Friday, November 18, 2011

Re: Bad news for the Occupiers

<Grin>! That's my BlueTooth.....I don't do earrings!
---
I figured as much ... I was just funnin' ya

(Good to see ya!)
---
ditto

On Nov 18, 9:35 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Good Morning PlainOl!
>
> <Grin>!  That's my BlueTooth.....I don't do earrings!  As a matter of fact,
> there is nothing on my anatomy that is pierced, nor is there anything
> tattooed.....
>
> (Good to see ya!)
>
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 9:56 AM, plainolamerican
> <plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > nice earring!
>
> > On Nov 18, 8:46 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Here I am with my Peeps in D.C......A fine crew!  Of course,  I opted
> > for a
> > > $500.00 a night hotel room at the Mayflower hotel a few blocks away,
> > versus
> > > my Peeps' accommodations on K Street,  but I was there,  in spirit,
> > > protesting whatever the Hell it is that we are protesting!
>
> > > KeithBackInTampa
>
> > > On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 9:29 AM, GregfromBoston <greg.vinc...@yahoo.com
> > >wrote:
>
> > > > The Greenway Conservancy, who is in charge of taking care of the Rose
> > > > Kennedy Greenway, and orignally big supporters of Occupy Boston, is
> > > > now asking the city to clear them out.
> > > > On Nov 18, 9:28 am, GregfromBoston <greg.vinc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > Told ya.
>
> > > > > Tea Party Edges Out Occupy Wall Street for Public Favor
>
> > > > > The Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street -- fairly or unfairly pegged as
> > > > > the yin and yang of American political discourse -- have flip-flopped
> > > > > in the polls. A month ago, polls were showing twice as much support
> > > > > for the anti-inequality protesters in Zuccotti Park, but a poll out
> > > > > Wednesday from Public Policy Polling finds that the Tea Party now
> > > > > edges out the Occupiers in public affection.
>
> > > > > Asked whether they have a higher opinion of the Tea Party or Occupy
> > > > > Wall Street movement the Tea Party wins out 43-37, representing a
> > flip
> > > > > from last month when Occupy Wall Street won out 40-37 on that
> > > > > question. Again the movement with independents is notable- from
> > > > > preferring Occupy Wall Street 43-34, to siding with the Tea Party
> > > > > 44-40.
>
> > > > --
> > > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> > >  KeithAtOccuyD C 11 17 2011 .jpg
> > > 315KViewDownload
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

**JP**

Pakistan memo puts pressure on Zardari

Asif Ali Zardari, Pakistan's president, is facing pressure from his opponents over allegations that he sought to strike a deal with the US to help him assert control over the country's powerful military.

Pakistan's political scene has been hit by a claim that Mr Zardari authorised his ambassador to Washington to approach a top US official for help in preventing a coup in the tense days after the raid that killed Osama bin Laden in May.

The controversy erupted on October 10, when Mansoor Ijaz, a US businessman of Pakistani origin, wrote an article in the Financial Times claiming he had served as a conduit for a memorandum setting out Mr Zardari's plea for US backing in a showdown with the military.

Pakistan's government had dismissed Mr Ijaz's claims as a "fantasy" and his account was initially met with scepticism in much of Pakistan's boisterous media.

But the affair roared back into life this week when Admiral Mike Mullen, a former chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff, confirmed he had received a memo of the kind described by Mr Ijaz, although he did not find it credible.

That revelation has sparked a fresh political storm in Pakistan, where Mr Zardari's critics have demanded the government provide a full account of where the memo originated, who authorised it, and what it was designed to achieve.

"The government needs to come clean over whether President Zardari was somehow involved in this memo," said Khurram Dastgir Khan, one of several opposition lawmakers to raise similar questions in the National Assembly on Thursday.

"Shenanigans like this are not the way to conduct foreign policy."

The affair, dubbed "Memogate" by one columnist, has provided a glimpse into a determined but usually opaque power struggle between civilian officials and the generals who still wield enormous hidden influence after decades of army rule.

