Consumers Digest

why is it that fox news is so highly rated and watched more than msnbc,abc,cnn,nbc-all combined? Why is this? Numbers don't lie! TVNewser reports that Fox News Channel had the highest rated programs on cable news during the month of March. Leading that charge was The O'Reilly Factor, which took both the #1 (the 8PM original broadcast) and the #7 (the 11PM repeat) spots. Below, the 20 top ranked shows for March 2009, according to Nielsen Media Research: 1. The O'Reilly Factor (Fox) 2. Hannity's America(Fox) 3. The Fox Report with Shep Smith (Fox) 4. Special Report with Brit Hume (Fox) 5. On The Record with Greta Van Susteren (Fox) 6. Americas Newsroom (Fox) 7. The O'Reilly Factor (Repeat) (Fox) 8. The Big Story with John Gibson (Fox) 9. Hannity's America (repeat) (Fox) 10. Your World with Neil Cavuto (Fox) 11. Larry King Live (CNN) 12. Lou Dobbs Tonight (CNN) 13. Fox And Friends (Fox) 14. Happening Now (Fox) 15. Glen Beck (Fox) 16. Live Desk with Martha MacCallum (Fox) 17. Americas Pulse (Fox) 18. Anderson Cooper 360 (CNN) 19, Out In The Open (CNN) 20. CNN Center (CNN)

Why is it that deniers keep mentioning Al Gore? Is that as close as they ever got to science? Do they have any REAL science to back them up? Maybe like: NASA - http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap090421.html NSF - http://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/climate/pdf/NSF_Climate_Change_Report.pdf NOAA - http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/what.html MIT - http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2009/roulette-0519.html UCLA - http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/globa-warming-affects-warm-weather-68463.aspx http://dels.nas.edu/dels/rpt_briefs/climate_change_2008_final.pdf <== this is why CO2 is a problem. http://www.rkm.com.au/ANIMATIONS/carbon-dioxide-global-warming.html <== here's the physics. http://www.school-for-champions.com/science/infrared_greenhouse_effect.htm <== melting of the Siberian tundra is a global warming time bomb. http://fora.tv/2009/08/18/A_REALLY_Inconvenient_Truth_Dan_Miller <== This is an hour long, but is very good. http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/326/5960/1646 come-on, surely you must have something. where is it? <<I'll start being impressed when they can make accurate predictions.>> They said it was warming, back in the early 90s. It is warming. How many predictions do they have to make? <<al gore is also the one that the gullible public who believe in global warming listen to.>> You did note that i didn't quote Gore. In fact, i've never done that. I have stated that he has the name recognician to get attention. He's done that very well. However, when it comes to science, that's not where most of us look. It is true that some do -- we're always disappointed when that happens. And we criticize them. On the other hand, deniers almost never criticize other deniers, no matter how ridiculous the claim. Quite a difference, isn't it. <<Naughty boy, you have some catching up to do! There is a lot of material from respectable skeptics linked in this forum.>> "respectable skeptics?" who? which? really !! and just where is that material? also, really !! willie b: <<I'm educated, and opinionated also like to read here for the weak minded. Every time they open their mouth (keyboard) they prove it.>> <<His own words is why! Listen to his own words when he compares the CO2 and temp levels of Earth and a planet that is 5 times closer to the sun. His words not mine, fools one and all.>> Huh? What? Which planet? Where? got a link? i doubt it. <<Do you even know how much CO2 is in our air?>> In fact, yes, i do. If you have a 2,000 sq ft house, and a roof of the same area, there are 2,400 pounds of CO2 just over your house. And the same amount over every part of the surface of the earth, including the oceans. Up nearly 40% from a hundred years ago, or so. <<We are being told by THE science of today. That because of GW we have lost 30 to 40% of the caps. If this was true then New York should be under 20+ feet of water.>> you sure seem to have trouble getting your facts straight. 30-40% applies to arctic sea ice. When it melts it does not raise water level. a person: <<Maybe you should look at some news and realize everybody's talking about how COLD it is>> Uh yeah. it's weather. <<Just about 15,000 years ago average temperatures were around -200 degrees>> WOW !!!! It has never, ever, been -200 degrees on this earth. Not anywhere. Not in 4 1/2 billion years. Never. <<Mainstream media-supported propaganda intended to extort a wealth-transfer from developed nations to countries like North Korea, Somalia, and Zimbabwe is even worse.>> HUH? US mainstream media it actively trying to transfer wealth to N. Korea? Really? coldfuse: <<Gravity is not a theory; it is a law.>> It's both. Newton's law allows calculations. Modified by Einstein. CUrrent theory is that gravity is a result of the warping of space-time by massive objects. <<Have you been kind enough to share the thoughts of MIT's Richard Lindzen?>> Uh, this Richard Lindzen? http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Richard_S._Lindzen "one of the leading global warming skeptics and is a member of the Science, Health, and Economic Advisory Council, of the Annapolis Center, a Maryland-based think tank which has been funded by corporations including ExxonMobil." In a biographical note at the foot of a column published in Newsweek in 2007, Lindzen wrote that "his research has always been funded exclusively by the U.S. government. He receives no funding from any energy companies." Lindzen charged "oil and coal interests $2,500 a day for his consulting services; [and] his 1991 trip to testify before a Senate committee In a 2001 profile in Newsweek, journalist Fred Guterl wrote that Lindzen "clearly relishes the role of naysayer. He'll even expound on how weakly lung cancer is linked to cigarette smoking." Is that the Lindzen you are referring to? <<warmists, on the other hand, claim their evidence is irrefutable while purposefully denying the data and peer reviewed material to the contrary.>> would you like to point to some "peer reviewed material to the contrary?" Romeo, you get your science from Lyndon LaRouche and youtube? wow. daddeo get's his science from Penn and Teller. double WOW.

