Molech is not dead

"Because they were so loud, the machines – which fed into public drains – were switched on only during the early hours of the day to avoid drawing attention to the illegal arrangement, police sources said. Officers gathering evidence at the clinics this week have been testing the machines and drains for traces of DNA, which may be matched with that of past clients, according to reports."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article2971379.ece

Our favorite Lawyer (Sorry Winder)

You know just the other day I was thinking, “What if I suddenly become a blithering idiot, lose any last bit of dignity, and develop an overwhelming desire to stay at home all day sucking my thumb?”

Thankfully, John Edwards has the answer!

'If a person did not meet his or her monthly financial obligation for a set period of time (perhaps a year, perhaps longer) the Edwards plan would empower the federal government to garnish an individual's wages for purposes of collecting "back premiums with interest and collection costs." '

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/11/edwards-garnish.html

A sidetrack on the First Companion hopeful

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071128/ap_po/on_deadline_bill_clinton_1

"Even though I approved of Afghanistan and opposed Iraq from the beginning, I still resent that I was not asked or given the opportunity to support those soldiers,"

*************************************************
Please do not read this. It is not important. Move along.

Seriously, it is just pure propaganda!

"I supported the President when he asked the Congress for authority to stand up against weapons of mass destruction in Iraq," said Clinton in 2003 while delivering commencement remarks at Tougaloo College in Jackson, Miss.

"So, you're sitting there as President, you're reeling in the aftermath of [September 11], so, yeah, you want to go get bin Laden and do Afghanistan and all that. But you also have to say, well, my first responsibility now is to try everything possible to make sure that this terrorist network and other terrorist networks cannot reach chemical and biological weapons or small amounts of fissile material. I've got to do that. That's why I supported the Iraq thing." ("His Side Of The Story," Time, 6/28/04)

"'Saddam is gone and good riddance,' former President Bill Clinton said yesterday. Clinton also said Bush should not be faulted if banned weapons of mass destruction aren't found. 'I don't think you can criticize the President for trying to act on the belief that they have a substantial amount of chemical and biological stock. ... That is what I was always told.'" (Joel Siegel, "W Fought A Good Fight, Clinton Says," [New York] Daily News, 4/16/03)

I told you not to!
*************************************************

Having served as president I am sure he knows that there is an office in the federal government that has paid government employees whose job it is to take donations.
But I guess that is a bit much to ask from a man who wrote off the donation of his used silk boxers on his taxes.

Come to think of it why don’t some of these guilt ridden liberals start campaigning for us to pay more than our “fair share” and lead by example?

I am sure that Bill sending in a check for a million or two would lead to a stampede of charity. We could pay off the national debt!

Hey, an even easier idea would be for all these people that fret having too much money to just stop paying their lawyers to find tax breaks. I am a genius!

I mean in a time of war isn’t it our patriotic duty?

Ahh it finally came to me. Don't you remember back when then president Clinton made a big spectacle of a young boy who had earned some money donating it to the US to help reduce the deficit? And Clinton accepted it on our behalf. What a slimy bastard. He took some kids lawn mowing money and yet he can't spare some of his millions?

Wes Pruden of the Washington Times

"Now we're up to our hips in alligators and global-warming fanatics. We can't predict a hurricane next week, but Al Gore can predict doom 40 years from next Christmas, and a lot of people take him seriously. "

The presidential follies

I know, I know, I know.

You've all been waiting patiently (well most of you) for me to weigh in on The Race.

Having been inundated with pleas, demands, and several rather rude requests I will acquiesce and give you what you so desire.

Akshelly, you already know where I stand.

I am for the person who has read the Constitution and will actually govern in accordance with it.












STOP booing!!!

So which of the candidates best matches my concept of limited government?

At this time I will only comment on candidates and their positions on specific issues.

So let's dive in shall we?

Consider Fred Thompson. From his website:

"The U.S. tax code is broken and a burden on U.S. taxpayers and businesses, large and small. Today’s tax code is particularly hostile to savings and investment, and it shows. To make matters worse, its complexity is a drag on our productivity and economic growth. Moreover, taxpayers spend billions of dollars and untold hours each year filling out complicated tax returns, just so they can send more money to Washington, much of it for wasteful programs and the pet projects of special interests. We need lower taxes, and we need to let taxpayers keep more of their hard-earned dollars—they know best where and how to spend them. And we need to make the system simpler and fairer for all. To ensure America’s long term prosperity and economic security, I am committed to:
Fundamental tax reform built on the principles of simplicity, fairness, and growth.
A new tax code that gets the government out of our citizens’ pocketbooks, while enhancing U.S. competitiveness abroad.
Dissolution of the IRS as we know it. "

Well now! This bit of prose (which obligates him to do nothing if actually elected) does indeed give me the warm fuzzies.

Counterpoint:
"Fundamental tax reform built on the principles of simplicity, fairness, and growth."
This word is not very reassuring. What I think 'fairness' means and what politicians think it means has never been the same. It is most often a code word for (in my opinion) 'unfair'.

If he means that he wants us all to be assessed taxes at the same percentage without differing rates just because I cross some arbitrary tax boundary where I suddenly am, in some officious idiot's mind, making "too much money" or defining 57,349,231.67 different exemptions which I must pay someone to wade through just to find my "proper" tax bill or setting up tax breaks/incentives to engage in activity that some collection of pimpous, balloon headed, morons thinks is swell (whose only qualifications in life are that they are really good at begging for money and have no ethical foundation whatsoever), then I would support his position.




and yes pimpous is a word. See pompous + pimp

The Black Plague has been averted. Please take your pitchforks and go home

Like any good monopoly, government education in Utah rose to the occasion and defeated a modest attempt at introducing competition into the education industry.

It is not about quality education. It is about control.

It is not about possible tax increases. It is about control.

And for all those who didn't vote, go home and spank yourself.