McCain to Outline Climate Change Battle Plan

Once in a while I come across a statement that needs to gbe repeated and once again I am proud to be a contryman of this writer.

Posted by: drroz | May 11, 2008 11:37:51 PM


"I have labored through this site. Where else but in a country such as this one, could people have the constitutional right to freely speak their minds (no matter how illogical, biased, erroneous, well-thought out or otherwise)? To women, African Americans, any people of color, Americans period who threaten to refuse to vote because the candidate of their choice may not be selected, I say "SHAME ON YOU!!!" You spit on the efforts of your predecessors. You take for granted the fundamental right that other people ,in other countries of the world would, and do, die for. To those who threaten to vote for someone whose fundamental principles they do not believe in out of spite, "SHAME ON YOU!!!!" You leave your future and the future of your families to "the powers that be." Do not complain when policies that do not help you, that leave you out on the fringes, that strip away any hope that you or your children could ever obtain the American dream, and that depend upon your myopia, phobias, miseducation, and apathy are put into place. You have allowed that to happen. Do not whine. It is a sad day when people resort to name-calling, mud slinging, backbiting, and fear mongering to express their opinions. But we have the right to do so here in America.
All I am saying is this: let's not take the liberties that we have fought and died for, both abroad and here in this country, for granted. America, as great as she is, is not perfect. She has made her mistakes-some small and some egregious. But, she has also shown herself to be a country capable of accomplishing great things.
I look at the way the world views us and I'm not amazed that they hate us, or at best, don't trust us. Look at the way that we treat each other...look at the way we behave...listen to how we sound. We sound spoiled, ungrateful and spiteful. We sound small-minded, hate-filled and petty, but then, again, we, here in America have the right to do so.
I love this country in spite of her flaws and because of her potential to do great things. I see her clearly; I am not deluded. I will speak out when she does things that are counterproductive and could prove to be detrimental to her lofty objectives. I praise her when she rises to her potential and behaves as the leader she is, and should be. I acknowledge her diversity and I embrace her commonality. We truly are more alike than we are different, but it is those differences that make us interesting...not better or worse...just different. We are all, at the end of the day, American.
It would behoove us to carefully watch how we accept labels as being the truth. Opinion, no matter eloquently or forcefully stated, is just that...opinion, and should be weighed as just that. We should be mindful of what lessons we are teaching our young. Do we really want to impart in our young a sense of entitlement? Do we really want to teach our young that when we don't get our way, the proper way to behave is to pout, or to belittle or to name call or to result to holding someone "emotionally hostage?" What happened to "fight hard, do your best, but play fair?" What has happened to learning how to "pick one's battles, drop back and punt, timing is everything, I'll be back, it's not how you win or lose, but how you play the game, and doing unto others as you would have them do unto you?" We cannot teach what we do not know. We cannot provide what we do not have. We cannot lead if we, ourselves, have lost our way. Our children are watching; the world is watching. What lessons are we really teaching them?
(Lastly, one note to Michigander. PLEASE, do your homework and carefully research your resources. Liberation theology does not teach hatred for anyone, but rather a moral obligation to do everything to relieve the suffering of ANY oppressed people based upon the teachings of Jesus Christ, who "came to set the captives free." There are hundreds of books on the subject. Martin Luther King Jr. preached that doctrine. Mother Theresa lived it. Ghandi practiced it. It is evident in the behavior of anyone who not only speaks out but also works to fight against oppression. Study, read, question, and research...THINK. Any ideology can be perverted and/or "bastardized.")
Jesus warned that we should not judge least we be judged with the same measure by which we judge, wise words for any human being, being imperfect and therefore subject to error. People who live in glass houses should not throw stones. Remember the law of reciprocity...what goes around, comes around. Every dog has its day. A prophet is without honor, even in his own country. Timing is everything. You gotta know when to hold "um and know when to fold "um. True power knows that you can wipe out your opponent and choosing not to. There is such a thing as "grace under fire". A house divided, will fall. Perhaps, we should study the doctrine of reconciliation which simply stated says this: I know that you have done me wrong. I forgive you. Now, what can we do, TOGETHER, to make sure that this does not happen again?
TEAM... together each achieves much.


