About Me

Name: The New THOMA$...
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

"Shocking the Experts" (Again)

Posted by The New THOMA$ REPORT on Wednesday, August 20, 2008 5:10:22 PM
Why is it every time the economy gets better it "shocks" the experts? I thought they had their fingers "on the pulse" of the economy. I'm no economist, but I can "read the tea-leaves" and see that the economy, as a whole, is still intact, no matter how often the liberals try and convince us it isn't. Conservative economists such as Walter E. Williams and Thomas Sowell are NOT "shocked" at the direction the economy is taking because they have been trying to tell us about it for a long time; unfortunately, nobody is listening. (Investment Executive)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Zogby: McCain Takes the Lead

Posted by The New THOMA$ REPORT on Wednesday, August 20, 2008 5:05:41 PM
The Zogby Poll, which has been right when most others were wrong--says McCain has "surged ahead" of Obama by five points. "Five points!" Not a lot, but he is moving in the right direction. Maybe because people are beginning to realize he's an "empty suit" parroting what his "handlers" have taught him, but without a single good idea of his own. That he is a "dedicated socialist" who wants to take what you have earned and give it to the people who produce nothing, but who have a vote. A man who has NO experience and is "way above his pay grade" in all things presidential; a man who doesn't have a clue on what to do, but "speaks well" when he has a teleprompter and a speechwriter but who can't speak at all without it. I think the possibility of Obama ever being president is receding with every passing day, and every word out of his mouth--unless McCain torpedoes himself by choosing a pro-abortion vice-president. (News Max)

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Irresponsible Democrat Policies

Posted by The New THOMA$ REPORT on Tuesday, August 19, 2008 4:43:28 PM
If you had a pocketful of money you could spend, but it was starting to get low, you'd do something to replenish it, wouldn't you? The same applies to our supply of oil (the thing that has CREATED this prosperous country and which, if its cost continues to go up, will bankrupt it). But the Democrats, while they continue to USE oil, refuse to do ANYTHING to replenish our supplies, so we're forced to rely on foreign providers, many of whom HATE us. They won't let us drill ANYWHERE we run things. They won't let us build new oil refineries (for more than 30 years) while building Ethanol refineries by the hundreds. Their excuses for not building oil refineries just don't hold water if they're building ANY other kind. They think that, somehow, we'll find an alternative source of energy "from thin air" if "we wish hard enough." We've GOT oil! More than enough to run our economy for longer than any of us will live if they'll just let us go after it! Then people like a certain liberal/environmental extremist Colorado politician (Mark Udall, D-Co) who has been largely responsible for the BAN on drilling OR refining does commercials saying "we need to draw a line in the sand" as if HE was not "part of the problem! Sheesh! (Common Sense)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"Hate Writing?"

Posted by The New THOMA$ REPORT on Tuesday, August 19, 2008 4:40:32 PM
Is this illegal? Not if you ask a liberal. This writer is attempting to implicate Rush Limbaugh and other "conservative" personalities (probably me too, if he knew about me). Is this "hate writing?" If someone reads this and takes a shot at Rush or some other conservative, will this writer be responsible? He'll say no, but his very thesis says "yes." Be careful, liberals, what you write. It works both ways. If you see that as a threat, then so be it. Your seeing it so doesn't make it so. Has Rush EVER said "liberals ought to be shot?" No; only this writer. So should he be jailed? Just because Hannity said "there are some things worth fighting and dying for" doesn't mean he wants someone to kill a liberal, just that sometimes WARS are "just." Just because a deranged man reads conservative books and goes out and kills someone, does that make the writers guilty? What if someone read THIS article and went out and killed a conservative? Then he compares these serious conservatives to such as Howard Stern, who does NOTHING seriously, but does EVERYTHING to "shock.  Gawd, how stupid these people are! (Newsday)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The "Impossible Dream"

Posted by The New THOMA$ REPORT on Tuesday, August 19, 2008 4:37:16 PM
Women are promoting an "impossible dream" if they think a "restraining order," especially one gotten without allowing the subject his constitutional rights before it is issued, ever does any good. It's "just a piece of paper" to someone who really intends to do harm to a woman. Most men who harm women have "restraining orders" against them already, but routinely ignore them. It's like the "drug war." It has been in existence for many years, but drug use is higher today on a per capita basis than it was the day the "drug war" started, while many unconstitutional laws have been made and enforced in the name of "getting drugs off the streets," but have done nothing to do so. Better a woman should be allowed to get a gun for self defense without a lot of red tape. (Phyllis Schlafly)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