Analysts say Mr Zardari runs the risk that his enemies will seek to portray the memo as evidence that his government was contemplating an act bordering on treason by asking the US – which many Pakistanis regard as hostile – to rein in the army, which has spent decades cultivating an image as a guarantor of the country's integrity.

Mr Ijaz, a venture capitalist, initially wrote in the FT that he had served as an informal conduit to deliver the memo to Adm Mullen a week after Bin Laden's death on May 2. Mr Zardari, he wrote, felt he needed "an American fist" on the desk of General Ashfaq Kayani, Pakistan's army chief, to prevent any risk of a coup following the Bin Laden raid, which humiliated the army.

In return for US support, the government offered to stop Pakistan's intelligence agencies backing militants fighting Nato in Afghanistan, according to Mr Ijaz. To do this Mr Zardari would sack key generals and introduce a civilian-led security team.

Mr Ijaz told the FT on Thursday that he had been asked to deliver the message by Husain Haqqani, Pakistan's ambassador to the US, and an ally of Mr Zardari.

"Husain Haqqani, whom I have known for over 10 years, was indeed the senior Pakistani diplomat who asked me to assist him in privately delivering his message to Admiral Mike Mullen," Mr Ijaz said. He also detailed phone and email contact between himself and Mr Haqqani in May as they finalised the draft of the memorandum and awaited "the boss's approval". "The boss was an obvious reference to President Zardari," Mr Ijaz said.

Mr Haqqani, who has emerged as an influence in the fraught US-Pakistan alliance since taking his post in 2008, has denied any involvement.

But he has been recalled to Islamabad to explain his position. On Thursday, he told the FT he was prepared to resign if doing so would defuse the controversy and lashed out at Mr Ijaz.

"The back and forth and media manipulation involving the businessman who started this controversy with his op-ed [article] has been exploited by opponents of Pakistani democracy to drive a wedge between our civil and military leaders," Mr Haqqani said. "The individual who started this controversy with his op-ed might consider his ego more important than Pakistan; I do not."

Pakistani officials made no comment on Thursday on whether Mr Haqqani's offer to resign had been accepted and he remained in Washington.

The furore is being watched in Washington where the US is torn by its historic reliance on cultivating strong ties with the military, Pakistan's most powerful institution, while also hoping to foster greater democracy and bolster the prospects for long-term stability.

However, those hopes are complicated by the weakness of Mr Zardari's
administration, which has been hobbled by an entrenched legacy of corruption and the triumph of personality politics over institutions.

The storm over Memogate has also pumped up an already feverish political climate with a roster of the country's best known diplomats, spymasters and politicians using the affair to push their competing agendas ahead of elections due in early 2013.

Shaukat Qadir, a retired brigadier who writes on security issues, said the military was pressing the government to sack Mr Haqqani. "The question is how much pressure there will be on Zardari, and what that pressure will get him to do," he said.

The controversy flared on Wednesday when Adm Mullen revised an earlier claim that he could not recall receiving the memo and confirmed it had been sent to his office. Adm Mullen said through a spokesman that he had not believed the memo's contents were credible.

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2011. You may share using our article tools.
Please don't cut articles from FT.com and redistribute by email or post to the web.

====================================================================

October 10, 2011 7:58 pm

Time to take on Pakistan's jihadist spies

Early on May 9, a week after US Special Forces stormed the hideout of Osama bin Laden and killed him, a senior Pakistani diplomat telephoned me with an urgent request. Asif Ali Zardari, Pakistan's president, needed to communicate a message to White House national security officials that would bypass Pakistan's military and intelligence channels. The embarrassment of bin Laden being found on Pakistani soil had humiliated Mr Zardari's weak civilian government to such an extent that the president feared a military takeover was imminent. He needed an American fist on his army chief's desk to end any misguided notions of a coup – and fast.

