Wednesday, November 14, 2007

Counter Terrorism Expert Kook drops "bombshell" - 'Don't worry about it'

I thought we had it bad here in Montgomery County with our Conroe KOOK Bill Barnes, The Woodlands KOOK Jim Farrell, and Montgomery KOOKette Barbara Peyton spewing their bilge out at us, but the good folks down in Fort Bend County have the Sugarland KOOK Michael Fjetland to deal with. They have it even worse than us.

In his latest letter to The Bulletin's Publisher and Editor Mike Ladyman titled "The Big One," this 'legend in his own mind,' who has to be a member of the Gonadless race of peoples, says that man-made global warming is the greatest threat to the United States, and that it is even greater than the terrorists threat, of which he refers to himself as an expert, and as an analyst to desperate television stations like as Fox 26, that could bring on a well versed Sophomore in World History that would make more sense, if Fjetland wasn't available.

As a realists 'we have to have security first, or we have nothing Dude, I ask you Mr. Fjetland, I may not be from Missouri, but "SHOW ME!!!" Show me your evidence. Show me any evidence that the Northern or Southern Hemisphere is 'warming' by the complete hand of man.

You have no respect for your audience Sir. You expect them to be totally accepting of anything you have to say, swallowing it like Monica ... well, I'm not going there, but it's as if Fjetland is the great defender of socialism, and anything said against him is the equivalent to committing a seditious act against the state.

How come when I watch the Discovery Channel's "Deadliest Catch," they always have to deal with pack ice that somehow always seem to interfere with the best fishing areas in the Bering Sea, which is well below the Arctic Circle, where it is suppose to be really cold. How can this happen in a time of man-made global warming?

I have a question for you Mr. Fjetland, "how many molecules of CO2 are in every 100,000 molecules of air?" I will not tell you since you don't tell us things, but it is the 'number' of the President that spent the last ten days of peace on the European mainland, before returning to London on the first day of World War II.

Yes, "**" (insert answer there) is the amount of CO2 molecules per 100,000, and it takes five years to add just 1 single molecule of CO2 to 100,000 molecules of air. And we had much more CO2 in the air during non-man made warming periods in the past.

Mr. Fjetland, I'm sure a lot of people are tired of you trying to scare us. Ted Danson's prediction that the world's oceans would die in ten years all those years ago came and went. And when challenged on it, Danson labeled it a 'hyperbole," which for those of us that don't have a few seconds to open a dictionary, is a misleading statement "or exaggerated language that distorts facts by making them much bigger than they are if looked at objectively." In effect, DANSON LIED!!!

You see hyperboles are used all the time in media newstories, which makes them seem more important than they really are. And Fjetland is no different in his reporting.

Checking out Fjetland's blog and Yahoo Groups site, it is evident that no one listens to him, and why Ladyman posts his crap I will never know.

What I thought really humorous about Fjetland's tripe was his reference that "fiddling while Rome burns," and I couldn't help but think about Hillary Clinton fiddling with Rob "Meathead" Reiner of "All in the Family" fame, who both partied just a few miles away while the California countryside around them was burning and real citizens were losing their homes. If anyone is the epitome of Nero, it is Hillary Clinton and Michael Fjetland AND NOT George W. Bush.

Friday, November 09, 2007

Get Someone Elected before you cry Single Member Districts in Conroe

In a recent letter to The Bulletin that was titled "Single Member Districts" I was suddenly skeptical. I suspected something, and did a few searches real quickly, and low and behold I saw LULAC. I wasn't so surprised, but my jaw dropped anyway.

I don't see anything that LULAC does as contributing to American values, or -- to becoming American. I see LULAC as doing the opposite. Their aim to keep Hispanics from learning English, or God forbid, vote Republican, which thankfully more Hispanics, as well as Blacks are doing.


LULAC, I see as nothing but race baiters, like the Sharpton's and the Jackson's, they have to keep their constituencies dumbed down, America hating, middle and upper class hating and dependent on the LULAC for leadership. That's why racism will never be solved in the United States according to them. That's how they make their living. No racism means no money going into their coffers.


Luis Cristo of LULAC Council 1087, says that "We represent 40 percent of the minority voters who are not heard in the city."


First Mr. Cristo, no one has a right to be heard in this country. You have a right to speech, but it's up to you to make people want to listen to you. The only people who have the right to be heard are a few privileged people in Communist countries.


There has been at least one Hispanic citizen on the ballot for Conroe City Council before, Norma Duran, who ran for Council, Place 3, back in May 2006. Where was that 40% then?


Duran came in third place garnering only 346 votes. That was a prime opportunity for Conroe Hispanics to earn the respect of their fellow citizens, and like every other opportunity they get, they threw it away. Mind you, I have Hispanic blood in me, and even if I didn't have that blood, it still needed to be said.


I was an acquaintance of Duran since I attended the same soccer games she attended. I can't remember her politics at that time, but I voted for Debbie Glenn. Jim Gentry took the election with 958 votes. That was also the year the Guy Martin ran against his brother Jay Ross, making waves in the media. I voted for Guy, and still enjoy his newsletter every now and then.


Single Member Districts in Conroe will not solve the problem. I don't hear about the Black population complaining about not having representation, and they were here well before the Hispanic population in the county grew.


If any one group has failed it has been the Hispanic population of Conroe for not organizing to elect one of their own.


City elections don't have the greatest turnouts are they are notoriously low in voter turnout. Quite simply, Duran didn't get around to get her message out. How many people did she talk with during her campaign?
Case in point, I used to be an influential member of Brazoria County politics and am on schedule to be an influential member of MC politics in the next year or two.


I was there when in 1995 when Dennis Bonnen was introduced at his first GOP House Party, a fresh faced snot-nosed kid fresh out of St. Edward's University, with virtually no job or political experience to speak of.


How did Bonnen get recognized and win in '96. He knocked on thousands upon thousands of Brazoria County doors, something like in the order of 10,000 that I recall, and he got elected, and has been reelected six-times since then.


Did Bonnen ask government to give him a chance to get elected? Hell no. He saw an opportunity, he went for it, and he won, just by facial recognition and a sound belief in his policies and party, and he still won, despite being a kid.


Although the leaders of the Conroe Single Member District Committee I believe are Black, I believe they can learn from this posting. Sedrick Thrower is a Court Clerk II for the county, and I'm not sure if he is still president of the Metropolitan Child Development Center in Conroe. I'm not sure what Carl White does.


I don't mind minority representation at all, but you have to do with without the help of government. Show yourself to be a proud American, believe in those American values, wear an American flag lapel on your person, and put your hand-over-the-heart during the Pledge of Allegiance. All of those things Democrat Presidential candidate, Barack Obama does not do, mind you.


I was proud to hear that an American of Asian Indian decent Bobby Jindal won the recent governor's race in Louisiana. Hell, I'd vote for J.C. Watts in a minute for President, and he is a Black man. Both are Republican.

See, for Conservatives, it's about the ideology. Skin color doesn't ever factor into the equation.

With Democrats, skin color is the biggest factor in the equation.

Wednesday, October 24, 2007

Conroe Kook Lacks Reality When it comes to Gore's Nobel and America's Energy Concerns

The person that leads a small platoon of Montgomery County environmentalist wackos, the Conroe Kook Bill Barnes, recently wrote his usual one paragraph bilge to The Bulletin's E& P, Mike Ladyman.

The letter titled "Gore, U.N. Group Win 2007 Nobel Peace Prize," in this weeks Bulletin was a complete embarrassment. I'm embarrassed for you Bill, and on your behalf I apologize to the Citizens of Montgomery County for your complete incompetence when it comes to environmental issues.

It's people like you Bill, especially those liberal nut-jobs in governmental bureaucracies that make the "wrong" decisions for the public, which costs those in the public dearly later for their decisions made today.

For instance, those liberals have got a hold of government bureaucracy so much that they have not allowed a refinery to be built in the US for almost two generations. And guess what, we now have to pay $2.50 plus per gallon of gas just to go to work, and there's no hope in sight for $0.99 gas, especially with the fact that our refineries are aging beyond belief, and have to be brought down occasionally for maintenance. China is now consuming more and more oil, and building coal plants with no regards to the environment, and the US has no effective energy plan that involves a market driven 'green' goal, which I have no problem with as long as it is “market driven.”

Again, the liberals think of no consequences to their actions when it came to no refineries, and that was thirty years ago. And don't think that refineries can go up overnight -- it takes 10 years to build one at great expense to the investor.

Now, we have states like Kansas, who are starting to turn down permits to build 'clean burning coal technology plants' over concerns of so-called "man-made global warming" which is totally unproven and never will be, and we will only have ourselves to blame when it becomes apparent that energy providers will not have enough of the stuff to dish out in the future for America’s energy needs. Can you say “rolling blackouts” anyone? Thank God Texas has its own energy grid and I hope we continue to make the right decisions.

Coal is America's greatest natural resource, and Kansas may well set a trend in turning down permits to provide for our energy future, when we should be building up those technologies now with the anticipation of going green in thirty to four years when those plants are nearing the end of their lifetimes.

But with liberals they only think about 'the next five minutes, and what the next poll has to say. The libs don't think about the future. They can spin only the present.

The only country that I can see that thought about the future in regards to its energy needs was Brazil, and that was over thirty years ago. They have an ethanol-based fuel that is not a food base like ours is, and just recently declared their energy independence.

Energy independence will never happen in the US until we wake up and see what liberalism has done to us. Liberals never account for improved technologies in their assumptions on the environment. It's always coal is 'filthy' and gas causes 'man-made global warming'. But that is not true.