This is How WWII Started

Posted by The New THOMA$ REPORT on Monday, August 18, 2008 8:32:20 AM
Hitler invaded Czechloslovakia, saying "Ethnic Germans living there want us to 'annex' this country," and Neville Chamberlain (played here by the French president) said, "it is a 'far-away country' of which we know little." This sounded simple and reasonable to him, as Russia's similar explanation for invading Georgia sounds to the French leader. It's a "small thing," but as we have learned, time and again, such "small things" often blow up into something big. Many people are just too young to remember this fiasco, but I'm not. I lived through it, and I can see the similarities. Russia's problem is that Georgia is a pro-Western, fragile new democracy that has an oil pipeline they want to run through Turkey, while Russia wants it to run through Russia, so they can control it. Then Georgia applied for membership in NATO. That was "the last straw" for Russia. Obama opines that "peace is better than war." McCain didn't even need to bother to point out Obama's ignorance on foreign affairs. (Monica Crowley/Human Events)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Typical Democrat "Sour Grapes"

Posted by The New THOMA$ REPORT on Monday, August 18, 2008 8:28:56 AM
The Democrats, in the person of Barack Obama, clearly lost the debate the other night. So Andrea Mitchell naturally has to accuse McCain of cheating. It's the only reason a Democrat media person can see for McCain winning a debate with a man who doesn't ever do well when he isn't speaking off a teleprompter. They just can't envision a man who is a long-time politician with a lot of experience knowing more answers than an amateur who HAS no experience if he is a Republixan. (News Busters)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Criminalizing Jerome Corsi

Posted by The New THOMA$ REPORT on Sunday, August 17, 2008 4:03:35 PM
Corsi wrote a book that may do for the Obama campaign the same thing that the "Swiftboaters" book did for the Kerry campaign. Bury it, especially if, as was the case with the "Swiftboaters" book, they can't find a thing in it that was false. So they will be reduced to saying this book "swiftboated" Obama. To them, that is a synonym for "lying about them." In real life, it means "telling the truth" about them. I live in the real life; how about you? Corsi's "crime?" He did what the liberal media should have done, and used to do; especially if the candidate was a Republican. Now they are doing more "investigation" into Jerome Corsi than they ever did into Obama, who may indeed be our next president, like it or not. He calls Corsi's book "a work of fiction." But he either can't or won't point out (other than in generalities) what's untrue about it. "Isn't it interesting how Jerome Corsi has received more scrutiny from the Big Media in the last 24 hours than Barack Obama has received in his entire political career?" We'll no doubt learn what kind of man Obama is if he is, indeed, elected. (World Newt Daily)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Nobody Cares About Global Warming

Posted by The New THOMA$ REPORT on Sunday, August 17, 2008 3:56:09 PM
According to a recent ABC News/Planet Green/Stanford University survey, they found that public concern over the global warming issue has diminished over the past year. Fewer than half of the poll’s respondents, 47 percent, think global warming is an important issue to them personally, down from 52 percent in April 2007. While 80 percent believe the earth is warming, that figure is down four percentage points from last year. How about THIS? I believe the planet is "warming," overall. But it's not due to our activities. It's "cyclical," as Dr. Fred Singer, the INVENTOR of the very gauges AlGore's "scientists" use to measure global temperatures, has said, many times. Of course, AlGore, who has NO "credentials" as a climate scientist, says Singer "is no longer in the main stream of global science." Who the hell is Gore to decide that? (Tom Nelson)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The "Kennedy Method"

Posted by The New THOMA$ REPORT on Friday, August 15, 2008 8:59:09 AM
It's a proven method to avoid what would normally be a certain investigation that would prove your guilt. Admit what can be proved, then DEMAND a full investigation, while paying off the victim, or victim's family to block any attempt at an investigation. Teddy did it at Chappaquiddick, demanding an autopsy, well knowing the Kopechne family was opposing an autopsy, so none was done, for the first time in Massachusetts history in such a case. Now John Edwards is demanding a paternity test, knowing his girlfriend was opposing it. Works like a charm, as long as you can depend on the "other side" to remain paid off. I guess Edwards IS "Kennedyesque," after all. (Ann Coulter)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Do We Care?

Posted by The New THOMA$ REPORT on Friday, August 15, 2008 8:56:38 AM
Chuck Norris, of "Walker, Texas Ranger" fame, asks the same question that liberals have been promoting to protect Bill Clinton. That illicit sex is a "personal matter" and shouldn't be "fodder" for public consumption. I like Chuck, and in most things agree with him. But in this case, he completely misses the point, as do liberals--on purpose. It's not the indiscretion (though we ought to be able to expect the best of behavior from people who pretend to make laws to tell us how to live and what to do). It's the lying. We ought to be able to depend on what our politicians say, but we can't. And this is one case where the lie is PROVEN. Bill Clinton would lie when the truth would serve better, but Democrats still say he was one of the best presidents ever--even though he was IMPEACHED, and is a convicted felon who was disbarred for five years (a résumé enhancement for a Democrat), which only shows their ignorance. Do we care if he had sex with a woman not his wife?: No. That's not our business. Do we care that he lied, calling the newspaper that broke the story "tabloid trash?" Yes. We DO care about that, and I'm glad he wasn't elected vice president. I don't think he should be elected ANYTHING. But that would allow him to go back to his sleazy lawyering. What made him rich, in the first place, victimizing many people. It's a hard decision. (Chuck Norris)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

How STUPID Do They Think We Are?

