The Fairness of Hate Crime Laws; Even Nonviolent Crime Needs to Be Fought

The Fairness of Hate Crime Laws

The trial of the Rutgers student Dharun Ravi, who secretly videotaped
his roommate Tyler Clementi with another man before Clementi committed
suicide, has raised questions about whether Ravi's actions were a hate
crime or simple boorishness. But some have even questioned whether
there need to be hate crime laws at all. Do they protect against
intimidation and bigotry, or are they unnecessary and unfair?

Why We Need Bias Laws
Wade Henderson is the president and chief executive of the Leadership
Conference on Civil and Human Rights.

March 7, 2012

Hate violence is very personal, with an especially emotional and
psychological impact on the victim — and the victim's community.
That's because hate crimes are intentionally and specifically targeted
at individuals because of their personal, immutable characteristics.
Although the tragic case of Tyler Clementi clearly demonstrates the
need for greater awareness of cyberbullying and digital privacy and
safety, it does not present the typical hate crime paradigm.
Reasonable people can disagree about whether it should be prosecuted
as such.

When these crimes do occur, we must send an unmistakable message that
they matter. Like antidiscrimination laws, hate crime statutes, like
those in 45 states, the District of Columbia, and the recently passed
federal statute, the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes
Prevention Act, are content-neutral, color-blind mechanisms that
appropriately allow society to redress a unique type of wrongful
conduct in a manner befitting that conduct's seriousness.

When these crimes do occur, we must send an unmistakable message that
they matter.We recognize we cannot outlaw hate. However, laws shape
attitudes. And attitudes influence behavior. Strong enforcement of
these laws can have a deterrent impact and limit the potential for a
hate crime incident to explode into a cycle of violence and widespread
community disturbances.

Hate crime laws do not punish thoughts. Americans are free to think
and believe whatever they want. It is only when an individual commits
a crime based on those biased beliefs and intentionally targets
another for violence or vandalism that a hate crime statute applies.
That's why the Supreme Court unanimously upheld hate crime laws
against a First Amendment challenge in 1993.

Hate violence merits priority attention — and hate crime laws help
ensure they receive it.

Even Nonviolent Crime Needs to Be Fought

Hayley Gorenberg is the deputy legal director of Lambda Legal, a
civil rights group for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people.

March 7, 2012

Controversy accompanies prosecutions under hate crime laws, and
perhaps that's inevitable; the pattern of discrimination that shows
people have been targeted based upon their personal traits springs
from prejudices we have not conquered. The Supreme Court has said, in
Wisconsin v. Mitchell, that we mete out extra punishment for hate
crimes because they can "provoke retaliatory crimes, inflict distinct
emotional harms on their victims, and incite community unrest.''

Thousands upon thousands of lesbians, gay men and transgender people
have had their lives scarred by discrimination, and countless died
violent deaths decades before young Matthew Shepard was robbed,
pistol-whipped and strung up on a fence to die because he was gay. Yet
even after that murder made headlines, it took more than 10 years to
pass the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention
Act in 2009, which, for the first time, applied federal hate crime law
to crimes motivated by a victim's actual or perceived sexual
orientation or gender identity.

It's possible to strike deep at one's core without a bullet or a knife
blade.Even in the face of gruesome crimes it was hard to get lesbian,
gay, bisexual and transgender people on the map. But perhaps we should
not be surprised, since we still fight for visibility, and against
silencing, in law and policy. Yesterday the Department of Justice
announced a settlement in a discrimination case that stemmed from a
Minnesota school district's policy that silenced staff members who
might have intervened against bullying over sexual orientation or
identity. It was mere months ago that the nation allowed our military
service members to step from the ominous shadows of "Don't Ask, Don't
Tell." And today in Puerto Rico, there is a movement afoot to erase
the Commonwealth's hate crimes law that specifically protects lesbian,
gay, bisexual and transgender people even as murders of transgender
women grab headlines.

With regard to the Ravi trial, our legal system recognizes that not
all crimes draw blood. It's possible to strike deep at one's core
without a bullet or a knife blade. Whether or not the proof is
mustered to a New Jersey jury's satisfaction, justice is served by a
system that has properly acknowledged that if hate is a legal factor,
it should be recognized in all of its most virulent forms, including
those leveled at lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people for who
they are.

More:
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/03/07/are-hate-crime-laws-necessary/even-nonviolent-crime-needs-to-be-fought

--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

--
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: The Incomplete Greatness of Barack Obama

No question, the technology of obtaining fuel from these shale fields are a boon to the United States.  Nevertheless, we need to drill for other sources of oil,  which would bring speculation down. 

 

By no means do I think we should eliminate or quit pursuing alternative forms of energy.  I would like to see a program, much like NASA was back in the 1950s and 1960s where there is a concerted effort to obtain alternative forms of energy.  

 

From a national security standpoint, we must develop our hydrocarbon resources, which means that we must get rid of the current administration, and disregard these Moonbats who have not a clue,  who currently have so much sway over the current Administration.

 

 

On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 1:38 PM, plainolamerican <plainolamerican@gmail.com> wrote:

the declared policy of the Obama Administration that they want
oil prices to increase in the United States, in  order to push Green
Energy, which has failed miserably

----
Shale field finds have revived the U.S. oil and gas output after four
decades of decline. The advent of new technologies, including
horizontal drilling of well and hydraulic fracturing, is the main
reason behind such huge discoveries. Anadarko, along with peers
Carrizo Oil & Gas (NYSE: CRZO  ) and Noble Energy (NYSE: NBL  ) , has
been putting the latest technology to use in the Wattenberg fields.
The company also holds leases in Wyoming where it is evaluating
drilling prospects. These mean machines are expected to boost North
American oil production and may even double it by 2025.

China has lost 1/3 of it's energy source ... nuclear energy, and is
buying into older energy. They're going to love our natural gas
resources!

On Mar 8, 11:14 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well said PlainOl.  If President Obama succeeds in November,  we might not
> recognize the United States in ten years.  We must repeal ObamaCare,  which
> has relatively little to do with health care in the first place, but is
> such an intrusion into our lives, and an usurpation of our basic rights and
> liberties.  Most Moonbats don't realize this, because they don't really
> know what ObamaCare even is.
>
> The fact that Americans are paying $4.00 and in some cases $5.00 a gallon
> for fuel at the pump is obscene, and we have nothing but Democrats to blame
> for this.  Recently,  Obama vetoed the Keystone Pipeline coming from our
> neighbor Canada.  This in and of itself would have caused speculation for
> oil to have been greatly reduced, thereby causing oil prices to crash.
> But it is the declared policy of the Obama Administration that they want
> oil prices to increase in the United States, in  order to push Green
> Energy, which has failed miserably, and of which the Obama Administraiton
> has pumped billions of dollars into,  all for naught and to watch this
> crony capitalist companies to crash and burn.
>
> On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 11:06 AM, plainolamerican

> <plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > In his first three years in office, Barack Obama has gotten more done
> > -- ending the Iraq War, turning around Detroit, repealing Don't Ask,
> > Don't Tell, averting another Great Depression
> > ---
> > giving O credit for these things is deceptive and insane.
> > He's done his best to promote socialism and minorities ... just like
> > we knew he would.
>
> >http://www.stupidvideos.com/video/politics/Obama_the_Monkey_Boy/#207020
>
> > On Mar 8, 9:53 am, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > The Incomplete Greatness of Barack Obama
> > > In his first three years in office, Barack Obama has gotten more done
> > > -- ending the Iraq War, turning around Detroit, repealing Don't Ask,
> > > Don't Tell, averting another Great Depression -- than any president in
> > > decades. Yet polls show that most Americans think he's achieved very
> > > little. That gap between perception and reality, which could make all
> > > the difference in this November's election, is the subject of the
> > > cover story in the March/April issue of the Washington Monthly, by
> > > Editor in Chief Paul Glastris.
>
> > > The problem for Obama, Glastris explains, is that while liberals
> > > measure him against their hopes, and conservatives against their
> > > fears, few have evaluated him by the more relevant yardstick: how his
> > > deeds compare to those of other presidents. By this measure, Obama
> > > does extraordinarily well, and not just in terms of quantity. True,
> > > his biggest and most controversial accomplishments, like health care
> > > reform and the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill, have been widely
> > > criticized as crimped, compromised, slow to take effect, and
> > > vulnerable to being overturned. But so too, notes Glastris, were many
> > > of history's most important and lasting presidential achievements,
> > > from Social Security to the GI Bill.
>
> > > Taking a deep dive into the full range of this administration's
> > > policies, Glastris concludes that historians in the future will likely
> > > consider Obama as one of America's great presidents -- if he gets
> > > re-elected and can protect his legacy from Republicans who would
> > > dismantle it. But Obama's striking inability to speak up for his own
> > > record has put him in an unenviable spot: in order to win that crucial
> > > second term, he must first convince voters that he has a substantial
> > > record of achievement to defend in the first place.
>
> > > Read "The Incomplete Greatness of Barack Obama."
>
> > > Plus: "Obama's Top 50 Accomplishments"
>
> > > More:
> >http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/march_april_2012/features/t...
>
> > > --
> > > Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> > > Have a great day,
> > > Tommy
>
> > > --
> > > Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> > > Have a great day,
> > > Tommy
>
> > --
> > 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.

