Listen to my testimony
In 1986, Peter Davies was on holiday in Kenya after graduating from Northwestern University. On a hike through the bush, he came across a young bull elephant standing with one leg raised in the air. The elephant seemed distressed, so Peter approached it very carefully. He got down on one knee, inspected the elephant's foot, and found a large piece of wood deeply embedded in it.
As carefully and as gently as he could, Peter worked the wood out with his knife, after which the elephant gingerly put down its foot. The elephant turned to face the man, and with a rather curious look on its face, stared at him for several tense moments. Peter stood frozen, thinking of nothing else but being trampled. Eventually the elephant trumpeted loudly, turned, and walked away.
Peter never forgot that elephant or the events of that day. Twenty years later, Peter was walking through the Chicago Zoo with his teenaged son. As they approached the elephant enclosure, one of the creatures turned and walked over to near where Peter and his son Cameron were standing. The large bull elephant stared at Peter, lifted its front foot off the ground, then put it down.
The elephant did that several times then trumpeted loudly, all the while staring at the man. Remembering the encounter in 1986, Peter could not help wondering if this was the same elephant. Peter summoned up his courage, climbed over the railing, and made his way into the enclosure.
He walked right up to the elephant and stared back in wonder. The elephant trumpeted again, wrapped its trunk around one of Peter legs and slammed him against the railing, killing him instantly.
Probably wasn't the same elephant.
Posted: 4/30/2010 
Tags: humor,elephant,zoo 
Edit
Delete
Everyone of voting age should read these two books. Don't buy them, get them from the library before they are removed from the shelves.
From Dreams of My Father: 'I ceased to advertise my mother's race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites.'
From Dreams of My Father : 'I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother's race.'
From Dreams of My Father: 'There was something about her that made me wary, a little too sure of herself, maybe and white.
From Dreams of My Father: 'It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names.'
From Dreams of My Father: 'I never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn't speak to my own.. It was into my father's image, the black man, son of Africa, that I'd packed all the attributes I sought in myself: the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, DuBois and Mandela.'
And finally, and most scary!
From Audacity of Hope: 'I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.'
Which Is The Boy And Which Is The Girl?
In each of the following photos, try to guess which member of the couple is a girl and which is a guy. There are 6 pairs. Look closely, then pick left or right to identify the guy. (Answers are at the end. Don't cheat!)
All of them are GUYS!
Be careful out there…
El Camino Del Rey, Malaga, Spain
I would love to hike this trail, but common sense and cowardice prevent me from doing so.
Franklin Graham On Islam And The Media
"I do not agree with the teachings of this religion," Graham said to On Faith''s Sally Quinn. (Video by Katherine Crnko and Elizabeth Tenety/Washington Post)
Is Free Speech Endangered In America?
Glenn Beck: The One Thing 4/23/2010
Is free speech an endangered species in America?
Rep. David Scott Screams at Constituent For Asking Tough Health Care Questions
During a Q&A period at the end of the town hall meeting, David Scott gets nasty with a constituent.
Here is a new game to help make Obama's speeches more interesting. Just print out this page, distribute it to your friends, and go listen. You don't even have to wait – just search the internet for previous speeches!
Rules for Barack Bingo:
1. Before Barack Obama's next televised speech, print your "Bullshit Bingo".
2. Check off the appropriate block when you hear one of the words/phrases.
3. When you get five blocks horizontally, vertically, or diagonally, stand up and shout BULLSHIT!"
Testimonials from past satisfied "Barack Bingo" players:
"I had been listening to the speech for only five minutes when I won." - Jack W., Boston
"My attention span during speeches has improved dramatically." - David D., Florida
"What a gas! Speeches will never be the same for me after my first win." - Bill R., New York City
“The atmosphere was tense in the last speech as 14 of us waited for the fifth box." - Ben G., Denver
"The speaker was stunned as eight of us screamed "BULLSHIT!" for the third time in two hours." - Harry A, Chantilly
"This is the most fun I have ever had with my pants up!" - Robert H. Portland
Rolling Back Government: Lessons from New Zealand
This is from a 2004 Imprimis article from Hillsdale College but it is very interesting today:
Rolling Back Government: Lessons from New Zealand
by Maurice P. McTigue
If we look back through history, growth in government has been a modern phenomenon. Beginning in the 1850s and lasting until the 1920s or ’30s, the government’s share of GDP in most of the world’s industrialized economies was about six percent. From that period onwards — and particularly since the 1950s — we’ve seen a massive explosion in government share of GDP, in some places as much as 35-45 percent. (In the case of Sweden, of course, it reached 65 percent, and Sweden nearly self-destructed as a result. It is now starting to dismantle some of its social programs to remain economically viable.) Can this situation be halted or even rolled back? My view, based upon personal experience, is that the answer is “yes.” But it requires high levels of transparency and significant consequences for bad decisions — and these are not easy things to bring about.