Posted by: drroz | May 11, 2008 11:37:51 PM

During a Michelle Obama appearance at Carnegie Mellon University, the school paper The Tartan reported the attention-getting phrase:
The Tartan's correspondents observed one event coordinator say to another, "Get me more white people, we need more white people." To an Asian girl sitting in the back row, one coordinator said, "We're moving you, sorry. It's going to look so pretty, though."

"I didn't know they would say, 'We need a white person here,' " said attendee and senior psychology major Shayna Watson, who sat in the crowd behind Mrs. Obama. "I understood they would want a show of diversity, but to pick up people and to reseat them, I didn't know it would be so outright."

YAY! McCAIN!! You are speaking to ME. The environment is one of the big reasons why I am a democrat.

Now, remember, I am a moderate democrat who LOVES Hillary, and I will never EVER vote for Obama.

Hillary or McCain: NEVER EVERRRRR OBAMA!

I do NOT believe in Obama and I disagree with too many of his la la land liberal policy ideas--especially foreign policy ideas. I think he is a national security risk. I also believe that he does not like the USA or white people. NO THANKS.

Response to drroz:

Here is a reference link to an article about a book by Dr. Lyle Rossiter titled: The Liberal Mind-The Psychological Causes of Political Madness.

http://www.wvwnews.net/story.php?id=4017
http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=57683

So to your chagrin drroz, shame on you. For placing symbolism over substance: SHAME ON YOU!!! For advocating a vote based on a persons Color-fication: SHAME ON YOU!!! For eluding to the belief system of voting for the Politician of the Day to ensure the American Dream: SHAME ON YOU!!!

Do everyone a favor drroz and read the Constitution and Bill of Rights!!!!!!!

Oh wait...

I just noticed something brilliant about that McCain ad: Do you understand why he is speaking to people like me in that ad? Because he just placed himself firmly in the middle of the debate.

Oh crap, he really wants those Hillary votes.

Obama is too LIBERAL for America. Why can't his boosters stop hanging out with JUST one another and look AROUND...visit around our country more, maybe go on a cross-country trip, and GET A CLUE.

--Also, that Hillary ad is good. If those two think she would be best at the job of ending the war in Iraq, I believe them.

Hillary or McCain.

Never Obama.

Accountable? McCain and Clinton are being held accountble for a WAR that should have never been WAGED OR FOUGHT. As far as Global Warming goes, many scientists refute Gore's theory. How are we to know if his cause is accurate or just another attention gimmick. Gore win the Nobel Prize and got him some claimt to fame. Causes can be driven by many reasons. My take is, it has not been proven that climate changes are all the fault of the way we live. The poles are known to shift; nothing in the Universe is stationary. Yin and Yang. Tide goes in, tide goes out. I remain unconvinced. Like they say in Missouri, prove it.

I also maintain the same approach in this presidential election. I would like to have Clinton prove she is ahead of Barack Obama in states, delegates, superdelegates and popular votes. Claiming red vs blue states and claiming Florida and Michigan is a red herring used to defray Clinton's losing battle. A fact is something that can be proven. Clinton has proved nothing; is a cheap empty pant's suit full of false rhetoric and false claims. Falling victim to her falsity, the general public, who she should be honest with, she has fooled and betrayed. Her honesty level is rated the lowest of any candidate thus far. Talk is cheap.

