27
Jul
Here’s today’s headline:
Study: Even Infrequent Use of Marijuana Increases Risk of Psychosis by 40 Percent
And here’s a snippet of the article:
LONDON Using marijuana seems to increase the chance of becoming psychotic, researchers report in an analysis of past research that reignites the issue of whether pot is dangerous.
The new review suggests that even infrequent use could raise the small but real risk of this serious mental illness by 40 percent.
Doctors have long suspected a connection and say the latest findings underline the need to highlight marijuana’s long-term risks. The research, paid for by the British Health Department, is being published Friday in medical journal The Lancet.
Now, I have reported on this issue before. However, at that time, I kinda poked fun at the issue. However, on this blog, it takes a little different perspective. For instance, I just did a post on the New World Order. Now, in order to believe in the New World Order, you have to believe in aliens, satanic rituals, people eating babies, men in black, and just about every single conspiracy theory that has ever existed is all a coordinated plan to rule the world by a select few super-intellectuals that include George W. Bush and Bill Clinton. I came to the conclusion one has to be crazier than a bird to believe in the New World Order. Being crazier than a bird is a layman’s term for one of the myriad of psychosis. In addition, I have a hard time understanding some uber-liberals logic. It just doesn’t make sense. The Iraq conflict has exposed them with a bright shining beacon. Their logic is that since the US was attacked, and we attacked back, we’re less safe now than we were when we were being attacked even though we haven’t been attacked since we attacked. Go figure that one huh? My logic is polar opposite. Since we haven’t been attacked since then, we’re doing something right. Then of course, you got the Bush destroying all our civil rights crowd. I love them. They cite nothing to support their phobia but are scared to death of the president they poke fun at for being almost completely unable to speak a coherent sentence. The blogdom is overwhelmed by bloggers publicly protesting their loss of those freedoms that they don’t know if they ever had or not. Go figure that one as well. Then of course, you got the Charlie Sheens and Rosie O’Donnells that are quite certain President Bush single handedly brought down the World Trade Centers while muddling a speech to elementary school kids, citing the fact fire couldn’t melt steel while a bridge in Oakland was melting from a truck fire. That irony was of course a setup by the New World Order to make Bush look smart. Go figure all that if you can. It never stops. The headline story of the week is Ward Churchill claiming that plagiarism, theft, citing non-facts as facts, harassment, copyright infringement, lying, and teaching unverified conspiracy theories are a protected form of freedom of speech and should be supported with taxpayer money. I just don’t get that one either. These are just a few examples. I could cite many, many, many, more. Now, having a little experience in the field of psychosis, I recognize it to a certain degree. However, rather than just taking my word for it, let’s look a little closer, shall we?
From Wiki:
Now, that sound familiar? It should. I won’t take it to the next level because things could get excessively long and I try to adhere to the 100 word rule for the most part. However, a lot of these people exhibit to me a certain degree of psychosis. Not the paralyzing schizophrenia of The Wall
Following me so far? OK, now, let’s look at the social norm of the last forty years or so. According to the Office of National Drug Control Policy, kids smoking pot “in the last month” are about 18% (varies pretty wildly from year to year ). Now, what percentage of the US would you guess is uber-liberal? I’m not talking run of the mill liberal here, I’m talking those people, like Ward Churchill, Charlie Sheen, and Rosie O’Donnell, that have fears of persons completely unfounded by reality and could care less about the real world. I’m gonna bet it’s somewhere around 18% and varying wildly year to year. Now, what’s scary to me these days is that most of our government leadership grew up in the 60′s. I think you can figure where I’m going with that, so I’ll just leave it there.
I’m not EVEN going to tackle what meth does to your brain. However, some people are quite certain communism is a good thing and some even think being a Nazi in this modern era has its advantages. Something’s amiss there as well. And, I don’t think pot’s strong enough to do it.