Who thinks all of the science community is wrong about global warming? and why? Every major science organization thinks that AGW is a problem. Why would anyone think differently? NASA - http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap090421.html NSF - http://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/climate/pdf/NSF_Climate_Change_Report.pdf NOAA - http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/what.html MIT - http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2009/roulette-0519.html UCLA - http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/globa-warming-affects-warm-weather-68463.aspx Who is smarter than all of these folks combined? this link is from james e, used to support his claim of a "solar shutdown". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_variation the bigger picture. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Solar-cycle-data.png note the scale on the left. "Solar shutdown" is a reduction of 00.07% however, the graph follows the sunspot cycle, which is, this time, a wee bit slow. i'd sure not depend on it to stay that way however. i'd be more than willing to go to Vegas and put my money on having a warmest year ever within the next 3 years, because el nino is coming back, and the solar cycle is very likely to climb back to a peak.

what have we learned about 'exit strategies' from past wars so far? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/16/AR2007071601680_2.html?referrer=email Exit Strategies The bottom line, one participant said, was "pretty much what we are seeing" since the Bush administration began intermittent talks with Damascus and Tehran: not much progress or tangible results. Amid political arguments in Washington over troop departures, U.S. military commanders on the ground stress the importance of developing a careful and thorough withdrawal plan. Whatever the politicians decide, "it needs to be well-thought-out and it cannot be a strategy that is based on 'Well, we need to leave,' " Army Maj. Gen. Benjamin Mixon, a top U.S. commander in Iraq, said Friday from his base near Tikrit. GRAPHIC How Not to End a War As President Bush and Congress debate a drawdown of U.S. forces in Iraq, past wars offer cautionary lessons on how not to withdraw from a prolonged conflict. SPECIAL REPORT Washington Post coverage of the U.S. military and its operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. • Faces of the Fallen » FULL REPORT WHO'S BLOGGING? Read what bloggers are saying about this article. •politosphere.com •Robert Gates is the best man for Rummy's job. - By Fred Kaplan - Slate Magazine •Aqoul Newsroom Full List of Blogs (8 links) » Most Blogged About Articles On washingtonpost.com | On the web SAVE & SHARE ARTICLEWhat's This? Digg Google del.icio.us Yahoo! Reddit Facebook History is replete with bad withdrawal outcomes. Among the most horrific was the British departure from Afghanistan in 1842, when 16,500 active troops and civilians left Kabul thinking they had safe passage to India. Two weeks later, only one European arrived alive in Jalalabad, near the Afghan-Indian border. The Soviet Union's withdrawal from Afghanistan, which began in May 1988 after a decade of occupation, reveals other mistakes to avoid. Like the U.S. troops who arrived in Iraq in 2003, the Soviet force in Afghanistan was overwhelmingly conventional, heavy with tanks and other armored vehicles. Once Moscow made public its plans to leave, the political and security situations unraveled much faster than anticipated. "The Soviet Army actually had to fight out of certain areas," said Army Maj. Daniel Morgan, a two-tour veteran of the Iraq war who has been studying the Soviet pullout at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., with an eye toward gleaning lessons for Iraq. "As a matter of fact, they had to airlift out of Kandahar, the fighting was so bad." War supporters and opponents in Washington disagree on the lessons of the departure most deeply imprinted on the American psyche: the U.S. exit from Vietnam. "I saw it once before, a long time ago," Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a Vietnam veteran and presidential candidate, said last week of an early Iraq withdrawal. "I saw a defeated military, and I saw how long it took a military that was defeated to recover." Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), also a White House hopeful, finds a different message in the Vietnam retreat. Saying that Baghdad would become "Saigon revisited," he warned that "we will be lifting American personnel off the roofs of buildings in the Green Zone if we do not change policy, and pretty drastically." The Al-Qaeda Threat ________________________________________ What is perhaps most striking about the military's simulations is that its post-drawdown scenarios focus on civil war and regional intervention and upheaval rather than the establishment of an al-Qaeda sanctuary in Iraq. For Bush, however, that is the primary risk of withdrawal. "It would mean surrendering the future of Iraq to al-Qaeda," he said in a news conference last week. "It would mean that we'd be risking mass killings on a horrific scale. It would mean we'd allow the terrorists to establish a safe haven in Iraq to replace the one they lost in Afghanistan." If U.S. troops leave too soon, Bush said, they would probably "have to return at some later date to confront an enemy that is even more dangerous." Withdrawal would also "confuse and frighten friends and allies in the region and embolden Syria and especially Iran, which would then exert its influence throughout the Middle East," the president said. Bush is not alone in his description of the al-Qaeda threat should the United States leave Iraq too soon. "There's not a doubt in my mind that Osama bin Laden's one goal is to take over the Kingdom of the Two Mosques [Saudi Arabia] and reestablish the caliphate" that ended with the Ottoman Empire, said a former senior military official now at a Washington think tank. "It would be very easy for them to set up camps and run them in Anbar and Najaf" provinces in Iraq. U.S. intelligence analysts, however, have a somewhat different view of al-Qaeda's presence in Iraq, noting that the local branch takes its inspiration but not its orders from bin Laden. Its enemies -- the overwhelming majority of whom are Iraqis -- reside in Baghdad and Shiite-majority areas of Iraq, not in Saudi Arabia or the United States. While intelligence officials have described the Sunni insurgent group calling itself al-Qaeda in Iraq as an "accelerant" for violence, they have cited domestic sectarian divisions as the main impediment to peace. In a report released yesterday, Anthony H. Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies warned that al-Qaeda is "only one part" of a spectrum of Sunni extremist groups and is far from the largest or most active. Military officials have said in background briefings that al-Qaeda is responsible for about 15 percent of the attacks, Cordesman said, although the group is "highly effective" and probably does "the most damage in pushing Iraq towards civil war." But its activities "must be kept in careful perspective, and it does not dominate the Sunni insurgency," he said. 'Serious Consequences' ________________________________________ Moderate lawmakers such as Sen. Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.) have concluded that a unified Iraqi government is not on the near horizon and have called for redeployment, change of mission and a phased drawdown of U.S. forces. Far from protecting U.S. interests, Lugar said in a recent speech, the continuation of Bush's policy poses "extreme risks for U.S. national security." Critics of complete withdrawal often charge that "those advocating [it] just don't understand the serious consequences of doing so," said Wayne White, a former deputy director of Near East division of the State Department's Intelligence and Research Bureau. "Unfortunately, most of us old Middle East hands understand all too well some of the consequences." White is among many Middle East experts who think that the United States should leave Iraq sooner rather than later, but differ on when, how and what would happen next. Most agree that either an al-Qaeda or Iranian takeover would be unlikely, and say that Washington should step up its regional diplomacy, putting more pressure on regional actors such as Saudi Arabia to take responsibility for what is happening in their back yards. Many regional experts within and outside the administration note that while there is a range of truly awful possibilities, it is impossible to predict what will happen in Iraq -- with or without U.S. troops. "Say the Shiites drive the Sunnis into Anbar," one expert said of Anderson's war-game scenario. "Well, what does that really mean? How many tens of thousands of people are going to get killed before all the surviving Sunnis are in Anbar?" He questioned whether that result would prove acceptable to a pro-withdrawal U.S. public. White, speaking at a recent symposium on Iraq, addressed the possibility of unpalatable withdrawal consequences by paraphrasing Winston Churchill's famous statement about democracy. "I posit that withdrawal from Iraq is the worst possible option, except for all the others."