What we’re seeing around the world at the moment is what I would call a silent revolution, reflected in a change in how people view government accountability. The old idea of accountability simply held that government should spend money in accordance with appropriations. The new accountability is based on asking, “What did we get in public benefits as a result of the expenditure of money?” This is a question that has always been asked in business, but has not been the norm for governments. And those governments today that are struggling valiantly with this question are showing quite extraordinary results. This was certainly the basis of the successful reforms in my own country of New Zealand.
New Zealand’s per capita income in the period prior to the late 1950s was right around number three in the world, behind the United States and Canada. But by 1984, its per capita income had sunk to 27th in the world, alongside Portugal and Turkey. Not only that, but our unemployment rate was 11.6 percent, we’d had 23 successive years of deficits (sometimes ranging as high as 40 percent of GDP), our debt had grown to 65 percent of GDP, and our credit ratings were continually being downgraded. Government spending was a full 44 percent of GDP, investment capital was exiting in huge quantities, and government controls and micromanagement were pervasive at every level of the economy. We had foreign exchange controls that meant I couldn’t buy a subscription to The Economist magazine without the permission of the Minister of Finance. I couldn’t buy shares in a foreign company without surrendering my citizenship. There were price controls on all goods and services, on all shops and on all service industries. There were wage controls and wage freezes. I couldn’t pay my employees more — or pay them bonuses — if I wanted to. There were import controls on the goods that I could bring into the country. There were massive levels of subsidies on industries in order to keep them viable. Young people were leaving in droves.
Spending and Taxes
When a reform government was elected in 1984, it identified three problems: too much spending, too much taxing and too much government. The question was how to cut spending and taxes and diminish government’s role in the economy. Well, the first thing you have to do in this situation is to figure out what you’re getting for dollars spent. Towards this end, we implemented a new policy whereby money wouldn’t simply be allocated to government agencies; instead, there would be a purchase contract with the senior executives of those agencies that clearly delineated what was expected in return for the money. Those who headed up government agencies were now chosen on the basis of a worldwide search and received term contracts — five years with a possible extension of another three years. The only ground for their removal was non-performance, so a newly-elected government couldn’t simply throw them out as had happened with civil servants under the old system. And of course, with those kinds of incentives, agency heads — like CEOs in the private sector — made certain that the next tier of people had very clear objectives that they were expected to achieve as well.
The first purchase that we made from every agency was policy advice. That policy advice was meant to produce a vigorous debate between the government and the agency heads about how to achieve goals like reducing hunger and homelessness. This didn’t mean, by the way, how government could feed or house more people — that’s not important. What’s important is the extent to which hunger and homelessness are actually reduced. In other words, we made it clear that what’s important is not how many people are on welfare, but how many people get off welfare and into independent living.
As we started to work through this process, we also asked some fundamental questions of the agencies. The first question was, “What are you doing?” The second question was, “What should you be doing?” Based on the answers, we then said, “Eliminate what you shouldn’t be doing” — that is, if you are doing something that clearly is not a responsibility of the government, stop doing it. Then we asked the final question: “Who should be paying — the taxpayer, the user, the consumer, or the industry?” We asked this because, in many instances, the taxpayers were subsidizing things that did not benefit them. And if you take the cost of services away from actual consumers and users, you promote overuse and devalue whatever it is that you’re doing.
McTigue is a Distinguished Visiting Scholar at George Mason University. According to GMU’s site,
The Honorable Maurice McTigue joined the Mercatus Center in 1997 as a distinguished visiting scholar following an illustrious career as a New Zealand Member of Parliament, Cabinet Minister and Ambassador. Prior to his arrival in the United States, Mr. McTigue led an ambitious and extremely successful effort to restructure New Zealand’s public sector and to revitalize its stagnant economy in the 1984-94 period.”
It appears that New Zealand was being led by Progressives and was even further along the path of socialism than we are today. And it was turned around. It is no wonder that Limbaugh has been eyeing NZ.