I get so angry sometimes that I can spit, but it is your children that will have to deal with the real decisions that are being made by today's environmentalist liberals. So go ahead and start blaming yourself now.

Tuesday, October 23, 2007

Last Weeks Bulletin Full of False Assumptions on Health Care

Talking about lying Democrats, check out the Oct. 11-18 issue of The Bulletin pages 2 and 3, if you can still find it, but it is on the website. You would think that government health care were in the Constitution or something.

I inherited a family Bible several years ago from an Aunt that is now barely hanging on in a Austin nursing home. When I looked in the beautiful book I found several family momentos decades old, which I have come to cherish.

I also found a hospital receipt from the hospital in Austin that had been stuffed in the bowels of the Bible. It was for a short stay in Brackenridge Hospital, and the receipt was for a whopping total of $30.00.

Of course the receipt was dated from the Kennedy Administration, and I don't know how long my Aunt took to pay off the bill or anything like that, but it was certainly a time when a hospital bill was still unperverted by the likes of government and the Johnson Administration, when it was projected that Medicare would only be $ 9 billion per year -- for eternity. Yeah right!

In the budget for next year, 1/3rd of the total will go to pay the Social Security payments of our senior citizens. That's over $700 million of nearly $3 trillion, and we haven't even got into Medicare and Medicade, all the fraud possibilities, etc, nor the fact that the first of Americas 'baby boomers' just started retiring.

For nearly 190 years prior to the LBJ Administration, and decades and decades before that, Americans were entrusted to themselves in taking care of their own health. Granted, they were tough times and all that, and doctors and healthcare facilties were not as readily available as they are today, but Americans had choice.

All Americans do not truly have a choice today when it comes to health care today. The extremely wealthy do of course, but for these purposes they don't count. I'm talking just the average Joe, who up until the time of the Kennedy American, like my Aunt did, could go to the hospital an not be forced to leave a kidney to pay for care.

Like it or not liberals, the US has the best health care system in the World. And although as flawed as it may be, we have Canadians, and many others from around the World who flock here in search of good health.

Government is the problem when it comes to our healthcare. Government run healthcare has always been a backdoor socialist program, and it always will be. It allows for no competition whatsoever so prices continue to rise, as well as the cost of health insurance.

And the SCHIP bill that the President vetoed was just another example of backdoor socialism that would have put nearly every American under 25 years of age on a government run healthcare program.

The President likes the current SCHIP program as written, and wanted to add more children by providing additioinal funds to cover more children, but the Democrats had to pervert the entire thing, with the thinking that anything that has the word "children" in it and is vetoed is assumed bad news for the President.

Evidently, that is not true, and the Democrats were caught.

So what of the solution? Again. Ask a Democrat what his solution is and he will say "the government." Wrong.

The solution will be for the government to get out of the doctors and hospitals way. Do what Texas did, and limit liabilities on lawsuits. No wonder doctors are moving to Texas in droves.

Obviously, state boards that govern the license of doctors need to have more power to rule on the complaints of doctors so that those in the wrong can be removed immediately from practice.

Perhaps doctors should be routinely tested to make their skills are up to standards of practice.

There are lots of options in making our healthcare even better.

Medical Savings Accounts are a great way to help reduce routine preventive medical care, of which the premiums are way to high already. Many families pay as much as $5000.00 or more per year on health coverage. Ridiculous.

What Americans really need is 'catastrophic insurance' plans, which should be separate from MSA's and can be sold at much lower premiums, dependent upon the deductable.

I look at catastrophic insurance as a bond that is held in reserve until it is time to cash it in for use. Simple as that.
The letters posted by The Woodlands Kook Jim Farrell, and now Montgomery Kookette Barbara Peyton on the SCHIP bill were irresponsible and lacked any bit of reality in reference to the truth in regards to the bill.

It is yet another example of Democrats having to lie to get there point across.

And the use of worthless polls to prove there point is growing so old as well. Most of us know, that polls are already predetermined before pollsters make up their first contacts.

Another thing with the liberals and healthcare. They never offer any solutions. Only that the government healthcare umbrella is the only way to go.

Well libs. Tell that to Great Britian and Canada, where government run health care in one word -- SUCKS!!!

Monday, October 08, 2007

TW KOOK Jim Farrell 'Has Not One Drop of Confidence in the American Way'

In response to The Woodlands KOOK James T. Farrell latest tripe letter to The Bulletin titled "Full Circle" I say -- What?

First off, I don't accept the premise that Farrell could convince anybody to do anything; much less convince an Upstate New York Republican, evidently an influentual Republican at that, to completely change his mind on America's national defense attitude, thus turning the former Republican into a total wimp.

You know with the Democrats tactic of lie, lie, lie to fool their base to stand with them, I will stand up, unlike other Republicans, and say "Mr. James T. Farrell, aka The Woodlands KOOK -- PROOF IT!!"

Put your brother-in-laws phone number in my e-mail box. Give me his bio so I can check it out with my New York posse.

I want to call this guy myself, because quite frankly Jim, I don't believe you, and the trees that were felled in the printing of your tripe deserved a better fate.

Can you imagine living in Farrell's "Bush deranged" household? Everything, and I mean, everything that goes wrong from eggs being overcooked on the stove to the cable going out, would literally be blamed on President Bush.

I wonder how the Kook would feel if a President Gore, had "to convince the American public that war with Iraq was in our country’s national interest." I'm positive that Farrell would be singing a different tune.

See as long as a Republican can be saddled with defeat in the War on Terror, the liberals will be doing everything in their power to lose the war.

But the growing "dirty little secret," is that if a Democrat does win the White House in 2008, American troops will not be pulled out, as evidenced in a recent Democrat debate, that posed the question if the Gulf region was not secure, American troops would still be needed in the area.

Liberals will not saddle themselves with defeat, and Farrell will be sadly mistakened if he votes for Clinton or Obama expecting troops in The War on Terror to be back home by February 2009. Sorry Jim, they're staying put.

In reviewing his letter, I'm quite sure that Farrell opposed going into Afghanistan. The man is a complete wimp. He obviously doesn't own a gun, and knowledgeable MC criminals would see his domicile as an easy mark.

Farrell will stoop to any level to find anything to insult his country. He has a Vietnam mindset in an Iraq War world, and old 'flower child' Jim would love another quagmire, which in the case of Iraq is impossible, unless another Democrat White House starts making calls for the Pentagon, personally choosing which targets are to be engaged or not.

Farrell's take on General Petraeus was downright treasonists. Does Jim have a soul?

The General does his job, not at direction of the White House, but from the standpoint of the situation in Iraq.

We hear very little from Iraq nowadays because everything is going well there. That's why attacks on Rush Limbaugh, as false as they are, are given play on liberal airwaves. Not for the truth, but for the lefts mindnumbed robot bases response.

And it is quite funny that Farrell mentions September 11th as the day of the the General's testimony to Congress, but Farrell failed to mention all the al-Qaeda statements that were also played mentioning Democrat talking-points.

Farrell and the Democrats are so dense, that they fail to be embarrassed when America's enemies mention things such as relief for Hurricane Katrina, and other issues that liberals consider their own.

For a culture of death that is the world of the Demcrats, who abort 4,000 fetal lives a day, who support euthanasia wholeheartedly, while they support saving the lives of death row inmates whom they see as future Democrat voters. I know Farrell is eagerly planning the day we he can assemble his flashmob to celebrate 4,000 American deaths.

Look, war is a terrible thing, but it is sadly a necessary evil, and unfortunately many young men and women are cut down in the prime of their lives. And I can attest that in many ways those who survive the battlefield are effected for the rest of their natural lives, and with no regrets for that fact.

To Farrell and all you liberals, how do you think a real peace is achieved?

Name for me one lasting peace accord since Camp David that didn't end badly for somebody?

One thing puzzles me with these Democrats. They keep complaining that we need to get out of Iraq, when we have had troops stationed in Germany and Japan since World War II, and the American's have had a presence in the Persian Gulf for decades now. Korea is still a war at rest.

Farrell's assessment that if the US left Iraq, that the country would remain stable is naive. He's a little girl novice in a man's world. How many other situations where the US has withdrawn leaving a power vacuum has that caused problems leaving millions of innocents dead.

It took over ten years after the American Revolution before our Constitution was signed. So our own history is not perfect. Our country has done many things wrong, but still we have done more things right, and in the few centuries our country has existed when have achieved more than countries thousands of years old.

It's liberals like The Woodlands Kook Jim Farrell that would love to see our country knocked down to the dark ages. His guilt over America being the best and setting the example frustrates him. To Farrell, America should be on the same par as say Botswana.

Ask Jim about his opinion about the United States, and he will speak of a racists nation, an aggressor nation, an environmental wasteland of dirty air and water; a nation that tramples on free speech of others. Of course he would be wrong on all accounts.

And in the case of the latter, it is the Democrats, of which many cases have been documented that show they taken free speech rights away.

I recall the libs rushing the stage at Columbia when Minute Man founder Jim Gilchrist started speaking effectively ending that event, yet when a dictator thug like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad shows up on Columbia's stage, he's welcomed with open arms and allowed to speak his peace.

Liberals never speak of the growing environmental disaster of China, nor Chinese human rights issues, but if an American agent so much as twists a terrorists arm accidentally in interrrogations, they'll have the ACLU crawling up their ass. Something is desparately wrong, and it is not the Republican Party.

