|
|
liberal making the same mistake
American liberals are making the same mistake in the war on terror that they made during the Cold War.
They trust anti-American voices around the world more than they trust the American people. During the second debate, John Kerry was still touting UN sanctions as a viable way to contain Saddam, despite everything we have already learned about the oil for food pay-offs to foreign interests (in both France and Russia). Liberals believe that our responsibilities can be shoved onto the backs of other countries that have made it abundantly clear have no intention of helping us. (Although even Kerry had to admit last week that France and Germany will not send troops to Iraq even if he wins on November 2.) They believe in a moral equivalence between the United States and its adversaries. They were wrong in the 1980's, and they are wrong today. That is why Kerry cannot articulate a credible plan to win the war on terrorism. That is why Edwards looked and sounded so vague during his debate. Until American liberals overcome this fear of the American people--until they learn to trust us more than they trust their friends in Europe--they will flip, flop and flounder in their effort to take back the White House.
They are dumber than the clinton white house,for you babe!
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Clinton saga continues. More
Could be in a hep o' trouble.
Oct 10, 2004
The Clintons could be in a hep o' trouble.
Not only could a key witness cut a deal with federal prosecutors and give up Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign in a finance fraud case, Mrs. Clinton and former President Bill Clinton soon could find themselves in the docket in a serious civil lawsuit they desperately are hoping to stop:
= The Justice Department says it has evidence that Hillary Clinton's 2000 campaign for the U.S. Senate deliberately low-balled costs associated with a fund-raising event. That, supposedly, to free up more money for electioneering.
Peter Paul, a three-time felon currently under indictment for stock fraud charges in New York, claims he underwrote most of the cost of the August 2000 star-studded Hollywood gala. Prosecutors say he did so in hopes of securing a presidential pardon that never came. Mr. Paul and the Clintons have denied the allegation. Clinton's campaign denies any fund-raising chicanery.
= In a second matter, the Clintons have filed an appeal with the California Supreme Court in an attempt to stop a lawsuit filed by Paul. Acting on Paul's behalf, Judicial Watch contends Mr. Clinton reneged on a $17 million deal to work for two Paul Internet companies.
The lawsuit says none of Paul's expenses -- $2 million he spent to put on the Hollywood gala that also was part of the business deal -- were reported as required to the Federal Election Commission.
The Clinton saga continues. More's the pity.
-By If I Were A Rich Man,Yhaba,Yahab
By If I Were A Rich Man,Yhaba,Yahab
|
|
|
To kill a foetus after 24 weeks
It is time to think what it means to kill a foetus after 24 weeks
I am not in favour of making all abortion illegal: I believe that any abortion is a source for profound regret, but that it is a choice that women are entitled to make at an early stage in a pregnancy, often because of other factors in their lives.
I strongly believe, however, that there now needs to be a fresh debate about the number of weeks at which a pregnancy can be legally terminated.
This should come in the wake of recent medical technology which has deepened our understanding of a baby's development in the womb, coupled with the fact that medical advances now allow growing numbers of premature babies to survive at an increasingly early stage.
Doctors should not be aborting foetuses at a stage at which another doctor - operating under a different set of instructions - could give that same baby a reasonable chance of leading a full and healthy life.
Too many women treat abortion as a morally viable option even at a very late stage in a pregnancy. They create the demand, and culpable doctors such as Dr Tanda go on to fulfil it by providing illegal, late-term abortions - effectively early infanticide.
But if these women could be persuaded to endure just another three months of pregnancy - which almost all would if illegal interventions such as those we uncovered in Barcelona were not available - such is the demand for adoption that their unwanted babies could be guaranteed a loving home for the rest of their lives.
At no point did BPAS attempt to talk me out of my apparent ''decision'' to terminate my pregnancy at such a late stage. No counselling was offered.
Many women who seek late-term abortions are themselves in a state of confusion and desperation. If they were offered professional reassurance instead of encouraged towards such a grotesque ''solution'', they might be prevented from making a decision which may well haunt them for the rest of their lives.
By not in favour of making allabort
|
|
|
Interesting
Very Interesting post and for the most part I agree with you. Where I disagree with you is that the Russians with Americas help with military and other aid were well on the way to destroying Germany.
On the same tract we need to put this in some sort of historical perespective. There are many examples as to what makes a country a great and prosperous country. My sense is when a country becomes lazy, its population
just is not willing to make the sacrifice that it takes to maintain its leadership. We were on the way down in that respect for some time . That is why we were preceived to be weak and that we would not defend ourselves
Hopefully President Bush will be remembered as the man of his times who had the foresight to do the right thing.
|
