About Me

My photo
Georgia, United States

Sunday, November 22, 2009

Barred from Communion?



Rhode Island Representative Patrick J. Kennedy was recently banned from receiving communion by the Roman Catholic bishop of Providence. Why? The bishop believes that since Kennedy supports abortion, then he is not a true Catholic. Bishop Tobin said "If you freely choose to be a Catholic, it means you believe certain things, you do certain things,” Bishop Tobin said at the time. “If you cannot do all that in conscience, then you should perhaps feel free to go somewhere else.” In a way, this is understandable because abortion is against what the Catholic Church believes, but on the other hand it seems wrong to deny any person who wishes to receive communion that right. What do you think? Was Bishop Tobin right to deny communion to Kennedy or not?

"An Inconvenient Truth" Turns Out To Be Gore's Convenient Lie...




Everyone is familiar with Al Gore's movie. Why? Because most all of us have been forced to watch this garbage in not one, but several classes at school. It has been famed for helping to "revitalize" the environmentalist movement. When the movie first came out, there were several errors found in the "facts" that Gore presented to his audience. But recently, a British court found that Gore's film contains 9 significant errors and has said that the film should no longer be shown to students in schools unless the viewing is accompanied by "guidance notes that balance Gore's 'one sided' views." Just one small example of something that Gore just threw out there that was not backed with research is the claim that polar bears are endangered. I know some of you may be reading this and thinking that I'm crazy for even questioning the profound scholar's claims. I am doubting Gore's claims for one simple reason: they are only claims and with no research. Recently, there was an environmental journalist conference where Gore was the key speaker. At the conference, Irish journalist Phelim McAleer, confronted Gore on several issues including the polar bear claims:

"When asked by McAleer whether he would do anything to correct the errors found by the British court, Gore said he wouldn't go through each of the errors but added that the ruling was in favor of screening the film in schools.

"There's been such a long discussion of each one of those specific things," he said. "One of them for example was that polar bears really aren't endangered. Well polar bears didn't get that word." The audience laughed.

Phelim countered that the number of polar bears has increased and is increasing.

"You don't think they're endangered?" Gore asked.

"The number has increased," McAleer repeated, prompting the same question from Gore. "If the number of polar bears has increased, surely they're not in danger."

Before McAleer could say anything else, he was interrupted by environmental journalists who said it wasn't a debate and shut off his microphone."

Another interesting fact that I think interesting and necessary to share is the fact that much of the temperatures that Gore presents in his movie are false. I had to do a research project on this movie, so I set out to find what I could about where Gore got all his information and facts. As a result, I found that Gore's so-called evidence of how the temperatures have increased over time are anything but evidence. He received his information from NASA on how much the temperatures have risen over the past several years. Interestingly, I found that the same temperatures Gore presents in his movie are the same ones that were edited by NASA. In other words, these temperatures were temporarily and artificially inflated on NASA's records, but were later fixed to reflect the real temperatures. Hmm.... Sounds more like a convenient lie to make money rather than an inconvenient truth....

Saturday, November 21, 2009

Obama's Response to the Fort Hood Shooting

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/06/obamas-response-fort-hood-shooting-scrutiny/

As Obama addressed the nation on the Fort Hood shooting, he almost appeared to think the incident not important because he addressed other things in an informal way. One would think that a shooting on an army base would be so significant that the President of the United States would treat the incident with the utmost care and sensitivity. However, that did not seem to be the case with President Obama. He began by giving a "shout out" to someone in the audience and by using the opportunity of being on television to further push his health care agenda rather than addressing a possible incident of terrorism on an American army base. I think this behavior is absolutely inexcusable and just flat out ridiculous! In hard times, many people look to the president for reassurance, but that's not what they got this time. The American people were simply warned not to jump to any conclusions of the shooting. To me, it was just a heartless move, especially to all of those people in Texas that desperately needed to hear something reassuring from their commander in chief.

Thursday, November 19, 2009

Mrs. Palin's Media Attention



Of all of the 2008 Presidential Candidates, none have kept the media's attention the way Sarah Palin has, and she was only a Vice Presidential candidate! I find it very interesting that the media continues to follow a woman that they have portrayed as ignorant and dismissed from having a place in the future politics of America. The claims have been that she doesn't have many supporters and that people couldn't care less about her, but as we have seen this week with her new book tour people have stood in lines over night for these events. Even more, Palin appeared on Oprah's show this week to discuss the campaign and her new book. Having Sarah Palin on Oprah's show drew the largest crowd and highest ratings for Oprah's talk show in YEARS. It is clear that she still has an impressive place in future politics and in the future of the Republican Party.

Everyone remembers the interview Sarah Palin had with Katie Couric. It was one of many attacks on Sarah. But the attacks continue even after the election. Why? I have found one main reason to be jealousy. If you ask people why they don't like her, they have no problem with saying how jealous they are of her. Women are jealous of her looks and of her success. So it is no surprise that the attacks continue when it is clear that Palin continues to draw huge crowds.

Just this week, another attack came from the Associated Press. This time it was on Palin's new book, Going Rogue. Reportedly, the AP has given 11 reporters the duty to fact check this new book, but did not do the same for either of Obama's books. Why? It's simple. The press is doing anything and everything in their power to try to catch her in a slip-up. It's not that I don't think that politicians should be fact checked, but I do believe that there should be some form of standardization when it comes to things like this. If Palin's book is going to be checked for telling the truth, then so should every other politician's book.

Tuesday, November 17, 2009

Media Doing Their Job For Once

So it seems that this website that was made by the Obama administration to track how and where the $787 billion stimulus was being spent may still "blow you away", but in a different way than the administration meant to. One of the many examples of the huge mess up is the fact that the website claims to have saved or created 30 jobs in Arizona's 15th Congressional district. The problem is the fact that Arizona has only 8 districts. The website's creators are putting the blame off on the recipients by saying that they sometimes give incorrect information, but you would like to think that a government agency would have do just a little investigating before publishing information like that to ensure that it is correct. Anyone can receive the information from the recipients and punch in a few numbers on a website. Government agencies should be held to a higher accountability. Part of me believes that the administration artificially inflated and created these numbers to simply help its image. What do you think?

Saturday, November 7, 2009

Abortion under the new health care legislation

The House passed an amendment to the current health care legislation that will prohibit any federal dollars from going to abortion services. However, this does exclude abortions that are done due to rape, incest, or if the mother's life is in danger. I believe that this was an appropriate move because it is not right for people to be able to have abortions at the cost of tax payers simply because they accidentally got pregnant. This issue is important not only to Republicans, but to many Democrats as well. On this issue, 66 Democrats split from the rest of their party. It will be interesting to see how these same representatives will vote tonight on the overall health care legislation. What do you think?

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/11/07/health.care/index.html