when is obama going to try and shut down fox news for this Fox Remains #2 Cabler With Top 11 News Programs? Fox Remains #2 Cabler With Top 11 News Programs As the Fox News Channel continues to be berated by America's new president along with his Party and liberal media minions, the cable network keeps drawing in more and more viewers. In fact, it has been the second most-watched ad-supported cable network for nine straight weeks, and now sports the top eleven cable news programs. Adding insult to injury, TVNewser reported Tuesday that FNC is now attracting more viewers than CNN and MSNBC combined: Story Continues Below Ad ↓ How's this for cable news domination - Fox News beat CNN and MSNBC combined in every hour from 6amET to MidnightET in both Total Viewers and the A25-54 demo for April 2009. [...] From 9amET on, every program grew by more than 60% in the demo. The 5pmET hour, now occupied by Glenn Beck, is up 212% in the demo and up 128% in Total Viewers. Your World with Neil Cavuto is up 102% in the demo and up 60% in Total Viewers. On the Record with Greta Van Susteren is up 75% in demo and up 55% in Total Viewers. Also in demo: FOX Report is up 75%, Special Report 70%, The O'Reilly Factor 74% and Hannity 64%. Fox & Friends has now been #1 for 90 consecutive months, Studio B with Shepard Smith for 80 consecutive months. Awfully impressive, wouldn't you say? But it gets better, for MediaWeek reported Monday that FNC is gunning to replace USA as the number one cable network: Naturally, Fox News says that second place isn’t good enough. Even after taking the silver among ad-supported cable in the first quarter of 2009, averaging 2.26 million total viewers to USA Network’s record delivery of 3.26 million, the channel won’t rest until it has reached the summit. In short, FNC wants to win the prime-time ratings crown outright, and as the upfront season approaches, its ad sales team is trumpeting that message to media buyers. As the Huffington Post reported Tuesday, FNC narrowed the gap further in April averaging 2.350 million total viewers in primetime compared to USA's 3.044, a difference of only 694,000. Can you imagine what liberals will think if FNC actually becomes the #1 ad-supported cable network? Speaking of which, Headline News's Nancy Grace actually beat MSNBC's Keith Olbermann this month in the all important 25 to 54-year-old demo. Nice job, Keith. For those interested, here are the top 20 cable news program in April: 1. "The O'Reilly Factor" (Fox News): 3,498,000 total viewers 2. "Hannity" (Fox News): 2,566,000 total viewers 3. "Glenn Beck" (Fox News): 2,230,000 total viewers 4. "On the Record with Greta van Susteren" (Fox News): 2,173,000 total viewers 5. "Special Report with Bret Baier" (Fox News): 2,047,000 total viewers 6. "The Fox Report with Shepard Smith" (Fox News): 1,915,000 total viewers 7. "The O'Reilly Factor" (Fox News, repeat): 1,723,000 total viewers 8. "Your World with Neil Cavuto" (Fox News): 1,520,000 total viewers 9. "America's Newsroom" (Fox News): 1,505,000 total viewers 10. "Studio B with Shepard Smith" (Fox News): 1,314,000 total viewers 11. "Happening Now" (Fox News): 1,247,000 total viewers 12. "Countdown with Keith Olbermann" (MSNBC): 1,237,000 total viewers 13. "The Live Desk" (Fox News): 1,210,000 total viewers 14. "Larry King Live" (CNN): 1,093,000 total viewers 15. "Anderson Cooper 360" (CNN): 1,058,000 total viewers 16. "The Rachel Maddow Show" (MSNBC): 1,042,000 total viewers 17. "Situation Room" (CNN): 898,000 total viewers 18. "Lou Dobbs Tonight" (CNN): 826,000 total viewers 19. "Campbell Brown: No Bias, No Bull" (CNN): 786,000 total viewers 20. "CNN Newsroom" (CNN): 725,000 total viewers

Will Fox News dominate the next four years? Fox News had another dominant month, claiming the top 11 program spots in cable news and placing 2nd in all of cable in primetime, behind only USA. "The O'Reilly Factor" was the #1 cable news show in April, averaging 3.498 million total viewers. "Hannity" (2.566 million), "Glenn Beck" (2.230 million), "On the Record with Greta van Susteren" (2.173 million) and "Special Report with Bret Baier" (1.631 million) rounded out the top five. The full top 20 appears below. Fox News also placed #2 among all cable networks in primetime, averaging 2.350 total viewers. USA took the top spot with 3.044 million total viewers, just 694,000 ahead of Fox News. Fox News is currently selling advertisers on the idea that it is gunning for USA's cable crown. CNN placed 23rd with an average of 917,000 total viewers; MSNBC came in 25th with an average of 826,000 total viewers. Interesting Note: While end-of-month ratings typically mean press releases galore, Fox News has not issued a release