Someone has got their priorities mixed up, and it's definitely Jim Farrell. I believe in my country, Farrell doesn't. I believe in free speech, Farrell believes in free liberalspeak and of crushing the Conservative voice. I believe in free market health care, Farrell believes in government run health care, from which no one is qualified to operate, and has cost to multiply hundreds fold since the government got involved.

All of Farrell's ideas lead to socialism and communism, which we all know does not work. Hell, the Democrat Big Brothers in Tennessee are losing revenue to cigarettes due to excessive taxation, that they are now posting lookouts across their seven states borders and they are reporting back to TN Highway Patrol if you try and cheat Tennesse out of its taxes, and those with too much are having their cigarettes and beer confiscated.

Farrell is of course salavating over that news, but Conservatives and normal citizens out there, be very scared of taxation of any kind, because they will come for you one day.

So Montgomery County citizens, no matter what The Woodlands Kook Jim Farrell tells you. Whether it be about General Petraeus, the Iraqi government, heel, even about Dick Cheney. Simply don't believe it.

I ask the Lord, please forgive The Woodlands Kook Jim Farrell, for he knows not what he writes.

P.S. - I don't know if Jim Farrell took the Conroe KOOK Bill Barnes writing class in TW, since his writing hasn't shown any improvement of content.

Bill's next class for MC Democrats will be featuring words starting with the letter "B."

Friday, September 28, 2007

No Wonder former RINO Fjetland Was Creamed in the Election

Although he writes slicker that the Conroe KOOK Bill Barnes and The Woodlands KOOK Jim Farrell, Michael Fjetland, in his letter to The Bulletin's Publisher and Editor Mike Ladyman titled "We need a uniter," in this weeks paper, one can get the sense that America is always wrong, Chrisitianity is always wrong, and unless we yield American greatness to some piss ant third world country -- then we haven't got a chance.

Michael Fjetland, as you may remember, ran against Tom DeLay in 2004, and mustered a whopping 2% of the vote. He's now an Independent, which means he to chicken to call himself at least a Progressive, which in my book means liberal. The former Republican in Name Only, RINO, ran against DeLay twice.

Fjetland at this junction in his prose can be labeled a "snake oil salesman," for what he tries to sell as a cure-all for all of Americas ills is nothing more that a relabeled bottle of bad tasting Castor Oil in a bright shiny Democrat bottle.

When Fjetland speaks of "the next President" in his letter to Ladyman, those you can understand
The Bulletin's liberalspeak know full well he means "the next DEMOCRAT President."

Nowhere in Fjetland's letter does he speak of American exceptionalism. Nowhere in his tripe does he speak of the Judeo-Christian values that made the United States, which in only 200 short years, has become the greatest country that ever existed.

No, with Fjetland, "we need a President who earns us respect worldwide by showing respect." He wants a yeilding America. A bent over America that is retrospect of some gay guy taking it in the you know what.

Pardon me Mr. Fjetland, we've already had a President that went around the world showing respect and apologizing for every little thing that Ameica apparently did wrong. His name was Mr. Bill Clinton, and his inaction in a time of much needed decision, was one of the main reasons why my country was attacked on September 11th, a day that Fjetland, probably like Barbara Streisand's husband and worthless actor James Brolin, looks on as a day of celebration rather that a day of remembrance. "Happy September 11th," as Brolin says.

Like a Democrat, in no way does Fjetland present one solution in his tripe. When it comes to oil, he never mentions domestic drilling, only some bull about harnessing the solar power in desert places like Algeria that would provide Europe the power it is now getting from Russian oil." What?

And of course, Fjetland, will never mention market forces, that are the rightfully justifier of alternative fuels demand, which is the only way something like that will work. Look, until the poor man can buy a hybrid without the urging of government, then shut up. And no one, and I mean no one, is talking about the environmental disaster of tens of thousands nickel medal hybride batteries and their impact on the environment in the future. If you think a few AA and AAA batteries in our landfills is bad, just wait.

Folks, liberals never think about the consequences to any of their actions. And libs tell me that burning corn in my gasoline will make the planet safer, but when corn prices are skyrocketing, forcing tortilla riots in Mexico, something is wrong. Corn, if you don't know, is the base food for most of the food products we eat, being milk, meat, cheese, etc. In some form or fashion the animal that started the process was fed corn. Ever wonder why milk at Walgreens is $4 a gallon?

Look, when liberals like the socialist Ted Kennedy get pissed when plans for a wind farm place it within site of his Nantucket Sound complex, that speaks volumes. Liberals exempt themselves from what they tell you, and do exactly the opposite.

For instance, Al Gore, the Bishop of the Church of Environmentalism, will tell you to be environmentally friendly in your home and car, but in his house, he uses twenty times as much power as the average home in Conroe. And when it comes to his Gulfstream 400 private jet, it is the most environmentally unfriendly plane flying, being four times worst environmentally than a regular commercial jet, and his plane carries less than 20 people. You can drive across the country like ten times -- back and forth -- and still not emit as many carbon emissions as Al Gore in his jet flying just one way across the country.

Folks, we are looking at "do as I say, not as I do" liberals in action, and Fjetland is just one of them.

When, Fjetland talks of a "uniter," I can't help but think of us under the umbrella of socialism. In Michael's book, all of us Outer Party folks, as well as the proles will be subjected to Fjetland's Big Brother philosophy.

On another for instance, if you don't sign up for Comrade Clinton's proposed voluntary mandatory health care plan, you could wind up paying a hefty fine, or worst yet if you do, you might be directed by Big Brother's doctor to quit smoking or stop eating Whataburgers, before you can receive care under her perverted government healthcare plan.

Don't let any liberal tell you socialist healthcare is the solution.

Market forces brother. How come doctors are the only professional expected to work for free? No wonder we have so many foreign doctors now. If government gets any further involved in our healthcare no American will waist the time to sign up to be a doctor, and they are very much needed.

Fjetland's attack on Christianity was more than uncalled for. For Christ's sake (intentionally used to piss off liberals), Osama bin Laden (D-Afghanistan) on September 11th spouted Democrat talking points in his demand that we all convert to Islam.

Yet over here, Osama bin Fjetland will never mention that to
The Bulletin's gullible readers who take his tripe for the liberal gospel.

What does Fjetland care what the Pope says? He only denounces him because Michael detest Christianity anyway. The Pope does not demand everyone convert to Catholicism or he will kill us all. Yet Michael condemns His Holiness.

Does Michael denouce Islamofascism? Hell no. To Fjetland, "the enemy (al-Qaeda) of my enemy (President Bush), is my friend." Even if it is Osama bin Laden.

Monday, September 24, 2007

Conroe Courier AP Poll (Independents [and America Hating Dictators] tilting toward Dems in '08)

Oh boy, another survey that says the American people so adore the Democrats and hate the evil Republicans. Ho hum. Like the Soviet Union's KGB, the American liberal media is nothing more than a hollow shell thinking that they control our hearts and minds. In time the liberal media will fall as well.

Have you noticed since the Democrats won in '06 you never hear the Sunday shows asking the Republican leadership, "what does the GOP need to do to win in '08?"

When Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a state-sponsor of terrorism, can come to my country and spout Democrat Party talking points, as well be invited to speak at Columbia under the auspices of "free speech" while Ahmadinejad will be treated with respect and dignity by the liberals there and those in the leftist media.

While Minutemen founder Jim Gilchrist, when he started to speak at Columbia, the Stalinists liberals there rushed the stage forcing an immediate halt to the event. Folks, liberal Democrats have never met an evil America-hating dictator they ever hated. I can point out episode after episode of liberals stamping out Conservative speech, but I find it difficult to recall liberal speech that has been stamped out by Conservatives.

The stupid AP-Ipsos poll about the Independents in today's Conroe Courier, which should have never been conducted in the first place, touts that Independent Americans are leaning Democrat because of President Bush. Look, I admit that the Republicans lost focus when the were in power, but to honestly believe that Democrats should be put in charge of our national security, which is truly our highest priority issue, because you cannot have a strong and growing economy without national security when you think about it.

Our nation really needs to get real. You might as well hand over our national security concerns to Ahmadinejad and Hugo Chavez if the Democrats win in 2008. You know, I sometimes wonder what many Americans are going to think come Nov. 4, 2008, when they discover that President Bush is not on the ballot.

To all those liberals out there that consider it "brave" to allow Adolf Ahmadinejad or Adolf Chavez to come and speak on our shores, I dare you wusses to go to over to their lands and try and speak with your same wicked leftist conviction. You will then find out that America is not such a bad land after all.

Monday, August 27, 2007

TW Millionare Liberal Feels Guilty For His Success (Wants us all to feel crappy)

If there is one thing that I loath in this world besides al-Qaeda, cancer, liver, and lima beans, its rich, snobbish, white guiltish liberals, like Dick Alexander, from The Woodlands, who complain that the real meaning of "tax relief is to cut taxes for the wealthy and to pass debt on to future generations."

Folks, if you haven't heard the news, the Federal revenue in April hit an all-time high, which has helped improve the budget deficit this year. Governments all over are flush with money, yet Stalinist liberals like Dick Alexander wants us all to submit to him in the spirit of '1984,' because good 'ol Dick will then be in the "Big Brother" crowd.

Alexander, who chairs a successful company (thank goodness its private or I would have called my Edward Jones rep. and dump any interest I had) has donated $1,500 to Hillary Clinton, another stinking rich white guiltish liberal, who wants to be "Big Sister."