Reading the whole six page text of McTigue’s speech made me realize two things: First, it is possible to reverse what is being done. Second, the candidate who comes out as friendly to business, low taxes, and personal responsibility will be the one who gets my vote.
If this happens it will be refreshing to have a distinct choice in an election.
Reform's Nasty Little Surprises
On Tuesday, the New York Times reported that, to the surprise of many lawmakers, one provision of the new health care law states that members of Congress and congressional staff may be removed from their current coverage under the gold-plated Federal Employees Health Benefits Program.
Serves them right. This came to light after the Congressional Research Service was besieged by calls from concerned congressmen who didn't realize they might have to give up their own super-duper health care coverage. They only meant to strip us of our good health care coverage, not theirs. Now they're angry.
Ah, sorry to bother you Mr. Obama, Sir. . ..
Excuse me Mr. Obama, I mean President Obama, Sir. Um . . I know you're busy, and important and stuff. I mean, running the country is very important and -- ah -- I hate to bother you, Sir... I will only take a minute. Ok, Sir?
See, I have these missing pieces that are holding me up, and I was wondering, Sir, if you could take time out of your busy schedule and help me out. You know, no big deal, just some loose ends and things.
Could you please help me find these things, Sir?
1. Occidental College records -- Not released
2. Columbia College records -- Not released
3. Columbia Thesis paper -- "Not available"
4. Harvard College records -- Not released
5. Selective Service Registration -- Not released
6. Medical records -- Not released
7. Illinois State Senate schedule -- Not available
8. Your Illinois State Senate records -- Not available
9. Law practice client list -- Not released
10. Certified Copy of original Birth certificate -- Not released
11. Embossed, signed paper Certification of Live Birth -- Not released
12. Record of your baptism -- Not available
13. Why your wife, Michelle, can no longer practice law as an attorney? (Insurance Fraud?)
14. Why your wife has 22 assistants?
15. Why were you getting "foreign student aid" as a college student?
16. Which countries "passport" did you have when you visited Pakistan in 1981?
Oh and one more thing Mr. President, I can't seem to find any articles you published as editor of the Harvard Law Review, or as a Professor at the University of Chicago. Can you explain that to me, Sir?
Oh, but hey -- listen! I know you're busy! If this is too much for you right now -- I mean -- tell you what. I'll come back tomorrow. Give you some time to get these things together, you know? I mean, I know you're busy. I'll just let myself out. I'll be back tomorrow.... And the day after...
What's that Mr. President? Who wants to know these things?
We the People of the United States of America! You know, the ones that vote.
If I had told you that there is a picture where purple hair is the least weird thing going on, would you have believed me?
Bishop Joe Grech's Week 4 Lenten Reflection
After 50 years I discovered that Bishop Joe (aka "The Bish") is my cousin. I previously thought there was only a distant relationship. Here is his Facebook page.
A Chinese ISP Momentarily Hijacks The Internet - Again
For the second time in two weeks, bad networking information spreading from China has disrupted the Internet. A small ISP in China, who typically announces 30 BGP routes, "accidentally" announced routes for tens of thousands of networks - about 10% of the internet. This is, perhaps, a simple test to see how many would notice. Always send your recon teams in first to check defenses and reaction times.
After Google-China Incident, Cyberwar Threat Emerges
The disclosure in January that Google and dozens of other tech firms had been attacked by China-based hackers stoked long-standing fears over cyberattacks that could escalate into an all-out cyberwar. If a full-fledged cyberwar were to break out, the nation's economy would be hit hard.
Parody of the "History Will Be Made" NHL Ads
The NHL's "History Will Be Made" playoff ads focus on names like Messier, Orr, Lemieux, Roy and Bourque. But doesn't that seem like a waste of time and money when clearly the focus should be on real hockey legends, like NBC/TSN "between the benches" reporter Pierre McGuire?
The Government Is Bankrupting The Country
It is time to hear from Bob again. Do you suppose his eventual heart attack or stroke will be on YouTube too?
We have no idea WHAT he sees in her!!!
To the Guy Who Tried to Mug Me...
This has got to be made up but it is entertaining nonetheless.
To the guy who tried to mug me in Downtown Savannah night before last.
Date: 2009-05-27, 1:43 a.m. E.S.T.
I was the guy wearing the black jacket that you demanded that I hand over, shortly after you pulled the knife on me and my girlfriend, threatening our lives. You also asked for my girlfriend's purse and earrings. I can only hope that you somehow come across this rather important message.