Gen Ashfaq Kayani, the army chief, and his troops were demoralised by the embarrassing ease with which US special forces had violated Pakistani sovereignty. Inter-Services Intelligence, Pakistan's feared spy service, was charged by virtually the entire international community with complicity in hiding bin Laden for almost six years. Both camps were looking for a scapegoat; Mr Zardari was their most convenient target.

The diplomat made clear that the civilian government's preferred channel to receive Mr Zardari's message was Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff. He was a time-tested friend of Pakistan and could convey the necessary message with force not only to President Barack Obama, but also to Gen Kayani.

In a flurry of phone calls and emails over two days a memorandum was crafted that included a critical offer from the Pakistani president to the Obama administration: "The new national security team will eliminate Section S of the ISI charged with maintaining relations to the Taliban, Haqqani network, etc. This will dramatically improve relations with Afghanistan."

The memo was delivered to Admiral Mullen at 14.00 hours on May 10. A meeting between him and Pakistani national security officials took place the next day at the White House. Pakistan's military and intelligence chiefs, it seems, neither heeded the warning, nor acted on the admiral's advice.

On September 22, in his farewell testimony to the Senate armed services committee, Admiral Mullen said he had "credible intelligence" that a bombing on September 11 that wounded 77 US and Nato troops and an attack on the US embassy in Kabul on September 13 were done "with ISI support."Essentially he was indicting Pakistan's intelligence services for carrying out a covert war against the US – perhaps in retaliation for the raid on bin Laden's compound, perhaps out of strategic national interest to put Taliban forces back in power in Afghanistan so that Pakistan would once again have the "strategic depth" its paranoid security policies against India always envisioned.

Questions about the ISI's role in Pakistan have intensified in recent months. The finger of responsibility in many otherwise inexplicable attacks has often pointed to a shadowy outfit of ISI dubbed "S-Wing", which is said to be dedicated to promoting the dubious agenda of a narrow group of nationalists who believe only they can protect Pakistan's territorial integrity.

The time has come for the state department to declare the S-Wing a sponsor of terrorism under the designation of "foreign governmental organisations". Plans by the Obama administration to blacklist the Haqqani network are toothless and will have no material impact on the group's military support and intelligence logistics; it is S-Wing that allegedly provides all of this in the first place. It no longer matters whether ISI is wilfully blind, complicit or incompetent in the attacks its S-Wing is carrying out. S-Wing must be stopped.

ISI embodies the scourge of radicalism that has become a cornerstone of Pakistan's foreign policy. The time has come for America to take the lead in shutting down the political and financial support that sustains an organ of the Pakistani state that undermines global antiterrorism efforts at every turn. Measures such as stopping aid to Pakistan, as a bill now moving through Congress aims to do, are not the solution. More precise policies are needed to remove the cancer that ISI and its rogue wings have become on the Pakistani state.

Pakistanis are not America's enemies. Neither is their incompetent and toothless civilian government – the one Admiral Mullen was asked to help that May morning. The enemy is a state organ that breeds hatred among Pakistan's Islamist masses and then uses their thirst for jihad against Pakistan's neighbours and allies to sate its hunger for power. Taking steps to reduce its influence over Pakistan's state affairs is a critical measure of the world's willingness to stop the terror masters at their very roots.

The writer is an American of Pakistani ancestry. In 1997 he negotiated Sudan's offer of counter-terrorism assistance to the Clinton administration

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2011. You may share using our article tools.
Please don't cut articles from FT.com and redistribute by email or post to the web.

 

Prepare Yourself for Obama's Second Term







 

 

Prepare Yourself for Obama's Second Term

 

 

 

(See also: The Prism of Electoral Reality)

For some time now, many conservatives have thought that President Obama is the Second Coming of Jimmy Carter. They think that chronic 9% unemployment, creeping inflation, and a foreign policy of self-abasement and weakness will doom Obama to a single term, and that he'll slink off with his tail between his legs in disgrace, just like Carter did after the election of 1980.

Maybe they should be thinking about the election of 1996 instead.