Alexander blames President Reagan, and both Presidents Bush for our national debt, while convienently leaving out President Clinton, but of course good 'ol Dick does not examine any of the details and just throws out statics in his recent Republicans BAD, Democrats GOOD letter to
The Bulletin Publisher and Editor Mike Ladyman.

I don't know what good 'ol Dick believes to be "bad policy," but what President Reagan and the Presidents Bush have done is to face real world threats, not run away from them like President Clinton did. Facing world threats takes money, and the truth. It's incredible, that in the time since 9/11 our economy has doubled, and still in the liberal media we only get news stories about the stock market correcting.

I bet you good 'ol Dick has never once thought about the Soviet Union in writing any of his tripe, nor has he thought about any of Clinton's trickery while ignoring his contributions to the national debt.

Of course good 'ol Dick will never mention, if memory serves me correct, that when President Clinton restructured the national debt during his Presidency, he choose to use short-term loans with slightly lower interest rates than the 30-years interest rates that were offered at the time. All this so Clinton's poll numbers would look good and he could be heralded in the liberal media. A lot of good that did oral-sex legacied president.

That's Democrats folks. They show you a trick with their right hand and lift your wallet with their left.

We all know that the Clintons take credit for the great economy in the nineties, but it was not until 1995, when Republicans gained leadership in The House that the economy started to take off until late in Clinton's Presidency when his policies started to slow it down, and it can be argued that President Reagan set the stage for the roaring economy of the '90s with the reduction in tax rates, and that it's the Bush 43 tax cuts that are responsible for record revenues we are having today.

I am tired of liberals like Dick Alexander, trying to scare us to death over the national debt. During the Clinton years, they said the budget could be balanced in two years, then five, then ten, and so on. It wasn't a priority to the Clinton's then, and neither should it be now.

The national debt has been an issue since before I was born, and none of the predictions that we are going to be wiped out by the deficit have never materialized, yet our ecomony keeps chugging along.

The Democrats are the party of "tax and spend." Democrats, and good 'ol Dick Alexander want you to panic. They want you to run to them like scared puppies running to their Mother's teet as it thunders outside.

I say don't panic. Don't let liberals like Dick Alexander put you into panic.

"The wealthy" such as Dick Alexander, "and the corporations" such as Global Shop Solutions, "have been the primary recipients of Republican tax cuts," and the both of them are thriving.

Five will get you ten that good 'ol Dick structures his compensation much like Warren Buffett and other CEO's who would be stupid to pay themselves huge taxable salaries, when other means of compensation can be found. And of course, if the tightwad Dick Alexander would have shelled out another hundred thousand or two, he could have had a home on Lake Woodlands rather than living across the street from it. I guess he couldn't get a government handout.

Look Dick Alexander, if you feel so guilty about being successful and rich, do as The Bible says, and sell all your possessions, and give the money to the poor. But instead, you want a Big Brother type government to take everybody elses money and possessions, and give them to the poor.

Mr. Alexander, If you are so adamant that "'tax relief' means cutting taxes for the wealthy and creating a large national debt to be paid for by future generations," why don't you set a liberal example for once -- GIVE YOUR TAXCUT BACK.

Wednesday, August 01, 2007

TW KOOK Jim Farrell 'Bush/Cheney must be impeached' (If he didn't lie, he'd have nothing to say)

Once one KOOK leaves The Bulletin's grace (i.e. - the Conroe KOOK Bill Barnes), another one takes his place. This time, it is The Woodlands KOOK James T. Farrell, out of Oak Ridge North. I wouldn't be surprised if this guy already has a Barack Obama for President yardsign in his front of his house for the white guilt he oozes.

The kook James Farrell, who has written several letters before, would believe a poll stating that more than 70% of Democrats believe that the sky is green. And in liberals ever belief, however made up polls are, Farrell touts one of Bruce Feins latest pieces breeding dream "impeachment scenarios" involving President Bush and Vice President Cheney.

And as with most liberal arguments, The Woodlands kook Jim Farrell, in order to get his point across in his tripe -- HAS TO LIE!!! Look, Fein may have worked for Republicans in the past, but he is not a Conservative Republican who has abandoned Bush/Cheney and started writing against him with all haste.

When Fein writes for the "liberal hawk" Slate.com, the kook Farrell still labels Fein as Conservative. Bullcrap. That proves that the kook is nothing but a cheat, liar, and fraud. And the worst thing is that he has to lie to himself. How do you think that his letter found itself in
The Bulletin's mailbox?

If you look at the pledges of Bruce Fein's organization American Freedom Agenda, they appear to be talking points from the ACLU and Democratic National Committee, and are very much supported by al-Qaeda in every which way.

The kook Farrell's idea that by including a so-called "Conservative Republican" in his letter who is against President Bush, he didn't think that someone would actually take a few moments to verify his assertions -- its ridicuous. But what do you expect from
The Bulletin's readers.

I would venture to guess that Jim Farrell has never supported the United States. I honestly believe that he couldn't define American Exceptionalism, nor does he believe in the greatness of America.

The kook does believe that the US's kidnapping and jailing of bad guys is bad, and that the governments listening in of the most select of phone conversations involving suspected terrorists is much worse. Hopefully in the future we will be able to do what FDR did to suspected terrorists during WWII -- open their mail.

The kook Farrell never explores why the US does what its does. He never examines that we have not got hit again since 9/11. No, with the kook, the US is always the bad guy, no matter how barbaric al-Qaeda can be.

Of course The Woodlands kook completely ignores al-Qaeda's chopping off of American prisioners heads, or the fact that al-Qaeda's bakes pre-teen boys like a pig, and serves them to his family in order to recruit them to their brand of the Religion of Peace. Even The Woodlands kook Jim Farrell has his standards.

Look, I don't want to know what our good guys are doing to al-Qaeda to keep us safe. To leak that stuff only hurts us, and you know if Clinton or Obama are ever elected President reporting like that will suddenly stop. All of a sudden, the economy will look bright, worthless Democrat oversight of the Clinton or Obama Administration will stop, and we will suddenly get good news out of Iraq.

To The Woodlands kook James T. "Jim" Farrell, if the US is so bad as you say, why don't you do like a lot of other Americans liberals who adore socialism -- MOVE TO CANADA!!!!

Tuesday, July 10, 2007

The Bulletin's Liberalism Wanes (Yet their silence on al-Qaeda atrocities is deafening)

As of late The Bulletin Publisher and Editor Mike Ladyman has evidently become aware of this blog and has pulled back from his outright liberal message.

Even The Conroe "Kook" Bill Barnes has limited himself to one-liners agreeing with other Kooks who write-in to
The Bulletin, but in time both of them will be back.

To bad these guys continue to berate the United States, all the while al-Qaeda is literally "baking" 11-years old boys in efforts to gain converts to their brand of the "Religion of Peace."

And by "baking," yes I do mean in an oven, (as in 'shake and bake") with an apple in the boys mouth, and served to his own family under penalty of death.

The silence in the liberal media is deafening over America's enemies doing the most cruel and barbaric of things, but if a US soldier so much as gives an al-Qaeda member a wedgie, all hell breaks lose in the liberal media.

Thankfully the "Big-Three" nightly newscast are slowly dying. Katie Couric is certainly a big flop in her endeavor at CBS News -- Thank God. And in time, America will hopefully get an hour of Wheel-of-Fortune a night instead of the tripe that passes thru Katie's lips on a nightly basis.

To my friends in the liberal media and their fellow Kook supporters, "what is wrong with being pro-American?" (would create to much independence among the people, and the Democrats need victims to vote for them, seeing as they aborted their base of 40 million fetuses, and now need illegial immigrant votes to survive).

Can you find me one example of liberals supporting the troops without throwing-up afterwards? (no).

Why do you liberals continue to put the Democrat Party ahead of God, Family, and the security of our Country? (simply put -- power. Democrats envy dictatorial power such as with Chavez in Venezuela, yet you hear nothing from liberals about the collapsing of democracy and free speech in Venezuela).

In this age of the new threat of nuclear terrorism the liberal attitude that "it can't happen hear" is totally ridiculous as we just saw in the UK and Scotland, and with us on September 11th. I would hope that some expressions coming out of
The Bulletin would express support of the United States, its military, our mission in Iraq, which al-Qaeda itself has said Iraq "is the place to be and fight the infedels" since a democratic Iraq, to al-Qaeda, cannot survive.

Wednesday, June 20, 2007

Conroe KOOK Bill Barnes 'Has more faith in the insurgency in Iraq than his own Country'

The Bulletin Publisher and Editor Mike Ladyman has evidently stopped posting Bullpen pieces passing them off as his own, but that has not stopped the kooks who regularly spew their tripish letters on paper much more valuable than the words printed on them, and Conroe kook Bill Barnes is no exception.

Obviously Barnes must have been dropped on his head as a baby, or somehow has been indoctrinated into total hate for his country, because the man has some issues upstairs that need to be resolved. As my nephew says, it's always "opposite day" with Bill Barnes given his hatred for America.

Bill Barnes is easily coercised as we have seen with Algore's “hoax” of man-made global warming, and “the farce” of Y2K. Bill will tell you to buy a Prius, but he'll be seen around town in a busted up old polluting truck. He'll tell you to seperate and recyle your trash, but he'll be the guy burning his trash in the back of his house.

Barnes is a man of hate. Of course he's a Democrat, because when Democrats break the law, he convienently looks the other way, and finds no fault in those Democrats, but he will pound on the Republican who makes the slightest of all missteps. Barnes is a fraud, and he will not be happy until everyone is miserable like him.