--
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.

Personal Quest to Clarify Bin Laden’s Last Days Yields Vexing Accounts

Personal Quest to Clarify Bin Laden's Last Days Yields Vexing Accounts
By DECLAN WALSH
Published: March 7, 2012
RAWALPINDI, Pakistan — In his quest for the truth about his country's
most notorious guest, Shaukat Qadir started where it all ended: the
room where Osama bin Laden was killed.

The house in Abbotabad, Pakistan, last November, several months after
Osama bin Laden was killed there by commandos from the United States.

Last August, Mr. Qadir, a retired Pakistani Army brigadier, retraced
the steps of the American commandos who stormed through the corridors
of Bin Laden's hide-out on May 2.

Climbing the stairs to the second floor, Mr. Qadir passed a body
outline that marked the spot where Bin Laden's 22-year-old son,
Khalid, was shot dead. Then he turned to a small room with a low
ceiling, an empty wardrobe and a tight cluster of bullet holes in one
wall, he said. Above that, on the ceiling, was a fading splash of
blood that, his Pakistani intelligence escort told him, belonged to
Bin Laden.

"As a former soldier, I was struck by how badly the house was
defended," Mr. Qadir said in an interview. "No proper security
measures, nothing high-tech — in fact, nothing like you would expect."

Mr. Qadir's quixotic investigation began as a personal attempt to
truth-check the competing accounts of Bin Laden's last years in
Pakistan. But his work has already come under scrutiny and criticism,
mostly on the grounds that his heavy reliance on Pakistani military
and intelligence sources leaves him open to official manipulation.

At the least, though, the end product — a novella-length report, still
officially unpublished — offers tantalizing possibilities about Bin
Laden's circumstances and the suspicions that drove relations between
Pakistan and the United States to the brink.

For instance, Mr. Qadir claims that Bin Laden's fifth and youngest
wife, Amal Ahmed al-Sadah, told Pakistani interrogators that her
husband underwent a kidney transplant operation in 2002 — a claim
that, if proven, could help explain how the ailing Saudi militant was
able to survive with a known kidney ailment, but raises questions
about who was helping him. He also heard of poisonous mistrust between
Bin Laden's wives. In the cramped Abbottabad house, he was told,
tensions erupted between Ms. Sadah, described as "the favored wife,"
and Khairiah Saber, an older woman who occupied a separate floor. In
interrogation, Ms. Sadah accused her rival of having betrayed their
husband to American intelligence.

Bin Laden's youngest wife also told interrogators that her husband
shaved his beard and disguised himself as an ailing Pashtun elder as
he leapfrogged between safe houses across northwestern Pakistan,
eventually regrowing the beard after finally settling in the
Abbottabad house in 2005.

In one sense, Mr. Qadir's work is an interesting entry in a
decade-long parlor game among spies, soldiers and journalists, all
guessing the whereabouts and condition of the world's most wanted
fugitive.

Despite Bin Laden's death, many of the toughest questions remain. Who
helped him stay on the run? How did the C.I.A. track him down? And,
perhaps most important, did Pakistan's generals know he was living a
stone's throw from their leading military academy?

Pakistan's government says the answers will come from an official
commission of inquiry, led by a Supreme Court judge, that has been
working since May. Yet few believe the Abbottabad Commission, as it is
known, will succeed. And at times, the Pakistani government has seemed
more interested in moving on than seeking answers: on the night of
Feb. 25, the local authorities in Abbottabad sent bulldozers to
demolish Bin Laden's house after nightfall, erasing a painful symbol
of an embarrassing episode for the military.

Publication of the commission's findings, originally scheduled for
December, has been repeatedly postponed, and critics of the government
smell political pressure to tone down its findings.

Among those who have testified is Mr. Qadir, a 64-year-old former
infantry commander. Suspicious of official explanations of Bin Laden's
life and death, Mr. Qadir set out to find his own truth. He embarked
on a sleuthing expedition that would last eight months and has left
him $10,000 out of pocket. He traveled into the tribal belt and
Afghanistan to interview old tribal contacts, and into the hushed
headquarters of Pakistani military intelligence agency, the
Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate, or ISI, in Islamabad, where
officials provided briefings.

His army background was crucial: Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, Pakistan's
top commander, approved two visits to Bin Laden's house; personal
connections led to an interview with the ISI brigadier who had
interrogated Bin Laden's three wives.

A former Obama administration official who read the report agreed with
some of Mr. Qadir's findings, like a claim that Bin Laden and his
deputy, Ayman al-Zawahri, suffered serious disagreements that led to
Bin Laden's being pushed to the sidelines. "This divide grew with
time, and remained a source of tension until the day Bin Laden died,"
the official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity. "His role
had been diminished."

The official was puzzled by the account about Bin Laden's wives,
saying that previous American intelligence reports had indicated that
the first wife, Ms. Saber, was the closest to Bin Laden. The C.I.A.
has since interrogated both women in Pakistan; Ms. Saber proved to be
"defiant, difficult and refused to engage," the American official
said.

Several of the conclusions that Mr. Qadir draws in his report are
highly contentious, like a belief that Qaeda operatives betrayed their
leader to earn America's reward money. "They wanted Bin Laden gone,
and they wanted a share of the $25 million," he said. Peter Bergen, a
terrorism analyst and author of a forthcoming book on Bin Laden's last
years, called that a "ridiculous" notion.

Mr. Qadir's report was "larded with strange conspiracies," Mr. Bergen
said, adding that it was indicative of a broader culture of conspiracy
theories in Pakistan. "When I was in Abbottabad in July, plenty of
people told me Bin Laden didn't live there. What do you say to that?
It's so untethered from rational discourse," he said.

Mr. Qadir, for his part, concedes that his conclusions are based on
conjecture, and admits that his ISI briefers may have concealed
crucial facts. "I'd be a bloody fool if I didn't see that," he said.
"I don't say this is the entire truth. But it's the closest you will
get at this point in time."

Other Pakistani soldiers have also theorized about Bin Laden. Last
fall Ziauddin Butt, a former ISI chief, reportedly told a conference
that while he was in power, Pakistan's former military leader, Pervez
Musharraf, had been covertly sheltering Bin Laden. Contacted by
telephone, Mr. Butt said he had been misquoted but declined to
elaborate. Another account that is popular on military message boards
claims that Bin Laden was betrayed by a retired Pakistan spy, who has
since fled abroad.

One question in particular has stayed at the heart of the mutual
distrust between Pakistan and the United States: was the ISI
incompetent in failing to spot Bin Laden under its nose, or complicit
in his protection?

Muhammad Hanif, a popular Pakistani novelist, recently suggested that
the answer was both; Mr. Bergen, the analyst, said it was neither.
"Bin Laden was a hyper-paranoid guy who went to extreme lengths to
hide himself. Don't forget that it took the U.S. government 10 years
to find him, with huge resources at its disposal. And we had the will
to look," he said.

Several American and Western officials, speaking in Washington and
Pakistan on the condition of anonymity, said that the C.I.A. had
scanned millions of documents taken from computer disks found in Bin
Laden's house yet found no evidence of official Pakistani support. But
for some analysts, that proves nothing.

"There is no smoking gun, but there is also no evidence that firmly
rules out complicity," said Bruce Riedel, a former C.I.A. officer and
Obama adviser.

The official verdict will come from the Abbottabad Commission, which
on Wednesday heard testimony from the interior minister, Rehman Malik.

But many are skeptical about what will emerge, with at least one
commission member having apparently already made up his mind.

