchanan, Vern (FL)
Burton, Dan (IN)
Buyer, Steve (IN)
Campbell, (CA)
Cantor, Eric (VA)
Cao, Joseph (LA)
Castle, Mike (DE)
Coffman (CO)
Cole, Tom (OK)
Crenshaw, Ander (FL)
Dent, Charlie (PA)
Diaz-Balart, Lincoln (FL)
Diaz-Balart, Mario (FL)
Ehlers, Vernon (MI)
Flake, Jeff (AZ)
Frelinghuysen, Rodney (NJ)
Hensarling< Jeb (TX)
Issa, Darrell (CA)
King, Pete (NY)
Kirk, Mark (IL)
Kline (MN)
Lungren, Daniel E. (CA)
Mack, Connie IV (FL)
McCarthy, Kevin (CA)
Mica, John (FL)
Murphy, Tim (PA)
Pence, Mike (IN)
Posey, Bill (FL)
Putnam, Adam (FL)
Reichert, Dave (WA)
Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana (FL)
Schock, Aaron (FL)
Thompson, Glenn (PA)
Walden, Greg (OR)
Young, Don (AK)
Straight from Obama's Marxist, fire-breathing, racist mouth, he strays off-teleprompter, and we hear it from him - he who made $5.5 million in 2009, there comes a time when we've made enough money. See video below.
From the video:
[OBAMA] We’re not, we’re not trying to push financial reform because we begrudge
success that’s fairly earned. I mean, I do think at a certain point
you’ve made enough money. But, you know, part of the American way is,
you know, you can just keep on making it if you’re providing a good
product or providing good service. We don’t want people to stop, ah,
fulfilling the core responsibilities of the financial system to help
grow our economy.
"The core responsibilities" - like sharing our wealth? Like he told Joe the Plumber, to help "the guy behind us?" Americans do not have a responsibility to grow the economy. When we take care of our business, the economy grows. The responsibility to ourselves and our families, our church and the other private and charitable outreaches we choose to make - those are our responsibilities.
Obama is so steeped in collectivism, that he doesn't have a clue how this country works, or the fight he will face as we take this country back from him.
"This bill is not the product of consensus. It does not provide for true self-determination. The two-step process in the bill is designed to craft an artificial majority for statehood," Velazquez and Gutierrez said in their e-mail.
"The people of Puerto Rico deserve a truly fair, democratic and inclusive self-determination process that is the product of consensus. H.R. 2499 does not provide for such a process. It is divisive, unfair and undemocratic."
I have contacted each member of the Oklahoma delegation about the Puerto Rican Democracy Act, H.R. 2499. The bill is still being debated. I believe it is safe to say, the Oklahoma delegation will vote against the bill. Rep. Cole's office wasn't completely clear and Rep. Fallin will not be available to vote. Have you called your delegation? There's still time, and believe me, Congress is recording your opinion.
Oklahoma
For background on the importance of voting this bill down, read this.
According to their offices:
Rep. Dan Boren (D) will vote not to pass the bill as we know it.
Rep. Tom Cole (R) no definite answer. Cole has not yet made up his mind, but a spokesman said it is possible that the bill will be gutted. I believe the intimation was, if the bill can be gutted, the Congressman might be a "Yes" vote, which concludes that he is against the bill as we know it.
Rep. Mary Fallin (R) is out of the office with an emergency root canal, but her office is tallying the opinions of voters.
Rep. Frank Lucas (R) is voting against the bill as we know it.
Rep. John Sullivan (R) is voting against the bill as we know it.
Arizona governor, Jan Brewer, explains in no uncertain words, the horrors residents of Arizona are going through because of broken borders, and why the new Arizona law to handle illegal aliens is exactly like federal law, and will not result in civil rights violations. See a video below.
Jan Brewer
Every U.S. president is charged with the same prime responsibility: keep America safe. Instead, every president after Reagan has allowed open borders to increase to boost their voting base. Every one of those presidents should have been impeached. Every Republican candidate for Congress must know that he/she will not get our vote unless they commit to a "real" fence, of however many levels it takes to do the job, and promises never to vote for amnesty.Every member of Congress must lose their job unless they adhere to the Rule of Law, which is, if you are here illegally, you are illegal and have broken the Rule of Law. It's a "mindset," America. We must adopt it with firm resolve, it is our only protection.