The Kook does not want the US in Iraq. He doesn't realize that even if a Democrat is elected President, the US will still remain in Iraq. We must leave a stable Iraq, or face a true bloodbath in the future. The vacuum created by a US withdrawal will truly bring carnage such be as Cambodia following the US withdrawal in Vietnam.

Conroe kook Bill Barnes reports that the "on May 8th, without mention in the U.S. media, the Iraqi parliament signed a petition calling for US withdrawal." Of course the kook websites ran with this. But for fear of being embarrassed because of the false petition the so-called mainstream media failed to carry the breaking news. Hmm.

Would you think a petition sponsored by Muqtada al-Sadr would carry some weight in a US media hellbent on a US loss in Iraq. After all, CNN probably displays their propaganda of US soldiers being gunned down and IEDs killing American troops. Of course the petition participants probably signed their names at the point of an al-Sadr gun calling for the US troops to be withdrawn, and The Kook loves the Al Sadr movement.

Mr. Bill "Kook" Barnes probably thinks that any enemy insurgent against the Bush administration is his friend. Even if that friend would have no qualms about killing Bill Barnes and his entire infidel family. But hell, in The Kooks case -- its all about hating President Bush.

The Kook will never mention of al-Qaeda hinting of peace talks with the US. That would hail Bush as "the peacemaker," and anything less than making President Bush look like a failure in Iraq will not stand. No, for The Kook Bill Barnes, its US withdrawal and failure from Iraq or nothing. He smiles when he hears of another dead American soldier, and especially one from our area.

Yet on the same death note, The Kook Barnes will never bat an eyelash at the latest drive-by shooting that killed a young kid, or how many deaths are caused by doctors bad handwriting, or how many deaths there are in car accidents. All of which run into the high tens of thousands annually, yet The Kook gets pissed when the President claims "that setting a timetable [for a US withdrawal] will 'embolden the terrorists, those who hate and fear democracy'".

It will take many years before we are out of Iraq. Hell, we still have troops in Germany, and Japan, and that was WWII.

Look, we are the United States of America. No matter how much we are loved or hated around the World. We are the still basicly The Worlds "police," but it has to have a strategic interest to the US. We just can't go into Darfur because it makes us feel good, because Kooks like Conroe's Bill Barnes will soon be complaining about that as well, especially if it makes President Bush look good.

Saturday, May 26, 2007

Conroe KOOK Bill Barnes 'Believes Every Word His Environmentalist Wacko Bishop Al Gore Says'

The Bulletin Publisher and Editor Mike Ladyman may have taken a week off in printing anti-American propaganda in honor of Memorial Day, but the kooks who regularly write letters to him have not made the same deal.

Conroe kook Bill Barnes, who is an ever believer in the church of global warming, takes on all-comers whenever the bishop of his environmentalists wacko church, Al Gore, is attacked in any way. The receipient of Barnes rath is Steve Casey from Stonewall, Louisiana, who "wrote in the April 6 Bulletin, noting a similarity between “the hoax” of global warming and “the farce” of Y2K."

The kook Barnes writes, "Mr. Casey's analogy between possible over-reacting to the perceived threat of inconvenient costly computer chaos and the very real and scientifically proven threat of life-threatening, catastrophic global warming is weak and Ill-conceived." Undoubtedly Barnes, has changed his tune from his old communist loving days, which most wacko environmentalists have switched over from in an everlasting effort to control our lives from the cars we drive to how many breaths the Democrats will "authorize" us to take in the future.

Barnes complains of Mr. Casey not having any "documentation" to support his cause, but their is plenty out there for those who really want to find out the truth. If there is anyone who does not provide any "documentation" it is Al Gore himself. In his worthless book "Earth in the Balance," commonly referred by Conservatives as "Earth in the Learch," Gore does not include one scientific reference to back up his assertions.

In his worthless book, Gore called for the Earth mission of an "environmentalism of the spirit." Casey is right in bringing up the money angle to "the global warming bandwagon." The liberal consensus of "scientists who want their projects financed must go with the cash-flow.” They know the facts when it comes to man-made global warming, compared to natures emissions, man's contribution is miniscule, something like 4% of all emissions the World, including what nature puts out.

So how does the Conroe kook Bill Barnes rebut Casey, with worthless tripe of course and not with science. Who cares how much was donated to whom, where is your science Mr. Bill "Kook" Barnes. I guarantee you that President Bush's ranch in Crawford is much more environmentally friendly than Al Gore's mansion in Tennessee, which virtually requires its own power station since Gore uses twenty times the average household in a single month.

It seems to me that Al Gore is nothing more than a "do as I say, not as I do liberal." It also seems to me that Mr. Bill Barnes of Conroe, herein known as "The Kook," can quote just about every argument outside of the science realm to justify his rage at man's so-called "raping" of the planet.

How the hell wacko environmentalists such as Al Gore, and The Kook Bill Barnes have been able to promote their cause this winter and spring has to boggle one's mind. This year's winter has been one of the coldest on record, in both the Northern and Southern Hemispheres. In Conroe, we have had nightime lows in the 50s in this month of May, which to many of us is unheardof. In Anchorage this winter, fire hydrants were bursting from the cold. Two global warming researchers were forced to call off their mission to the North, when they got "frost-bite" of all things, the Canadian seal hunt had to be delayed or cancelled because the fleet was trapped in ice. In fact, multiple global warming conferences scheduled this past winter were cancelled because of "the cold."

In the Southern Hemisphere, a South Africa newspaper reported last week "winter has started to take hold of the country as very cold conditions are expected over the central interior of South Africa this week," and this has begun to affect crops and give South Africans their own big chill.

If any of you see "The Kook" Barnes this week or next, ask him how the Sun plays out in the Global Warming debate. It does cycle, which causes the Earth to warm or cool over hundreds or thousands of years. Ask "The Kook" how does rain factor into global warming? Or better yet, ask "The Kook" "how did man get an SUV on Mars?" because their polar ice caps are melting too.

The Kook will not be able to fight you with facts on science. He'll tell you how "Philip Morris, R.J. Reynolds, Chevron, Exxon, Shell Oil, Tenneco Gas, American Petroleum Institute, Amoco and Atlantic Richfield," all "contributed heavily to Bush/Cheney'04."

The Kook will complain that you that you are contributing to global warming, that "NASCAR fans, churchgoers, labor-union members, small businessmen, engineers, hunters, sportsmen," all are contributing to global warming. And not to mention, ask The Kook if he uses one-square of toilet paper, and suffers from a case of the "sticky-butt."

Ask The Kook if “An Inconvenient Truth” were made by George W. Bush rather than Al Gore, how much of "a testimony to our duty as stewards of the earth God," would it be. See environmentalism is a religion -- Earth is their God, or was it Bill Clinton, Al Gore, or Barack Obama, I can't remember.

The Kook Bill Barnes really sums up how desperate or stupid he is in writing this statement, "watch Al Gore's gift to mankind and decide for yourself before it's too late," for Earth's sake (not Christ's of course).

I'm sure The Kook would have wrote if he thought he would get away with it, "please watch Al Gore's gift to mankind and decide for yourself before it's too late, the Earth only has 90 days to live."

The Kooks final plea to Conroe's stupid, please "rise above politics and religion," please support my environmental bishop Al Gore, and "don't be deluded by charlatans like Glen Beck or Rush Limbaugh." It is pathetic isn't it.

I suppose The Kook Bill Barnes would at least listen to liberal talk radio if they could keep it on the air for liberal talk radio, Air America included, has been a dismal failure. The Kook ought to listen to Beck and Limbaugh, and maybe, just maybe, he might just smarten up.

Monday, May 21, 2007

If Bush is No Churchill, then Clinton is No Kennedy (Nor John Holmes)

In Salon.com's "Last refuge of the scoundrel," which is labeled "Bush Ain’t No Churchill And Iraq Ain’t No World War II... But Don’t Tell That to the G.O.P.," in this weeks The Bulletin, in which Publisher and Editor Mike Ladyman tries to pass on as his own, the statements are rather lame on the part of the liberal Democrats or Progressives, or whatever the want themselves to be referred.

I do believe that Democrats "are a cross between Benedict Arnold and Tokyo Rose," but I don't believe that a majority of the American people are traitors. Deep down, I believe they want to win the war, and have peace. And believe me, peace thru dialogue will not work. Just as the people of the Czechoslovakia found out in 1938.

I think many Americans are misinformed by a purposely misleading propagandists liberal media,
Mike Ladyman included, which gives them power in the Press with the hopeful achievement of controlling the White House, the Congress, the Courts, just as the Nazis did in the early 1930's with their control of an entire people in every aspect of their lives, including their thoughts.

I guarantee you, as a loyal American, as a Taxpayer, the GOP, the Republican Party (once they get off their duffs and get on the right track), will do the right thing, especially with this illegal immigration issue. NO AMNESTY!!!

I challenge every Democrats patriotism. Look, when you have the Democrat civilian Leadership saying "WE CAN'T WIN THIS WAR," what would you rather have -- someone with the qualities of PM Churchill, as we have seen in President Bush, or someone with the surrender qualities of Marshal P├ętain, like the leadership of the Democrat party as we have seen with Liberal Senator Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi.

I wonder how many Americans have been rethinking their 2006 votes when they heard or read "Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's statement, "As long as we follow the president's path in Iraq, the war is lost,"" or how many Black's are thinking of switching back to the Republican Party when they realize how their voices will be trampled down by millions of newly legalized illegally-based citizens. I truly believe the Democrats know not what they do.