Does anyone remember the disaster that was Bill Clinton's first term? The first attempt to put gays in the military, the first attack on the World Trade Center by Muslim fanatics, and the "Assault Weapons" Ban? The proposal to raise taxes, increase spending, and downsize the military? Hillary arrogantly proclaiming that she was no little Tammy Wynette standing by her man and baking cookies? That she would revamp the entire health care system, by herself, in secret, without congressional input? Does anyone remember the Waco debacle, which led directly to the Oklahoma City bombing, and Clinton's allegation that it was the fault of talk radio? Does anyone remember the landslide Republican victory in the House in 1994, breaking forty straight years of Democratic control -- a massive rebuke of the Clinton administration?

And yet...Clinton got re-elected in 1996. He didn't just squeak by, either -- he won a crushing 379-159 victory in the Electoral College and beat the Republican ticket by eight and a half percent in the popular vote.

Conservatives were in shock. How could this happen? Answer: after the 1994 conservative revolution in the midterm elections, the Republican 1996 presidential campaign turned into the Revenge of the Flaming Moderates. The Republican primaries featured banal, milquetoast candidates like Lamar Alexander (whose campaign strategy was to don a flannel shirt and stand in front of a sign proclaiming, appropriately enough, "Lamar!"), Steve Forbes, Richard Lugar, and the doddering Washington insider Bob Dole. Pat Buchanan fought an insurgent battle against the GOP moderates, finishing second in the primaries just to keep it interesting, but he quit the party soon thereafter.

The 2012 crop of GOP candidates is no better; quite arguably, they are a good deal worse.

I'm sure Herman Cain is a great guy and that the sexual harassment allegations against him are either overblown or outright false. Nonetheless, he demonstrated that he's in over his head the other day when he couldn't answer a simple question on Obama's illegal war in Libya. Cain has no political experience whatsoever. A couple of terms in the Senate or a stint as secretary of commerce would burnish his credentials. But frankly, right now, he has none. The last person to become president without having previously held elective office was Eisenhower, and he had "Supreme Allied Commander on the Winning Side of the Biggest War in Human History" on his resume, not "pizza salesman."

Rick Perry showed some promise early on. As governor of the second-largest state in the country with a healthy economy, low taxes, and fiscal stability, he might've been a contender. But he managed to become an example of the left-wing caricature of the Texas redneck all by himself, without the usual dirty tricks from the likes of Dan Rather and the Travis County Democratic Party to set him up. His latest flub -- the inability to remember which Cabinet agencies he'd cut -- finished him. Never before has the cliché "He shot himself in the foot" been more apropos.

There's Newt Gingrich, who lost the 1995 budget battle to Clinton. His political negatives were so high that he resigned after only four years as speaker so that the left couldn't use his own infidelity against him during the impeachment of Clinton. In 2000, two years after Gingrich left office, Hillary Clinton carpetbagged her way into New York and campaigned against the "Newt Gingrich Republicans." She promised to bring 200,000 jobs to New York. Six years later, the state had lost 50,000 jobs. She was re-elected. Newt hasn't held office since 1998.

Then there's Ron Paul -- interesting, sincere. Would've been a perfect running mate for Calvin Coolidge in 1924.

That leaves us with the blow-dried Janus, Mitt Romney. Romney is from a high-tax liberal state and has backtracked on almost every position he's ever taken. Why would Democratic voters cross party lines to vote for a white, pro-choice, pro-gun control, pro-government health care Republican graduate of Harvard Business and Law Schools when they can vote for a black, pro-choice, pro-gun control, pro-government health care Democratic incumbent -- also a graduate of Harvard Law? Answer: they won't. Romney bent over backwards to appeal to left-wing voters in the Senate campaign against Ted Kennedy, and Romney lost.

Not only is the Republican field extremely weak, but it has little appeal to the average voter. Tea Party activists -- whom political scientists refer to as "attentive publics" -- are not average voters. The average schlub will vote for the most ubiquitous political face he sees while channel-surfing between the football game, the porno channel, and Judge Judy after yet another trip to the refrigerator. That means for Obama. Beyond that, the primordial concern of the average American is "What kind of government freebee can I get, and who's going to give it to me?"

