The group is so sure of their new found truth that they are offering up a publicly held debate on the subject. The group who are the real numbers crunchers and model generators not social activists that that once called global warming unconvertible. Have new data according to APS forum editors, Jeff Marque, "There is a considerable presence within the scientific community of people who do not agree with the IPCC conclusion that anthropogenic CO2 emissions are very probably likely to be primarily responsible for global warming that has occurred since the Industrial Revolution."

[q url="http://www.dailytech.com/Myth+of+Consensus+Explodes+APS+Opens+Global+Warming+Debate/article12403.htm"]

The APS is opening its debate with the publication of a paper by Lord Monckton of Brenchley, which concludes that climate sensitivity -- the rate of temperature change a given amount of greenhouse gas will cause -- has been grossly overstated by IPCC modeling.   A low sensitivity implies additional atmospheric CO2 will have little effect on global climate.

Larry Gould, Professor of Physics at the University of Hartford and Chairman of the New England Section of the APS, called Monckton's paper an "expose of the IPCC that details numerous exaggerations and "extensive errors"

In an email to DailyTech, Monckton says, "I was dismayed to discover that the IPCC's 2001 and 2007 reports did not devote chapters to the central 'climate sensitivity' question, and did not explain in proper, systematic detail the methods by which they evaluated it. When I began to investigate, it seemed that the IPCC was deliberately concealing and obscuring its method." 

According to Monckton, there is substantial support for his results, "in the peer-reviewed literature, most articles on climate sensitivity conclude, as I have done, that climate sensitivity must be harmlessly low."

Monckton, who was the science advisor to Britain's Thatcher administration, says natural variability is the cause of most of the Earth's recent warming.   "In the past 70 years the Sun was more active than at almost any other time in the past 11,400 years ... Mars, Jupiter, Neptune’s largest moon, and Pluto warmed at the same time as Earth." [/q]

Unless there are industrialized nations on Jupiter or Pluto, Global warming could be called solar system warming and has very little to do with Human emissions.
The Politisite Bottom Line: (Opinion) Al Gore and other scientists while looking at data from the Earth and coming to the conclusion that the earth is on a warming trend. Coming to the conclusion that since industry has caused increased emission is th reason for the earth warming. What the scientists failed to see what due to the suns increased solar activity, other heavenly bodies where effected as well. most of the Planets with our solar system has increased in temperature as well.

Does this mean, stop conserving resources? We say no. We are on a better trend and n matter ones view of Al Gore, we have made our country better by following some of the environmental steps outlined by those who have blamed humans for the natural unfolding of our universe. So keep those energy efficient lights and keep recycling. Just don't go to therapy for ruining the world for driving your Hummer.

Stiff Right Jab Recommended Read

Military Intelligence Guru Bill Gertz at The Washington Times looks into

• The false threat that is Iran, a country that is seeking greater capabilities to fight a modern war, but doesn't have them, not even the capability to block the 21 mile strip called the Strait of Hormuz (and a thus the shipment of a significant slice of the world's oil) as claimed by Team Bush.
• Our nation's refusal to sell submarines, new F-16's and other needed weapons to a vulnerable Taiwan for fear of "offending" China before the Olympics.
• And our continuing detente inspired policy of becoming increasingly unprepared for a modern nuclear attack from Russia, China, or even a remote terrorist state or group, that has NORAD understandably concerned that were we attacked, all we could do is send a few missiles up in the air, many of them unarmed.

Read Bill Gertz's assessment here >>

And here we are wasting our assets (financial and military), our young men's lives, and for what: to make new enemies throughout the world by violating their sovereignty, occupying their lands, and forcing upon them a neo-con's dream of a new world order, a new world order that has a sort of 'religious' dream that is more akin to European Enlightenment's unprincipled, godless, pro-socialist Jacobin version, than the heavily Judeo-Christian influenced type our American Founders gave us - a version of the Enlightenment, which, for the record, firmly rejected offensive war, entangling alliances, and the Utopian dream that democratic republics and ill educated, virtueless peoples mix.

Democracy isn't the cure-all, virtue and knowledge must be its partner; but besides, the American Founders rejected democracy, per se, for a far more complicated and balanced formula of a Republic that divided and checked power. And while the Founders were smart enough to know that most nations weren't even prepared for what God inspired them to do, Team Bush rejects the American Constitution and imposes the centralized power structure of Parliamentary government, you know, the type of government our Founders broke away to change the world.

As for democracy, Communist Founder Karl Marx proclaims in his Communist Manifesto: "We must win the battle of democracy!" The perfect tool, even he knew, to overthrow the most advanced Capitalist countries, once his program of attacking religion, morality, the family, private property, and history (Communism is the modern inventor and chief sponsor of historical revisionism), and well, everything else, was firmly in place.

So what of nations that lack the sort of history, morality, education, economic traditions, and so forth of a free people in the first place? Will giving them democracy save them, or insure that what political and legal stability they do have will be overthrown overnight?

Isn't that how Iran lost what freedom and prosperity it had under the tough-minded policies of that friend of the West, the Shah, gave them in the first place? Capitalism was thriving. Religious freedom was guaranteed. Christianity had a foothold and was winning many converts. But radical Islam was still there, only politically disenfranchised. It would take time the culture and the virtue of the people to be ready for an American styled government. The Carter Administration knew darn well that the majority of the voters would be religious fanatics with a thousand year anti-freedom tradition. But that was all that mattered to Carter, democracy, not morality, not education, not loving your neighbor as yourself, not patience, not wisdom. Democracy was the God. And through American led international pressure, democracy was imposed.

Overnight, everything was lost. Carter did it to Somoza in Nicaragua as well. West point educated, friend of the West Antonio Somoza, doing everything in his power to keep an outside inspired Communist revolution at bay, had democracy imposed on him too, U.S. aid cut off to him, U.S. aid turned on to Daniel Ortega, and the blood bath began.

The neo-cons would repeat this devastatingly revolutionary policy all over the world that Ronald Reagan turned off. In Palestine our pressure for free elections put Hamas in charge. In Iraq, religious fanatics have the job as well, and Christians are fleeing the country (something Team Bush is very quiet about).

The conservative party is dead. Your local congressmen and Senator, whoever he is, with few exceptions, has joined in on this ill-inspired Holy Grail mission.

My advice? Stop covering our eyes and plugging our ears. Face the truth and throw the neo-cons out! Bring back the days of Jesse Helms, Larry McDonald, Ronald Reagan, and Pat Buchanan-like conservatism, before it's too late.