Liberal Wesley College Grad Hillary took a year Sabbatical to study under a KNOWN COMMUNIST PROF. Her thesis is under lock and key; her orders. About as liberal as the "GOLDWATER" gal can get. Can't have it both ways Hillary. Can't talk out of both sides of your mouth and get away with it either. Maybe it is not kosher to be talking about dead issues and the dead, the the facts remain to be reckoned with in this election. Clinton can count her lucky stars! Losing this election has saved her ass from her past rising out of Clinton's graveyard full of filth and dirt. The repers have been waiting in the wings to deliver yards and yards of filthy dirt. Her math and money problems changed the arena. Time for Clinton go quietly into the night, acknowledging her political demise. Join the greatfull dead who have passed that way before her.

NO NO NO NO NO NO WAY WAY WAY WAY PRESIDNET FOR HILLARY CLINTON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WELLESLEY, Mass. - The senior thesis of Hillary D. Rodham, Wellesley College class of 1969, has been speculated about, spun, analyzed, debated, criticized and defended. But rarely has it been read, because for the eight years of Bill Clinton’s presidency it was locked away.

As forbidden fruit, the writings of a 21-year-old college senior, examining the tactics of radical community organizer Saul D. Alinsky, have gained mythic status among her critics — a “Rosetta Stone,” in the words of one, that would allow readers to decode the thinking of the former first lady and 2008 presidential candidate.

Despite the fervent interest in the thesis, few realize that it is no longer kept under lock and key,
available to anyone who visits the archive room of the prestigious women’s college outside Boston. With Clinton’s opponents in the 2008 presidential race looking for the next “Swift Boat” attack ad, and the senator herself trying to cast off her liberal image, Clinton's 92-page thesis is certain to be read and reread by opposition researchers and reporters visiting the campus.

If you plan to run for president, be careful what you research.

Some reporters and political operatives digging for blemishes in presidential candidate Sen. Hillary Clinton's past are suggesting that the junior Democratic senator from New York's 1969 undergraduate thesis about leftist community organizer Saul Alinsky could shed light on her current political outlook.

The controversy surrounding Clinton's college paper reminds undergrads that, no matter how much time has passed since graduation, their college writings are never too far behind.

"Oftentimes people have gone back to candidates' colleges and found information that is damaging," said Darrell West, professor of political science and director of the Taubman Center for Public Policy. "I think they're going to dig further this year."

Whether Clinton's Wellesley College thesis reveals anything about her current political mindset is debatable. "It's always interesting to hear how people came to the political process because sometimes that does shape how people act later in life," West said. "Everybody wants to know how, if in any way, (Clinton) was shaped by Alinsky's thinking."

A controversial topic
Widely considered the father of community organizing, Alinsky brought together residents in Chicago's Back of the Yards neighborhood in the 1930s. Yet the activist's anti-establishment mantra made him a controversial figure.

"He argued that powerless people could learn to trust one another and recognize their potential for making change," said Associate Professor of Sociology Hilary Silver. "I don't think that anybody who advocates for poor people has been considered a mainstream guy in this country."

Though some biographers labeled Alinsky a communist, he disputed those claims before his death in 1972.

According to a March 3 article on MSNBC.com, Clinton's thesis praised aspects of Alinsky's vision and leadership style but criticized his overarching vision. In her 2003 autobiography "Living History," Clinton wrote, "I agreed with some of Alinsky's ideas. … But we had a fundamental disagreement. He believed you could change the system only from the outside. I didn't."

In 1993, the Clinton White House asked Wellesley to make the thesis unavailable to the public, spurring speculation among some conservatives that Sen. Clinton's writings revealed radical or communist sympathies. Accessible to Wellesley visitors since 2001, the paper could become fodder for the senator's presidential opponents.

A Republican consultant told MSNBC.com that Clinton's political foes could highlight that while Clinton was writing about Alinksy, Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., was a prisioner of war in Vietnam.

Could it happen to you?
Many of Brown's humanities and social science departments provide open access to undergraduate honors theses, mostly for the benefit of future thesis-writers.

Honors theses from roughly a dozen departments - including history, psychology and English - are archived in the John Hay Library and are open to the public. University Archivist Gerald Gaidmore said he and his staff hope to put abstracts of all the Hay's theses online by the end of this semester, meaning a former student's thesis topic could pop up if someone does a Google search for that person.