A recent Bloomberg News article by Brian Fuller stated that "a record 49% percent of Americans live in a household where someone receives at least one type of government benefit, according to the Census Bureau." Forty-nine percent! All Obama has to do is get another two percent, and he's in for a second term.

I could be wrong, of course. I've been wrong before. In 2008, I publicly stated that there was no way in hell the American public was going to vote for a man named "Hussein," who spent his youth in a Muslim country, only seven years after 9/11.

I sincerely hope I'm wrong again. But I doubt it. Instead of Obama looking like the Second Coming of Jimmy Carter, it looks like Romney may be the Second Coming of Bob Dole.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

water board me now

The GOP Presidential Debates: A Waterboarding Alternative

by Edward H. Crane

This article appeared in Forbes on November 18, 2011.

     Sans Serif
     Serif

Share with your friends:

ShareThis

I think I've solved the problem of waterboarding. We can get rid of that technique in dealing with alleged terrorists and simply force them to watch the Republican presidential debates. If they don't fess up given the prospect of having to watch additional debates, they're probably innocent.

Cato Institute aficionados are well aware of how fiercely non-partisan we are ("we" in the royal sense). Nevertheless, I was deeply disappointed when New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie opted not to enter the race. Not only did he have the unique advantage of being smart; I had a perfect campaign slogan for him: "Fat Chance in '12!"

On the good news front we finally got our bilateral trade agreements ratified with Colombia, South Korea, and Panama. As far as I can tell, it's the only thing to come out of the Obama administration that would actually create jobs. Perhaps that explains why he had no press conference to announce it.

Edward H. Crane is the founder and president of the Cato Institute.

More by Edward H. Crane

Another reason to lament the absence of Chris Christie in the presidential sweepstakes is that none of the remaining candidates, certainly including Barack Obama, have the wherewithal to discuss the 800-pound gorilla in the room, namely entitlements. Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid together have unfunded liabilities in excess of $60 trillion.

It seems as though Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and Christie are the only pols out there who are willing to talk to Americans as though they are adults. Virtually all of the other so-called leaders of both major parties have their heads in the sand, pretending that what is an obvious fiscal crisis will go away if they just act as if it's not there. Cato distinguished senior fellow José Piñera, architect of Chile's wildly successful social security privatization scheme, could enlighten these leaders if only they would listen.

Fortunately, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's hard-core lobbying effort to have tens of thousands of U.S. troops remain in Iraq failed. Thus, President Obama's now claiming that he is fulfilling the campaign pledge by promising to bring the troops home by the end of the year. Let's hope he does.

That said, our friend Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) argues that we will continue to maintain a massive military force in Iraq. Certainly the world's largest embassy there will require an impressive security force as it becomes target practice for various Iraqi factions. As for Afghanistan, don't ask. After 9/11 we did the right thing in going into that nation and ousting the Taliban regime that tolerated al-Qaeda. Now, however, our efforts are utterly futile. Ultimately, we will leave (minus a few thousand more young Americans killed) and the non-nation of Afghanistan will revert to its eighth century tribal society, just as it was before we engaged in our nation-building there.

Share with your friends:   ShareThis

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Podcast interview w/ Adm. Bobby Ray Inman

Posted this morning at Electric Politics, a podcast interview with
Admiral Bobby Ray Inman (Ret.), a former Deputy Director of CIA and
former Director of the NSA, on nuclear nonproliferation and several
other subjects, including Fourth Amendment Rights and torture.

Admiral Inman thinks our nuclear arsenal could safely be reduced by a
large number and that so-called investments in new generations of
nuclear weapons are a waste. Considering that the Navy has as much to
do with nuclear weapons strategy as the Air Force, coming from a
retired four star Admiral this is an important, well-informed opinion,
not to be disregarded lightly. The Admiral, btw, says he doesn't think
we're about to launch a war against Iran -- hopefully his assessment
is correct!

