Say Anything has some good observations about the hospital that incinerates aborted babies with the trash:
http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/culture_of_abortion/
This is a must read to get updated on current attitudes toward legalized murder.
We already know that politics in South Carolina are just as corrupt as elsewhere in the country - or in the world for that matter. Does anyone recall how the state went after video poker because of its alleged violation of South Carolina’s anti-gambling laws? Remember how the very second the video poker industry was shut down that we started hearing the drumbeat calls for a state lottery? The illiterate dufusses here in South Carolina swallowed the whole thing just about as easily as they swallowed the recent bogus property tax relief.
We were told that the lottery would benefit those seeking higher education in the state. Those that had no means to attend college could get a chance through lottery-funded scholarships. Sounded great and the ignorant masses voted the lottery in. That was then.
This is now. Finally a newspaper has printed what we knew would happen, know is happening, and know will happen: Tuition has soared at an uncontrolled, unjustifiable, and out-of-proportional rate since the Education Lottery began. Now, the only way to get tuition to be about the same as it is in other states is with lottery scholarships. We know that not everyone can get a lottery scholarship, so we thus understand that the net result of the Education Lottery is less education and more money flooding the coffers of the institutional and governmental big-wheels.
Once more, I am left to wonder: Am I the only one who understands that government always makes things worse?
Read the article HERE.
http://www.beaufortgazette.com/local_news/story/6189119p-5410966c.html
From the BBC:
I guess the warnings worked so well the first time….
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6059240.stm
N Korea warned over second test
North Korea has been warned against conducting a second test of a nuclear weapon, as the US said expectations of a new test happening were “reasonable”.
“It would not be a good thing for them, but it certainly would not be out of character,” the White House said.
France said it would demand an even stronger response than the UN sanctions imposed after the first 9-October blast if the North carried out a new test.
North Korea has dubbed those sanctions a declaration of war, state media says.
Pyongyang also warned of “merciless” blows against any country infringing on its sovereignty, the official KCNA news agency reported.
On Monday, US intelligence officials confirmed for the first time that last week’s underground explosion had been nuclear. “
Read the rest of the article HERE: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6059240.stm
It starts in the Oval Office with El Presidente and apparantly permeates every level. This time it was Secretary of State Rice endorsing the sodomite lifestyle and its associated undermining American society. The Republicrat traitors in charge came up with a sodomite openly living with another sodomite in open abomination for all to see. This sodomite is now in charge of AIDS initiatives and they are stealing your wages and mine to support this person.
That WorldNet Daily reports this news is a good thing because you won’t see this in the Drive-By Media.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52472
WND Rice’s approving ‘gay’ remarks rankle GOP base
Secretary welcomed new AIDS ambassador’s ‘mother-in-law’
Posted: October 17, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
The Bush administration’s swearing-in of an openly homosexual global AIDS ambassador and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s approving remarks during the ceremony about his lifestyle are reflective of a Republican party “identity crisis,” say some family advocates in the nation’s capital.
While the party wants the support of “values voters,” it also is courting homosexuals and seems willing to appease the movement’s radical agenda, USA Today said in a feature story.
Rice and first lady Laura Bush spoke for the administration at the Oct. 10 swearing-in at the State Department where Dybul was accompanied by his male partner, Jason Claire. Rice, during her comments, referred to the presence of Claire’s mother and called her Dybul’s “mother-in-law.”
According to the State Department transcript, Rice said:
Thank you. Thank you very much. I am truly honored and delighted to have the opportunity to swear in Mark Dybul as our next Global AIDS Coordinator. I am pleased to do that in the presence of Mark’s parents, Claire and Richard; his partner, Jason; and his mother-in-law, Marilyn. You have wonderful family to support you, Mark, and I know that’s always important to us. Welcome.
The use of a term normally reserved for legally married heterosexual families rankled Peter Sprigg, vice president for policy at the Family Research Council, who called Rice’s comments “profoundly offensive,” according to Agape Press.
The secretary’s remarks, he said, fly in the face of the Bush administration’s endorsement of a federal marriage protection amendment.