Just a few weeks into the commission's deliberations last July, Nadeem
Ahmed, a former general on the panel, told Australian journalists that
he had firmly believed "that no intelligence organization in Pakistan
would do such a stupid thing" as harbor Bin Laden.

Suggestions to the contrary were the product of an American news media
conspiracy, he added. "There is a deliberate design to undermine the
security establishment," he said.

With such high military and political stakes, many Pakistanis believe
that the truth will remain as elusive as Bin Laden once was. "You have
to ask the right questions to get the right answers," Mr. Qadir said.
"I doubt this report will explain anything to anyone's satisfaction."

More:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/08/world/asia/quest-to-clarify-bin-ladens-last-days-in-pakistan-yields-vexing-accounts.html?_r=1&pagewanted=2&google_editors_picks=true

--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

--
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 Nonissue That’s Still an Issue

The Nonissue That's Still an Issue
by Gregory Bresiger, March 7, 2012

Let the voters beware.

There are lots of Wimpies and Wilkins Micawbers who propose to expand deficits by spending more of your money now, with the promise that next year or five years from now the nation will have surpluses.

This legerdemain allows candidates to skirt or ignore what is possibly the most important issue now, the issue that most candidates avoid ­ overspending. The crisis of spending is now.

The government's relentless spending threatens to hobble a weak economy with ridiculous costs.

Yet most popular mainstream candidates are pushing policies that will ultimately lead to still more economic disaster and possibly another market meltdown or national bankruptcy or both. They are mostly Wimpies and Micawbers whose policies mean spending today by ignoring a dangerous financial future that is getting closer and closer.

It is a future that could, in one market blowup in which markets lose confidence in the ability of the government to repay, destroy our economic liberty.


The forgotten lesson

It is a lesson that was illustrated by President Grover Cleveland, whose comments in 1887 remain relevant today. He warned of the evils of government overspending and overtaxing.

The United States Treasury, he said, would become "a hoarding place for money needlessly withdrawn from trade and peoples' use, thus crippling our national energies, suspending our country's development, preventing investment in productive enterprise, threatening financial disturbance, and inviting schemes of public plunder."

Why have most politicians forgotten or never learned this lesson of economic liberty? It's because most major political candidates, especially those on the presidential trail, have taken a see-no-evil perspective on one of the most important issues threatening the health of our country.

Almost all of our political class, both Republicans and Democrats, have grandiose plans to spend lots of money or cut taxes. And none of the leading candidates will go into detail about how taxpayers today and tomorrow will pay for it. Although the two major parties claim to have staked out dramatically different positions, the truth is, they are in tacit agreement on spending. They both propose much more of it.

Most Republicans actually don't disagree with Barack Obama. Most Republicans are not calling for the huge spending cuts needed to prevent the nation from following the same road taken by Greece and other advanced welfare-state democracies, nations whose government overspending could lead to a worldwide depression. This is a lesson that even some socialists have recognized.

"I have always pleaded that people should be careful when overseeing government finances. There are many who are too easily inclined to act as though they are inexhaustible."

Those are not the words of a Friedrich Hayek or a Ludwig von Mises, but instead of socialist Willem Drees, a post–World War II Dutch prime minister who founded Holland's Social Security system (History of Holland, Mark T. Hooker, p. 147).

There is a constant that Drees warned of: The tendency of governments, Right and Left, to overspend.


How to continue the madness

Indeed, the Obama budget record is quite similar to that of previous presidents and congressional leaders' positions on red ink: pretend concern. Appoint a commission and forget it, even if its members take things seriously. The commission's recommendations can always be ignored or waylaid. (The Kerrey-Danforth Entitlement Commission of 2000 predicted all the problems we are going through now. It was ignored.)

Propose some spending cutbacks, but with a twist. The cuts go into effect five or ten years down the road. That's when you're no longer in office, collecting a government pension that is much better than the 401(k)s most of your former constituents have. Continue spending and spending in the short term. Elections often can be bought with promises of wonderful programs.

(In 1972, both the Republicans and Democrats tried to outdo each other with who could make bigger promises on expanding Social Security. Forty years later, the result will be documented in this article.)

First, let us examine the numbers of a president whose administration is becoming the Wilkins McCawber of presidencies, the veritable gold standard for red ink and failed promises of prosperity and deficit reduction. Campaigning four years ago Obama promised the deficit would be halved by this point. Obama, "read my lips" George H.W. Bush, and middle-class tax cut Bill Clinton all apparently hoped that, once in office, voters would forget what they had said during the campaign.

The president's latest plan projects the deficit at $1.3 trillion in fiscal 2013, continuing a pattern of new debt that never seems to end. Indeed, the trend is unmistakable under Republicans and Democrats ­ it's going from bad to worse. Obama is running for reelection after four consecutive trillion-dollar deficits.


Slow spending?

Yet clearly, substantially slowing government spending is not a priority for this administration, or for the prior one for that matter. In his latest budget, the president projects that federal spending will increase by $193 billion to $3.8 trillion. That means a few things.

Just in two fiscal years, from 2011 to 2013, the total debt will go from 68 percent of GDP to 77 percent, according to U.S. Office of Management and Budget. The debt to GDP figure was once about 40 percent in the 1970s and now it seems headed for close to 100 percent in the next five to ten years unless something dramatic changes.

At the same time the president is proposing new spending cuts. But most of them don't go into effect for years and certainly they are not going to kick in during an election year. This is an election year in which the president has nearly $2.1 trillion of new spending proposals, which are a hallmark of his administration. Indeed, the four Obama budgets will constitute the four highest-spending years for the federal government since 1946.

The nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget says the president's latest plan would not constrain rising debt over the long term.

"According to the Administration's own estimates," the committee recently wrote in an analysis of the president's plan, "debt would grow as a share of the economy past 2022 ­ exceeding 93 percent by 2035 and nearly 125 percent by 2050." Such spending levels, the committee adds in an understatement, would be "unsustainable."

The latest budget proposal also means that the Obama administration will have run up nearly $5 trillion in new red ink over the past four years. Thirty years ago the whole debt of the United States was about $1 trillion, although one can and should always closely examine any official government numbers.

Now, with this new red ink, the debt is in the dozens of trillions of dollars. I estimate dozens because most economists agree that today's official $16 trillion debt, which is even quoted in the Wall Street Journal as though it is a real number, is bogus.


Next year and next year

Yet the administration, once again, is, in effect, saying give us time to do things, such as raise taxes on the rich and turn the economy around, but wasn't that the same message in 2008? Now it promises that the deficit will finally come down over the next four years. But how reliable are those projections?

The administration expects real GDP growth of 2.7 percent this year and 3 percent next year. Yet the administration in 2009 originally expected the recovery would happen two years ago, with the economy booming by now. Nobody thinks the economy is now booming.

We are now in a weak recovery. And the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) disagrees with the Obama numbers. It projects only 2.2 percent growth this year and things get worse next year (1 percent GDP growth). Of course, lower growth means less in tax receipts, which means higher projected deficits.

Yet the Obama administration, like a sleazy business cooking the books, is in effect already booking sales that have never happened, expecting happy days that haven't come.


The other side to the rescue?

Certainly, the main opposition party, the Republicans, must be offering something more credible and realistic, right?

No, with few exceptions none of them will ever be mistaken for statesmen at the height of a crisis, telling us hard truths and offering us the right solutions.

That was recently underscored by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a group whose name seems an oxymoron.

Most Republicans seem to share the same general approach. In effect, they almost all say, Yes, I know we have a serious spending problems, but we have to go ahead right now with ______ (fill in the blank): more government health-care programs, more aircraft carriers, no significant cuts in government departments and space projects, and so on.


The GOP candidates on spending

Let's take former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who favors tax cuts as well as hundreds of billions of dollars in new spending, some of which include establishing a moon base and a manned mission to Mars. Whether one favors government space exploration or not, Gingrich seems to ignore a hard fact: the country can't afford such projects.

"We estimate," writes the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget which analyzed the Gingrich spending plan, "that taken together, these proposals would increase deficits by $7.0 trillion through 2012 under our intermediate projections, resulting in 2021 debt levels at about 114 percent of GDP."

How about the leading Republican candidate, the former governor, Mitt Romney?

"We estimate the sum of his proposals would increase deficits by $250 billion through 2021 under our intermediate projections, resulting in 2021 debt levels at about 86 percent of GDP," according to the committee.