If you like the podcast please forward the link.

http://www.electricpolitics.com/podcast/2011/11/accelerated_ideas.html

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Bush Jr.'s tax cut is ending in 2013

Speculation of course, but they could have let them sunset last year.
Why delay?

Tell ya what, if they don't extend when they take the senate, then
I'll join you.

On Nov 18, 10:29 am, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> Theater.
> If they wanted them to be permanent, then a Republican House, Republican Senate and Republican President COULD have (and should have) made them permanent.
> Instead they chose to phase them in gradually and sunset them.
> Regard$,
> --MJ
> "GOP strategy: scare people into believing state socialism is an imminent threat, then drape state capitalism in free-market garb as the alternative." -- Sheldon RichmanAt 09:32 AM 11/18/2011, you wrote:The Republicans -- by design -- WANTED these rates to return to their
> previous levels.
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> That explains why they forced Obama to extend them of course.
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
> * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

We Never Stop Thinking of You!



New post on Fellowship of the Minds

We Never Stop Thinking of You!

by Dr. Eowyn

Warms the cockles of your heart, doesn't it?

H/t our own Miss May!

~Eowyn

Dr. Eowyn | November 18, 2011 at 4:00 am | Tags: confiscatory taxation, IRS | Categories: Taxes, United States | URL: http://wp.me/pKuKY-aGM

Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2011/11/18/we-never-stop-thinking-of-you/

Thanks for flying with WordPress.com


--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Crotchless Panties for Kids




New post on Fellowship of the Minds

Crotchless Panties for Kids

by Dr. Eowyn

There is a silent undeclared war against America's children.

Our government mandates all newborn babies be given Hepatitis B vaccination although the disease is a sexually-transmitted disease in the United States. Hepatitis B virus cannot be spread by casual contact but is transmitted via infectious blood or body fluids such as semen and vaginal fluids.

Crotchless panties do not serve the purpose of underwear (i.e., to prevent our clothes from being soiled) but are a sexual turn-on for fetishists.

So why would anyone manufacture crotchless thong panties sized for 7-year-old girls? And why would a children's clothing store sell the panties?

Colorado's KUSA Channel 9 News reports, November 14, 2011, that while shopping for her kids in a new store called "Kids N Teen" in Colorado's Greeley Mall, Erin French found crotchless thong panties for sale among the stuffed animal backpacks and princess dresses.

Erin French

The mom took out her cell phone to document the inappropriate merchandise. Her grainy video shows pink and leopard-print thong panties with no crotches.

French told KUSA:

"I was mortified. My first initial response was, 'Am I really seeing that?'…They're sized to fit a 7-year-old girl. That's just totally inappropriate.  There is one purpose for an item of that nature and that is not something we want to encourage for our girls."

The owner of Kids N Teen, who would only give her name as Kristina, didn't want to speak on camera, but said that after a complaint from mall management, the crotchless panties were removed.

In her defense, "Kristina" said that the store's only been in business for two weeks and they're still trying to figure out what to sell. She also said that while her store caters mostly to kids, about 25% of the inventory is for teenagers -- as if crotchless panties for teenagers are appropriate. There is also the fact that the crotchless thongs being sold are sized to fit 7-year-old girls, who are not teenagers.

After a complaint from mall management, Kids N Teen removed the crotchless panties.

Pics from Daily Mail. You can see KUSA's news video on this here.

~Eowyn

 

Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2011/11/18/crotchless-panties-for-kids/

Thanks for flying with WordPress.com


--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: OWS and TP

Nuts.  I thought this was about OWS and Toilet Paper.  something they evidently have no use for.

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 8:29 AM, Bruce Majors <majors.bruce@gmail.com> wrote:

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Halal KFC in Texas



New post on Creeping Sharia

Halal KFC in Texas

by creeping

via Twitter http://twitter.com/#!/IANTmasjid/status/134831262920744960 Posted by the same mosque in Texas that days ago hosted and asked the FBI to enforce "hate crime" (aka sharia blasphemy) laws against non-Muslims. They also hosted an unindicted co-conspirator to the 1993 WTC bombing. Halal KFC, it's da bomb!!