Brewer, speaking of Janet Napolitano, Homeland Security Secretary, and Brewer's predecessor, the Governor says this:
I have written her a letter, of course, and I've seen -- I saw her at a meeting. But she obviously is turning a blind eye to Arizona. She understands what the situation is. She wrote numerous letters when she was governor to the administration, looking for help and some relief.
And for her to make the comment that she made that the borders are, what was it, that the borders just as secure -- are more secure than they have ever been -- well, they've never been secure. We are a gateway for every illegal immigration and criminal element into the United States.
I'm impressed with Governor Brewer's resolve. God bless her as she fights this battle for all of us.
Governor Jan Brewer on Arizona illegal aliens and Janet Napolitano (video)
Listen to this conversation: can you believe Florida governor, Charlie Crist, would possibly contact Rahm Emanuel about caucusing with Democrats if he can win the Florida senate seat as an Independent.
Background: Sitting Governor Charlie Crist announced today he will leave the Republican Party (because he would lose the primary to Republican Marco Rubio) and would run for Florida's senate seat as an Independent.
Karl Rove on Charlie Crist and Rahm Emanuel (video)
Al and Tipper Gore have purchased a mansion with an ocean view on 1.5 acres with six fireplaces, a swimming pool, spa and fountains and - Oprah lives in the neighborhood. The price tag: $8,875,000. The global warming lie, and especially the fear-mongering insistence that the "oceans would rise" and displace man, land and life, has been profitable for the Gore's. Source: Los Angeles Times
In June 2008, soon-to-be president, Barack Obama, magnanimously assured all of us: "This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow...." but there was no sea level rise. It was all a hoax...a ruse...a money-making scheme, and scientists have now withdrawn their claims. Read
more on sea levels not rising here.
April 19, 2009: PORT-OF-SPAIN, Trinidad and Tobago -- Caribbean nations face "very, very
scary" rises in sea level and intensifying hurricanes, and Florida,
Louisiana and even northern California could be overrun with rising
water levels due to global warming triggered by carbon-based greenhouse
gases, Energy Secretary Steven Chu said Saturday.
Sea Rise
June 30, 2009: The global warming promoting website
RealClimate.org, is under fire yet again from a prominent scientist for
presenting incorrect climate information.
Climatologist Dr. Roger Pielke
Sr. publicly rebuked the website in a June 30, 2009
article for "erroneously
communicating the reality of the how the climate system is actually
behaving." Pielke, the former Colorado State Climatologist and currently
a senior scientist at the University of Colorado in Boulder, countered Real
Climate's claim that warming was "progressing faster than
expected" with the latest data on sea level rise, ocean heat content and
Arctic ice.
Sea levels are not rising, and Gore's movie "An Inconvenient Truth" has turned out to be inconveniently untruthful. He claimed in the film, for which he won an Oscar and and a Nobel Peace prize, that sea levels could rise up to 20 feet. But in November 2009, Gore told a meeting of Middle Eastern countries the oceans would rise 67 metres, or 220 feet:
“Each one metre of sea level rise is associated with 100 million climate
refugees in the world,” the Nobel laureate told a business forum in Dubai, which could see its famous man-made islands disappear under the waves if his prediction prove true.
“The North Pole ice cap is 40 percent gone already and could be
completely and totally gone in the winter months in the next 5 to 10
years,” he warned.
If the North Pole were to melt it could increase sea levels by 67
metres, Gore said, speaking in the heart of an oil-rich region not known
for its regard for the environment.
The inconvenient truth is, Liberals all over the world have made Al Gore a gazillionaire. He and others continue to suck billions out of world governments and taxpayer monies, and Al and Tipper continue to leave their gargantuan carbon footprint on the world.
I didn't hear Glenn Beck's radio show today but I did see some of his TV show. The U.S. House will vote to allow Puerto Rico to become a U.S. state. This is a complicated matter but the video gives an excellent explanation of the coming convoluted action in the House of tomorrow, April 29, with a vote on the Puerto Rico Democracy Act (H.R.
2499). See a video below.
Puerto Rico
This involves a new political party in Puerto Rico - The Progressive Party - which has figured out how engineer the Territory of Puerto Rico into U.S. statehood, even though Puerto Rico has never wanted statehood in the past. There are sources that I cannot cite that say the New Progressive Party "advocates for Puerto Rico's admission to the United States of America as the 51st state. Since 2008, I believe I am correct saying that the Progressive Party holds a large majority in their House of Representatives and Senate.