To get a historical view of these blinding numbers, remember that in 1970 debt was about 40 percent of the GDP. We're close to doubling that in 42 years of reckless spending.

Maybe former Sen. Rick Santorum takes overspending seriously?

Maybe not.

"In total, we estimate the sum of his proposals would increase deficits by $4.5 trillion through 2021 under our intermediate debt projections, resulting in debt levels at about 104 percent of GDP," according to the committee.

So I suppose the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget has nothing good to say about the GOP candidates.

No.

Rep. Ron Paul actually earned the committee's praise. "We estimate that, taken together, these proposals would reduce deficits by $2.2 trillion, resulting in 2021 debt levels at about 76 percent of GDP in our intermediate debt scenario," according to the committee.

How are his proposals to reduce federal red ink different?

Paul is not talking in generalities, moon shots and tax cuts without offsetting spending cuts. He is not saying that eliminating "fraud and waste" or appointing a spending commission or kicking the spending-reductions can down the road for the next administration would solve the problems.

No, Paul, who also has big tax cuts as part of his plan, is actually giving specific instances of how he would reduce spending and pay for those cuts. He would enact defense-spending cuts, end overseas wars, and eliminate five federal departments.

But won't the other Republicans save us from all that red ink? Won't they level with us and tell us to stop the madness? If we go by their records, if we go by their campaign rhetoric, the answer is no.


A poor GOP record

Senator Santorum was a Republican senator who never objected to the Bush administration's overspending.

Rep. Newt Gingrich, after his days as Speaker of the House, made big bucks advising Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The latter were two government-sponsored enterprises that went bust from mismanagement. They were at the heart of the mortgage disasters that led to the market meltdown of 2008, a meltdown that will take years to clean up.

Governor Romney sponsored a government health-care plan in the Bay State that now runs over budget and is a fiscal mess.

But as important as what those big spenders did is what they are proposing. In effect, their economic diet is based on the idea that one can eat junk food right now and eat salad later. The ideas of Gingrich, Romney, and Santorum are that tax cuts will stimulate the economy and there will be no need for any substantial cuts that would make them unpopular with voters.

So why are there no serious plans by most major political figures to stop the reckless spending that threatens to turn the United States into a Weimar Republic or a Spain under Philip II?

Neither Romney, Gingrich, Santorum, nor Obama offers anything that is specific for cleaning up the mess of excessive government spending that has been going for decades and generations. (I know some will cite Clinton's surpluses. But the debt, despite surpluses in his second term, continued to go up under Clinton. That's another example of why the government should be subjected to far stricter accounting standards.)

So it's not surprising that all Republican presidential candidates, save Paul, are offering plans that would make the problem worse. They helped Democrats to make this a serious problem. Most of the Republicans have played a prominent role in running up a $16 trillion (sic) national debt (please see below). By contrast, Paul, in his years in the House, has consistently voted against spending and tax increases. According to the National Taxpayers Union, Paul's career score was 90.8 percent. Gingrich's was 61.9 percent and Santorum's was 75 percent.


Can you trust government numbers?

And, by the way, that $16 trillion is not an accurate number. The number is actually much bigger, according to the former comptroller general David Walker and other financial experts.

In an article I wrote for the New York Post about two years ago, when the official debt number was $13.4 trillion, Walker and a group of economists I surveyed all agreed that that number was fraudulent. Their estimates? Somewhere between $50 trillion to $200 trillion. One economist, Laurence Kotlikoff, said the government was "functionally" bankrupt.

What is the debt, as distinguished from the annual deficits, the government, under Republicans or Democrats, seems to run each year?

The debt is the accumulated deficits. In 1970, the debt ­ the amount of all the accumulated deficits, represented about 40 percent of GDP. It has risen by nearly 75 percent over the past forty years and is today about 70 percent of GDP, according to OMB numbers. What is most alarming is the trend. The debt, even with the most optimistic projections, is likely to rise in the coming years, economists say. That's because previous governments have made pie in the sky promises that are coming due.

Now aging baby boomers will expect their entitlements, such as Social Security, which recently, for the first time, reported that it was in the red, according to the Social Security Commission. That means the program has been paying out more money than workers are paying into it.

"Entitlement programs in the red" actually is dicey way of putting it, since Social Security and Medicare have no money, merely the paper promises that a government says it will make good on while requiring workers to pay into the system. Nevertheless, the trustees of this system last spring warned that problems are coming sooner rather than later.

"Trustees for the two funds said the Medicare trust fund is projected to exhaust the funds in 2024, not 2029 as estimated last year, and that the Social Security retirement program will run out of money in 2036, not 2037 as previously thought."

That is a trend that is likely to continue because the birth rate is declining and people are living longer, the commission warned. But there is another factor that makes the problem worse and increases the red ink: there is no Social Security trust fund. The surpluses, in the years when there were fewer retirees and more workers, were spent every year on all manner of government expenditures. Here is another example of the government's "Enron accounting" that would send people who tried such chicanery in the private sector to jail.

Clearly, our government doesn't believe in government under law. Our government believes, like Charles I and Louis XIV, that the law is subservient to it. That is a subject for an interesting book, or perhaps a library of books that document the deeds of lawless governments.

"The history of Social Security," an economist friend of mine once said at a 401(k) conference I attended about 15 years ago, "is that whenever there have been surpluses, politicians have spent them."

Here, by the way, is another reason for Social Security and all entitlements to be privatized and why a young generation of American workers should have the ability to have individual retirement accounts that they ­ not the government ­ should control.

Baby Boomers depending on entitlements to fund a significant portion of retirement are playing with fire: You can't trust the government to keep your money safe, especially when the government forces you into those systems.


The career politician's problem

Why do the candidates, save Paul, have little to say about how the nation is spending itself into the poor house?

It's because the leading candidates all have their eyes on the office over everything else. And winning an election in an advanced welfare-state democracy is usually based on who can make the biggest promises. The bigger the promises ­ no cut in defense spending, expanding entitlement programs, and big tax cuts for everyone ­ the more likely the candidate is to win favor with the constituency of court intellectuals, mainstream media, neocons, and status-quo voters who believe the nation, no matter how much the red ink there is, needs more of the same.

Four years ago, I wrote a story calling spending the "Nonissue That Should Be an Issue." I will not say that little has changed since then because things have actually become much worse! Back then the official debt figure was $7 trillion.

In the last four years, the nation has rolled up four consecutive trillion-dollar deficits. And that's just the official numbers. As I have said, much of the debt incurred by the government isn't even counted in the official deficit numbers.

Example: Social Security/Medicare obligations aren't counted as part of the official debt. Does the government expect that tens of millions of Americans will be happy to give up their entitlements, entitlements they were forced to pay for throughout their working lives in the form of regressive taxes euphemistically called "contributions?"


Who pays to keep the promises?

Social Security/Medicare bills are real debts that are coming due. Tens of millions of baby boomers have made plans for retirement on the basis of receiving those benefits. They can't go back now and re-live their lives, increasing their private assets.

This shady "we don't recognize certain debts" practice, which is a bipartisan one, is a practice that I think any sensible person would agree is an example of "Enron accounting."

Our governing class doesn't want to discuss overspending in detail. So it's clear that they want Americans to accept more of their statist philosophy even when some of them actually claim they will reduce the size of the state.


Demand the truth

But how can one reduce the size of a government that will continue to spend more and more? That is certainly a logical question that should be put to the candidates again and again until they get sick of hearing it and actually have to give a coherent answer.

Instead of actually answering, most candidates, seeking to avoid hard choices, will coat their promises with phrases such as, "Change We Can Count On" or "Deficits Don't Matter."

It is all campaign drivel; it is political pabulum that patronizes voters.

Indeed, at heart, our ruling pols have the soul of French collectivists who believe that "the government must pay for everything." It is a philosophy brilliantly detailed in a book by the Gaullist minister Alain Peyrefitte, The Trouble with France.

So most of our candidates, as usual, are scamming voters. But unfortunately some of them are ready to accept this political Three-Card Monte. The truth is that the major candidates actually believe that "the more things change, the more they stay the same."

http://www.fff.org/comment/com1203g.asp

Re: Groups Of at Least 40 Gays And Lesbians Murdered In Iraq by a group of the Shiite militia.

Good point Mark!

 

But then again, this is what Madsen,  Kirk, Alinsky and Obama have all advocated; power by mob antics.   Lil'TommyTomTom is nothing more than a foot soldier for these mobsters and anti-Americans.