Read more of this post

Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2011/11/18/halal-kfc-in-texas/

Thanks for flying with WordPress.com


--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Bad news for the Occupiers

Keith:  Let me know if you ever get to Arkansas (or Little Rock) and we can meet for lunch or something.

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 8:46 AM, Keith In Tampa <keithintampa@gmail.com> wrote:
Here I am with my Peeps in D.C......A fine crew!  Of course,  I opted for a $500.00 a night hotel room at the Mayflower hotel a few blocks away, versus my Peeps' accommodations on K Street,  but I was there,  in spirit,  protesting whatever the Hell it is that we are protesting!
 
KeithBackInTampa
 

 
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 9:29 AM, GregfromBoston <greg.vincent@yahoo.com> wrote:
The Greenway Conservancy, who is in charge of taking care of the Rose
Kennedy Greenway, and orignally big supporters of Occupy Boston, is
now asking the city to clear them out.
On Nov 18, 9:28 am, GregfromBoston <greg.vinc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Told ya.
>
> Tea Party Edges Out Occupy Wall Street for Public Favor
>
> The Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street -- fairly or unfairly pegged as
> the yin and yang of American political discourse -- have flip-flopped
> in the polls. A month ago, polls were showing twice as much support
> for the anti-inequality protesters in Zuccotti Park, but a poll out
> Wednesday from Public Policy Polling finds that the Tea Party now
> edges out the Occupiers in public affection.
>
> Asked whether they have a higher opinion of the Tea Party or Occupy
> Wall Street movement the Tea Party wins out 43-37, representing a flip
> from last month when Occupy Wall Street won out 40-37 on that
> question. Again the movement with independents is notable- from
> preferring Occupy Wall Street 43-34, to siding with the Tea Party
> 44-40.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

The New, Exciting, Revolutionary, Exclusive from GM.....



 

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Bad news for the Occupiers

Good Morning PlainOl!
 
<Grin>!  That's my BlueTooth.....I don't do earrings!  As a matter of fact, there is nothing on my anatomy that is pierced, nor is there anything tattooed.....
 
(Good to see ya!)
 


 
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 9:56 AM, plainolamerican <plainolamerican@gmail.com> wrote:
nice earring!

On Nov 18, 8:46 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here I am with my Peeps in D.C......A fine crew!  Of course,  I opted for a
> $500.00 a night hotel room at the Mayflower hotel a few blocks away, versus
> my Peeps' accommodations on K Street,  but I was there,  in spirit,
> protesting whatever the Hell it is that we are protesting!
>
> KeithBackInTampa
>
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 9:29 AM, GregfromBoston <greg.vinc...@yahoo.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > The Greenway Conservancy, who is in charge of taking care of the Rose
> > Kennedy Greenway, and orignally big supporters of Occupy Boston, is
> > now asking the city to clear them out.
> > On Nov 18, 9:28 am, GregfromBoston <greg.vinc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > Told ya.
>
> > > Tea Party Edges Out Occupy Wall Street for Public Favor
>
> > > The Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street -- fairly or unfairly pegged as
> > > the yin and yang of American political discourse -- have flip-flopped
> > > in the polls. A month ago, polls were showing twice as much support
> > > for the anti-inequality protesters in Zuccotti Park, but a poll out
> > > Wednesday from Public Policy Polling finds that the Tea Party now
> > > edges out the Occupiers in public affection.
>
> > > Asked whether they have a higher opinion of the Tea Party or Occupy
> > > Wall Street movement the Tea Party wins out 43-37, representing a flip
> > > from last month when Occupy Wall Street won out 40-37 on that
> > > question. Again the movement with independents is notable- from
> > > preferring Occupy Wall Street 43-34, to siding with the Tea Party
> > > 44-40.
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
>
>
>  KeithAtOccuyD C 11 17 2011 .jpg
> 315KViewDownload

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.