In the news today is how the House Judiciary Committee issued contempt charges for Josh Bolten and Harriet Miers. Two former advisers to President Bush. I don’t really like “committee” actions. I like to know WHO that committee is. WHO it is doing it. Well, here’s the Democrat members of that committee since I will assume the Republican members didn’t go along with it for the most part:
- Howard Berman
- Rick Boucher
- Jerrold Nadler
- Robert Scott
- Melvin Watt
- Zoe Lofgren
- Sheila Jackson-Lee
- Maxine Waters
- Martin Meehan
- William Delahunt
- Robert Wexler
- Linda Sánchez
- Steve Cohen
- Hank Johnson
- Luis Gutierrez
- Brad Sherman
- Anthony Weiner
- Adam Schiff
- Artur Davis
- Debbie Wasserman Schultz
- Keith Ellison
- Tammy Baldwin
- John Conyers
Which reminded me of another list I wrote on a while back. Which got me to thinking. How much of an influence does the Progressive Caucus have on the House Judiciary Committee? Let’s look, shall we?
- Jerrold Nadler
- Mel Watt
- Sheila Jackson-Lee
- Maxine Waters
- Steve Cohen
- Hank Johnson
- Luis Gutierrez
- Danny Davis
- Keith Ellison
- Tammy Baldwin
- John Conyers
That is the list of Progressive Caucus members on the House Judiciary Committee. Now, this wouldn’t bother me so much, but I had a BIG issue with the caucus some time back in that they tend to be very idealistic and not terribly concerned about the existing laws.
That’s fine if you’re an idealistic poet or something. However, an idealistic lawyer is a dangerous thing in that they know how to work the legal system to create a big mess out of just about anything they choose to. Think ACLU for instance. Almost half of the Democrat members of the House Judiciary Committee are members of the Progressive Caucus. So, what would the chances be that these ultra-liberal radicals would choose political agendas over assuring equal justice for all?
Well, let’s look, shall we? On the issue of Harriet Miers and Josh Bolten, if you search the Judiciary Committee’s website, you find ten results for “miers”. If you use the same search for “jefferson”, as in William Jefferson, you’ll find one response, and that is on Katrina’s affect on the judicial system of New Orleans. Getting the picture yet? Well, if not, then consider something else. As I noted earlier, the Out of Iraq Caucus is primarily Democrat. Most of it’s leadership is also in the Progressive Caucus as well. Wanna guess who one of its co-founders is? No need to guess, it’s John Conyers, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.
Now, we can ASSUME it’s only a coincidence that Mr. Conyers has a stated agenda of doing whatever he can to push his agenda and that the subject of his agenda is the primary focus of the House Judiciary Committee. Or, we can look at the facts and come to the conclusion that it’s obvious that the House Judiciary Committee has become a political weapon for the Democrats, particularly the ultra-liberals who hijacked the Democrat Party.
I’m sure Nancy Pelosi will look into this obviously partisan Committee and demand an investigation into their ethics. After all, she wouldn’t want things to appear as business as usual for the culture of corruption. Anyone wanna take the wager that she will do what’s right?
I thought so.
In the meantime, let’s quit calling this farce the House Judiciary Committee and call it what it is, the Progressive Judiciary Committee, or even more accurately, the Out of Iraq Judiciary Committee.
25
Jul
Finally.? I’ve been following the Ward Churchill saga for about two and a half years.? Finally, he gets what he deserved.? He got canned.? The saga’s not completely over yet.? After taking two and half years to figure out he lied about his credentials and plagiarized to boot, he’s threatening to sue the school.? My guess, this goes nowhere but yet another self-promoting tour to promote his whacked ideas and super-inflated ego.? The sooner this nut fades to black the better off this country will be.
20
Jul
I’m sure those words ring terror in the hearts of every liberal on the planet. Not just here, but world-wide. I enjoy that for the novelty it will be for probably a couple of hours tomorrow morning.