If we don't, we and the world may be in for a long dark night, and it just may be that the majority of us deserve it.

Steve Farrell is Editor in Chief of Stiff Right Jab

FYI: This speech was made by Obama in Colorado Springs on July 2, 2008.

Obama stated, “We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

Thus a more Militant U.S?? The U.S as a Police State?

Where does this money come from now???  Why is this needed???

To control Americans as King Moron Obama wishes???

 SCARY!!!!!!!!

WILFONG'S THOUGHT OF THE DAY

We got an "Issuance" from one of our more active advocates.   He was passing around an article, he received, and bemoaning the fact that "The Beltway Bandits" were hijacking all the federal government business before it could get out to the hinterlands.  We won't print the article, for a number of reasons.  But, mainly we don't do it because we don't want to "institutionalize" the thought.

So, we'll write what we wrote back:

"Unfortunately, XXX has hit on a reality that we're just gonna have to get over.  We can cry about "The Beltway Bandits" getting all the work if we want.   The truth of the matter is not so much that they're LOCATED near D.C.  What they do is take advantage of that location to establish and capitalize on RELATIONSHIPS.

I got a copy of this memo not because of where I am located, but because of my relationship with XXX, and others on this list.  I got it because I am President of The National Association of Small Disadvantaged Businesses. XXX knows, but many of you on this mailer are probably not aware that NASDB is now located in Savannah, GA.

Though, Wyllene and I have been down here almost a year now, there are folk up in D.C. that think we're still there.  Part of this may be due to the fact that my cell phone still has a "301" area code.  Part of this may be due to the fact that I had at least half a dozen phone conversations with folk on The Hill, and in a couple of the big agencies just yesterday.  And, on Monday, I'll be hosting my usual Wilfong Hour, where folk from all over the country will be calling in to talk about "the problems of small business"

Strange as it may sound to some, "The Beltway Bandits" don't make our hit list.  The 80/20 ratio as to big/small business with the government does make that list.  So, my suggestion, get off the location issue and do your relationship establishment better.  Do your marketing by methods other than your having to stay in someone's face all the time.  Funny thing, I can just see  XXX with that "innocent" little look on his face.  But, I haven't SEEN him since five or six calls ago....

Hank"

Having said that, we invite those who are interested to call in on Monday.  These are the kind of things we want to hear from you.  Strange as it may sound, we recognize a lot of the names on the list that got the mailer.  A lot of them are within the "50 mile radius of the White House"-yet they ain't getting their fair share of the 80/20 pie.  Now, 'splain that...

And, they won't until somebody Changes that situation (80/20)

The struggle continues, until we succeed-and we shall-YES WE CAN!!!!!

EVERY MONDAY | 12 NOON CST - 1PM EST ~ Dial-in Number: 218.339.2626 (The Participant Access Code is: 408191#)

Free republics are not known to have long life expectancies. At the ripe old age of two hundred and thirty-two, America is definitely showing her age. She is long past her prime, and some are predicting her demise. No, some are PLANNING her demise.

Thomas Jefferson and the other founders of this once-great country believed there was a controlling cabal that was crafting America's servitude. With the assistance of Heaven, they decided to fight those forces. Pastors fought with fiery sermons from the pulpit; newsmen fought with the power of the pen; statesmen fought in the halls of Congress; and merchants fought with the sacrifice of their material gain. Together, they lifted Lady Liberty to her feet and defeated the powers of darkness.

It took the global elite a long time to recover, but they have reemerged with a vengeance. They are now on the precipice of accomplishing what their great granddaddies failed to do: bring the "Liberty or Death" colonists under their power and control.

Sadly, we no longer have the will to resist servitude. Our pulpits are too busy preaching a prosperity gospel; newsmen are in bed with the forces they once disdained; statesmen have been replaced with opportunistic, self-serving politicians; and merchants know no god but money. Hence, it is left to a small--and I mean very small--remnant to sound the clarion call for freedom and independence. Unfortunately, few seem to be listening to their cries.

2010 seems to be a banner year for these designers of despotism. That is the target year for the implementation of the North American Community, which will commercially unite the United States with Canada and Mexico. The global elite suffered a minor setback when the U.S. Senate failed to pass the Bush/McCain/Kennedy/Graham amnesty-for-illegal-aliens bill. But if you think that John Mccain is going to let that bill lie on the floor of defeat, you don't understand these people. Should McCain become President, He will do everything he can to implement some kind of amnesty law. Barack Obama will do the same. The reason? It is essential to the designers of despotism that our borders be eliminated.

Yes, I am saying it: George W. Bush, John McCain, and Barack Obama are part of the global elite that seeks America's entrance into an international New World Order. In fact, neither Presidential candidate from the two major parties will offer any resistance to this obstinate and oppressive oligarchy.

Perhaps one day the American people will wake up and realize that they are being led as sheep to the slaughter. I'm just not sure that it will be soon enough, however. 2010 is just around the corner.

There seems to be only one obstacle standing in the way of the globalists: America's citizens are the most heavily armed people in the world. That fact must surely stick in the throats of the globalists like a chicken bone.

Thank God that America's founders put the Second Amendment in the Constitution. Without America's deep-rooted commitment to the right of the people to keep and bear arms, we would have been sold into slavery decades ago.

Without the intellectual understanding of the principles of freedom and the moral resolve to maintain those principles, however, guns, by themselves, will only protect us for so long. In the end, our strength and protection come from God, and not too many people these days seem to be interested in His opinion.

Lady Liberty is walking very gingerly these days, and the path she treads is laden with traps and quicksand. The globalists have their handpicked puppets positioned to take up where The Three Amigos (George Bush I, Bill Clinton, and George Bush II) have left off. The pieces of the puzzle are almost all in place. 2010 just might be the year that Lady Liberty lowers her torch, folds her arms, and falls fast asleep.

For what it is worth, however, I pledge no loyalty to this emerging New World Order. Neither will I let Lady Liberty die without a fight. I will say it again: the battle today is not between conservatives and liberals or Republicans and Democrats. It is a battle between Americans and globalists. And, Ladies and Gentlemen, I am an American!

*If you enjoyed this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:

Stiff Right Jab contributing editor, Chuck Baldwin, is a radio show host, syndicated columnist, pastor dedicated to preserving the historic principles upon which this nation was founded, former Moral Majority leader (until it persisted in endorsing neo-con, George W. Bush), and Constitution Party Candidate for President of the United States (2008).

© Chuck Baldwin

Click here to view witness testimony. 