Important: Please call your Congresscritters on Friday April 29 - early as possible, as we don't know the time of the vote. Tell them to vote NO on H.R. 2499.
The possibility is that Puerto Rico becomes a state, and the Democrats gain 6 Congressmen and 2 Democrat Senators.
Basically, what they’ll do is rig the questions so that most Puerto
Ricans wind up voting for statehood, especially because American
citizens with Puerto Rican heritage can vote. There are more Puerto
Rican-Americans than there are citizens of Puerto Rico and Puerto
Rican-Americans are in favor of statehood for Puerto Rico. Once Puerto
Rico becomes a state, there’s no doubt the Puerto Ricans will vote for
the Democrats. Their national median income is about a third what it is
in the US, so we’ll be adding about4 million Puerto Ricans to the
welfare rolls.
Quietly sailing through the House this week is yet another piece of partisan stealth legislation aimed at manufacturing more Democrat power at the expense ofthe American people, the economy and the country.
Not only is Puerto Rico already a fully-functioning democracy, but it
has also repeatedly rejected attempts to turn it into a U.S. state, for
decades.
But still, desperate to create new Democrat voters and
elected officials, the left is now aggressively setting the stage for
the creation of a 51st state.
Due to its dense population of
poverty-stricken minorities, Puerto Rico can be counted on to vote
overwhelmingly for Democrats and all their handouts, and their
representation will also consequently outnumber that of 25 other
existing U.S. states.
Meanwhile, with Puerto Ricans having
an average income of less than half that of our poorest state, they will
instantly become eligible for dozens of our welfare programs. Truckloads
of taxpayer dollars will also have to be perpetually dumped into the
territory, by federal law, to bring it up to American infrastructure and
environmental standards.
* The U.S. would transform, overnight, into a bilingual nation. At least
half of Puerto Ricans do not speak English, the language of our U.S.
Constitution and founding documents. The Washington Times article,
“Puerto Rican statehood,” analyzes all the implications of adding a
foreign language-speaking state to the Union.
NASA launched the Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) in February 2010. The five-year mission will provide never-before-seen "ultra high definition images back to earth.
"It's huge. That's solar flare. It
doesn't look like it's that big, but if you take into account the size
of the sun, that is actually tens of thousands of miles off the surface
as it rotates up and falls back in. It doesn't happen as rapidly as
that. This is a time lapse, so it takes a couple hours for it to
actually do that."
The SDO collects enormous amounts of
data every day — enough to fill one
CD every 36 seconds. On InformationWeek, a NASA rep says the observatory's
latest data will have a colossal impact on the study of the sun.
The video below says that the popular Fox show, Glee, turned Left as soon as the show's popularity began its monumental rise. The question is, does the Liberal-bent of the show lead high schoolers down the Leftard road? Of course it does. The shock would be if we had talented, singing and dancing teenagers with a single conservative thought in their heads, because that just doesn't happen.
Noel Koch, the top Pentagon official in charge of the Wounded Warrior Program says Clifford Stanley, the undersecretary of defense for personnel asked him, via email, to step down from the position. He was appointed to the position by President Obama in May 2009, and was the first to hold the title.
Koch said he believes the decision was unjust and that he resigned "under duress" after Stanley told him he had no confidence in him. The Pentagon had no comment.
"No explanation was given, although I pressed for one," he said. "No prior indication of dissatisfaction with the work of this office was cited."
Koch said the wounded warrior program has done good work during the past 11 months since his appointment to lead the new office.
Koch's official title was Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for the Office of Wounded Warrior Care and Transition Policy. See his biography here.
In this role, he is responsible for policy and programs related to disability systems, Service member transitions to Veteran status, separations from the Armed Forces, and wounded warrior care coordination. He works closely with the Department of Veterans Affairs and other federal agencies to ensure medical and non-medical services are provided across the full continuum of care for wounded Service members, Veterans and families from recovery to rehabilitation through reintegration.
Mr. Koch recently served as the President and Chief Executive Officer of TranSecur, Inc., a global security corporation providing information and support services to foreign and domestic government agencies, corporations, families, and individuals at risk from crime, terrorism and related high-level threats in the multinational environment. Services include threat assessment; vulnerability analysis; security systems design, implementation, and management; crisis management systems design and assistance; and, security awareness training for high-risk personnel. TranSecur, Inc. has offices in the U.S., the Middle East, and Southeast Asia.