on their April ratings win (unlike the other three networks, who each spun various victories or growth figures). A network insider told me, "We didn't want to take away from the battle for fourth that's raging between CNN, MSNBC and Headline News [HLN]." Top 20 Cable News Programs by total viewers, April 2009 1. "The O'Reilly Factor" (Fox News): 3,498,000 total viewers 2. "Hannity" (Fox News): 2,566,000 total viewers 3. "Glenn Beck" (Fox News): 2,230,000 total viewers 4. "On the Record with Greta van Susteren" (Fox News): 2,173,000 total viewers 5. "Special Report with Bret Baier" (Fox News): 2,047,000 total viewers 6. "The Fox Report with Shepard Smith" (Fox News): 1,915,000 total viewers 7. "The O'Reilly Factor" (Fox News, repeat): 1,723,000 total viewers 8. "Your World with Neil Cavuto" (Fox News): 1,520,000 total viewers 9. "America's Newsroom" (Fox News): 1,505,000 total viewers 10. "Studio B with Shepard Smith" (Fox News): 1,314,000 total viewers 11. "Happening Now" (Fox News): 1,247,000 total viewers 12. "Countdown with Keith Olbermann" (MSNBC): 1,237,000 total viewers 13. "The Live Desk" (Fox News): 1,210,000 total viewers 14. "Larry King Live" (CNN): 1,093,000 total viewers 15. "Anderson Cooper 360" (CNN): 1,058,000 total viewers 16. "The Rachel Maddow Show" (MSNBC): 1,042,000 total viewers 17. "Situation Room" (CNN): 898,000 total viewers 18. "Lou Dobbs Tonight" (CNN): 826,000 total viewers 19. "Campbell Brown: No Bias, No Bull" (CNN): 786,000 total viewers 20. "CNN Newsroom" (CNN): 725,000 total viewers

Why are the Liberal Television host`s doing so poorly in the ratings? Since Obama came into office, Fox has continued not only winning, but doing so at unprecedented levels. As the Hollywood Reporter noted last week, the network is having its"best year yet," with the competition in the ratings shifting from not only the news networks but all of basic cable. Indeed, Fox came in 3rd this quarter, behind only USA and TNT. Across the board, already top-rated shows are up by percentages in the 30s and 40s. But Glenn Beck, who takes aim at the administration repeatedly, is proving an even bigger draw since coming over from HLN: His 5 p.m. slot is up 110 percent from last year. Such a trend shows commentators like Beck can thrive in the opposition. From TVNewser: 8pm - O'Reilly Factor — 3,188,000 9pm - Hannity — 2,341,000 5pm - Glenn Beck — 2,053,000 10pm - On the Record — 1,950,000 6pm - Special Report — 1,889,000 7pm - Fox Report — 1,757,000 11pm - O'Reilly Factor — 1,579,000 9am - America's Newsroom — 1,399,000 4pm - Your World — 1,389,000 3pm - Studio B — 1,169,000

Democrats, why do you think Fox news is the most watched new program? Resources http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_News_Channel http://articles.latimes.com/2009/mar/06/entertainment/et-foxnews6 1. The O'Reilly Factor: 3,438,000 total viewers 2. Hannity: 2,579,000 total viewers 3. Glenn Beck: 2,271,000 total viewers 4. Special Report with Bret Baier: 2,092,000 total viewers 5. On the Record with Greta Van Susteren: 1,977,000 total viewers 6. The FOX Report with Shepard Smith: 1,927,000 total viewers 7. The O'Reilly Factor (repeat): 1,457,000 total viewers 8. America's Newsroom: 1,445,000 total viewers 9. Your World with Neil Cavuto: 1,428,000 total viewers 10. Countdown with Keith Olbermann: 1,327,000 total viewers 9/10

Libs - do you hate everyone at FOX NEWS or is there specificity? Who are the targets of your venom and specifically, why? The FOX PROGRAMS: Fox & Friends - Steve Doocy, Gretchen Carlson, Brian Kilmeade America's Newsroom - Bill Hemmer & Megyn Kelly Happening Now - Jane Skinner & Jon Scott Live Desk w/ Martha - Martha MacCallum America's Pulse - E.D. Hill Studio B - Shepard Smith Your World - Neil Cavuto America's Election - Bill Hemmer & Megyn Kelly Special Report - Brit Hume Fox Report - Shepard Smith O'Reilly Factor - Bill O'Reilly Hannity & Colmes - Sean Hannity & Alan Colmes On the Record - Greta Van Sustern

If closing before April 15th, 2009 can I file the no-payback $8000 tax credit on my 2008 return? mentioned here: IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman reports, “For first-time home buyers this year, this special feature can put money in their pockets right now rather than waiting another year to claim the tax [credit. This] important change gives qualifying home buyers cash they do not have to pay back.” Source: http://www.investmentnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090318/REG/903189985 AND IRS site, "for first-time homebuyers there is an expanded credit available on 2008 tax returns" Source: http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=204335,00.html My question is: How?