First, I'd like to apologize for your embarrassment; I didn't expect you to actually crap in your pants when I drew my pistol after you took my jacket. The evening was not that cold, and I was wearing the jacket for a reason. My girlfriend had just bought me that Colt Model 1911 .45 ACP pistol for my birthday, and we had picked up a shoulder holster for it that very evening. Obviously you agree that it is a very intimidating weapon when pointed at your head ... isn't it?!
I know it probably wasn't fun walking back to wherever you'd come from with that brown sludge in your pants. I'm sure it was even worse walking bare-footed since I made you leave your shoes, cell phone, and wallet with me. [That prevented you from calling or running to your buddies to come help mug us again].
After I called your mother or "Momma" as you had her listed in your cell, I explained the entire episode of what you'd done. Then I went and filled up my gas tank as well as those of four other people in the gas station, -- on your credit card. The guy with the big motor home took 150 gallons and was extremely grateful!
I gave your shoes to a homeless guy outside Vinnie Van Go Go's, along with all the cash in your wallet. [That made his day!]
I then threw your wallet into the big pink "pimp mobile" that was parked at the curb ... after I broke the windshield and side window and keyed the entire driver's side of the car.
Later, I called a bunch of phone sex numbers from your cell phone. Ma Bell just now shut down the line, although I only used the phone for a little over a day now, so what 's going on with that? Earlier, I managed to get in two threatening phone calls to the DA's office and one to the FBI, while mentioning President Obama as my possible target.
The FBI guy seemed really intense and we had a nice long chat (I guess while he traced your number etc.).
In a way, perhaps I should apologize for not killing you ... but I feel this type of retribution is a far more appropriate punishment for your threatened crime. I wish you well as you try to sort through some of these rather immediate pressing issues, and can only hope that you have the opportunity to reflect upon, and perhaps reconsider, the career path you've chosen to pursue in life. Remember, next time you might not be so lucky.Have a good day!
Thoughtfully yours,
Mike
Every civilization reaches a point of no return, a point where the nail is hammered into the coffin. That time is now for the USA.
A rookie secret agent is faced with a problem seldom covered in basic training: what to do when a curious pigeon gets trapped inside your multi-million dollar, government-issued nuclear briefcase.
Speed controls being used in Canada . How's this for effective speed control?
I don't know about you, but this would certainly slow me down! People slow down and actually try to "straddle" the hole.
This is an actual speed control device that is currently in use. It is MUCH cheaper than speed cameras, radar guns, police officers, etc.
Pretty clever - especially when they move them around every day. Isn't art wonderful?
Ad by Ford against Toyota. But they didn't have the guts to run it!
A License Required For Your HOUSE?
If you own your home you really need to check this out. At the end of this email is the Google link to verify. If the country thinks the housing market is depressed now, wait until everyone sees this. No one will be buying homes in the future.
We encourage you to read the provisions of the Cap and Trade Bill that has passed the House of Representatives and are being considered by the Senate. We are ready to join the next march on Washington ! This Congress and their "experts" are truly out to destroy the middle class of the U.S.A.
A License will be required for your house...no longer just for cars and mobile homes....Thinking about selling your house? Take a look at H.R. 2454 (Cap and Trade bill). This is unbelievable! Home owners take note and tell your friends and relatives who are home owners!
Beginning one year after enactment of the Cap and Trade Act, you won't be able to sell your home unless you retrofit it to comply with the energy and water efficiency standards of this "Cap & Trade" bill, passed by the House of Representatives. If it is also passed by the Senate, it will be the largest tax increase any of us has ever experienced.
The Congressional Budget Office (supposedly non-partisan) estimates that in just a few years the average cost to every family of four will be $6,800 per year. No one is excluded. However, once the lower classes feel the pinch in their wallets, you can be sure that these voters will get a tax refund (even if they pay no taxes at all) to offset this new cost. Thus, you Mr. And Mrs. Middle Class have to pay even more since additional tax dollars will be needed to bail out everyone else.
But wait. This awful bill (that no one in Congress has actually read) has many more surprises in it. Probably the worst one is this: A year from now you won't be able to sell your house without some bureaucrat's OK. Yes, you read that right.
The caveat (there always is a caveat) is that if you have enough money to make required major upgrades to your home, then you can sell it. But, if not, then forget it. Even pre-fabricated homes ("mobile homes") are included. In effect, this bill prevents you from selling your home without the permission of the EPA administrator.