 

 

On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 1:13 PM, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmkahle@gmail.com> wrote:

Tommy,

While I find it wrong to "lynch" anyone.... Their constitution is
Sharia based and this is/was a completely legal "lynching". That is
democracy for you..... MOB RULE.

On Mar 8, 10:25 am, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Group Of at Least 40 Gays And Lesbians Murdered In Iraq
>
> Group Of 40 Gays And Lesbians Murdered In Iraq
> Written by Instinct Staff | Tuesday, 06 March 2012
> Tags: iraq, middle east, murder, groups, mass, lgbt, gays, lesbians,
> iglhrc, international, shiite
>
> A troubling report today from the International Gay & Lesbian Human
> Rights Commission informs the global LGBT community that mass groups
> of homosexuals are being murdered in Iraq. Details follow.
>
> From the IGLHRC:
>
> The International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission has today
> received reports from Iraq of a wave of targeted killings of
> individuals who are perceived to be gay or lesbian. According to Iraqi
> human rights activists, in early February 2012, an unidentified group
> posted death threats against "the adulterous individuals" in the
> predominantly Shiite neighborhoods of Baghdad and Basra. The threats
> gave the individuals, whose names and ages were listed, four days to
> stop their behavior or else face the wrath of God, and were to be
> carried out by the Mujahedin. According to sources inside Iraq, as the
> result of this new surge of anti-gay violence close to 40 people have
> been kidnapped, brutally tortured and murdered. The Iraqi authorities
> have neither responded to this targeted violence nor have they
> publicly denounced it. It is widely believed that these atrocities are
> being committed by a group of the Shiite militia.
>
> "Today the Government of Iraq represents a fully sovereign and
> democratic country," said IGLHRC Executive Director Cary Alan Johnson.
> "As such, it must protect all of its citizens including lesbian, gay,
> bisexual and transgender people from hate-filled violence and death at
> the hands of armed militias. Vigilantes who perpetuate the targeted
> killing of those perceived to be gay or lesbian must not be tolerated
> in a new Iraq. We have seen these atrocities before. In 2009
> vigilantes murdered hundreds of Iraqi individuals for their perceived
> sexual orientation. There are no excuses for such heinous human rights
> violations. We demand that the Iraqi Government put a stop to the
> wanton persecution and killing of gay people, and that the
> perpetrators punished."
>

> More:http://instinctmagazine.com/blogs/blog/group-of-40-gays-and-lesbians-...

>
> --
> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> Have a great day,
> Tommy
>
> --
> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> Have a great day,
> Tommy

--
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.

Re: The Incomplete Greatness of Barack Obama

the declared policy of the Obama Administration that they want
oil prices to increase in the United States, in order to push Green
Energy, which has failed miserably
----
Shale field finds have revived the U.S. oil and gas output after four
decades of decline. The advent of new technologies, including
horizontal drilling of well and hydraulic fracturing, is the main
reason behind such huge discoveries. Anadarko, along with peers
Carrizo Oil & Gas (NYSE: CRZO ) and Noble Energy (NYSE: NBL ) , has
been putting the latest technology to use in the Wattenberg fields.
The company also holds leases in Wyoming where it is evaluating
drilling prospects. These mean machines are expected to boost North
American oil production and may even double it by 2025.

China has lost 1/3 of it's energy source ... nuclear energy, and is
buying into older energy. They're going to love our natural gas
resources!

On Mar 8, 11:14 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well said PlainOl.  If President Obama succeeds in November,  we might not
> recognize the United States in ten years.  We must repeal ObamaCare,  which
> has relatively little to do with health care in the first place, but is
> such an intrusion into our lives, and an usurpation of our basic rights and
> liberties.  Most Moonbats don't realize this, because they don't really
> know what ObamaCare even is.
>
> The fact that Americans are paying $4.00 and in some cases $5.00 a gallon
> for fuel at the pump is obscene, and we have nothing but Democrats to blame
> for this.  Recently,  Obama vetoed the Keystone Pipeline coming from our
> neighbor Canada.  This in and of itself would have caused speculation for
> oil to have been greatly reduced, thereby causing oil prices to crash.
> But it is the declared policy of the Obama Administration that they want
> oil prices to increase in the United States, in  order to push Green
> Energy, which has failed miserably, and of which the Obama Administraiton
> has pumped billions of dollars into,  all for naught and to watch this
> crony capitalist companies to crash and burn.
>
> On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 11:06 AM, plainolamerican
> <plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > In his first three years in office, Barack Obama has gotten more done
> > -- ending the Iraq War, turning around Detroit, repealing Don't Ask,
> > Don't Tell, averting another Great Depression
> > ---
> > giving O credit for these things is deceptive and insane.
> > He's done his best to promote socialism and minorities ... just like
> > we knew he would.
>
> >http://www.stupidvideos.com/video/politics/Obama_the_Monkey_Boy/#207020
>
> > On Mar 8, 9:53 am, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > The Incomplete Greatness of Barack Obama
> > > In his first three years in office, Barack Obama has gotten more done
> > > -- ending the Iraq War, turning around Detroit, repealing Don't Ask,
> > > Don't Tell, averting another Great Depression -- than any president in
> > > decades. Yet polls show that most Americans think he's achieved very
> > > little. That gap between perception and reality, which could make all
> > > the difference in this November's election, is the subject of the
> > > cover story in the March/April issue of the Washington Monthly, by
> > > Editor in Chief Paul Glastris.
>
> > > The problem for Obama, Glastris explains, is that while liberals
> > > measure him against their hopes, and conservatives against their
> > > fears, few have evaluated him by the more relevant yardstick: how his
> > > deeds compare to those of other presidents. By this measure, Obama
> > > does extraordinarily well, and not just in terms of quantity. True,
> > > his biggest and most controversial accomplishments, like health care
> > > reform and the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill, have been widely
> > > criticized as crimped, compromised, slow to take effect, and
> > > vulnerable to being overturned. But so too, notes Glastris, were many
> > > of history's most important and lasting presidential achievements,
> > > from Social Security to the GI Bill.
>
> > > Taking a deep dive into the full range of this administration's
> > > policies, Glastris concludes that historians in the future will likely
> > > consider Obama as one of America's great presidents -- if he gets
> > > re-elected and can protect his legacy from Republicans who would
> > > dismantle it. But Obama's striking inability to speak up for his own
> > > record has put him in an unenviable spot: in order to win that crucial
> > > second term, he must first convince voters that he has a substantial
> > > record of achievement to defend in the first place.
>
> > > Read "The Incomplete Greatness of Barack Obama."
>
> > > Plus: "Obama's Top 50 Accomplishments"
>
> > > More:
> >http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/march_april_2012/features/t...
>
> > > --
> > > Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> > > Have a great day,
> > > Tommy
>
> > > --
> > > Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> > > Have a great day,
> > > Tommy
>
> > --
> > 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.

Re: Groups Of at Least 40 Gays And Lesbians Murdered In Iraq by a group of the Shiite militia.

At 12:01 PM 3/8/2012, you wrote:

as with the security of any other nation, the USA is not responsible
for the civil rights of non-Americans, regardless where they live

If the US Government is 'dealing' with these people it most certainly does.

Regard$,
--MJ

"By what right do men exercise power over each other?" -- Auberon Herbert

Re: Climate Change: Midwest Tornadoes: Record Week Of Twisters Hit America's Heartland, Warmest February

Gosh Batman. 4 Ice Ages before man walked the Earth, and 2 since, and
both of those were LONG before we could SPELL, "fossil fuel".