Mr. Koch is an expert on terrorism and security-related issues, with over forty years experience in developing intelligence and advanced analytical procedures for identifying and assessing potential threats to individuals, and institutional or corporate assets; and, providing security and protective services, including personal security details, facilities security, security force management, personal security awareness training for executives and other high-risk personnel.
AlterNet published a piece titled There Must Be Someway Out of Here, about soldiers suffering PTSD, and often, suicidal tendencies, after returning to the U.S. The road is steep for these soldiers - and one put it: "it's just a very dark place:"
Several reports last year exposed military foot-dragging on medical discharge as well as committing to diagnoses of PTSD....
And then they mentioned Noel Koch:
Of Course, Heads Must Roll
Call it a coincidence but, on the heels of the New York Times piece came the news, on Sunday, that Noel Koch, the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Wounded Warrior Care and Transition policy had been relieved of that position.
And then a possible explanation for the need for new Wounded Warrior leadership:
Problem Not Responding to Appropriations
Meanwhile, the Pentagon is “just baffled” by the fact that millions of dollars and revamped veteran’s programs have not stemmed the ever-increasing tide of military suicides. Just this morning, this report ran in Army Times:
“Troubling new data show there are (sic) an average of 950 suicide attempts each month by veterans who are receiving some type of treatment from the Veterans Affairs Department. Seven percent of the attempts are successful, and 11 percent of those who don’t succeed on the first attempt try again within nine months. The numbers, which come at a time when VA is strengthening its suicide prevention programs, show about 18 veteran suicides a day, about five by veterans who are receiving VA care.”
Something is definitely NOT working here despite whatever tweaks to programs have been tried. There are now more veterans killing themselves than are killed in battle.
The military tend to dance around the obvious “suspects” of multiple deployments and abbreviated dwell time (time spent at home between deployments); basically, because they are strapped for volunteer troops and have to deploy and redeploy to keep “boots on the ground” in multiple war zones. And whereas the Pentagon has a virtual blank check for analyzing weapons systems and planning the Long War out to 2050 and fun stuff like that, it doesn’t seem to have the time, money or inclination to do a deep dive into the suicidal troops problem.
The remainder of the AlterNet article is a must-read. I can't verify all that it says, but it seems obvious that our warriors are serving multiple tours in war zones, and might need some extra help when they arrive home to assist them in moving on to living a healthy life, after seeing and doing things that most of us will never face. I hope you will read it here.
Noel Koch is a veteran of the Vietnam war and served six years in the U.S. Army. A quick search of the Internet shows that Koch is a frequent contributor to many publications.
This is the idea of fun of the Nazis who run Comedy Central:
The Comedy Central website has created an anti-semitically named game there called "I.S.R.A.E.L. Attacks," in which a murderous robot called Israel is called upon to wipe out every cartoon character on the show.
Caving into Islam, promoting Anti-Semitism, what is next? Promoting cartoons from Hamas as good children's shows?
I am beginning to believe that there is an organized effort in the medi and government to not only delegitimatize Israel, but to demonize Jews. Thus the rise in Anti-Semitic incidences on American Universities, in the media, and by government officials.
I'm asking everyone to contact Comedy Central's President/CEO: Doug Herzog
Marco Rubio, a Republican running for Florida's U.S. Senate seat, said he has "concerns" about the Arizona so-called "Immigration" law, which is clearly and "illegal alien" law. Rubio is a smart guy. He knows this is not about putting law enforcement officers in a "difficult" position, as he states, because police are in "difficult" positions everyday. He cites the possibility of the law "singling" out legal citizens, which is unfortunate, but when, and if, it happens, it's a necessity to put an end to this problem. One illegals are identified, and the border is closed, legals won't have to worry about being misidentified.
Marco Rubio
He is also concerned about "Big Brother Arizona," and says "when government is given an inch, it takes a mile." Once he is sitting in the U.S. Senate, I hope he remember that.
He also blames the necessity for a new law on the federal government not accomplishing immigration reform, but here's the thing: there is no push to "reform" in any conservative way. Every option we have been given, going back years, is out-of-the question, and it always involves leaving illegals illegally in the U.S.
Both federal and state laws say to be in the U.S. illegally is illegal. That's the law. Let's start there.