Click here to view video of the hearing.

WASHINGTON, D.C. -  The Government Accountability Office (GAO) today released an extensive review of the Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone) program. Their findings point to extensive fraud in the eight-billion dollar initiative. "You have to wonder about a system that lets individuals self-qualify for a program of this size.  It doesn't take a genius to recognize the incredible potential for malfeasance."  That's what Chairwoman Nydia M. Velázquez (D-NY) said after hearing GAO's testimony before the House Committee on Small Business. 

The HUBZone initiative is meant to help disadvantaged communities by granting preferential contracts to small businesses in specific areas of the country.  GAO's lead investigators told the Congressional panel they had found countless instances of abuse by non-qualifying firms.  Members also heard from representatives of the Bush Administration-which has spoken out against stronger accountability in the HUBZone application and certification process.

"Small businesses deserve a fair share of the federal marketplace, but fraudulent HUBZone applicants are shutting out firms that play by the rules," said Chairwoman Velázquez. "Last year, we passed robust legislation to end these violations, but the Senate has yet to act on our bill and President Bush opposed it aggressively."

H.R. 3867, the Small Business Contracting Program Improvements Act, calls for on-site visits and other proven means of confirming compliance with HUBZone guidelines.  GAO found the Small Business Administration (SBA)-which is charged with managing the HUBZone program-is doing almost nothing to verify the information of applicants.  Investigators also said they had extensive evidence of individuals who misrepresent the locations of their companies, knowing the agency will not question them about their applications. 

"It's tougher to get a library card than it is to get into the HUBZone program. All you need is a bit of Wite-out.  It's absolutely shameful," said Chairwoman Velázquez.

The GAO reviews unveiled at today's hearing, were requested by the Committee late last year.  They offer a full audit of the HUBZone program and delve into ten randomly-selected firms in the DC metropolitan area.  Many of these companies had set up "virtual offices" or rented mailboxes in poor communities with the sole purpose of gaining a mailing address within HUBZone boundaries.  All ten failed GAO's site inspections, and have been referred to the Inspector General for corrective action.  Investigators also set up four bogus firms to test SBA's application process.  One of the businesses was listed as occupying a local Starbucks; another a major sports arena.  Others simply had P.O. Box addresses.  Each time, the applications were certified as HUBZone eligible by the SBA-with little or no questions asked.

"It's time the Bush Administration stops pretending fraud isn't rampant in this program. The American people know better," said Chairwoman Velázquez.  "The problems with the HUBZone initiative must be fixed immediately. Tax-payers, and the small businesses that drive our economy, deserve no less."

# # #

If a Woman Chooses to have children the State sometimes deems her "Unfit" because our Elite/Elected Officials decide they don't like the way she raises her children...she's to poor, lacks education, drinks beer, smokes cigarettes and the list goes on and on.

These Elite/Elected Officials decide that in the "Best Interest" of the child we will take her/him away from this "Unfit" Mom.

The Elite/Elected Officials then give this woman's child to someone else. They like to call this little scheme Foster Care...where all the Elite/Elected Officials make money.

"Tuesday, the Madison County Sheriff's Office received a call about possible child abuse. Their investigation revealed the child had a broken right arm, an adult bite mark or marks on his right arm near his shoulder and a bruise on his right leg, according to the release.

The 21-month-old is a foster child and was in the care of Damien Walker on Monday, the release said.

Woolfork declined to provide additional information about the case because a child is involved.

A call to the Department of Children's Services was not immediately returned."

http://www.jacksonsun.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080718/NEWS01/807180310/1002

Norway's massive oil reserves are all offshore on the Norwegian continental shelf.

Follow the Norway way to see that a beautiful coastline remains preserved while large-scale oil production goes on off shore. In fact, Norway is ranked second only to Switzerland in environmental stewardship. Another fact on statistics, Norway is one of the richest countries per capita in the world, out ranking many oil-rich nations.

Up until the 1960s very few people believed that the Norwegian continental shelf had oil and gas deposits. With the Ekofisk discovery in 1969, the Norwegian oil boom began. Deep-water production from the field began in June, 1971. During the next  years, a number of major oil discoveries were made. Today, there are 52 fields in production on off the Norwegian coast. In 2006, these fields produced 2.8 million barrels of oil (including NGL and condensate) per day and 88 billion standard cubic metres (scm) gas, for a total production of saleable petroleum of 249 million scm oil equivalents (o.e.). Norway ranks as the world’s third largest oil exporter and the tenth largest oil producer, in 2005 figures.

Ironically, it was the U.S. that first developed offshore oil exploration in the Gulf of Mexico. Companies such as Shell, Chevron, ExxonMobil with the expertise of oil services companies including Halliburton and Schlumberger.

Most of the U.S. continental shelf has been left untouched for 20 years by a series laws inacted by the "green" political movement, bought hook, line and sinker by  the Democratic party and in some cases Republicans to keep pace with the propadanda movement  of manmade global warming.

Former VP Albert Gore made an amazing speech yesterday claiming we had just 10 years to save the world by transforming to wind and solar energy.  Had Gore been working in the real world and made such an unresearched claim at a corporation, he would be sent to a detox center for pschological testing.

This week, President  Bush lifted the executive ban on offshore continental shelf drilling. But the Democrat controlled U.S. Congress refuses to do so. Think about that when you pay more that $4 a gallon at the pump today. The Republicans wanted to start drilling in ANWR Alsaska in 1993,  but Bill Clinton  vetoed the bill. That field could have been producing 1 million barrels per day in  1998.

I have a prediction, the Congressional ban on drilling offshore will eventually be lifted. It may take a surge of voters to throw out several in the  Democratic party and a few pandering Republicans, but there will be drilling offshore. The world price for oil is already dropping. Investors do their homework and have a good idea that the American people are starting to figure out the facts.

This weeks "Best Of The Rest" was written by Madamab...  Title:  "Centrist, Triangulation and the Netroots"

Madamab expresses exactly how i feel and how i felt about the progressive liberal netroots in this perfect post. 

Here is a snippet for you...

When the “progressive” blogosphere burst on the scene several years ago, I could not have been more thrilled. I was so tired of the corporate media covering up for the Deciderer and his criminal and anti-American activities. Here, at last, with the help of Talking Points Memo, Daily Kos, Huffington Post and Eschaton, I could find like-minded individuals who wanted to know what was REALLY going on and who had the resources to find out. I also could take action by joining Moveon.org and Democracy for America. It was a heady, wonderful time for me, and I thought we were all on the same page.