This is making the rounds, and it’s true:
I doubt it really served any purpose. But, I’m fully in support of Michael Polensek in this case and agree with every word he says here. Sounds like there’s some history between the two that motivated the exchange, but what Polensek summarizes about Arsenio is dead-on. I use the dead-on adjective intentionally.
My only hope is Polensek’s vitriol isn’t limited just to one piece of trash. It needs to be for the entire garbage heap.
This just in ( sorta ):
Plame’s Suit Against Top Officials Dismissed
U.S. District Judge John D. Bates said that Cheney and the others could not be held liable for the disclosures in the summer of 2003 in the midst of a White House effort to rebut criticism of the Iraq war by her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV. The judge said that such efforts are a natural part of the officials’ job duties, and, thus, they are immune from liability.
I have had a few things to say about the Plame Affair. I have had even more to say about Joe Wilson. Some people have not bought my argument that this whole charade was a media frenzy orchestrated solely by Joe Wilson. A while back, I wrote this:
The person who should have been indicted for outing a “covert CIA operative” is Joe Wilson.
Where have we heard that before? That’s exactly what the judge ruled. By making himself an issue, Joe Wilson outed Valerie Plame.
Meanwhile, I’m sure Keith Olbermann will have a few choice words on the issue, again. But, what Keith won’t admit, either to himself or to the public, is he was WRONG. A lot of people went bonkers when Bush pardoned Libby for the non-crime, but the fact is there was no crime committed. But the fact is, Libby obstructed NOTHING. There was no crime for Libby to obstruct. As much as all the people who emailed me and broke down sobbing that the Constitution had been completely destroyed, the fact is the Constitution did exactly what it was supposed to do. This case was tried by the media, and THEN by the courts. The media found everyone BUT the person who committed crimes guilty, the courts found otherwise. They didn’t sentence Joe Wilson to prison or fine him $250,000 for outing Valerie Plame. But, they did land the responsibility of this fiasco squarely in his lap. Exactly as I anticipated.
Now, what would make my day is for Libby to sue the life out of Joe Wilson for slander and a host of other issues. Now, in my opinion, THERE’S something with some meat to it.
No sooner than I posted the previous comment, I read this:
Apparently John Sweeney, president of the AFL-CIO, is so convinced Nancy and Harry can’t defend themselves, he has to do it for them. He’s probably right. However, this is pretty sad to me. This is the only accomplishment anyone can list for this Congress. And, I’m not sure who was calling for a minimum wage increase in the first place. The most common logic for raising the minimum wage was not by those living on the existing minimum wage, it was by people who were living on a lot more. Their argument was that we needed one because we hadn’t needed one for nine years. Now, the prevailing argument against it was that it would have no real impact. That those few people living below the proposed minimum wage level were so few and mostly part-time that it would have no relevance to the population at large. So, who was right? Well, let’s look at it this way. When it passed, Congress was more popular than Bush. Now, it’s the worst, Congress, ever. People either have very short memories, or, much more likely, no one benefited from the minimum wage increase John Sweeney seems to think was the root of the Nancy and Harry revolution of last November. Given that I seriously doubt John Sweeney represents one single person affected by that minimum wage increase, gotta wonder why he feels compelled to go to bat the day this Zogby poll is released? My guess, he read my previous post and feels the same way I do. Twelve more months of this kind of numbers and their party of choice’s chances of taking the White House are destroyed once again. Rather than offering up public displays of loyalty, Sweeney needs to be taking Nancy and Harry to the woodshed and telling them it’s time for someone else to take the helm. The Democrats have sold out to organized labor many times in the past, and usually won doing it. From the looks of things right now, they need to in the worst possible way now.
Just don’t let John Sweeney deliver the message. Get one of the Obama girls.
Nothing.