Shhh! Don tell 'em. Its just too much fun. :-)
On Mar 8, 11:30 am, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Climate Change
> ---
> continuously occurs ... get used to it
>
> On Mar 8, 9:14 am, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Climate Change: Midwest Tornadoes: Record Week Of Twisters Hit
> > America's Heartland, Warmest February
>
> > By Sharon Begley
>
> > NEW YORK, March 5 (Reuters) - When at least 80 tornadoes rampaged
> > across the United States, from the Midwest to the Gulf of Mexico, last
> > Friday, it was more than is typically observed during the entire month
> > of March, tracking firm AccuWeather.com reported on Monday.
>
> > According to some climate scientists, such earlier-than-normal
> > outbreaks of tornadoes, which typically peak in the spring, will
> > become the norm as the planet warms.
>
> > "As spring moves up a week or two, tornado season will start in
> > February instead of waiting for April," said climatologist Kevin
> > Trenberth of the National Center for Atmospheric Research.
>
> > Whether climate change will also affect the frequency or severity of
> > tornadoes, however, remains very much an open question, and one that
> > has received surprisingly little study.
>
> > "There are only a handful of papers, even to this day," said
> > atmospheric scientist Robert Trapp of Purdue University, who led a
> > pioneering 2007 study of tornadoes and climate change.
>
> > "Some of us think we should be paying more attention to it," said
> > atmospheric physicist Anthony Del Genio of the Goddard Institute for
> > Space Studies, part of NASA.
>
> > The scientific challenge is this: the two conditions necessary to
> > spawn a twister are expected to be affected in opposite ways. A warmer
> > climate will likely boost the intensity of thunderstorms but could
> > dampen wind shear, the increase of wind speed at higher altitudes,
> > researchers say.
>
> > Tomorrow's thunderstorms will pack a bigger wallop, but may strike
> > less frequently than they have historically, explained Del Genio.
>
> > "As we go to a warmer atmosphere, storms - which transfer energy from
> > one region to another - somehow figure out how to do that more
> > efficiently," he said. As a result, thunderstorms transfer more energy
> > per outbreak, and so have to make such transfers less often.
>
> > In a 2011 paper, Del Genio calculated that, "especially in the central
> > and eastern United States, we can expect a few more days per month
> > with conditions favorable to severe thunderstorm occurrence" by the
> > latter part of this century if the global climate grows warmer.
>
> > Indeed, the world has been experiencing more violent storms since
> > 1970, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reported in its
> > most recent assessment.
>
> > EXTENDING TORNADOES' PATH
>
> > Purdue's Trapp and colleagues got a similar result in their 2007
> > study, which they confirmed in research published in 2009 and 2011.
> > "The number of days when conditions exist to form tornadoes is
> > expected to increase" as the world warms, he said.
>
> > In addition, they found, regions near the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic
> > coasts not normally associated with tornadoes will experience
> > tornado-making weather more frequently. They projected a doubling in
> > the number of days with such conditions in Atlanta and New York City,
> > for instance.
>
> > More powerful thunderstorms would be expected to produce more
> > tornadoes, but wind shear could prove a mitigating factor.
>
> > Because climate change is not uniform, Del Genio wrote in the 2011
> > paper, "in the lower troposphere, the temperature difference between
> > low and high latitudes decreases as the planet warms, creating less
> > wind shear."
>
> > Other scientists are not so sure, and they see a surge in tornadoes
> > last year as ominous. April 2011 was the most active tornado month on
> > record, with 753, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
> > Administration (NOAA), compared to the previous record of 267 in April
> > 1974.
>
> > "I have no doubt that there will be many times when wind shear is
> > plenty strong to create a tornado," said Trenberth.
>
> > That is what Trapp's team concluded in their 2007 study. "Over most of
> > the United States," they wrote, the increase in the power of
> > thunderstorms will "more than compensate for the relative decreases in
> > shear."
>
> > As a result, "the environment would still be considered favorable for
> > severe convection" of the kind that creates tornadoes.
>
> > From March to May the projected increase in severe storms is "largest
> > over a 'tornado-alley'-like region extending northward from Texas,"
> > Trapp found. From June through August, the eastern half of the country
> > is projected to experience such an increase.
>
> > If there are more days in the future when wind shear is too weak to
> > produce a tornado from a thunderstorm, said Trenberth, then "the
> > frequency of tornadoes may decrease but the average intensity might
> > increase. You could have a doozy of an outbreak, and then they could
> > go away for a while."
>
> > On average, about 800 tornados are reported annually in the United
> > States. About 70 percent are "weak," finds NOAA, with winds less than
> > 110 mph (177 kph) . Just under 29 percent are "strong," with winds
> > between 110 and 205 mph (177 and 329 kph) . Only 2 percent of all
> > tornadoes are what NOAA characterizes as "violent," with winds in
> > excess of 205 mph (329 kph) , but they account for 70 percent of all
> > twister deaths. (Editing by Michele Gershberg and Sandra Maler)
>
> > More:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/06/midwest-tornadoes-record-wee...
>
> > --
> > Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> > Have a great day,
> > Tommy
>
> > --
> > Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> > Have a great day,
> > Tommy

--
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: Climate Change: Midwest Tornadoes: Record Week Of Twisters Hit America's Heartland, Warmest February

Climate Change
---
continuously occurs ... get used to it

On Mar 8, 9:14 am, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Climate Change: Midwest Tornadoes: Record Week Of Twisters Hit
> America's Heartland, Warmest February
>
> By Sharon Begley
>
> NEW YORK, March 5 (Reuters) - When at least 80 tornadoes rampaged
> across the United States, from the Midwest to the Gulf of Mexico, last
> Friday, it was more than is typically observed during the entire month
> of March, tracking firm AccuWeather.com reported on Monday.
>
> According to some climate scientists, such earlier-than-normal
> outbreaks of tornadoes, which typically peak in the spring, will
> become the norm as the planet warms.
>
> "As spring moves up a week or two, tornado season will start in
> February instead of waiting for April," said climatologist Kevin
> Trenberth of the National Center for Atmospheric Research.
>
> Whether climate change will also affect the frequency or severity of
> tornadoes, however, remains very much an open question, and one that
> has received surprisingly little study.
>
> "There are only a handful of papers, even to this day," said
> atmospheric scientist Robert Trapp of Purdue University, who led a
> pioneering 2007 study of tornadoes and climate change.
>
> "Some of us think we should be paying more attention to it," said
> atmospheric physicist Anthony Del Genio of the Goddard Institute for
> Space Studies, part of NASA.
>
> The scientific challenge is this: the two conditions necessary to
> spawn a twister are expected to be affected in opposite ways. A warmer
> climate will likely boost the intensity of thunderstorms but could
> dampen wind shear, the increase of wind speed at higher altitudes,
> researchers say.
>
> Tomorrow's thunderstorms will pack a bigger wallop, but may strike
> less frequently than they have historically, explained Del Genio.
>
> "As we go to a warmer atmosphere, storms - which transfer energy from
> one region to another - somehow figure out how to do that more
> efficiently," he said. As a result, thunderstorms transfer more energy
> per outbreak, and so have to make such transfers less often.
>
> In a 2011 paper, Del Genio calculated that, "especially in the central
> and eastern United States, we can expect a few more days per month
> with conditions favorable to severe thunderstorm occurrence" by the
> latter part of this century if the global climate grows warmer.
>
> Indeed, the world has been experiencing more violent storms since
> 1970, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reported in its
> most recent assessment.
>
> EXTENDING TORNADOES' PATH
>
> Purdue's Trapp and colleagues got a similar result in their 2007
> study, which they confirmed in research published in 2009 and 2011.
> "The number of days when conditions exist to form tornadoes is
> expected to increase" as the world warms, he said.
>
> In addition, they found, regions near the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic
> coasts not normally associated with tornadoes will experience
> tornado-making weather more frequently. They projected a doubling in
> the number of days with such conditions in Atlanta and New York City,
> for instance.
>
> More powerful thunderstorms would be expected to produce more
> tornadoes, but wind shear could prove a mitigating factor.
>
> Because climate change is not uniform, Del Genio wrote in the 2011
> paper, "in the lower troposphere, the temperature difference between
> low and high latitudes decreases as the planet warms, creating less
> wind shear."
>
> Other scientists are not so sure, and they see a surge in tornadoes
> last year as ominous. April 2011 was the most active tornado month on
> record, with 753, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
> Administration (NOAA), compared to the previous record of 267 in April
> 1974.
>
> "I have no doubt that there will be many times when wind shear is
> plenty strong to create a tornado," said Trenberth.
>
> That is what Trapp's team concluded in their 2007 study. "Over most of
> the United States," they wrote, the increase in the power of
> thunderstorms will "more than compensate for the relative decreases in
> shear."
>
> As a result, "the environment would still be considered favorable for
> severe convection" of the kind that creates tornadoes.
>
> From March to May the projected increase in severe storms is "largest
> over a 'tornado-alley'-like region extending northward from Texas,"
> Trapp found. From June through August, the eastern half of the country
> is projected to experience such an increase.
>
> If there are more days in the future when wind shear is too weak to
> produce a tornado from a thunderstorm, said Trenberth, then "the
> frequency of tornadoes may decrease but the average intensity might
> increase. You could have a doozy of an outbreak, and then they could
> go away for a while."
>
> On average, about 800 tornados are reported annually in the United
> States. About 70 percent are "weak," finds NOAA, with winds less than
> 110 mph (177 kph) . Just under 29 percent are "strong," with winds
> between 110 and 205 mph (177 and 329 kph) . Only 2 percent of all
> tornadoes are what NOAA characterizes as "violent," with winds in
> excess of 205 mph (329 kph) , but they account for 70 percent of all
> twister deaths. (Editing by Michele Gershberg and Sandra Maler)
>
> More:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/06/midwest-tornadoes-record-wee...
>
> --
> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> Have a great day,
> Tommy
>
> --
> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> Have a great day,
> Tommy

--
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: Groups Of at Least 40 Gays And Lesbians Murdered In Iraq by a group of the Shiite militia.

their country ... their problem

what do you expect from the animals in the middle east?