Then, things began to change.

It goes from there brilliantly...  Bravo.

Read the rest here.

Now, a website, LiebermanMustGo.com, is asking people to sign a petition for Lieberman to lose his chairmanship and be kicked out of the caucus after the November elections, when the Democrats are expected to pick up more seats, so they won't need him anymore.  The petition has now gathered over 48,000 signatures.  Robert Greenwald, who helped design the site, said, "Given that Lieberman is actively and aggressively attacking the candidate for presidency of his party, it seems pretty clear he should not be given any of the perks that come with being a member of the Democratic Party."

The whole thing started when Lieberman agreed to address the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minnesota.

Lieberman told reporters that he left the weekly lunch of the Senate Democrats on Tuesday when criticisms of McCain's energy policies came up, saying, "I just didn't feel it was appropriate for me to be there."  Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) said that a Senator came up to him to complain about Lieberman.  Durbin told reporters, "It was the right thing to do.  This is a delicate situation."  Sorry, Mr. Durbin, but that's not being a very good party whip right there.  Good for Lieberman, bad for you and the party.

Asked about crossing a point of no return, Lieberman told reporters, "I don't have any line that I have in my mind.  If it happened, I'd know it when I saw it."  He, however, said that he doesn't expect to leave the Democratic caucus any time soon: "Senator Reid has been easy to work with.  I have a lot of good friends in the caucus, and I don't have any intention of doing that before the end of this session of Congress."

And Lieberman isn't worried about getting kicked out of his position, saying, "That decision is up to my colleagues in the Democratic caucus next year.  I'm going to do what I think is right now and not worry about what the political consequences may be for me.  I strongly support John McCain.  I believe in him, his strength, his principle, his effectiveness, so if he thought that I could help him by speaking at the Republican convention, I would do that.  And I would do it really not to go and attack anybody but to explain why I as a Democrat have crossed party lines to support John McCain and why I hope a lot of other Democrats and independents will do the same."

Lately, Lieberman has been critical of Barack Obama; on a CNN interview he called him "naïve" on Iran, and said, The fact that the spokesperson for Hamas would say they would welcome the election of Senator Obama really does raise the question, 'Why?'"

He criticized Obama's lack of a consistent stance on issues during a FOX interview, saying, "Senator Obama has really moved.  Since he clinched the nomination a month ago, he has altered and nuanced more big positions more quickly than I can remember any other presidential nominee."

Here are some reactions from Senators:

• Dianne Feinstein (D-CA): "I very much regret what he's doing, candidly, but there isn't anything I can do about it, and that's really all I want to say."
• Chris Dodd (D-CT): "I think they're heading in the wrong direction.  And I see Joe as an ally on most matters and a person who's been supportive of Democrats here on most issues."
• Susan Collins (R-ME) (Lieberman has donated to her campaign): "My hope is that he will not be punished for doing what he thinks is right."
• Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV): "Anytime we have a problem here, with the exception of Iraq, Joe Lieberman's with us.  So I wish people would leave him alone.  We'll get to next year when we get there."

I say he should just stand up one day, give 'em the finger and move to the other side of the aisle.  That's some C-SPAN daytime drama for ya!

If I were him, I would not let them use me, just to kick me to the side of the road when they don't want me anymore.  Show them that they can't just use you and then dump you.

Now, I say all of this, but I should note that I disagree with Lieberman on most issues.  If McCain were to pick him as his VP (which Lieberman said he does not want, nor expect), it'd be stupid of McCain.  You don't pick a VP because you agree with them on one main issue.

I like Lieberman, but he's a liberal - but the Democrats would be stupid to do this to him.  It could come to haunt them.

Done Ranting,

Ranting Republican
:: :: :: :: ::

Government does not have the right to sterilize women it believes to be unfit. Government does not have the right to tell a woman she can or cannot have children. Government does not have the Right to make a pregnant woman a criminal because of what she puts into her body while pregnant. Democrats and Republicans quit using women. Leave our private, personal bodily choices alone. Our choices are none of your business. Women are not chattel and Women are not owned by the "Public".

And to my fellow Christians let me just say, Be careful when choosing the yardstick you measure others by, Father will show us the same mercy in our own lives that we have choosen to show others.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jJ83TQdFoKZ_hSK8JAsImgooHrYQD91V97F80

By Tammy R. Lawson

I was quite amused by some of the stories that made news last week-two in particular.

First, District Attorney Mary Lacy of Boulder, Colorado, sent a two-page letter to John Ramsey about his murdered daughter, JonBenet, stating, "...we do not consider your immediate family including you, your wife, Patsy, and your son, Burke, to be under any suspicion in the commission of this crime."

Was that not a noble gesture? It's been 12 years since JonBenet died, and Patsy expired two years ago due to ovarian cancer at the age of 49.

While attending junior high school and growing up in the same town as she, I viewed a photo in the newspaper of Miss Paugh being crowned supreme at the state's pageant competition; her daughter's face later clichéd that of the hometown girl an entire state was proud of, even if she did wear too much eyeliner.

That family could have been cleared years ago; DNA evidence was found on the girl that didn't match any family member. In a court of law, that would have been reasonable doubt any defense lawyer could have toyed with just for fun.

But since a court of law was never assembled, a court of public opinion (fueled by unscrupulous journalists reporting innuendo close to the case as factual truth) did so while the district attorney's office and police stood idly by. Public officials knew they mishandled the case from hour one and needed a scapegoat.

At least the office finally apologized, and some would quip they are the sorriest.

How treacherous it was to watch the family's demise, but at least the living can take solace in knowing Patsy Paugh Ramsey died with her character fully intact. There are those living in Boulder who can't even claim that.

Now, here's a piece of friendly advice:

If you are using a microphone in a public forum and do not have complete control of the on/off switch, beware, for you never know who is listening.

Having written that, Jesse Jackson should have known better. Not realizing his mic was on, the modern-day quote maker himself whispered vulgar things during a Fox News program about wanting to cut off parts of Barack Obama's manmade anatomy, and according to the media outlet, we have yet to hear the worst.

Maybe the reverend should rephrase his infamous quote accordingly: "Keep hope alive, and bring me a knife!"

In the same breath, he accused the fellow Chicagoan of "talking down to black folks" by giving moral lectures to African Americans. Oh, the irony.

Jackson could easily be paralleled for his remarks and this was a prime instance of practicing what he doth not preach. After all, Jackson ran for president twice during the Democratic presidential primary in 1984 and again in 1988, so instead of demeaning his fellow man, realizing that he may have helped pave the way for the first black American to possibly be the next leader of the United States might fair him better.