SOME people make the argument that a house divided is stronger than a unified house. Of course, some others have made the point that’s not true. I would be in that boat. I have also stated several times in the past that within two years, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi would do so much damage to the Democrat Party that not only will they lose the Presidential election, they most likely would lose their majority in Congress. So far, it’s looking like I over-estimated their chances to survive two years. Barely three months into their leadership I made the “saving Republicans” post. Now eight months in, it’s much, much, worse:
Last year The Rolling Stone did a piece called “Worst Congress Ever”. They based it on the fact that they don’t like Conservatives. They even said so. Part of the reason it was the worst ever was because one of their worst leaders ever was a Christian. They were pandering to poll numbers. Now, Rolling Stone and whoever agreed, what to make of THIS Congress? Remember Nancy’s 10 point plan? How much of that has actually been realized? More transparent government? They tried to hide pork. Cleaning up the culture of corruption, William Jefferson is STILL in Congress and Nancy won’t say a peep about it. Getting our troops out of Iraq? Harry goes home while the rest do nothing. Anyone still wonder why this Congress has a 14% approval rating? The lowest Zogby has EVER registered.
The plan as I laid out on November 7, 2006 is moving way ahead of schedule. I really thought Nancy and Harry could hold things together at least one year. I was wrong.
OK, divided supporters, that was mostly sarcasm. Harry and Nancy never had a chance because the guy who signs their legislation into law won’t. Rather than seeking some common middle ground as other, wiser, leaders have done in the past to show progress, Harry and Nancy are thumbing their noses at the guy that signs their legislation. As stupid as media and a lot of people paint Bush, his popularity has increased while Nancy and Harry’s has plummeted since they took the spotlight. That should tell ya something. But, I’m sure it won’t. A House divided will not stand. That doesn’t have anything to do with party lines. However, because of the infinite wisdom of our Founding Fathers, a broken House can be fixed in two years or less. In this case, I’m betting it gets repaired in about fifteen months. One way or another. Give Nancy and Harry another fifteen months and the Democrats won’t have a chance. This could get very, very messy very, very soon. The person who is getting hurt the worst by this inept leadership of Nancy and Harry is Hillary Clinton. Anyone remember what happened to people who got in Hillary’s cross-hairs in the past?
19
Jul
Fred Thompson, the non-candidate that was to save the neo-conservative element of the Republican Party from the dismal crop of current candidates that are as much, if not moreso, conservative than Fred, has enjoyed pretty much a free ride so far. I have felt that Fred’s toying with running is hurting the party in general. He’s no saint. No one is. Over time, if he committed to running, I fully expect a bunch of dirt to come flying in his general direction. if he waits too long to announce, then he could steal the primary but be a flawed candidate in the general. I don’t know enough about Fred to decide whether he’s saving the election or ruining it. Just don’t know. What I do know is he has gotten pretty much a free ride up to this point as the non-candidate.
Until now that is.
Thompson Lobbied for Abortion Group, Billing Records Show
Now, where this headline is getting ugly isn’t so much that he violated the very core of the group that supports him most, anti-abortionists, but how it’s being portrayed:
As I€™ve noted from the beginning of this controversy, the issue would seem to be Thompson€™s lying in denying it rather than hypocrisy.
Ouch. That’s from James Joyner, someone I respect a lot. Now that the other candidates have had a few weeks to take Fred seriousl and do some research, expect more of this kind of stuff coming out. If the core is already questioning his ethics, watch Fred implode faster than McCain.
19
Jul
I read this one this morning:
Now, at this particular moment in time, I’m not condoning Gareth’s right to drive whatever he wants in the US. I am looking at a completely different angle right now. Now, basically the idea of this situation is that people were so concerned with protecting the environment that they felt compelled to slash the tires and scratch the paint on this guy’s Hummer.
That is so amazingly stupid and so typical of eco-terrorists. Did they stop to think what was going to be done with those tires? Here’s a clue:
Real smart peeps huh? Just a clue here. Next time you feel compelled to destroy something manmade in an effort to protect the environment, nix it. It’s a bad idea. All of the exhaust and all of the gas used by Gareth’s Hummer won’t put a dent in the amount of damage those four tires might create.