“We have to face the fact that putting a homosexual in charge of AIDS policy is a bit like putting the fox in charge of the henhouse,” said Sprigg. “But even beyond that, the deferential treatment that was given not only to him but his partner and his partner’s family by the Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is very distressing.”
Read the rest of this artice:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52472
Of course, while Sanford should not have appeared before this largely despotic group of racists anywhere, he should not give them the benefit of one moment of his thought until they end their disgraceful and babyish “Economic Boycott” of the Governor’s state.
What came out though is the fear: fear and anger that Sanford has the nerve to propose higher standards in education. Government education is a failure. If it was worth anything, its proponents would not be concerned about competition. Problem is, giving parents a choice in education will doom the unionized Democrat Socialist stranglehold that forces filthy, immoral, communist, politically correct indoctrination upon every child in the state.
“It still doesn’t fix the issue,” Shelton said. “Choice takes money out of the system; out of the public education system and gives it to a small set of young people and allows them to go to a private school. Which is fine. The challenge for a lot of us is taking money out of an already strapped public school system and giving it to a private school.”
The more strapped the Government School System in South Carolina becomes, the more it must make available school choice in the form of tax credits, rebates, or vouchers. South Carolina taxpayers are paying approximately $13,000 for each student’s inadequate education every year. This enormous sum overshadows the most of the state’s most elite private and prestiegious schools. In other words, the NAACP favors forced inadequate education for no other reason than political points. Every child in the state could attend a high quality private school for less than what the state is now paying. This saves the state money, while improving the lives of its young citizens. Most parents who cannot afford private school would welcome the Governor’s plan, taking the opportunity to help their children have a brighter future.
It’s time to stop the fear-mongering and let market forces decide the fate of government education and the welfare of our youth!
http://news.bostonherald.com/localPolitics/view.bg?articleid=162563
“The price of same-sex marriage is paid by the children,” said Romney during a brief but peppy speech from Boston duringa forum hosted by the Family Research Council. “The child’s development is enhanced by the nurturing of parents of both genders. Every child deserves a mother and a father.”
We have already begun to suffer from the wealthy elite South Carolinian’s property tax relief. What a shocker all the pathetic (and typical) property owners had when they discovered that tax relief meant a tax increase for all but the most wealthy in the state!!
They are at it again. A misleading and deceptive poll question on the ballet leads the typical voter to say, “Yes!” The State, however, exposes this cherade as just one more way the state seeks to bankroll a small minority of citizens (who need no public assistance to start with) at the expense of those working families that are in most need of relief.
The standard operating procedure of South Carolina government has become tricking average taxpayers into voting to raise their own taxes. Everyone in South Carollina Government from the Governor down to the janitor should be ashamed that our representatives would resort to such lewd tactics.
Why do the representatives promote such deception and betrayal? Probably because they will benefit from it as well!
Read the article, then vote NO to more state sponsored enrichment of the wealthy. Maybe one day we can get some real people to represent us and thus act in the interests of all the people.
On Nov. 7, the voters in South Carolina will have the opportunity to vote on an amendment to two articles of the state constitution. These articles deal with the valuation of property for tax purposes.
The explanation for Question 4 reads this way:
“This amendment will limit increases in the value of a parcel of real property for purposes of imposing the property tax to no more than fifteen percent every five years after the current value of the property has been adjusted: (1) to reflect improvements made to the parcel; (2) to reflect a decline in the value of the parcel; and (3) to reflect the value of the parcel when ownership of the property changes as the General Assembly by law defines such changes.”
Wow, the voter will think. I have an opportunity to limit my property taxes! I had better vote “Yes” on this amendment!
Well, this may not be the deal you think it is.
Several studies warn that capping the appraised value of property at no more than 15 percent increase over five years will result in higher taxes for most taxpayers. The artificial cap causes a shift of the tax liability from rapidly increasing properties to those that do not increase so quickly in value. In plain language, from the higher-income taxpayer to the lower-income taxpayer.