What's Happening To America Report Shows Border Trash A Major Issue? It’s a long-standing concern of border-security proponents: Illegal immigration and smuggling cause significant environmental damage, says a report recently released by the Bureau of Land Management. The annual report for fiscal 2006 details efforts by the bureau and partner organizations to mitigate the impacts on lands in Southern Arizona. Deborah E. Stevens, public affairs specialist for the Bureau of Land Management, said the purpose of the report is to build public awareness and get attention to the issue. “Tremendous numbers of people and organizations are doing work. We kind of want to let people know what we are doing and what kind of project work is going on,” said Shela McFarlin, special assistant for international programs for the bureau. More than 225,000 pounds of trash related to smuggling were collected, according to a press release on the report. Another 900,000 pounds of litter that resulted from both smuggling and illegal dumping were removed. About 24 million pounds of trash cover thousands of acres of public and tribal lands. The most visible items are drinking bottles, clothing and food refuse. Illegal roads and trails cause damages to resources on the landscape. There are also damages to infrastructure, such as gates, ranges, fences and water tanks. Also as a result of the project, more than 75 projects were completed, ranging from cattleguard repair to re-vegetation. The project also involved rehabilitating more than 100 routes and maintaining 26 miles of roads. Also removed were more than 130 abandoned vehicles and 1,902 abandoned bicycles. Removal of the vehicles, which are often burned, is difficult and expensive because care must be exercised to avoid further damage to the environment. The BLM report is online at blm.gov/az/st/en/info/newsroom/undocumented_aliens.htm http://www.svherald.com/articles/2007/10/25/news/doc47202e4933e3c849906473.prt

Do these people deserve to be thrown in jail more than ACORN? 1) Sheriff Gene Fischer has requested registration cards and address forms for all Greene County residents who voted in a special session established in Ohio allowing new voters to register and vote on the same day. The process was challenged in court by the GOP. The Ohio Supreme Court turned down that challenge, and allowed the same-day voting to proceed. But now Fischer claims telephone calls complaining about the potential for voter fraud have prompted him to go after the information. http://www.ohio.com/news/ap?articleID=926189&c=y 2) In Franklin County, election protection observers are reporting CONTINUING SURVEILLANCE BY REPUBLICANS at Veterans Memorial, the site for early voting. The observers have documented REPUBLICANS OPERATIVES TaKING PHOTOGRAPHS and WRITING DOWN LICENSE #'s OF VOTERS. http://www.npr.org/blogs/politics/2008/09/license_plates_monitored_at_oh.html 3) The New York Times has reported that boards of elections in at least nine crucial states, including Ohio, have violated federal law in conducting purges and have been illegally using Social Security data bases as part of those purges. The Times has also reported that boards of elections in Nevada, North Carolina, Michigan, Indiana and Ohio have illegally used federal Social Security databases to flag and possibly eliminate voters whose registration applications were suspected of irregularities. The Times reported some 37,000 Colorado voters removed in the three weeks after July 21; Secretary Coffman said the number was 14,000. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/09/us/politics/09voting.html?pagewanted=2&_r=2 4) Michigan elections director Christopher Thomas said his state had removed about 11,000 voters in August, while the Times estimated the real number to be closer to 33,000. Thomas refused to make the purged files public. Michigan Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land is a long-standing Republican partisan whose political activism traces back to the mid-70s when she worked for Gerald Ford's campaign in high school. Critics charge that she functions in the traditional of Florida's Katherine Harris and Ohio's J. Kenneth Blackwell. 5) North Carolina's BOE director Gary Bartlett dismissed concerns raised by the Social Security Administration about possible mis-used of SS files to purge registrations there in conjunction with drivers licenses. The SSI contends Social Security numbers can only be accessed when there is no drivers license or other form of state ID available. 6) A US PIRG report has revealed organized caging attempts by the GOP TO ELIMINATE REGISTERED VOTERS FROM THE ROLLS IN 19 states. The report marks one of the first initiated by a corporate news organization isolating Republican anti-vote campaigning. http://www.uspirg.org/newsroom/voting/voting-news/washington-d.c.-nineteen-states-not-enforcing-federal-laws-on-voter-lists =============== Compare to The grassroots organizing group ACORN has come under serious attack in Nevada, Missouri, Ohio and elsewhere from Republicans attempting to negate the thousands of generally low-income citizens ACORN has registered to vote. As a matter of law, ACORN is required to report irregular registrations that come through its process. But GOP operatives have equated these with "fraudulent" filings, and a have ramped up a smear and fear campaign aimed at negating thousands of legitimate ACORN registrants throughout the US.