Kathleen Pappas, coordinating secretary for the Department of Religious Studies, said in the 14 years she's worked there she hasn't heard of anyone requesting to read a specific graduate's thesis with the hope of gaining biographical insight into the writer.

Associate Professor of Public Policy Ross Cheit, who advises public policy concentrators writing theses, said papers in disciplines involving theoretical analysis, such as philosophy and political science, are more likely to generate controversy than the case study analyses public policy concentrators write.

"I can't think of a thesis we've had that poses the Hillary Clinton issue," he said. "Our program is sort of moderate in its orientation. How well is the food stamp program implemented in Rhode Island? That's not going to be a radical thesis."

U.S. Rep. Bobby Jindal '91.5, R-La., a public policy concentrator at Brown and currently a candidate for governor of Louisiana, wrote his thesis about state health care expenditures.

The Department of Political Science does not have a "systematic" approach to storing honors theses, said thesis adviser Professor of Political Science Linda Cook. Some political science concentrators leave theses with professors, she said, but that is not required.

Similarly, the Department of Philosophy does not store old theses because "there's just never been any call from anyone to consider whether we should have a (thesis storage) policy," wrote David Estlund, professor of philosophy and chair of the department, in an e-mail to The Herald. Gaidmore said a few philosophy theses are on hand at the Hay.

West said this election season marks the first time he's heard of a college thesis becoming a campaign issue, but in politics, collegiate behavior is often fair game.

"I always tell my students they should be careful what they do on the weekends," he said. "You never know 30 years from now who will be interested in it."

Bully Pulpit Hillary Clinton wants to end those --- WARS...she helped start by her Yes votes. She lit the fire and wants to put it out? What a swinger. ( Bill too) They both say what ever is popular at the time to get votes. The culture of corruption has gained their power due to voter apathy. This year, voter are electrified and want change. Corruption only can rule, where apathy prevails. 2008 race will not be the year of apathy. The call for change is loud and clear. Clinton and McCain are not change! Part of the old culture of corruption!

The nomination process has spoken. The task ahaed id to separate the Limbaugh operatives from democratic roles. Given what McCain advocates, it is likely anyone who would vote for him is one of the Limbaugh operatives. It really isn't where we are at that makes the difference as much as it is in what direction we are headed. Today, we are headed toward extinction, already we are the world's greatest nation in military might only. Our can-do manufacturing base, and the knowledge that goes with it, has been given to China. Buying back all that stuff is with money that is sent to them rather than being spent here. We also send money to the Arabs, who are being insulted daily by the likes of those who write here. This is happening on a daily basis, and over a period of years will eventually bankrupt the Unied States. When that happens the stock market will collaspe and guess who has all the money to buy the stocks at next to nothing prices? Within a few days everyone holding stock in pension funds and so on will have nothing or close to nothing. We don't need that kind of experience. What we need is to learn how to work with other nations, especially the Arab nations, and very slowly bring our manufacturing base back to the United States.

The Nomination process is over folks.

Actually, when Al Gore started to run fo rht e presidency, Hillary Clinton began her run for the senate. And al the work and money the incumbant president could pass on to the presidential campaign was diverted by Hillary to her campaign. So in a sense, not only did Clinton approve the war, she put Bush into office, who, two days before 911, recalled our representative to the Interntional conference on race relations in Africa. That would not have happened if Gore were president, and it is likely that 911 would not have happened either and what a different world this would have been. I sure hope that she doesn't do it again and ten years from now we will be saying "Oh what a different world it would have been."

What are we Democrats trying to do, lose by putting Obama in as our nominee? Does the Democrat Party really fear women power that much that we prefer to lose rather than nominate Hillary? Rest assured there are millions of "US" who will not support Obama no matter what Hillary asks us to do. This is a dark time for the Democrats if, we continue on this path. Think voters and superdelegates before we get beat!!!