The chairman of the Greenville County Council says 62 percent of the properties in the county will see an increase caused by the reassessment cap. A study by Miley and Associates completed in March 2006 shows that $7.2 billion in taxable value will be shifted in just four counties: Beaufort, Berkeley, Florence and Richland. A study on a 15 percent cap in Beaufort County says, the higher rollback millage after capped reassessment means that many property owners will see a higher tax bill than they would have after conventional reassessment.
Why do these studies show that two out of three property owners will pay more taxes under the proposed cap? Local governments are required by state law to roll back their tax rate after each reassessment so that the same revenue is received to provide services. Protecting higher-valued properties will result in a higher-than-necessary tax rate on all properties. This includes automobiles, motorcycles, pickups and other forms of personal property.
Compounding the problem, business owners and renters will be hit with a double whammy: higher property taxes and higher sales taxes without the benefit of any rollback in school taxes. This cost will be passed to the consumer in the form of higher prices for goods and services.
So before you go to the polls on Nov. 7, think about your personal tax situation. Are you the one out of three taxpayers who will benefit from this amendment, or will you, like most South Carolina taxpayers, be left picking up the slack from the wealthy?
As if we didn’t know this already…
Shays Hits Hard In Page Scandal
Invokes Chappaquiddick In Rebuking Farrell; Polls Show Issue Not Helping Democrats
October 11, 2006
By DAVID LIGHTMAN, Washington Bureau Chief
WASHINGTON — When the congressional page scandal broke last month, Democrats across the country saw a chance to lambaste Republican leadership - including Diane Farrell, who called on House Speaker Dennis Hastert to step down.
But when Sen. Edward M. Kennedy came to Connecticut last week to help her campaign, Rep. Christopher Shays hit back.
“I know the speaker didn’t go over a bridge and leave a young person in the water, and then have a press conference the next day,” said Shays, R-4th District, referring to the 1969 incident in which the Massachusetts Democrat drove a car that plunged into the water and a young campaign worker died.
“Dennis Hastert didn’t kill anybody,” he added.
The latest from Democrat Scum Harry Reid:
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/10/11/D8KMJ8I00.html
AP Exclusive: Reid Got $1M in Land Sale
Oct 11 2:13 PM US/Eastern
By JOHN SOLOMON and KATHLEEN HENNESSEY
Associated Press Writers
WASHINGTON
Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid collected a $1.1 million windfall on a Las Vegas land sale even though he hadn’t personally owned the property for three years, property deeds show.
In the process, Reid did not disclose to Congress an earlier sale in which he transferred his land to a company created by a friend and took a financial stake in that company, according to records and interviews.
The Nevada Democrat’s deal was engineered by Jay Brown, a longtime friend and former casino lawyer whose name surfaced in a major political bribery trial this summer and in other prior organized crime investigations. He’s never been charged with wrongdoing _ except for a 1981 federal securities complaint that was settled out of court.
Land deeds obtained by The Associated Press during a review of Reid’s business dealings show:
_The deal began in 1998 when Reid bought undeveloped residential property on Las Vegas’ booming outskirts for about $400,000. Reid bought one lot outright, and a second parcel jointly with Brown. One of the sellers was a developer who was benefiting from a government land swap that Reid supported. The seller never talked to Reid.
_In 2001, Reid sold the land for the same price to a limited liability corporation created by Brown. The senator didn’t disclose the sale on his annual public ethics report or tell Congress he had any stake in Brown’s company. He continued to report to Congress that he personally owned the land.
_After getting local officials to rezone the property for a shopping center, Brown’s company sold the land in 2004 to other developers and Reid took $1.1 million of the proceeds, nearly tripling the senator’s investment. Reid reported it to Congress as a personal land sale.
The complex dealings allowed Reid to transfer ownership, legal liability and some tax consequences to Brown’s company without public knowledge, but still collect a seven-figure payoff nearly three years later.
Reid hung up the phone when questioned about the deal during an AP interview last week.
You are currently browsing the The TIW Blog weblog archives for October, 2006.