Asnoted below, the law says that police would only check on a person's immigration status if they had stopped a person for violating some other law, i.e. a traffic violation. But Arizona officials may bear some responsibility for concerns about how the law would be implemented by passing the law and leaving questions about its implementation to be resolved in the future. As theAP reported, Gov. Jan Brewer "ordered the state's law enforcement licensing agency to develop a training course on how to implement it without violating civil rights." Perhaps the law's backers could have cleared up concerns by laying out how it would be implemented right after the law was signed.
Marco Rubio needs to toughen up, and face the big problem that legal Arizonans of all ethnicities are living with everyday - 500,000 illegals in their midst.
We've seen numerous reports in the past that the Bible's Noah's Ark was found in Turkey. There is a new report out that a site believed to be the famous Noah's Ark has been found 13,000' up Mt. Ararat in Turkey. This is the highest point reported for the Ark sighting.
Noah's Ark by Edward Hicks
Chinese and Turkish "evangelical" explorers claim they have found the wooden remains, according to this report.
...carbon dating proves the relics are 4,800 years old -- around the same time the ark was said to be afloat....Local Turkish officials will ask the central government in Ankara to apply for UNESCO World Heritage status so the site can be protected while a major archeological dig is conducted.
"It's not 100% that it is Noah's Ark, but we think it is 99l9% that this is it," Yeung Wing-cheung, a Hong Kong documentary filmmaker, told AFP.
Wing-Cheung, a member of the 15-member team from Noah's Ark Ministries International, said the structure in which they got the wood had several compartments that wer possibly used to store animals.
For information on Noah's Ark, read here and here. Visit art.com for a Noah's Ark print by Edwards Hicks.
See the Underwear, Christmas Day bomber in a terrorist training camp, and filming his "martyrdom" video. He is firing at the Israeli flag, the Star of David and drones in the sky. See it in the video below.
Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab
There were numerous eye-witness reports of an older man who was with Abdulmutallab in the airport, before boarding Northwest Flight 253. This "older man," according to passenger Kurt Haskell, helped Abdulmutallab secure a ticket without proper documents. Mr. Haskell's reports went nowhere. What do we know about this man?
Abdulmutallab seen in Terrorist Training Camps (video)
The critical race for Pennsylvania's 12th District to fill the seat vacated by the deceased John Murtha is heating up. In the video below, Tim Burns, a Republican, says "this race is no longer about John Murtha," "it is more about stopping the liberal agenda of Obama and Pelosi." Burns said the 12th District voted for Murtha simply because he had been there for so long. The 12th District special election is May 18, 2010.
Tim Burns
Burns says the 12th District is pro-gun, pro-life, against health care and against Cap and Trade. His Democrat opponent is Mark Critz, a former staffer in Murtha's office. Visit his website here.
Tim Burns, Republican for Murtha's Seat in Pennsylvania's 12th Congressional District
The former governor of Illinois, Rod Blagojevich, better known as "Blago" was on Greta's On the Record last night. Blagojevich is asking a court to subpoena Barack Obama for his coming trial. It is alleged that Blago attempted "to sell" Illinois U.S. Senator Barack Obama's Illinois senate seat. He was videotaped and wiretapped. The prosecution wants to allow only certain video tapes. Blago wants them all admitted into evidence and says they will prove him innocent. There is a "smoking gun" he says. This was an intriguing interview. See the transcript below the video.
Rod Blagojevich
Blago on Great's On The Record: There is a smoking Gun (video)
ROD BLAGOJEVICH, FORMER ILLINOIS GOVERNOR:
Thanks for being here. VAN SUSTEREN: All right, Governor,
you're in a little bit of a fix. You've this trial coming up June 3rd,
and a lot of pre-trial matters have come to light recently and I want to
talk to you about -- let's start first with the tapes. The prosecution
has wiretapped you, has tapes of you, and there's a dispute over what's
going to be played in court. What's the dispute?
BLAGOJEVICH: Well, they taped my
conversations for six weeks. Our government came in to the sanctity of
this home, actually, and put the wiretaps on these telephones and a lot
of other telephones.
I've taken the position from the very beginning that I'm
innocent of everything and anything they're falsely accusing me of, and
that a lot of the truth can be found in those tapes. And from the
beginning, I've said, Play all the tapes.
My lawyers were instructed by me to challenge the government. We
waived the opportunity to challenge the tapes, happily did that, and
challenged the government to say that, Allow both sides to play any tape
they want. They should play anything they want to play in court and let
us play any tape that we want to play in court. The government declined
to comment, and then they've recently gone into court, the snuck into
court to try to get the judge to rule that all the tapes should not be
played.