But you know what the kicker is, the Democrats are in power. Yet they won't suggest anything other than losing the war as long as its saddled on Bush. Because if we run from the WOT like we ran in Somalia, we invite one or two more 9/11's, perhaps even a nuclear 9/11, which can never be blamed on President Bush. The Democrat's French-like statements of weakness are incredible. Doesn't anybody have a memory.

Does anybody remember when President Bush 41 was running for office, how he was label by the liberal media as a "wimp" on National Defense. How far we have come when the Democrats can openly herald "We've lost the war," and stage worthless votes on bringing the troops home and cutting off funding. Each and every Democrat would sell their Mother to the Devil if they could regain control of all branches of the Government.

What's missing from Salon.com's worthless tripe is the word "Vietnam," a time when liberals believed that the "best and brightest" were not fighing in 'Nam, but protesting in our city streets and universities across the United States. The liberals of today want to relive those days, but the magic has been lost, due to blogs, old age, and some changing of wills. The media couldn't bring down the war like Kronkite did in one broadcast in 1968.

It has taken four years of totally negative broadcasting that makes the whole WOT look lost, when truth be told, an American soldier has a greater chance of being killed in New York City than he does in Iraq.

For Christ's sake, we've had the coolest winter on record for ages, and no liberal even mentions anything about "man-made global warming" being a fraud, we've had only a little more than 3,000 killed in Iraq, no liberal even begins to rage about the 7,000 US deaths annually from Rx mistakes made from doctors bad handwriting.

For Salon.com or Ladyman's The Bulletin readers to buy any of this crap, they have to be totally brainwashed. They must be stupid to first, not have a sense of history, and second, not have a sense of what a people with a radical belief in Islam are capable of doing -- which we saw on 9/11. Seeing as most liberals don't believe in God, but instead they believe in Bill Clinton or Barack Obama, two living constitutions if I ever saw one (like Hitler or Jim Jones). But what happens when that leader dies, the whole movement falls apart. That's why we have a Constitution in the first place, so no one man or Democrat party can rest control over the whole government.

I'm glad the Bush Administration has labeled President Carter as "increasingly irrelevant" after he said Bush's administration had been the "worst in history." To me, that's shows desperation. For instance, a Conroe area soccer team recently won the State Championship in soccer for their age group. They beat an all Hispanic team from a South Texas border town that had not lost all season, and that STX team beat all their opponents in convincing shutouts. The STX team had it in their minds that they already won the state championship, that they were just to show up and receive the trophy when they get to the State Championship site.

The Conroe area team on the other hand had some shutouts, but lost one game and tied one game. They weren't the biggest team on the field, nor were they the strongest. But they did have a strong passion for the game and trust in their teammates and coach. Something the Democrats don't have. The Conroe team is about half White and half Hispanic, which is a great mix, and they all get along really well.

My point is, if the coach of the Conroe area team had looked at the other team from STX and their record, and said "we can't win," then left the field of battle. Then how would Conroe have ever known if their team could have ever beaten the STX team without trying. In the end, the coach of the STX team and the players were making mistakes in a desperate effort to win late in the game, and making statements like Jimmy Carter's worthless tripe.

If only the Democrats could look at little kids soccer teams that faced insurmountable odds, and yet still prevailed, we possibly could have won the War on Terror by now.

Tuesday, May 15, 2007

"Rudy's New Low" Completely Plagiarized from Salon.com 'Can "The Bulletin" ever come up with an original thought'

Low and behold, will The Bulletin Publisher and Editor Mike Ladyman ever give credit to pre-published articles in his liberal rag.

This time Ladyman takes his cue from Salon.com and their piece "A new low for Giuliani," which looks a lot like Ladyman's copied "Rudy’s New Low: Giulani Attacks Dems to Cover Up his 9/11 Mistakes." Now I know that all liberals think alike, but this is a little ridiculous.

In even reviewing the tripe that was posted, I asked my myself, "when it comes to criticizing Democrats, will liberals eat their own?" I mean, you will never read of Ladyman writing (or plagiarizing for that fact) about Louisiana Democrat William Jefferson and the FBI investigating him for his hiding of $90,000 in cold cash in his freezer from some scandal. You won't read of Nevada Democrat Senator "Dingy" Harry Reid and his very questionable land deals, or Jack Murtha and his abscam fame, or Nancy Pelosi and Diane Feinstein, and their crafting of legislation specifically designed to benefit their husband's businesses.

No, with liberals, it's all about "macaca" and "Mark Foley" and that stupid part of the electorate that believes anything the liberal media tells them.

But you will never read any of that by the hand of Montgomery County liberal Propaganda Minister Mike Ladyman. He does not take into account liberal indiscretions; only the few Conservative ones. Mike lies to me and you just as he lied to his grade school friends about not having any cookies to share at lunchtime. If anyone is "selling out" America -- it's Mike Ladyman.

Come to think of it, with Mike Ladyman or his staff, they've probably never have come up with an original thought in their lives to present to their readers, seeing as I've already come up with another example of them copying a piece to their wordprocessor, and this time not even modifying it to at least try and pass it off as their own.

The story in Media Matters titled "MSNBC discussed Giuliani's attack on Democrats over terrorism, did not question Giuliani's own record on terrorism," may or may not have started it all, but Salon.com finished it, and Ladyman copied it given his readers the idea that he came up with it himself. If it was me being copied, I know I would be pissed. My stuff has been republished before, and the proper notations made.

So what's the big deal about what The Bulletin is doing. The deal is, whether it's Mark Williams or Ladyman, they are not being honest in their work, or their intentions in regards to the reader. It's incredible how liberal Democrats still seek to destroy President Bush with their rhetoric, but when true history is finally written (free of today's liberal spin machine), he will be regarded as a great President.

The first GOP debate was about the liberal moderators and not about the Republican candidates. I would have loved for one of the candidates to say "pardon me, is President Bush in this race, or are we going to talk about the future of this great country." At least the GOP candidates had the guts to go on a leftist cable network for their debate. Of course, Ladyman won't tell you that the Democrat presidential candidates fear of Fox News forced them to refuse to go on the top cable news network for a debate for fear of getting some hardball questions.

One thing is clear about a Democrat 2008 White House victory. If they win, they will have won by using propaganda. They will not have been able to tell the truth about their agenda for fear of being scorned and laughed at.

You can already see signs from the 2006 elections. Of course, for the last two weeks of the election, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid were totally out of sight. The Democrats ran Conservative candidates in the House and Senate, and they basicly had no theme for the election. No catch-phrase to propel them to victory. The liberals won on virtually nothing -- hot air if you will. Would you think the Democrats had won if they sent out the message, that they are sending out today. The message of "we want to lose in Iraq," and we are going to stop funding this war because we think you will still vote for us -- you dopes.

Yes, a liberal 2008 White House victory will definitely scream to al-Qaeda and the rest of the world that the United States is a weak country, weaker than we have ever been by electing a woman or black Democrat President. Now that doesn't make me a racist, I would still vote for a Conservative woman or black GOP nominee, but electing Mrs. Bill Clinton or Barack Obama -- PLEASE!!

Look, the words "nuclear terrorism" are slowly making their way to the forefront of our society. And our appeasement to terrorism, and not to mention, appeasing nuclear or soon to be nuclear nations such as North Korea and Iran, and if the lessons of World War II are not heeded, then we are all screwed.

Keep it up liberals. Continue to avoid the lessons that brought about WWII, and you will bring about our destruction by the hands those terrorists who believe in God more than you, and are more than willing to die for their God more than you are willing to die for you God(s) -- Bill Clinton, for the Blacks, and Barack Obama, for guilty white interlopers like Mike Ladyman.

Thursday, May 10, 2007

Bush Approval Numbers Show how Flawed Polls are in the Days with Dwindling Telephone Landlines in Homes (Cell phone only homes never get polled)

Thank God that President George W. Bush is not liberal and is not mastered by approval polls. If Bush were Clintonesk, we would have already withdrawn from the War on Terror by now.

Let's be honest. For the truly educated our there, you know that pollsters already have a conclusion in mind even before the first poll question is asked, and whether the respondents answer the way the pollster wishes or not, the liberal media headline is still going to read: Bush's approval rating falls to 28%.

Polls todays are made up news that stand in for real news. If they are not totally fake they are vastly skewed. My God, President Clinton had poll numbers in the low 70's following impeachment, and the man never go 50% of the Presidential vote.

Polls are manufactured according to the questions asked in the poll. For instance, if worded right, a poll could make Adolf Hitler look out to be one of the world's greatest humanitarians when we all know he killed millions. So when I see President Bush having approvals in the 30's or 20's, I say please. Even the man's base would not desert him in droves.

I know in the future, that GWB will be regarded as a great President in the future, just as approvals Clinton in the 70's will pan out to him being an average President in the future. In effect, the spin machine cannot go on forever.
In this age of 'cell phone and VoIP only' households pollsters only use landlines to contact their respondents, many people are being left out of polling, which vastly skews the polls in favor of the liberals. And guess whose home with their landlines during the day -- senior citizens and the non-workers. Yes, the Oprah watchers, the drive-by media watchers, are there answering the poles, and making it look like our country is falling apart.

But even if the liberal media were allowed to contact any available number and get all the information they needed fairly -- would anything change?

Tuesday, May 08, 2007

Happy V-E Anniversary Day

Sixty-two years ago today, the world learned that Europe was finally free and ushered in was the beginning of the end of World War II. Today, liberals will call it a 'day of shame' for the guilt they reserve over the greatness of the United States.