What About Sanctuary For Us, From Them? It takes a minute to read if reading is a hardship skip this question? At the funeral of Iofemi Hightower, her classmate Mecca Ali wore a T-shirt with the slogan: "Tell Me Why They Had To Die." "They" are Miss Hightower, Dashon Harvey and Terrance Aeriel, three young citizens of Newark, New Jersey, lined up against a schoolyard wall, forced to kneel and then shot in the head. Miss Ali poses an interesting question. No one can say why they "had" to die, but it ought to be possible to advance theories as to what factors make violent death in Newark a more-likely proposition than it should be. That's usually what happens when lurid cases make national headlines: When Matthew Shepard was beaten and hung on a fence in Wyoming, Frank Rich wrote in the New York Times that it was merely the latest stage in a "war" against homosexuals loosed by the forces of intolerance. Mr. Shepard's murder was dramatized in plays and movies and innumerable songs by Melissa Etheridge, Elton John, Peter, Paul and Mary, etc. The fact that this vile crucifixion was a grisly one-off and that American gays have never been less at risk from getting bashed did not deter pundits and politicians and lobby groups galore from arguing that this freak case demonstrated the need for special legislation. By contrast, there's been a succession of prominent stories with one common feature that the very same pundits, politicians and lobby groups have a curious reluctance to go anywhere near. In a New York Times report headlined "Sorrow And Anger As Newark Buries Slain Youth", the limpidly tasteful Times prose prioritized "sorrow" over "anger," and offered only the following reference to the perpetrators: "The authorities have said robbery appeared to be the motive. Three suspects – two 15-year-olds and a 28-year-old construction worker from Peru – have been arrested." So, this Peruvian guy was here on a green card? Or did he apply for a temporary construction-work visa from the U.S. Embassy in Lima? Not exactly. Jose Carranza is an "undocumented" immigrant. His criminal career did not begin with the triple murder he's alleged to have committed, nor with the barroom assault from earlier this year, nor with the 31 counts of aggravated sexual assault relating to the rape of a 5-year-old child, for which Mr. Carranza had been released on bail. (His $50,000 bail on the assault charge and $150,000 bail on the child-rape charges have now been revoked.) No, Mr. Carranza's criminal career in the United States began when he decided to live in this country unlawfully. Jose Carranza isn't exactly a member of an exclusive club. Violent crime committed by fine upstanding members of the Undocumented-American community is now a routine feature of American life. But who cares? In 2002, as the "Washington Sniper" piled up his body count, "experts" lined up to tell the media that he was most likely an "angry white male," a "macho hunter" or an "icy loner." When the icy loner turned out to be a black Muslim named Muhammad accompanied by an illegal immigrant from Jamaica, the only angry white males around were the lads in America's newsrooms who were noticeably reluctant to abandon their thesis: Early editions of the New York Times speculated that Muhammad and John Lee Malvo were being sought for "possible ties to 'skinhead militia' groups," which seemed a somewhat improbable alliance given the size of Mr. Muhammad's hair in the only available mug shot. As for his illegal sidekick, Malvo was detained and released by the INS in breach of their own procedures. America has a high murder rate: Murdering people is definitely one of the jobs Americans can do. But that's what ties young Malvo to Jose Carranza: He's just another killer let loose in this country to kill Americans by the bureaucracy's boundless sensitivity toward the "undocumented." Will the Newark murders change anything? Will there be an Ioefemi Hightower Act of Congress like the Matthew Shepard Act passed by the House of Representatives? No. Three thousand people died Sept. 11, 2001, in an act of murder facilitated by the illegal-immigration support structures in this country, and, if that didn't rouse Americans to action, another trio of victims seems unlikely to tip the scales. As Michelle Malkin documented in her book "Invasion," four of the killers boarded the plane with photo ID obtained through the "undocumented worker" network at the 7-Eleven in Falls Church, Va. That's to say, officialdom's tolerance of the illegal immigration shadow-state enabled 9/11. And what did we do? Not only did we not shut it down, we enshrined the shadow-state's charade as part of the new tough post-slaughter security procedures. Go take a flight from Newark Airport. The TSA guy will ask for your driver's license, glance at the name and picture, and hand it back to you. Feel safer? The terrorists could pass that test, and the morning of 9/11 they did: 19 foreign "visitors" had, between them, 63 valid U.S. driver's licenses. Did government agencies then make it harder to obtain lawful photo ID? No. Since 9/11, the likes of Maryland and New Mexico have joined those states that issue legal driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. Newark is the logical end point of these policies. It is a failed city: 60 percent of its children are being raised in households without fathers. Into that vacuum pour all kinds of alternative authority structures: Mr. Carranza is alleged to have committed his crime with various teenage members of MS-13, a gang with origins in El Salvador's civil war of the 1980s that now operates in some 30 U.S. states. In its toughest redoubts, immigrants don't assimilate with America, America assimilates to the immigrants, and a Fairfax, Va., teenager finds himself getting hacked at by machete wielders. One could, I suppose, regard this as one of those unforeseen incremental consequences that happens in the darkest shadows of society. But that doesn't extend to Newark's official status as an illegal-immigrant "sanctuary city." Like Los Angeles, New York and untold others, Newark has formally erased the distinction between U.S. citizens and the armies of the undocumented. This is the active collusion by multiple cities and states in the subversion of U.S. sovereignty. In Newark, N.J., it means an illegal-immigrant child rapist is free to murder on a Saturday night. In Somerville, Mass., it means two deaf girls are raped by MS-13 members. And in Falls Church, Va., it means Saudi Wahhabists figuring out that, if the "sanctuary nation" (in Michelle Malkin's phrases) offers such rich pickings to imported killers and imported gangs, why not to jihadists? "Tell Me Why They Had To Die"? Hard to answer. But tell me why, no matter how many Jose Carranzas it spawns, the nationwide undocumented-immigration protection program erected by this country's political class remains untouchable and ever-expanding.