Jackson once said, "If my mind can conceive it and my heart can believe it, I know I can achieve it." If so, the next time he hypocritically dines with the presidential candidate, secret service will be removing all sharp objects from the table as Obama sports a cup holding something other than coffee.

Marshall County Sun© Copyright 2008

One, Nader will need major media attention to reach a large enough audience to even possibly become electable and second, the problem that occurs when the electability of the more likely but less favorable candidate is reduced by the independent vote thus causing the less favored candidate to win. (In this case I assume the scenario would be the democrat losing votes to the independent causing the republican to win.)

There is a trick to getting Nader access to a major audience. He would need to do one of two things, either get authorization from the private owned company that controls the debates, which in turn is owned by the two major political parties, the democrat and republican parties respectively ( Who for obvious reasons don't want an independent candidate debating them) or he can appeal to another corporation to sponsor the debate, one that can offer an audience that can't be turned down, as to insure the acceptance of the major parties. Nader has accomplished the latter, he has managed to convince Google to fight the aforementioned, two partied owned, corporation for its monopoly over the debates and now they have agreed to hold an open debate live on YouTube that will allow multiple parties to participate, as long as the party has at least 10% in the national poll.  (Which is 5% less than what the Dem & Rep owned debates accept, even thought that doesn't necessary insure acceptance) Nader, by the way, is around 6%. That being said, I do believe that there is a big problem with Nader not having enough media coverage, you can see him expressing it when he says buzz-word-phrases that attract media attention, but he's been able to sway Google to help him with this obstacle.

Concerning a two party system which forces us into voting for one party for fear of the other party being elected,  convinces me that it itself is problematic to the concept of democracy. (Which we hold to be conducted by a series of free elections) Furthermore, in denying the possibility of a third party we are condemning ourselves to the polarizing and monopolizing effects of a two party system. I think that in exposing this flaw common sense logic tells us that a two party system is counter intuitive to a democracy.

The McCain-Bush Iraq strategy has failed to pressure Iraqis to take responsibility for their future, stretched our military to the breaking point, sacrificed investments in critical domestic priorities here at home and has distracted us from tracking down the terrorists who attacked the U.S. on September 11, 2001. Because McCain and Bush insisted on launching a war that should have never been waged, and then doubling down on a failed strategy, the war in Afghanistan has been ignored and the Taliban and al-Qaeda are as strong now as any time since just after the U.S. invasion in 2001. Senator McCain has supported a strategy in Iraq that has compromised our security and made us less safe at home and abroad.

When it comes to bringing our brave troops home, McCain has also been wrong and inconsistent--offering at least 11 different answers on when he thinks the war will end. And now Senator McCain has absolutely no plan to deal with Iraq but to leave our troops there for 100 years.

After seven years of failed leadership on Iraq and Afghanistan, John McCain is the last thing our country needs. See here the ongoing DNC web series "McCain on Iraq, Wrong from the Start."

To view the DNC's videos on McCain's failed leadership on Iraq, click here:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=TTwqqfS505c and here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eejYoz3Nl0

McCain: Wrong to praise the Bush Administration for their conduct of the war…

McCain Praises Bush Administration on Iraq. QUESTION: Are you proud of the work and the leadership of the Commander in Chief in this war? MCCAIN: Yes I am. I think the President has led with great clarity and I think he's done a great job leading the country [Hardball, 4/23/03] and MCCAIN: We've got to stay the course and speeches like the President's last night, I think, are important. [CBS Early Show, 6/29/05]

McCain Praises Rumsfeld. QUESTION: Is it your view that Donald Rumsfeld can continue to be an effective Secretary of Defense? MCCAIN: Yes, today I do and I believe he's done a fine job. He's an honorable man. [Hannity & Colmes, 5/12/04]

McCain: Wrong to echo Bush talking points on Iraq from the start…

May 1, 2003: Bush Declares War Over. "Major combat operations in Iraq have ended." [Speech by President Bush, 5/1/03]

McCain Proclaimed "Massive Victory" in Iraq and Credited Combat-Readiness for "Our Victory" in Afghanistan and Iraq." Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom demonstrated to the world what we saw just 12 years ago. We went to war as the most combat-ready force in the world. The value of that readiness is clear. We won a massive victory in a few weeks, and we did so with very limited loss of American and allied lives. We were able to end aggression with minimum overall loss of life, and we were even able to greatly reduce the civilian casualties of Afghani and Iraqi citizens. . . . Our technology edge in Afghanistan and Iraq would have been meaningless if we did not have men and women trained to use it. Having the best weapons system platforms in the world would not have given us our victory if we had not had the right command and control facilities, maintenance capabilities, and munitions." [Congressional Record, 5/22/03]

Bush: Surge is Working, Al Qaeda on the Run. "Ladies and gentlemen, some may deny the surge is working, but among the terrorists there is no doubt," Bush declared in his 2008 State of the Union address. "Al Qaeda is on the run in Iraq, and this enemy will be defeated." [2008 State of the Union, 1/28/08]

McCain: Strategy Succeeding, Al Qaeda on the Run. "We are succeeding," in Iraq, McCain told Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday. "I've said many times, Al Qaida is on the run," he continued. "This [surge] strategy is succeeding." [Fox News Sunday, 2/3/08]

White House Advocated Long Term Troops Presence in Iraq Like South Korean Model. "President Bush envisions a long-term U.S. troop presence in Iraq similar to the one in South Korea where American forces have helped keep an uneasy peace for more than 50 years, the White House said Wednesday." [Associated Press, 5/31/07]

McCain Cited South Korean Model as Defense for Staying in Iraq 100 Years. When McCain was asked a question about George Bush's belief that we will stay in Iraq for fifty years McCain responded, "Make it a hundred… We've been in Japan for 60 years. We've been in South Korea 50 years or so. That would be fine with me." [McCain Town hall in Derry, NH, 1/3/2008; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf7HYoh9YMM]

McCain: part of Bush propaganda machine...