On Mar 8, 10:25 am, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Group Of at Least 40 Gays And Lesbians Murdered In Iraq
>
> Group Of 40 Gays And Lesbians Murdered In Iraq
> Written by Instinct Staff | Tuesday, 06 March 2012
> Tags: iraq, middle east, murder, groups, mass, lgbt, gays, lesbians,
> iglhrc, international, shiite
>
> A troubling report today from the International Gay & Lesbian Human
> Rights Commission informs the global LGBT community that mass groups
> of homosexuals are being murdered in Iraq. Details follow.
>
> From the IGLHRC:
>
> The International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission has today
> received reports from Iraq of a wave of targeted killings of
> individuals who are perceived to be gay or lesbian. According to Iraqi
> human rights activists, in early February 2012, an unidentified group
> posted death threats against "the adulterous individuals" in the
> predominantly Shiite neighborhoods of Baghdad and Basra. The threats
> gave the individuals, whose names and ages were listed, four days to
> stop their behavior or else face the wrath of God, and were to be
> carried out by the Mujahedin. According to sources inside Iraq, as the
> result of this new surge of anti-gay violence close to 40 people have
> been kidnapped, brutally tortured and murdered. The Iraqi authorities
> have neither responded to this targeted violence nor have they
> publicly denounced it. It is widely believed that these atrocities are
> being committed by a group of the Shiite militia.
>
> "Today the Government of Iraq represents a fully sovereign and
> democratic country," said IGLHRC Executive Director Cary Alan Johnson.
> "As such, it must protect all of its citizens including lesbian, gay,
> bisexual and transgender people from hate-filled violence and death at
> the hands of armed militias. Vigilantes who perpetuate the targeted
> killing of those perceived to be gay or lesbian must not be tolerated
> in a new Iraq. We have seen these atrocities before. In 2009
> vigilantes murdered hundreds of Iraqi individuals for their perceived
> sexual orientation. There are no excuses for such heinous human rights
> violations. We demand that the Iraqi Government put a stop to the
> wanton persecution and killing of gay people, and that the
> perpetrators punished."
>
> More:http://instinctmagazine.com/blogs/blog/group-of-40-gays-and-lesbians-...
>
> --
> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> Have a great day,
> Tommy
>
> --
> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> Have a great day,
> Tommy

--
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.

Groups Of at Least 40 Gays And Lesbians Murdered In Iraq by a group of the Shiite militia.

Group Of at Least 40 Gays And Lesbians Murdered In Iraq

Group Of 40 Gays And Lesbians Murdered In Iraq
Written by Instinct Staff | Tuesday, 06 March 2012
Tags: iraq, middle east, murder, groups, mass, lgbt, gays, lesbians,
iglhrc, international, shiite

A troubling report today from the International Gay & Lesbian Human
Rights Commission informs the global LGBT community that mass groups
of homosexuals are being murdered in Iraq. Details follow.

From the IGLHRC:

The International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission has today
received reports from Iraq of a wave of targeted killings of
individuals who are perceived to be gay or lesbian. According to Iraqi
human rights activists, in early February 2012, an unidentified group
posted death threats against "the adulterous individuals" in the
predominantly Shiite neighborhoods of Baghdad and Basra. The threats
gave the individuals, whose names and ages were listed, four days to
stop their behavior or else face the wrath of God, and were to be
carried out by the Mujahedin. According to sources inside Iraq, as the
result of this new surge of anti-gay violence close to 40 people have
been kidnapped, brutally tortured and murdered. The Iraqi authorities
have neither responded to this targeted violence nor have they
publicly denounced it. It is widely believed that these atrocities are
being committed by a group of the Shiite militia.

"Today the Government of Iraq represents a fully sovereign and
democratic country," said IGLHRC Executive Director Cary Alan Johnson.
"As such, it must protect all of its citizens including lesbian, gay,
bisexual and transgender people from hate-filled violence and death at
the hands of armed militias. Vigilantes who perpetuate the targeted
killing of those perceived to be gay or lesbian must not be tolerated
in a new Iraq. We have seen these atrocities before. In 2009
vigilantes murdered hundreds of Iraqi individuals for their perceived
sexual orientation. There are no excuses for such heinous human rights
violations. We demand that the Iraqi Government put a stop to the
wanton persecution and killing of gay people, and that the
perpetrators punished."

More:
http://instinctmagazine.com/blogs/blog/group-of-40-gays-and-lesbians-murdered-in-iraq?directory=100011

--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

--
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.

Campaign and vote for Howard Kudler, Defeat GOP Congressman Peter King in Long Island's 3rd Congressional District:

Lil'MarxistMoonbatTommyTomTomForNews,

 

First,  I am not going to get into,  "He Said" versus "He Said"  with you;  but a quick perusal of all of your posts will demonstrate that like a true far left extremist,  you are ALWAYS slinging nasty, defamatory names and hateful smear.   Look at your recent posts regarding Rush Limbaugh, or any post that you have posted regarding Sarah Palin.  

 

Most of us are amused at your name calling,  especially with folks like Palin, who, the last time I checked was not running for any office, but just seems to really irk far left individuals to no end. 

 

Whenever you, and your typical kind,  (and that is to say,  those individuals who hold far left extremist points of view, and who cannot support or cognizantly argue their points of view with logic or diction)  are engaged in any type of discoure,  it always turns out with you slinging nasty, derogatory remarks, and never being able to to explain why or how it is that you believe or support such a position, without using groups like Media Matters', the Daily Kos's,  Democratic Underground's daily spin, or the Democratic Party's daily talking points.  Once again, these entities rarely if ever have substance or are anything more than what I just referenced,  daily talking points or spin. 

 

You would make a great "Tweeter";  in that you can never add substance or explain why it is that you believe the way that you do.   This is when you always revert to the nasty name calling and hateful rhetoric.   There are very few posts in this group where what I have written is not "spot on".  The exception(s)  are lengthy cut and paste articles where you have clipped something from some far left extremist hate site, and again, when asked or questioned about such an article, you can never support such rhetoric or hate filled smear. 

 

I don't know if you are a Marxist, a communist, or a socialist.   I have point blank asked you to demonstrate what points from the Communist Party U.S.A.  that you disagree with, and to date you have refused to do so.   I have shown, and proven on numerous occasions, where the Democratic Party of the United States has been infiltrated, caters to, and is the mouthpiece of the socialists and communists,  and now,  most elected Democrats admit as much,  belonging either to the Communist Party or the Socialist Party, along with their Democratic Party affiliation.  One can only surmise that the Democratic Party is broken beyond repair. 

 

As far as the name calling that you sling my way,   I look at the source.  If it makes you feel bigger to call me names,  by all means, do so!   You will note that in the beginning,  I was as polite and as courteous to you as I am with all members,  and it only became evident of my disdain for you when you acted like a Moonbat.  A Moonbat is an individual who holds far left extremist viewpoints, but cannot defend or ascertain why he holds far left extremist viewpoints.  I think you are the poster boy for Moonbats.

 

You can prove me wrong, by acting respectfully, and start supporting your arguments with clear, rational thinking instead of cut and paste articles from hate sites,  and ceasing the hateful smear that you post.

 

Keith

 

 

On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 9:06 AM, Tommy News <tommysnews@gmail.com> wrote:

Little Grand Old Kiethie McCarthy-

Calling people derrogatory names like "Moonbat" "Little Tom Tom"
"Marxist" , as you do to me, is offensive and childish, and it
deserves the same trerment back at you in kind, as you have learned in
lotr discussion of handling bullies. I am not a Marxist. a communist,
or a socialist, and in calling me those names you are a slanderous
liar and spreader of false smear.