Posted by The New THOMA$ REPORT on Thursday, August 14, 2008 3:20:51 PM
ABC, NBC, CBS, "The Washington Post," The "New York Times," and all the left-wing blogs and web sites are telling you that YOU "want more gun control!" They cite "studies" and polls that turn out to have been done by anti-gun freaks themselves. They ask questions for these polls and studies ONLY of other gun-control freaks and pretend they are real polls and studies (Has anybody asked YOU any questions about gun control?). The very questions they ask are tailored to get an answer in favor of gun control. They ran 650 stories about "crime and the need for gun control," using the usual false "facts and figures" that are just not logical. There were only TWO stories about the use of guns for self-defense in the same time period--and they are distorted. They REFUSE to run the many stories of people using legally-owned guns in self-defense (millions of them, actually, sometimes just by showing one and not even having to fire a shot), forcing each one to remain "a local story" so the nation, as a whole, won't "tumble" to the millions of legal gun owners who have used their guns in self-defense. They're trying to make a law right now so that, if a criminal STEALS your gun and commits a crime with it, they can send YOU to federal prison (H. R. 256) and another to allow the Attorney General the UNCONTESTED power to put your name on a secret government list and BAN YOU from buying a gun--forever (H. R. 1237). These are only a few of the onerous bills the liberal gun control freaks want to pass into law, including one to fingerprint, photograph, test you, license you, investigate you, and tax you, just to own a gun for your own defense (H. R. 2666).Remember, gun-hating Democrats are now "in charge" in both houses and if a Democrat is elected president, look for the "gun hunt" to begin. You need to let your representatives know that you will not stand for them disarming you so the closest illegally-armed criminal can target you and maybe kill you, while you can't do anything about it. (Just common sense)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Whaddaya Know?

Posted by The New THOMA$ REPORT on Thursday, August 14, 2008 3:16:40 PM
They're going to place Hillary's name in nomination at the national Democrat convention in Denver. And I wouldn't be surprised if she has sealed up the votes to get the nomination over Obama (Like Bill, she "knows where the bodies are buried"). I've been predicting that all along. She's the "queen!" She's not going to let this unknown, untried upstart take away her chance to be president! They SAY it is something she and Obama AGREED to, to "heal" the divisions in the party. I hear Obama came "kicking and screaming" to this position. But I'd bet she'll force more than one vote to get a REAL nominee, and she intends it be her. I'll give her one thing; she never gives up. She wants to be president, by "hook or crook." (Yahoo News)

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The "Fairness Doctrine?"

Posted by The New THOMA$ REPORT on Wednesday, August 13, 2008 5:03:10 PM
The liberals still are talking about a "return of the fairness doctrine." They think they can even "control what's on the Internet" by requiring any web site that criticizes a liberal to publish "the other side." They want to "shut up" the opposition. ("Fairness Doctrine, my sore rear end!) It'll never happen. My web sites and others like it ARE "the other side" while the liberals have just about every other news source out there. I would not put a word written or uttered by a liberal on ANY of my web sites except to tell my readers what I'm criticizing and ridiculing. If they think they can force me to do any more, they can go to hell! Jail me. If they think they can dictate the content of my web sites, they can "take it and stick it." I don't have to kowtow to the FCC for a license to exercise free speech. They're even discussing it in Congress today, but they don't have the guts to call it "The Fairness Doctrine," hoping people who don't pay attention won't recognize it. If a liberal (Democrat) gets into the White House with a liberal-dominated Congress, look for them to try it. I guess being in prison is a good place to die. At least they'll have to pay all my medical bills. If they succeed, look for them to try and force authors of books critical of their actions to be told to include "the other side" in their books. Books such as my own "What's WRONG in America." I look forward to THAT fight. (Business & Media Institute)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Communist China Cheats

Posted by The New THOMA$ REPORT on Wednesday, August 13, 2008 4:55:45 PM
Surprised? I'm not. I know what kind or people are running things there. They lie, they cheat, they "spin" what they can't lie about. In this case, they used girls on their gymnast team TWO YEARS YOUNGER than is allowed, in order to win, and so get more gold medals than anybody else, for propaganda purposes. This isn't in dispute. At least not among people with any degree of intelligence. "There is absolutely no doubt -- none, zero, zilch - that the Chinese 'women's' gymnastics team featured several little girls no older than 14 years of age -- two years younger than the international federation allows for competition. Online registrations of these girls list one age, their passports list another. This is blatant cheating - no other word for it."  Their age on their Olympic Application lists one age, and their passports another. But the Olympic Committee, faced with a "fait accompli," let it go and accepted the age on their application. So I guess the claims of the Communist Chinese will forever be tainted, whether or not they ever admit it. In the shooting competition, the officials awarded the gold medal, even though the shooter MISSED the target! It's obvious that communist China has "fixed" the games so they could win more medals than anyone else and have "bragging rights" at least for the next four years. (American Thinker)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1234Next »