In 2003, McCain echoed Bush's rosy predictions by claiming that the end was "very much in sight" in Iraq. In 2005, McCain backed Bush, arguing that another year would prove "stay the course" was working. [The Hill, 12/8/05; ABC News, Good Morning America, 4/9/03] In 2006, McCain argued that Iraq was "on the right track" even as it slipped further toward civil war. [MSNBC, Imus in the Morning, 3/1/06]

2003: McCain: "There's no doubt in my mind that once these people are gone that we will be welcomed as liberators." [MSNBC, Hardball, 3/24/03]

McCain: wrong and inconsistent on when our troops can come home…

October 2003: McCain Said Iraq War Would Take "Four Or Five Years." During an appearance on ABC's Nightline, McCain was asked how much more money the war would cost. He replied, "Estimates I hear as much as 50 to $55 billion more." When asked, "Over a course of how many years?" McCain answered, "Four or five years." [ABC, "Nightline," 10/1/03]

February 2004: McCain Said War Would Take Five or Six Years. MCCAIN: "Listen, my friend, we're going to be there for five or six years. A little straight talk." [MSNBC, "Hardball," 2/25/04]

February 2005: McCain Said War Would Take A Year to a Year and a Half. [2006] MCCAIN: "If I had to guess, I would think that it's going to be at least another year to a year and a half, but, hopefully before then we could have our troops out of a lot of the areas where they're vulnerable to casualties." [CBS, "The Early Show," 2/3/05]

June 2005: McCain Would Be Surprised if it Took Two or Three More Years: "And, again, I think we should tell people it's not going to be a short--I'd rather say two or three years, and be surprised a year from now, than say, 'Everything's fine,' and then be disappointed a year or two from now." [NBC, "Meet the Press," 6/19/05]

January 2008: McCain Would Be "Fine" With Our Troops Staying in Iraq 100 Years. MCCAIN: "QUESTION: President Bush is talking about our staying in Iraq for 50 year…" MCCAIN: "Make it a hundred. We've been in South Korea, we've been in Japan for 60 years, we've been in South Korea for 50 years or so." [Town Hall Meeting in Concord, NH, 1/3/08]

May 2008: Most of Our Troops Will Be Home by 2013: "By January 2013, America has welcomed home most of the servicemen and women who have sacrificed terribly so that America might be secure in her freedom. The Iraq war has been won." [Reuters, 5/15/08]

June 2008: When Troops Can Come Home is "Not Too Important." QUESTION: "Do you know have a better estimate of when American forces can come home from Iraq?" MCCAIN: "No, but that's not too important." [NBC, "Today Show," 6/11/08]

Companion piece to post on Democratic chances in the Senate, “US Senate: 60+ Democrats with 2008 Elections?”

There's more of this brilliant post available! CLICK HERE!!!!

So analysts are now writing about how the Obama campaign will help down-ticket

There’s more of this brilliant post available! CLICK HERE!!!!

AAHSA recently developed platform statements to share with both parties on the Long-Term Care Solution. Please share you own versions of the following platform statements by July 25.

Whatever your political affiliation, please consider submitting information to both parties.

Democratic Party

• Visit My Barack Obama.
• Enter your zip code under “Find a Listening to America Event Near You” (It’s best to check this site as soon as possible. Many of these events are happening within the next few days).
• Select an event to attend and share your own version of the following platform statement:

AAHSA’s Platform:

Any initiative to reform health care must also include long-term care financing reform to address the need of seniors and persons with disabilities for supportive services. The responsibility of care giving will only increase as the baby boom generation ages and the number of people who need services multiply. A fiscally sound, long-term care financing strategy, based on a national insurance model like the CLASS Act, must be developed to provide cash benefits that maximize choice, dignity and independence for seniors and those with disabilities, regardless of income. The plan should support those who need services and those who provide them, without a bias toward institutional care.

Republican Party

• Visit GOP Platform 2008.
• Click “create platform account.”
• Create an account.
• Click on “submit text entry” and enter your own version of the following platform statement:

AAHSA’s Platform:

Any effort at health care reform must also include long-term care financing reform. The responsibility of care giving will only increase as the baby boom generation ages and needs additional services. America needs a fiscally responsible approach for long-term care financing based on the principles developed in the successful state-based Cash & Counseling programs. These principles, including a cash benefit, offer the maximum choice, independence, and personal responsibility for seniors and persons with disabilities, while ensuring fiscal integrity.

I received my stimulus check yesterday. It was $600 and I put it into my checking account and immediately paid a bill that accounted for half of it. I have serious doubts that it did anything to stimulate an economy that is undergoing a crisis of confidence in its financial and government institutions.

There is a serious crisis of trust in Congress. Polls indicate that most Americans think it is the worst in modern memory. They have good reason as they watch two horribly polarized political parties ignore some of the nation’s most pressing problems. These are the morons who banned the future sale of incandescent light bulbs. Meanwhile, Democrats and Republicans concentrate on seizing enough control to decide who gets to spend and waste our money.

It is, of course, our money. Or more precisely, it's the money the U.S. government borrows from other nations in our name. Giving everyone who paid taxes a pittance in return suggests that Congress thinks we are so stupid that we will actually be grateful.

Why should we be grateful to a government that, as it grows larger and larger, seems increasingly less competent to address common sense solutions to our energy needs, refusing to permit the exploration, drilling and mining of our own national resources?

Why should we be grateful to be told that we need to drive slower, purchase cars the size of golf carts, or use mass transit when we have ample, known reserves of oil?

Why should we be grateful for government mandates for ethanol that do nothing other than drive up the price of food and drive down mileage per gallon?

Why should we be grateful for the push to impose a bogus “cap and trade” system that will do nothing to reduce carbon dioxide emissions? Why create a market for “credits” that will make those trading in them immensely wealthy? Why do this when, in addition to oxygen, CO2 is the most essential gas to the maintenance of all life on Earth, vital to the growth of all vegetation?

Why should we be grateful for the privilege of being the world’s policeman when Europe thinks we’re a chump for defending it long after they should have taken on that responsibility? Or when a prolonged occupation in Iraq is greeted with the perfectly natural request that we leave? There are 566,000 Iraqis in police or military uniform these days.

Why should we be grateful when we might be taken into a war with Iran over its demand to be a nuclear power when it is surrounded by nuclear powers in Pakistan, India, Russia, and China to name just four? Isn’t a nuclear Iran their problem too? Why do we assume that the prospect of having its cities obliterated and millions of its citizens killed would not have a sobering affect on Iran’s leaders?

Why should we be grateful to a government that, during the Bush administration, spent $45 billion on "climate change" research at a time when the Earth is a decade into a natural cooling cycle that any freshman in Meteorology 101 could understand? Could the billions spent on the mission to Mars been spent more wisely on repairs to our nation’s infrastructure of roads and bridges?