To get this permission, you will have to have the energy efficiency of your home measured. Then the government will tell you what your new energy efficiency requirement is and you will be required to make modifications to your home under the retrofit provisions of this Act, to comply with the new energy and water efficiency requirements.
Then you will have to get your home measured again and get a license (called a "label" in the Act) that must be posted on your property to show what your efficiency rating is; sort of like the Energy Star efficiency rating label on your refrigerator or air conditioner. If you don't get a high enough rating, you can't sell.
And, the EPA administrator is authorized to raise the standards every year, even above the automatic energy efficiency increases built into the Act. The EPA administrator, appointed by the President, will run the Cap & Trade program (AKA the "American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009") and is authorized to make any future changes to the regulations and standards he/she alone determines to be in the government's best interest. Requirements are set low initially so the bill will pass Congress. Then the Administrator can set new standards every year.
The Act itself contains annual required increases in energy efficiency for private and commercial residences and buildings. However, the EPA administrator can set higher standards at any time. Sect. 202 - Building Retrofit Program mandates a national retrofit program to increase the energy efficiency of all existing homes across America .
Beginning one year after enactment of the Act, you won't be able to sell your home unless you retrofit it to comply with its energy and water efficiency standards. You had better sell soon, because the standards will be raised each year and will be really hard (expen$ive) to meet in a few years. Oh, goody!
The Act allows the government to give you a grant of several thousand dollars to comply with the retrofit program requirements IF you meet certain energy efficiency levels. But, wait, the State can set additional requirements on who qualifies to receive the grants. You should expect requirements such as "can't have an income of more than $50K per year", "home selling price can't be more than $125K", or anything else to target the upper middle class (that includes YOU?) and prevent you from qualifying for the grants.
Most of us won't get a dime and will have to pay the entire cost of the retrofit out of our own pockets. More transfer of wealth, more "change you can believe in." Sect. 204 - Building Energy Performance Labeling Program establishes a labeling program that for each individual residence will identify the achieved energy efficiency performance for "at least 90 percent of the residential market within 5 years after the date of the enactment of this Act."
This means that within 5 years 90% of all residential homes in the U.S. must be measured and labeled. The EPA administrator will get $50M each year to enforce the labeling program. The Secretary of the Department of Energy will get an additional $20M each year to help the EPA. Some of this money will, of course, be spent on coming up with tougher standards each year.
Oh, the label will be like a license for your car. You will be required to post the label in a conspicuous location in your home and will not be allowed to sell your home without having this label. And, just like your car license, you will probably be required to get a new label every so often - maybe every year.
But, the government estimates the cost of measuring the energy efficiency of your home should only cost about $200 each time.Remember what they said about the auto smog inspections when they first started: that in California ? It would only cost $15. That was when the program started. Now the cost is about $50 for the inspection and certificate.
Expect the same from the home labeling program. Sect. 304 - Greater Energy Efficiency in Building Codes establishes new energy efficiency guidelines for the National Building Code and mandates at 304(d) that one year after enactment of this Act, all state and local jurisdictions must adopt the National Building Code energy efficiency provisions or must obtain a certification from the federal government that their state and/or local codes have been brought into full compliance with the National Building Code energy efficiency standards.
CHECK OUT a few of the sites;
Cap and Trade: A License required for your Home http://www.nachi. org/forum/ f14/cap-and- trade-license- required- your-home- 44750/
HR2454 American Clean Energy & Security Act: http://www.govtrack .us/congress/ bill.xpd? bill=h111- 2454
Cap & Trade a license required for your home: http://www.prisonplanet.com/cap-and-trade-a-license-required-for-your-home.html
Cap and trade is a license to cheat and steal: http://www.sfexamin er.com/opinion/ columns/oped_ contributors/ Cap-and-trade- is-a-license- to-cheat- and-steal- 45371937. html
Cap and Trade: A License required for your Home: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2393940/posts
Thinking about selling you House? Look at HR 2454: http://www.federalobserver.com/2009/10/01/thinking-about-selling-your-house-a-look-at-h-r-2454-cap-and-trade-bill/
www.google.com/ search?hl= en&source=hp&ie=ISO-8859- 1&q=A+License+ required+ for+your+ home-+Cap+ and+Trade&btnG=Google+ Search
Mike Cox Appears on the Fox Business Channel With Neil Cavuto
On March 23, 2010, Mike Cox appeared on the Fox Business Channel to talk to Neil Cavuto about his constitutional challenge to the health care bill.