This case in so many ways is upside down. Mr. Fitzgerald, the
prosecutor, invades the sanctity of my home. The government is in here
looking at those private conversations. Those are his tapes and he's
going to court to suppress his own tapes. And I'm the one saying play
them all because I note the truth is on those tapes and will show I did
nothing wrong.
VAN SUSTEREN: You say he snuck into court. You
had no notice the prosecutor was going into court and say we only want
to play these tapes and not all the tapes?
BLAGOJEVICH: The way the motion was written by
the government with footnotes and buried in the body of a motion that
was filled with a lot of other things was an incipient request to
suggest that not all the tapes be heard. They even misled and said the
judge ruled that all the tapes wouldn't be played which was not the case
at the time they filed the motion.
VAN SUSTEREN: Has your lawyer heard all
these tapes?
BLAGOJEVICH: We had tapes for months.
VAN SUSTEREN: You have copies of the
tapes?
BLAGOJEVICH: Yes. Let me say this. I've been
consistent from the beginning. From the moment I was falsely accused, I
said long before we had access to the tapes, play all the tapes, because
I know who I am and I would not do the things they are suggesting that I
did.
And I know that notwithstanding some language on the tapes, the
use of pro fan, which I have apologized for. I didn't know --
VAN SUSTEREN: That is not a crime. Do you have
any idea how many hours of tapes the prosecution intends to play at your
June 3rd trial?
BLAGOJEVICH: I don't know that. But what I do
know is they have in a very dishonest way taken selective snippets of
conversations out of context, purposely misleading the people and
purposely providing false information.
VAN SUSTEREN: They've identified what tapes they
are going to play? You know what they are going to play?
BLAGOJEVICH: No. They've quoted some of them.
They've released a couple of them. And they've done it in a way where
snippets of conversations were taken out of context.
And if you are allowed to listen to the breadth of the
conversation -- again, I can't comment on what is on the tapes. The very
government that taped me went into court to say I can't what is on them
nor can I allow to you take a look at them.
VAN SUSTEREN: There's a gag order ton this part
of it, the contents of the tape?
BLAGOJEVICH: That's correct. And the
government sought that gag order. They've been free to take snippets of
conversation out whenever they choose to do it, and it is designed to
mislead the public.
VAN SUSTEREN: Hasn't the judge said, OK
Governor Blagojevich, you identify what tapes you want heard and I'll
consider it so it is not a complete bar at this point?
BLAGOJEVICH: That's correct. The judge
seems to be a fair and thoughtful man. He's obviously a very smart,
intelligent man who understands and knows the law. So he has said two
things. He said one publicly that if I testify that he wail will you us
to play the tapes we want to play.
VAN SUSTEREN: Just if you testify, not
for a doctrine of complete? Let's say hypothetically, a tape is put on
that has half a thought, and it is your position that half of thought
falsely convoys a message. Are you allowed to play the entire thought
without having to take the witness stand?
BLAGOJEVICH: I don't know that yet. The
judge has said that if I testify, which will, by the way, he will allow
us to play the tapes that we ask for. This is as I've been told by my
attorneys.
And the judge said in the last court day, and I was
there because I challenged the prosecutor to be there too, to explain
why he's preventing all the tapes from being heard except the tapes that
he went out and got.
But the judge said that -- instructed my lawyers to
submit to him the different tapes that we would be requesting to be
heard in court. And so, I'm cautiously optimistic and hopeful he will
say yes.
VAN SUSTEREN: What is the prosecution's
opposition? Do they think you are going to waste a lot of time and play
400 inconsequential conversations and bore the jury to death or do they
have a more sinister purpose to evade, confuse, or do something with
the jury?
BLAGOJEVICH: I fervently believe the
prosecution is trying to cover- up their misdeeds.
VAN SUSTEREN: Which misdeeds?
BLAGOJEVICH: That they arrested a
sitting governor and falsely accused him of things he didn't do and did
it in a super sensational press conference on December the ninth, 2008,
this is what Mr. Fitzgerald did. And e used and quoted from the tapes
from snippets of the tapes to suggest that was the basis for arresting a
governor in a state like Illinois -- unprecedented.
And he did it, and he said, and I'm quoting, that he was
doing to "stop a crime spree." The reality is when people hear the
whole truth and hear what was on those conversations, the days and weeks
leading up to those acts by the government, by the prosecutors, there
was no crime spree. He lied.