Now, if our liberal Democrats of today were in charge back in WWII with their attitudes, they would have said that the "war was lost" following the Battles off Guadal Canal, Midway. By then, we had way more than 3,000 dead, and it was still early in that war. It makes one wonder, if Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid were in charge back then, would the US be speaking German or Japanese?

I've often asked myself and others, and I ask you today, "what is the consequence to war?" The liberal will tell you -- death. But that is simple and naive. War is a dirty business, and the United States has no reason to be the "agressor nation." We have no reason to be imperialist like we were back during the Spanish-American War, but that was the nature of the World back then. The US is obligated to protect what is ours and our children's future no matter where that may be in the World, and all this liberal crap of cutting and run, withdrawing our soldiers, and defunding our troops, hurts the chances for prosperity in the future. Appeasement gives al-Qaeda more hope, and makes them more aggressive.

The US has grown so much since WWII, that today the liberals of today may not know one soldier, and they definitely have a different attitude since military families are few and far between. During WWII we had over 10 million men under arms, today its closer to 1.5, so the liberals can gamble that their constiuencies have no contact or don't care for the miltary, and liberals can see the US military as the enemy rather than al-Qaeda.

Has the liberal of today ever suffered? Do they have a grasp of history -- they don't. Just look at Wheel of Fortune when the players are forced to answer simple social studies questions and they come up empty. That there defines the state of US public education. Accountability, not more money in education, is what is needed.

In today's history books, Lincoln gets a paragraph, we get nothing on the Spanish-American War or World War I. WWII gets a sentence or two. American aggression on Vietnam gets a paragraph, valiant Vietnam War protesters get a whole page, and the policies of President Clinton get a chapter minus stains on the blue dress. In mathematics, its even worse. No wonder the World's students run rings around us.

So what is the consequence to war? I say PEACE. It is something that liberals will not understand because they don't have the proper grasp of history.

I'll put it together in a cancer analogy. The cancer (al-Qaeda) invades or provokes the host (the US) with its weapons (cancer cells), and the host suffers. The host fights back with its own weapons (chemotherapy), but the host body is weakened, and the left side of the host's brain (the liberals) calls for the chemotherapy to be stopped and withdrawn, the host is suffering to much, the war is lost and the host dies. But for the host to win, it has to suffer, and the the right side of the host's brain (the Conservatives) hold on for dear life that for one day the cancer will be defeated via patience, determination, and lots of chemotherapy.

Don't ask me, even though I survived my cancer. Ask Lance Armstrong. It is possiible to win today's war.

The liberals have made us run from wars before -- Vietnam, Somalia. Millions died in the killing fields following our withdrawal from Southeast Asia. Somalia continues to be a hell-hole today, because less than twenty of our best and brightest died in battle. Blood which can be linked to the liberals hands because they walked away from the fight for democracy. And they call themselves Democrats.

War will always be a necessary evil to achieve peace in a world "governed by the use of force." Thank God the US has the best trained men and women, the best equipment possible to prosecute the war. The only thing lacking is the total will of the America people and its media. I certainly hope that the grandparents, and great-grandparents of today that helped support and win WWII are thoroughly ashamed of their grandchild and great-grandchild liberals that persecute our war effort today.

One thing that was not asked and liberals will never ask, "what are the consequences of appeasement and cutting and running from al-Qaeda." The liberal will say PEACE. If we leave the battlefield, stupid liberal Democrats argue that al-Qaeda will stay in place and not chase us back to the US. Folks, they are already here. Iran and North Korea will be emboldened to continue to develop their programs free of World interference.

In actuality, the consequences of appeasement and cutting and running from al-Qaeda, will usher in the era of nuclear terrorism, whether it be a radiological bomb (a poor-man's nuke) or a full suitcase nuke that will kill thousands instantly, and cause havoc with our economy perhaps for decades. That also will be blood on the liberal's hands.

God Bless the United States, and liberals be damned.

Monday, May 07, 2007

'The Bulletin' Offers No Janet Reno Input When Crucifying AG Gonzales

Has Attorney General Alberto Gonzales returned a little kid who arrived on our shores from a communist nation back to a communist country. Has Attorney General Alberto Gonzales murdered citizens while carrying weapons on their own property such as with David Koresh's gang in Waco, or parts of Randy Weaver's family at Ruby Ridge. HELL NO!

Was Attorney General Alberto Gonzales part of an Administration that fired every US Attorney for personal reasons when existing US Attorneys were hurting the interest of the Clinton Administration. HELL NO! And I won't even bring up Chinagate, and how that was brushed aside by Janey Reno, the Attorney General for Clinton.

Yes, in the latest bilge from our good friends at The Bulletin we get "Enough is Enough: Gonzales Has Got to Go -- And It's Up to the New Congress to See That it Happens," which labels Attorney General Alberto Gonzales as a "clueless, hapless figurehead," Republicans as wrongdoers, Democrats as angelic, and they have to go back to the Nixon Administration to find any so-called "official misconduct" that was just as egregious in a Presidential Administration.

We all know that The Bulletin labels themselves as 'Alternative' in our overwhelmingly Conservative Montgomery County. But for those liberal Democrats who wish to be taken under the umbrella of The Bulletin's liberal breath, let it be known that you either know that you are being lied to, and/or you plain just don't care.

Our good friends at The Bulletin, Mike the publisher, and Mark the plagiarizer, have to think of themselves as the 'liberal souls' of Conroe and Montgomery County. They can be seen as the great withholders of pertinent information that would educate its readership. Just as slaveowners sought not to teach their slaves to read for fear of mass revolt, so to The Bulletin ensures that its slavish readers are kept dumb seeing as an educated liberal democrat will eventually turn Republican.

As one who knows that newspaper and television news are a product just as much as canned vegetables and cereals are stocked in the aisles of Kroger's, HEB, and Budget Chopper, it boggles my mind why our good friends at The Bulletin cater to only 18% - 22% of Montgomery County residents. To me that is bad for business, and for our friends to change their mind and their entire way of thinking they would have to undergo an intervention. It reminds me of the old adage that it takes less muscles to smile than to frown, so why overwork.

Look, if Gonzales were truly guilty, he would have been gone by now. Hardly anyone brings the facts of Clinton's replacing every US Attorney when he moved into the White House, a move I would have supported Bush doing at the beginning of his term.

Quite simply, you cannot trust the liberals, or liberal appointees. You cannot trust the liberal bureaucracy, who believe their jobs are more important than the safety of the nation. You cannot trust liberals with our national security, for they see the US as more of the enemy than they do al-Qaeda.

I don't only blame the liberals for this Gonzales incident, I blame the Bush Administration too for being so damn nice to liberals. So many times they could have blown questions out of the water -- but they are so 'goddamned' nice. And that can be frustrating at times.

This whole so-called "scandal" has truly been manufactured seening as everything that Bush takes part in has to be seen as scandal by the drive-by liberal media. Those US Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President, and one or two even were due to be replaced.

Have you noticed the increased amount of "oversight" we are getting from the current do-nothing liberal Congress? The perjury traps set are ridiculous. That's how they got Scooter Libby, whose testimony was based on no crime at all.

There are a lot of stupid people out there. Thankfully most of them are Democrats, who still believe the Duke lacross boys guilt even when proven innocent, and they equally condemn Tom Delay for his so-called 'proven' unjudged offenses. That's why we have two justice systems. The courtroom of public opinion held by the drive-by liberal media, and the actual courts governed by our Constitution, which is sometimes battered but for the most part intact.

Its incredible that I haven't even mentioned race yet. If Gonzales were a liberal under a liberal Administration this whole thing wouldn't even be news. In fact, if Gonzales were a liberal, it would be the fired US Attorneys who would be under fire, and the motivation for the story.

But no, AG Gonzales is not a liberal, and The Bulletin is "telling him to resign." You know, the silence of the Hispanic community is deafening, but that usually happens when non-liberal minorities make it without the help of the Democrat Party.

Sunday, May 06, 2007

35% Democrats (17% of them American) Think Bush Let 9/11 Happen (and French Elections)

A recent Rassmussen Report poll noted that 35% of Democrats think that GWB knew of the 9/11 in advance. Of course this poll will be hailed as the greatest evidence against Bush from our friends at The Bulletin and the liberal drive-by media.

To selectively believe the poll, then you have to totally ignore the suggestions that FDR knew in advance of the attacks on Pearl Harbor, the PI, etc. in December 1941. In all reality in this regard, the thinking that the FDR Administration knew in advance of Japanese attacks may have some plausibility -- multiple war warnings had been issued. But hardcore historians on the subject may more than likely believe that the FDR Administration believed that the Japanese would attack The Phillipines due to its proximity to Japan, and its war making capabilities aside from Pearl Harbor with its compliment of US Army Air Corp planes and the US Navy Asiatic Fleet stationed at Cavite Navy Yard.

Now if the US Pacific Fleet HQ had not moved from San Diego to Pearl Harbor in May 1940, perhaps the main thrust of the December 1941 Japanese attacks would have been pointed at the PI or the attack would have been delayed or perhaps not have taken place at all, but after all, history is history.

This poll exactly defines how kooks such as the MoveOn.orgers and other Soros types have taken over the Democrat Party. Just as our CIA knew back in the days of JFK that the USSR was a paper tiger, I'm placing my "sure thing" bet that the Democrat kook fringe, the drive-by liberal media, of which The Bulletin is apart of, will soon falter, and evidence of that can be seen in the recent French elections.