Why should we be grateful to a government that is inattentive to millions of illegal aliens crossing our southern border, taking up residence while taking jobs that might otherwise be available to native-born and naturalized Americans, and draining the financial resources of states and cities that must educate their children and pay for their medical care?

Why wouldn’t a wall along the southern border have some effect on illegal immigration and the huge flow of drugs into the nation? Surely that has a greater priority than Mars?

Why should we be grateful to a government that adopted an idiotic policy to not manage our nation’s forests, leading to California's catastrophic fires and the previous loss of countless forested acres in Yellowstone? Removing aging and dead trees and underbrush protects forests. Instead of a thriving timber industry, we have Smokey the Bear.

And why should I believe that my $600 is going to make any difference in the resolution of an economic mess created by banking and investment institutions that gave away billions in mortgage loans to people who could not afford them and now want to be bailed out…with our money? Right now, some of these same institutions are driving up the cost of a barrel of oil by gambling in the world’s mercantile exchanges.

The nation is being run by people who are clearly delusional over a non-existent “global warming” or committed to a failed “No Child Left Behind” law that transfers control over the nation’s schools to a central government. There is no Constitutional authorization for federal involvement in education.

We need a stimulus in rational solutions to real problems. We need something that a government must earn, not confiscate, and not secure through a bribe. It’s called trust. It’s called confidence.

Alan Caruba writes a weekly column posted on the Internet site of The National Anxiety Center, www.anxietycenter.com. He blogs at Facts Not Fantasy.

Last week, the front pages of the world press blossomed with photos of four Iranian rockets, fired in salvo, heading skyward.

The image was powerful, and the message reinforced by the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. Should Israel attack Iran, said Ali Shira, Tel Aviv will be “set on fire.”

U.S. reaction was swift and bristling. “Rice Says U.S. Will Defend Gulf,” declared the headline over the AP story that began:

“Condoleezza Rice flexed America’s muscles in the Middle East Thursday, forcefully warning Iran the U.S. won’t ignore threats and will take any action necessary to defend friends and interests in the Persian Gulf. …

“Rice said Iran’s leaders should understand that Washington won’t dismiss provocations from Tehran and has the ability to counter them. ‘I don’t think the Iranians are too confused, either, about the capability and the power of the United States to do exactly that.’”

And what were the results of last week’s missile crisis in the Gulf? Tensions rose, strengthening Tehran’s embattled Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. And oil prices shot from $136 a barrel to a record $147.

That $11-a-barrel spike alone translates into $25 million a day in fresh revenue for Ahmadinejad and Co. And as the United States imports 13 million of the 20 million barrels we daily consume, that $11 spike in price translates into $143 million more sucked out of the U.S. economy every day — into the coffers of Canada, Mexico, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia and OPEC.

Can we not see who benefits and who pays for this war talk?

Every day the war drums beat, the mullahs get richer and we get poorer. Which raises the question. Was this mini-missile crisis cooked up by the mullahs to rip off Uncle Sam? For by week’s end it appeared the Americans had been had, big-time.

Saturday’s New York Times reported that that photo of the four Iranian missiles fired in salvo had been doctored.

One rocket appears twice in the same photo. The large missile, on inspection, was not the new Shahab-3b, which has a range of 1,200 miles, but a Shahab-3a, with a range of 900 miles. It is no longer in production.

The missiles fired with the Shahab-3a turned out to be Scuds, a short-range missile that is no threat to Israel.

The second day’s firing turns out to have been of a single anti-ship missile. Iranian TV showed one firing from three angles, making it appear as though three missiles had been fired in succession.

“The bottom line is that the Iranians are tweaking our noses,” said Charles Vick, an expert on Iran’s missile forces.

Under Secretary of State Nick Burns then splashed cold water on Iran’s alleged crash program to acquire nuclear weapons.

“Iran has not yet perfected (uranium) enrichment,” said Burns, “and, as a direct result of U.N. sanctions, Iran’s ability to procure technology or items of significance to its missile programs, even dual-use items, is being impaired.”

Though the ex-head of Mossad, Shabtai Shavit, says Iran may be one year away from a bomb — and will use it on Israel — according to the latest U.S. National Intelligence Estimate, Iran shut down its nuclear weapons program in 2003.

Iran, says Burns, has not yet mastered the technology of converting uranium gas into fuel for use in power plants, let alone the stuff of bombs. And even if Iran is one day able to enrich to weapons grade, she would still have to build and test a nuclear device, then weaponize it to fit atop a missile and deploy a missile force. All in all, says Burns, Iran’s progress with uranium enrichment has been “modest.”

There is thus no imminent crisis to justify war on Iran.

Yet, what is Nancy Pelosi’s Democratic House doing?

Some 220 members, a majority, have endorsed House Concurrent Resolution 362. This virtual war resolution “demands” that President Bush initiate a blockade to halt all Iranian imports of refined petroleum products and impose “stringent inspection requirements on all persons, vehicles, ships, planes, trains, and cargo entering or departing Iran.”

A Democratic House that came to power denouncing the rush to war on Iraq is about to vote to demand that Bush commit an act of war against Iran.

The front men for 362 are liberal Gary Ackerman of New York and conservative Mike Pence of Indiana. But the juice behind them is that of the Israeli lobby AIPAC, which is marching in step with Israel.

Last week, Mossad’s chief, Meir Dagan, was here to make the case for war on Iran. This week, Defense Minister Ehud Barak visits Dick Cheney and maybe Bush. Next week, it is the head of Israel’s armed forces.

Israel and its Fifth Column in this city seek to stampede us into war with Iran. Bush should rebuff them, and the American people should tell their congressmen: You vote for 362, we don’t vote for you.

Stiff Right Jab contributor, Pat Buchanan, is America’s leading populist conservative, was a senior advisor to three American Presidents, ran twice for the Republican nomination in 1992 and 1996, and was the Reform Party’s Presidential candidate in 2000. The author of eight books, including the mega-bestsellers, The Death of the West and Where the Right Went Wrong, as well as other bestsellers. Mr. Buchanan is a syndicated columnist, a political analyst for MSNBC, and a founding member of three of America’s foremost public affairs shows. He is also Editor Emeritus of The American Conservative..

Stiff Right Jab invites you to visit Buchanan.org to get your copy of Pat’s great new book, Churchill, Hitler, and The Unnecessary War.