To answer your question, let me ask you this: Why is it that you are
offended when I in kind call you a Little Grand Old Teabagger Reich
Wingnut Fascist Homophobe Mysoginist Drunkard? Because it is true?

-Tommy

On 3/7/12, Keith In Tampa <keithintampa@gmail.com> wrote:
> Good Evening Tom, and thanks for responding (sort of)  to this message from
> seventeen months ago.
>
>  Assuming for a moment that I did call you a communist,  or a socialist, or
> assuming for a moment that you are in fact a communist or a socialist, I
> don't understand why you would be offended.   That is not at all some type
> of an insult or remotely similar to the vile, hateful spew that is directed
> by the far left towards conservatives.   The terms, "Communist"  or
> "Socialist" is nothing but a term that describes one's economic and
> socio-political ideology.   I don't know if you are a communist or a
> socialist,  (which is the forerunner to communism)  but there is no
> question that the Democratic Party is and stands for socialism and
> communism, period.  There are at least seventy members of the House of
> Representatives,  all Democrat, who are currently registered, card carrying
> members of the  Democratic Socialists of America:
>
>
> http://www.scribd.com/doc/35733956/DSA-Members-American-Socialist-Voter-Democratic-Socialists-of-America-10-1-09
>
>

> The President of the United States is at a minimum a socialist, (*e.g*.;

> the forerunner to being a communist) calling constantly for redistribution
> of wealth,  and playing the class warfare card against hard working

> Americans on a *daily* basis.

>
> It amazes me that those on the left would like to make it sound as if
> calling them a Socialist or a Communist,  which is an accurate description
> of the socio-economic policies that they subscribe to,  is some type of an
> insult, or "name calling".
>
> Once again,  I ask, which platforms of the Communist Party U.S.A.  do you
> disagree with?
>
> http://www.rense.com/general32/americ.htm
>
>
> KeithInTampa
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 7:59 PM, Tommy News <tommysnews@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Fascist Kiethie McCarthy-
>>
>> I am not now and have never been a Communist, a Socialist, or a
>> Marxist.
>> But even if I were, that would not be such a terrible thing.
>>
>> On Oct 11 2010, 1:57 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Tom,
>> >
>> > Several days ago, I posted an article that listed planks from the 1965
>> > Communist Party here in the United States.  I asked specifically, which
>> > particular planks of the U.S. Communist Party did you disagree with.  To
>> > date, you have not responded.
>> >
>> > Today, I submit the 2010 United States Communist Party Constitution:
>> >
>> > http://www.cpusa.org/cpusa-constitution/
>> >
>> > Here is their home page:
>> >
>> > http://www.cpusa.org/
>> >
>> > Once again,  I ask you, what is contained within the Communist Party
>> > U.S.A.'s Constitution, that you disagree with?   Please Tom, name one
>> thing,
>> > or as many things that you disagree with!  We'll all sit here with
>> atwitter
>> > with excitement and anticipation, awaiting your response!!
>> >
>> > In general, we as a group are aware that you support and agree with a
>> number
>> > of the Marxist and socialist policies that the Obama Administration has
>> > adopted.
>> >
>> > Tom, the terms, "Marxism", and "Socialism" are not bad words.  They are
>> not
>> > hate filled.  They are apt and accurate descriptions of political
>> ideology.
>> >
>> > Should you feel ashamed that you embrace some of these Marxist and
>> > socialistic policies?   I don't know.....Only you can answer that.
>> > Nevertheless, I think it would be maybe theraputic, as well as an eye
>> opener
>> > for you, to actually sit and determine which ideals of the Marxists and
>> the
>> > Communists that you disfavor.
>> >
>> > KeithInTampaOn Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Tommy News <
>> tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > *Democrats are not Marxists, Socialists, or Communists.*
>> > > **
>> > > *Repeat 100 times.*
>> >
>> > > *Then stop calling them that.*
>> >
>> > >  On 10/10/10, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > >>  Probably true, but one must consider the other option/lesser of the
>> two
>> > >> evils.  King is not a Marxist, and will not succumb to Marxist
>> > >> policy.
>> >
>> > >> There really is no other choice.
>> >
>> > >>   On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 10:58 AM, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > >>>  King Peter is a whiny cry baby.....WAAHHHHH ..... EVERYBODY PICKS
>> > >>> ON
>> > >>> ME.... WAAAHHHH.....
>> >
>> > >>> On Oct 10, 10:48 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >>> > Uhm.......Lemme think about it for a second......
>> >
>> > >>> > No.
>> >
>> > >>> > On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com>
>> > >>> wrote:
>> > >>> > > *Defeat GOP Congressman Peter King in Long Island's 3rd
>> Congressional
>> >
>> > >>> > > District: *
>> > >>> > > **
>> > >>> > > <
>> > >>>http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://static.thehollywoodgossip.
>> ..
>> > >>> .>
>> > >>>  > > Peter King
>> > >>> > > **
>> > >>> > > *Campaign and vote for Howard Kudler*
>> >
>> > >>> > >  Howard Kudler
>> >
>> > >>> > > *The People of Long Island need a new Congressman!*
>> >
>> > >>> > >  We Need:
>> >
>> > >>> > >  A leader who will bring jobs and businesses back to Long
>> > >>> > > Island!
>> >
>> > >>> > >  A person who will protect the families in our communities as
>> well as
>> > >>> > > shores of our nation!
>> >
>> > >>> > >  A leader who will bring lost Federal funds back to the Island
>> so we
>> > >>> can
>> > >>> > > pay lower taxes!
>> >
>> > >>> > >  A leader who will fight to end the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan
>> > >>> > > and
>> > >>> Pakistan
>> > >>> > > and will bring our troops home!
>> >
>> > >>> > >  A friend to Israel and a leader who will stand strong against
>> all
>> > >>> > > terrorists!
>> >
>> > >>> > >  We need Howard Kudler!
>> >
>> > >>> > >  Howard Kudler is an honest, hardworking union member with 26
>> years
>> > >>> of
>> > >>> > > public service. He is tough, award winning NYC teacher of
>> Government
>> > >>> and
>> > >>> > > Economics. Mr. Kudler is a community leader and has a 43 year
>> > >>> affiliation
>> > >>> > > with the Boy Scouts of America.
>> >
>> > >>> > >  "It is time to bring the reign of Peter King to an end! For too
>> > >>> long, his
>> > >>> > > loud and bigoted remarks have embarrassed and diminished the
>> ideals
>> > >>> of all
>> > >>> > > good Americans. Under this Congressman's tenure, we have been
>> > >>> over-taxed,
>> > >>> > > over-burdened and under-employed.
>> >
>> > >>> > >  He has created an exodus of families and businesses from Long
>> > >>> Island. If
>> > >>> > > this continues, we may soon have nothing left to protect. His
>> actions
>> > >>> and
>> > >>> > > party politics have taken far more from the people of our
>> communities
>> > >>> then
>> > >>> > > they have ever contributed."
>> >
>> > >>> > >  I need your support to restore good government to our towns and
>> > >>> villages.
>> > >>> > > Let's bring the power of the nation back to people. "
>> >
>> > >>> > >  Please support Howard Kudler. Howard Kudler will fight to keep
>> the
>> > >>> > > American Dream from becoming the American memory for our
>> community.
>> >
>> > >>> > > Contribute here:
>> >
>> > >>> > >http://www.actblue.com/page/kudlerforcongress
>> >
>> > >>> > > --
>> > >>> > > Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
>> > >>> > > Have a great day,
>> > >>> > > Tommy
>> >
>> > >>> > >       --
>> > >>> > > 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/<
>> http://www.politicalforum.com/>
>> > >>> <http://www.politicalforum.com/>
>> > >>>  > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>> >
>> > >>> > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.- Hide quoted text -
>> >
>> > >>> > - Show quoted text -
>> >
>> > >>> --
>> > >>> 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/<
>> 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 seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>> >
>> > >> * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/<
>> http://www.politicalforum.com/>
>> > >> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>> > >> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>> >
>> > > --
>> > > Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
>> > > Have a great day,
>> > > Tommy
>> >
>> > > --
>> > > 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/<
>> http://www.politicalforum.com/>
>> > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>> > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>
>


--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

--
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.