For Christ's sake, 85% of the French voted over the weekend, and a pro-US French President was elected. What do you expect when France is being relieved of its "Frenchness" by the socialists and immigrants who don't wish to assimilate, those who think ill will of the French teet from which they suck, and seek to poison the rest of the population with their insanity.

When the liberal drive-by media can only muster 22% of Americans to think that Bush let 9/11 happen, you know they have to be failing in their Stalinists endeavor. Like the USSR, the drive-by liberal media, The Bulletin included, is a paper tiger. Thank God they continue to lose readership at every six-month reporting period. And to survive, the drive-by liberal media will one day have to start telling "the truth," because their biggest reader and viewership, gullible senior citizens, who don't research on their own, are slowing dying off.

And guess who the drive-by liberal media and The Bulletin blames for their problems-- YOU, because you are too stupid to understand the liberal medias way of thinking.

Saturday, May 05, 2007

The Bulletin's Ladyman Doesn't Know A Damn Thing About The Liberal Media

One of the small consolations that I can take now with the current liberal media and liberal small-wigs like The Bulletin's Publisher and Editor Mike Ladyman is that they cannot control what historians write in the future.

Did you know that
President Harry Truman had an approval rating of 22-23% near the end of his Presidency. He had his problems as well as the Korean Conflict, which was considered unpopular back then as well. And now they have an aircraft carrier named after him -- the HST.

Dick Morris has written about categorizing presidents into four tiers:
First Tier - Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Wilson, & FDR.
Second Tier - Teddy Roosevelt, Truman & Ronald Reagan.
Third - Kennedy, Johnson, GHW Bush.
Fourth - Every other uneventful President, including Clinton.

Clinton had asked Morris about what it took to be considered first tier and Morris told Clinton that he would never be regarded as first tier because he never won a war. Of course we all know that Clinton's legacy will always revolved around oral sex and Monica.

While reading
Ladyman's bunk "Everybody's Talking: How the Media has Dropped the Ball When it Comes to Bush" it was like I was reading an old edition of the communist Pravda newspaper. As one who has been in a communist country, I've seen the empty shelves in person, and the next thing you know Ladyman will be tauting how the Cuban healthcare system can run rings around our own Texas Medical Center.

Has
Ladyman ever said one positive thing about the United States? No doubt one the first things he must have thought after he learned about the 9/11 attacks, "damn, now Bush's approval numbers are going to skyrocket." You see with liberals -- everything, and I mean everything -- is seen through a political prism.

I remember back in the days before Nelson Mandela was released from prison. Liberal Democrats were oozing about spreading democracy around the world. My God, since 9/11 the United States has liberated tens of millions from dictatorial rule and since it was a Republican Presidents administration that accomplished the feat liberals have been dead quiet on the subject. And that goes for a plethora of topics such as the economy, high tax revenues coming in due to tax cuts, etc.

Can you imagine how the liberal media would be dumbfoundingly falling over themselves to praise a President Gore or Kerry for the same actions that President Bush has taken. Again, there goes that political prism.

Look,
Ladyman would have you believe that we should have never gone into Iraq because as he says "Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11. Enough said." Look, if Bush would have appeased Saddam, the Iraqi dictator would be well on his way, if not already have nuclear weapons. And get this, if Bush would not have gone into Iraq, those same liberals and Ladyman would be demanding in their tripe-ridden post that action against Iraq be taken. See, President Bush, can do no right when it comes to liberals. If Bush came out and said that man was completely responsible for global warming, the liberal press would go out and find the rightful information on the true cause, our lifegiver -- the Sun.

Now what would you rather have: a dead Saddam, or an alive Saddam of whom Mrs. Bill Clinton said in 2003 in a speech to Code Pink on disarming Saddam, "I have absolutely no belief that he will" disarm. She went on to say in the same speech, "if he were serious about disarming, he would have been much more forthcoming. I ended up voting for the resolution after carefully reviewing the information, intelligence that I had available, talking with people whose opinions I trusted, tried to discount the political or other factors that I didn't believe should be in any way a part of this decision. I would love to agree with you, but I can't based on my own understanding and assessment of the situation."

Of course now Mrs. Bill Clinton is singing a new tune in 2007 to appease the George Soros leftist crowd, but she had the same intelligence as all our Allies had back in 2003, and WMDs don't just disappear into Syria, oops, I mean into the Iraqi desert with some coordination where American soldiers can't find them.

Ladyman has to be the most depressed castrati in Montgomery County. He blames the liberal media for failing to have President Bush impeached for his war crimes. The "Bush administration lies and distortions went unchallenged or were actively promoted." I honestly believe that if Ladyman would come across information of a al-Qaeda terrorist plot to attack the Conroe Wal-Mart on a crowded Saturday, going to the FBI or Conroe Police would be the farthest thing from his mind, and Mike instead would be ready for exclusive news reporting with camera in hand, and e-mails to Al-Jazeera and CNN ready to go to show the blood and gore pictures, just as they willingly show video of American soldiers being sniped.

Toyko Rose Ladyman is definitely frustrated over the liberal medias "inability to determine just why this disastrous war was ever launched." Again, a total inability to connect with the truth on Mike's part. I mean, does this guy have any friends? Does he smile or laugh?

You have to be in denial to say that "Congress rolled over and gave Bush authorization to go to war." We all knew, those of us in the real world, that this war is going to be different from any other war the United States had ever fought. Ladyman's reliving of the glory days of Vietnam activism are far different from today. Appeasement will not bring "peace for our time" such as Neville Chamberlain thought following the Munich Agreement.

How the hell do you appease an enemy whose only item at the peace table calls for all American infidels (those "without faith") to be slaughtered.

For instance, al-Qaeda hates all homosexuals. If the United States appeased them and gave them all American homosexuals, once the last homosexual was killed, they would come back to the table and demand "give us all your feminists." OK, we give them all American feminists. Hmm, maybe al-Qaeda does have a point?

Then the Supreme Court would have to get involved and define who is "one without faith." Definitely the Madalyn Murray O'Hair atheist types would have to go, the wacko enviromentalists would have to go, and the vast majority of liberals. All would be slaughtered for appeasement.

Of course that was tongue-in-cheek, but my point is that American liberalism is bent that they can't see the forest for the trees. Al-Qaeda literally wants to die to kill us, and when that first terrorists nuke hits, even you might be singing a different tune. We can hope.

I've seen war, young kids torn apart and killed, and I tell you we ought to be grateful that only 3,000 Americans have been killed. Hell, during World War II, it was common to lose many times that during major engagements.

I'm tired of liberal Democrats and their selective outrage when it comes to American deaths in the War on Terror. Christ, we have 7,000 Americans that die each year because pharmacist misread doctors shoddy handwriting. Should we withdraw doctors from their offices? We have tens of thousands that die in auto accidents each year. Should we go back to horse and buggy? And I won't even go into how the Democrats have aborted themselves into supporting illegal immigration.

I challenge your patriotism Mike Ladyman. You were obviously offended when Fox newscasters "sported American flag pins" during broadcast. No sir, they weren't "cheerleading for Bush administration policies," they were reporting the damn news and being American.

"It seems like the 9/11 attacks not only killed almost 3,000 Americans, but also killed the mainstream media's ability to challenge the administration." Your pathetic Ladyman. As I said before, liberals look through that political prism before they think anything else.

Walter Cronkite's "we are mired in stalemate" broadcast in late Feb. 1968 killed the Vietnam War in one newscast. This time, it has taken today's liberal media over three years of negative coverage, and still the War on Terror is not dead.

Ladyman, if there is anyone "bordering on treason" in reference to your views on Iraq and non-support of my country, it is you. Man, if we could bring back the Sedition Act of 1918 signed by DEMOCRAT President Wilson, I would have had your ass turned into the government long ago.

Thankfully Ladyman recognizes the "meteoric success" of Conservative media. He even spelled Rush Lmbaugh's and Ann Coultr's names correctly. Of course Mike won't mention the dismal failure of Air America Radio even after it was heavily promoted by the liberal media as an alternative to Conservative Talk Radio. No, he just uneventfully remarks "most of those bucks are on the right, not the left."

Ladyman never defines US failure in Iraq. Look, it took the US thirteen years to OK our own Constitution, it only took the Iraqi's three. They've held successful elections multiple times, yet Jimmy Carter still has to go to Africa to oversee elections. They have a working government that's trying its hardest, all the while putting up with daily violence equivalent to one day of our Virginia Tech Massacre. The Iraqi's are a free people free of a ruthless dictator, and as one who has seen a country start up overnight, I can tell you that all problems will not be solved overnight, in three, four, five, or even ten years. But I can tell you, it will get better -- even in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"One more reason for the media's Iraq failure," and Ladyman it is not "the Bush administration," it is not even "the mainstream media" themselves. It is the fault of stupid Americans like you Mike Ladyman. Americans who refuse to believe in the greatness of America. Americans like yourself who have that "can't do" spirit. Americans who fall for the liberal line hook, line, and sinker, just as the Hitler Youth were loyal to the death for Hitler. Your guilt overides you each day because you believe the United States has so much and the World has so little, and that it is not fair in your book. Meanwhile you overlook the transgressions of dictators and revel with jealousy at the power they command.

Going back to my small consolations that I take with the liberal media and liberals like Mike Ladyman about the unborn historians of the future. President Bush, at the end of his term, may have approval ratings similiar to that of President Truman's 22-23%, but you can be damned sure that Bush will be at least a Second Tier President, if not First Tier, that he had his problems as well as the War on Terror, which was considered unpopular back then. And that they will have an aircraft carrier named after him -- the GWB.