Is Paul Krugman really as smart as people say he is? (READ ALL)? This man has won a Nobel Peace Prize, so what? Al-Gore got one and now NASA has PROVED him wrong. They say global warming is due to the sun--that same statment from NASA came from the UN years ago... Nothing special. Now lets take a look at his most recent arguement. Paul Krugman said we needed a stimulus. Lets look at the New Deal Stimulus. What the New Deal gave America was relief, but it did not solve the problem, it only prolonged it. It also left America with more debt. When FDR took office in 1933 (Year New Deal was passed.) unemployment was over 24%. In 1935 (Second year New Deal was passed) unemployment was at 18%. In 1939, it was 17.2%. In 1940 (before the War), unemployment was still over 17%. That doesn't sound like something that worked, after all 17% unemployment is MASSIVE. From 1933 to 1938, unemployment dropped only 7%. When America entered the Second World War in 1942, unemployment began to drop in a rapid pace. In 1943 unemployment had fallen to 1.9%. The Second World War is what got us out of the Depression. It made unemployment go away and it awakened the industrial might of America. It's not hard to see how WW2 got us out of the Great Depression. With everyone buying, spending, and producing, the economy made a great recovery. With the demand for war supplies high, it forced our nation to be more productive, which lead to us being more prosperous. WW2 got us out, the New Deal did not. All the New Deal left us with was a higher debt and a larger government… I think FDR’s own staff members can summarize how badly the New Deal failed, like what Henry Morgenthau, Secretary of Treasury for FDR, said once. He said - “We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. And I have just one interest, and now if I am wrong somebody else can have my job. I want to see this country prosper. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises. I say after eight years of this administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started. And enormous debt to boot.” - Henry Morgenthau, FDR's Secretary of Treasury... (1941) That came from FDR’s own staff member! The numbers don’t lie either. Redistribution of wealth, which is what a stimulus does, does not create wealth or jobs! It only changes who has the money… Lets look at the $152 billion Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 and the $300 billion Housing Recovery Act of 2008, or Bush stimulus. Did it work? No... Before the stimulus was passed, Bush had 6 million unemployed, 5.1% inflation, summer gas crisis, increase in poverty, and a falling economy. After the stimulus, Bush left us with 6.7 million unemployed, 7.2% inflation, same poverty rates, more debt, and an economy which still fell into a recession… hmmm.... How about Japan's troubles in the early 90's? They had banks failing and they used a stimulus to bail them out. That lead them into a HUGE recession... Hmmm. Funny right? Now Paul supports Obama's stimulus, which 90% of it is filled with earmarks to special interest groups. The amount of useless spending in this bill is unbelievable… How is $50 million dollars towards Frisbee Golf going to stimulate the economy? How is $60 million dollars for sex prevention going to help our economy!? How is $40 million dollars to the liberal company ACORN going to help us!? How is $600 million dollars, which will be used to buy federal employees hybrid cars, going to help the economy!? How is $2 billion dollars towards the new FutureGen near-zero emission power plant in Mattoon going to help our economy!? How the hell are we going to pay for this $1.1 trillion dollar bill!? There’s also a large amount of money invested in Green Jobs for cleaner air… What bothers me about this is that it’s spending money we don’t have! It could be a lot cheaper for us if we let the oil companies, not the government, drill in Alaska, off the shore of California, and build more refineries-this way the price of energy can easily go down. Then we could allow companies to build more nuclear power plants around the nation-that too would bring prices down. In fact, did you know that 70% of France’s energy comes from nuclear power-it is safe! Then after we become energy independent, then we could invest on the expensive green technology that we need-but doing all that green spending now is just NOT sustainable! I know this green spending is for a good cause-but President Obama is doing it the WRONG way… SO WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO SAY? SOURCES: http://www.academia.org/campus_reports/2002/summer_2002_3.html http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=176 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1089131/Great-myth-New-Deal-Depression-era-plan-prolonged-US-economic-slump-makes-poor-model-Britain.html http://www.floppingaces.net/2008/12/06/obamas-desc more sources: http://lvb.net/item/960 Some times the truth seems like nonsense to people, that si why u can't reply to it. Adam B., that economist was the Secretary of Treasury for FDR. HE SUPPORTED FDR U IDIOT. And i am right about Japan, u libs are so pathetic. Nobel peace prizes mean nothing if u are wrong.