VAN SUSTEREN: Why did he do that? Just
for the sake of lying or something more sinister? Not that lying isn't
sinister.
BLAGOJEVICH: I believe the effort to
prevent all the tapes being played is designed to keep justice from
being heard in court as it is to cover-up their wrongdoing and misdeeds.
To suggest you should -- to arrest a sitting governor,
to state in a press conference where the whole world is listening that
you have a governor trying to sell a Senate seat for money which the
allegation he made at the press conversation that he had heard
conversations over the telephone, had to come in at 6:00 in the morning
in my home where my little girls are sleeping, invade the privacy of our
home to say they had to stop the crime spree before it happened is just
a flat out lie.
The tapes show what the truth is. I have said from the
beginning play all the tapes. Why is my accuser is trying to prevent the
full truth from being heard? I believe part of it is because he's
covering up the fact that he told this big lie that foreseeably led to a
chain of events that would remove a governor from office that would
undo the will of a people, undo an election, and he doesn't ever want
anybody to know that's what he did.
There's a smoking gun on these tapes, and that smoking
gun is directed and pointed at the prosecutor.
VAN SUSTEREN: You are in essence accused
of selling the Senate seat vacated by President Obama. Everyone that
you ever had a conversation with about that Senate seat, is there any
way you could have spoken to someone and not have it tapped. Did you
have a conversation in the car, for instance, with the other person?
BLAGOJEVICH: I had a conversation with
Senator Dick Durbin.
VAN SUSTEREN: Where?
BLAGOJEVICH: In my office in Chicago.
VAN SUSTEREN: Was your office bugged?
BLAGOJEVICH: They say it wasn't. So
Senator Durbin and I, we spoke about the Senate seat, and he offered to
be a go between. I decided that my first choice I was going to try to
appoint the daughter of my political nemesis, the House speaker was
blocking a public works bill that would create 500,000 jobs he was
blocking, health care for over 300,000 families, working people in
writing.
And I wanted a guarantee in writing to not raise taxes
on people.
VAN SUSTEREN: They say they didn't bug
your office.
BLAGOJEVICH: The office downtown
Chicago, that conversation with Senator Durbin, my recollection was
there. Bu I spoke to Senator Harry Reid --
VAN SUSTEREN: On the phone?
BLAGOJEVICH: On the telephone from my
campaign office. I spoke to Harry Reid about the Senate seat, enlisting
his help. Senator Menendez, the head of the Senate campaign committee
for the Democrats, who expressed an interest --
VAN SUSTEREN: On the phone?
BLAGOJEVICH: On the telephone, working
out what was going to be what I called the best political deal in the
political history second to the Louisiana Purchase, because I was going
to hold my nose and appoint someone who I thought was working against
the people in many ways, but notwithstanding, her father was creating
legislation gridlock.
VAN SUSTEREN: Who else did you talk to?
BLAGOJEVICH: I spoke to Rahm Emanuel. I
spoke to several people. VAN SUSTEREN: Who are the sort of the
main players in this discussion of the Senate seat? Who did you talk to
-- I'm trying to figure out who is going to be on tape and who is not.
BLAGOJEVICH: I can't tell you that
VAN SUSTEREN: Who do you remember
talking to, to give me some idea?
BLAGOJEVICH: Again, I spoke to Senator
Reid, Senator Menendez, then Congressman Rahm Emanuel days after the
election right here from this room, and several other people about
potential scenarios on the Senate seat.
VAN SUSTEREN: A lot of the
conversations about the Senate seat maybe some that aren't on tape but a
lot are or should be because they are done by telephone?
BLAGOJEVICH: Most of the conversations I
was engaged in during that six week period had been tape recorded. VAN SUSTEREN: You mentioned President
Obama. You have filed notice to the court that would you like to
subpoena him. And you have enumerated a number of reasons. What is it
that you think Senator Obama -- President Obama, then-Senate Obama,
could offer you at trial on June 3rd that would be helpful to your case?
BLAGOJEVICH: I think President Obama
can help prove my innocence.
VAN SUSTEREN: How?
BLAGOJEVICH: Let me say this, before
anybody says I'm interested in bringing everybody down with me. That's
completely not the case. I've done nothing wrong.