So it is with Senator Barack Obama.  Though he is not new to politics, he is relatively new to the national political landscape.  And like the iPhone, he is revolutionizing politics as we know them.  Bringing sound judgment (against Iraq, for universal healthcare, for attacking Al Qaeda where they are, and more) and a new vision (speaking with those who oppose us, both to state our case and to find common ground, planning how and determining why we should apply our military before sending them into action, understanding that being the last remaining superpower doesn't mean everyone has to do what we say but that we are still part of the global community) to the national discussion, he is changing the dynamic.  Additionally, let us not forget the millions of new voters, contributors and participants in our political process that Senator Obama has engendered.  Yes, Senator McCain has been around longer.  And he has served our country, for which he has earned respect and appreciation.  But like those earlier mobile devices, his application is limited.  As he and his surrogates (who now include the President of the United States) continue to speak, their dated approach becomes more and more apparent.

As I continue to play with my iPhone (1.0) and my political philosophy (socially more liberal, fiscally more conservative, a little libertarian with regards to the Constitution), I find that Barack Obama is speaking my language (and he speaks so well).  He is living up to the promise that he showed in the 2004 convention speech, both in words and more importantly, in deeds.

Cyrus Krohn has a huge responsibility with GOP.com.  Where do the Republicans go technologically if McCain doesn’t win in November?  GOP.com is definitely a step in the right direction for the Republicans, one that, win or lose, needs to be continually advanced. 

But a few criticisms, if I might…

First, the site takes forever to load (as do other links when I clicked on them), which is an unnecessary frustration.  Those valuable few seconds give me the opportunity to type a different address into my browser and be on my way.  If I want to join the GOP, make a donation to the cause or read some dish about an opponent, don’t give me an excuse not to by taking too long to load the page.

At any given time, visitors might think this is an Obama Web site at first glance: 

Give opponents their due, but chances are that people who visit this site are voting for McCain to begin with.  Obama information is absolutely necessary, but it doesn’t have to be front and center. 

Finding the donation application widget took me two days, four phone calls and an email.  Turns out that the widget isn't even part of GOP.com - it's part of meetbarackobama.com, one of the RNC's other sites that's linked-to from the GOP.com homepage.  Confused yet?  I would suggest making this much easier to find or simply posting it on the homepage.  It’s a great tool, but why is it buried?

The staggering amount of data about voters that is collected, cross-referenced and analyzed is overwhelming but impressive.  I assume that both parties have equally detailed databases.  People tend to feel as if their privacy has been invaded, but it should be no surprise that the bottom line of this technology is money, power and influence – on both sides. 

Of course it’s easier to point out the negatives.  Overall, the site looks great.  It’s networks – Facebook, del.icio.us and digg to name a few - are readily available. The RNC’s YouTube page is richly designed and opens with this video:

But again, all pages seem to take forever to load, which only perpetuates the impression that Republicans are old, stodgy and behind the times. 

Krohn had a right to be proud of the “Republican Platform Committee” page. 

For once in the tech realm, the Republicans had something great and they had it first.  The site is very interactive, allowing for both text and video entries.  It also was a wise call to allow (almost) everything to post.  Nothing should be hidden, especially when internet viewers are lurking in the shadows, ready at a moments notice to jump on an inaccuracy or inconsistency.  Also, the Valentines were funny and unique in their simplicity.  I'd definitely send one out!

Just a few criticisms, but overall, well-done, Republicans.

A younger, well-read student of history disguises himself as an older, white male Republican. Imagine a light navy suit, white shirt with the collar that buttons down at the corners, bright-red tie, over-sized American flag lapel pin, light brown hair - slightly graying - that's been calling for a clip for a week. Somehow, this Navy Suit gains audience with the president - the specifics aren't important - and extracts a thin, hollow tube from his pants - no, not that tube! - a bamboo tube.

Without notice, a dart tipped with the Secret Serum of Logic (found at one of the oldest, unnoticed library's in the U.S.) is loaded into the thin tube. The Navy Suit raises the tube to his lips and, much like we've seen on TV or even practiced ourselves with paper-wrapped straws, emits a sharp, intense breath into the elongated apparatus, forcing the dart from its launching position into the neck of the President of the United States of America, who unfortunately carries the name George W. Bush and dreams of spooning Dick Cheney in the nighttime.

Not-so-coincidentally, soon after the so-called "Dart Incident," Army Lt. Gen. James Dubik says U.S. ground troops will be "mostly finished" in Iraq by mid-2009.

Most stunning of all, a week later The Guardian claims the U.S. will establish a diplomatic presence - "a halfway house to setting up a full embassy" - in the capital of Iran, Tehran. After 30 years of relatively cool relations between the U.S. and Iran, George W. Bush has chosen a bold strategy of reaching out to Tehran in an effort to slow the Middle East country's development of nuclear technology.

Such out-of-character developments originating from the White House cause hopeful brows to furrow in consternation over the sharp 180 (can a 180 be sharp? anyway...) in U.S. foreign policy. Theories of all kinds have emerged to explain such an enigma:

• With a little less than 200 days left in office, Bush is grasping at straws - or logic, as we call it in the left-wing blogosphere - in a desperate effort to save the embers of his legacy after a tumultuous tenure at the helm of the American government.
• Bush no longer feels beholden to his voters, donors, supporters - most of whom suffer from chronic headupassness - and is grasping at all straws in sight to have a least one, true success before leaving office.
• Bush was kidnapped and water-boarded by former Secretary of State James Baker who convinces the current Executive to thank Iran for helping us with Afghanistan in the early days following 9/11.
• Bush will want to ride the coattails of potential positive policy utilized by the next president, Obama, and claim that the strategies this new president has found beneficial were actually introduced by Bush. No one will believe the failed oilman who duped a small majority of the country into believing he'd be the best leader to steer the U.S. into the next century.
• Presidential candidate John McCain has angered Bush by trying to forge a gap of reputation between the two old, white Republicans - prompting Bush to initiate policies that follow ideology spouted by Obama, not McCan't.
• Or, conversely, Bush wants to initiate these more leftist strategies he mistakenly believes will fail, allowing McCain to distance himself from Bush and garner voter approval after these Democratic tactics fall short. First of all, too little too late for McCain and secondly - most surprising to Bush, these strategies actually WORK. Tally-ho!
• Bush wanted to plant a diplomatic effort in Iran to cover for a spy-team meant to infiltrate Iran's confusing and secretive government hierarchy. Little did he know that President Obama would actually use the diplomatic team for diplomacy, goshdarnit.

Nevertheless, as the global population sits stunned over their morning coffee, reading rumors of the U.S. actively extending a diplomatic hand to Iran under the direction of W, the young, well-read student of history chuckles to himself in fond memory of his morning with the president and the dart that changed history.