What I'm interested in is for the whole truth to come
out that neither did I do anything wrong, President Obama didn't do
anything wrong, the senators that I talked to didn't do anything wrong
either. And so they should come into court and tell the truth as they
know it. Swear on the Holy Bible as I'm looking forward to do --
VAN SUSTEREN: I got that, but what is
it that -- the judge is going to say how is President Obama going to
help your case? He is going to ask that flat out to your lawyer. Tell me
how.
BLAGOJEVICH: Again, a lot of evidence
and information that I'm prohibited by court order because it is under
seal to tell you. So there's relevance connected to that.
VAN SUSTEREN: In the pleading your
lawyers talked about a conversation in December '08, a conversation.
President Obama called you?
BLAGOJEVICH: Again, I can't -- because
of the court order and me following the law I can't comment specifically
on those telephone conversations. My lawyers filed motions in court.
They redacted, as far as I understand, they redacted the substance of
those. There was a computer glitch apparently that made some of this
stuff unwittingly public -- the media found it.
VAN SUSTEREN: You see that still as
part of the seal?
BLAGOJEVICH: It is still part of seal.
VAN SUSTEREN: What is the breadth of
the gag order? What can you or can't talk about?
BLAGOJEVICH: I can't talk about the
evidence that we have and we know that is currently under seal, which is
as far as I know everything. I can tell you independently what I
recollect.
VAN SUSTEREN: Can you tell me
independently what recollect about the conversation you had with
President Obama in December of '08?
BLAGOJEVICH: Again, I don't think I
can. I don't think I should in that particular case. President Obama and
I, I can recall independently, spoke at the governor's event at the
Independence Hall in Philadelphia days before I was arrested.
VAN SUSTEREN: In person?
BLAGOJEVICH: In person. And a lot of
other governors --
VAN SUSTEREN: Was it about the Senate
seat, just generally?
BLAGOJEVICH: I don't think I should say
what we talked about. It will all eventually --
VAN SUSTEREN: If it is not about the
Senate seat, I have a hard time figuring out why he would be a witness
that the court is going to allow you to call.
The court ought to let you play any tapes that in any
way exculpate you or even tend to. They should let you call witnesses
that will help you in your defense. The one thing the court won't do is
let you call someone who doesn't have anything to benefit you.
BLAGOJEVICH: Again, there's information
and there's evidence that is under seal. And I'm prohibited by a court
order from specifically talking about those things --
VAN SUSTEREN: Even from what you
recollect?
BLAGOJEVICH: I feel like if I start
going into substance of conversations it is a slippery slope and I might
inadvertently cross the line.
VAN SUSTEREN: What is the line? What
does the gag order say you can and can't do?
BLAGOJEVICH: Again, the evidence that
we have access to that we had the chance to review, the taped
conversations.
VAN SUSTEREN: That's out, you can't
talk about the content of those.
BLAGOJEVICH: The FBI interviews. The
statements of potential witnesses, all those things are not something
that would be appropriate for me to comment on.
Let me also say in the case of President Obama and me,
and again, let me be very clear, I know absolutely no wrongdoing that
the president was involved in. And I know I was involved in no
wrongdoing. But there is a common political support of ours named Tony
Rezko who is relevant to both me and President Obama.
Again he wrote a letter to a federal sentencing judge --
VAN SUSTEREN: Is Rezko helpful to you
at your June 3rd trial?
BLAGOJEVICH: I can't comment about the
specifics of the case. VAN SUSTEREN: Is he on your witness
list?
BLAGOJEVICH: I'll leave that for the
lawyers to discuss.
VAN SUSTEREN: The president is not
going to appear on some wiretap?
BLAGOJEVICH: I'm telling you from my
reelection I don't recall talking to President Obama during that period
on the telephone.
FAIR USE: This blog may contain copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner or may be authorized or licensed for publication at this site only. Permission to copy, republish or reproduce such material must be obtained from the original copyright owner.
Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Important Notice
Patrons of this Blog are advised that they will be held responsible for any unlawful, harassing, libelous, abusive, threatening, or harmful material of any kind or nature posted by their respective ISP. Patrons are cautioned not to transmit via comments, including links to any material that encourages conduct that could constitute a criminal offense, give rise to civil liability, or otherwise violate any applicable local, state, national or international law or regulation. Comments here are typically unmoderated and unedited. The fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes the site owner's endorsement of commenters' views.
![Twitter](<a href="http://www.twitter.com/maggiesnotebook"><img src="http://twitter-badges.s3.amazonaws.com/follow_me-b.png" alt="Follow maggiesnotebook on Twitter"/></a>){kind=small}
