This video offers the most comprehensive information seen to date on the theft of Classified Documents from the National Archives by President Clinton’s former National Security Advisor, Sandy Berger.

Not only does it detail the various visits by Mr. Berger to the Archives, but also provides information on the obvious mishandling by the Department of Justice in the prosecution of this case.

David Asman investigates on a level not seen before and in an interview with the Inspector General of the National Archives has this exchange:

Asman: Why was it that Sandy Berger was looking a highly classified information in a non SCIF? (Sensitive Compartmentalized Information Facility)

IG: Because he was allowed to.

Asman: Why was he allowed to?

IG: Because he was Sandy Berger.

The entire video runs approximately 40 minutes but if you visit the link below you can copy the link to your desktop and view at your leisure.

If you followed at the time or have any interest in this case, this is a must see.

A few of Dr. Thomas Sowell’s “Random Thoughts”.

Most of the problems of this country are not nearly as bad as the “solutions” — especially the solutions that politicians come up with during election years.

Senator John McCain could never convince me to vote for him. Only Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama can cause me to vote for McCain.

It is amazing to me that there are people who still take seriously claims by some candidates that they are against “special interests.” All politicians are against their opponents’ special interests and in favor of his own special interests.

Among the many wise things said by the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan was that you are entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts. Yet an incredible number of people make up whatever “facts” are needed to support whatever they choose to believe.

More good, old fashioned common sense thoughts at the link.

I was sent the following video in an email and it disturbed me so much I thought I’d share it with any readers who may care to watch it.

So, when Oprah was about 27 years old she went to church early one morning and listened to a very charasmatic preacher. She was caught up in all the feel-good things the preacher had to say but was turned off and disturbed when she apparently heard for the first time that God is a jealous God.

Apparently, rather than go to the preacher or one of the ministerial staff for answers to her questions so she could understand what was said, she just drifted around for over 20 years, upset that God is a jealous God.

I’m not being sarcastic when I say if she had just discovered at age 27 that our God is a jealous God then what was she doing for those 27 years, most of them spent in a Baptist church? Was she not paying attention, or was she paying attention only to the things that made her feel good and discarding the uncomfortable things?

Things such as Jesus saying He is the Way the Truth and the Life and no man comes to the Father but by Him (Jesus). Things such as “You must be born again”? Did she miss the uncomfortable story Jesus told of the poor man named Lazarus who was in the bosom of Abraham while the rich man who fed him the scraps from his table was in hell? Did she miss the part that Jesus actually told us of a literal hell in that passage? And it’s interesting to note it is not a parable or Jesus would have said “Listen to the parable of Lazarus and the rich man.”?

This story is found in Luke 16:19-31 (NIV)

19″There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. 20At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores 21and longing to eat what fell from the rich man’s table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores.

22″The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried. 23In hell,[a] where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. 24So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.’

25″But Abraham replied, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. 26And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.’

27″He answered, ‘Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my father’s house, 28for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’

29″Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’

30″ ‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’

31″He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’ “

Exodus 20:5 tells us the context in which God declares Himself to be a jealous God:

5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,

(NIV)

Yes, Oprah, and anyone else who does not believe and does not know in what context God is jealous, God is a jealous God. He wants no other gods before Him. He is the Only God and there is none before Him or after Him.

He is not jealous of Oprah or any other human being unless we hold that human being to be higher than God is. God is jealous of anything we put above Him and make a god.

Exodus 20 shows us the Ten Commandments. Read the very first commandment and the punishment for disobeying it:

1 And God spoke all these words:
2 “I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.

3 “You shall have no other gods before [a] me.

4 “You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing love to a thousand {generations} of those who love me and keep my commandments.

He’s not jealous of you, Oprah, but He is jealous of what you put ahead of Him now.

It is my prayer that Oprah Winfrey and anyone else who believes there is no real Being called God Who is The Creator, is ominscient, omnipotent and all the other adjectives given to Him by Himself, will be awakened to the Spirit of God and cast aside the false gods and accept God’s Only begotten Son Jesus as their Savior and Lord, because there is something on the other side of death. We are not meant to not exist after this life. There are only two places we can go, and all the money Oprah has is not enough to keep her from hell if she has not accepted Jesus as her Savior and Lord.

It could not be easier to donate to a very worthy cause:

The band, Five for Fighting, is generously donating $0.49 to Autism Speaks each time this video is viewed. The funding goes toward research studies to help find a cure. When you have a moment, please visit the link below to watch the video and pass it along. They are aiming for 10,000 hits, but hopefully we can help them to surpass this goal

Please, if you have a few moments to spare, click here and help in this endeavor to assist children afflicted with autism.

We’ve all no doubt faced a time in our lives when we had to opt to forgive or simply walk away and carry the burden of a grudge forever.

The Anchoress has penned a wonderful post about the power of forgiveness:

I was at Adoration earlier today and wondering about saints and heroes, and whether it is “easier” sometimes to be a “hero” when things are clearly one or the other - good or bad, black or white - than when things are ambiguous and blurred as so much is, in our age. And I wondered too whether it’s easier to be merciful, when a hurt against you is huge and very, very clear, when it is a “hurt” that you know is going to be with you every day for the rest of your life…maybe when it’s that crystaline - so obvious that you don’t need Oprah or Dr. Phil to tell you you’ve been hurt - you have to forgive or you can’t move on, either. Maybe if you can’t forgive…you kill your own spirit.

As for the answer to the question posed in the title of the post, I believe the answer is yes.

I wonder how the people in Minnesota or London feel about all the global warming talk.

A novel idea indeed..don’t complain about the economy affecting your small business, rather set out to find a way to keep afloat:

These folks deserve an A for effort and ingenuity.

Last but not least , mans best friend once again comes to the rescue:

Harriet, an only child and now 11, spent most of her childhood in a wheelchair - until Yeppa, a Hungarian wire-haired Vizsla, arrived.

Remarkably the dog, which Harriet lovingly describes as “her best friend”, has enabled her to walk.

“I can get about without my wheelchair now,” she says enthusiastically from the garden of the cottage where she lives with her mother, a hairdresser, and father Adrian, 46, who owns a cleaning firm, in Hawridge, a quiet Buckinghamshire village.

“I can even walk on my own for short distances without my special walking frame. It’s all thanks to Yeppa.”

And now, because of her trusted companion, Harriet is about to undergo an operation that it is hoped will help her to walk completely independently.

It was in recognition of the incredible assistance Yeppa gives Harriet that she and her beloved pet won the Friends For Life award at this year’s Crufts.

Check out the link for photos of this loving, faithful companion.

What a powerful ad this is.

It really makes no difference which political campaign from which it emanates, but rather indicates how many would hope the political factions in this country should work towards the betterment of America.

HT:Classical Values

Michael Reagan posts what I consider to be one of the finest pieces on Haditha written to date.

It may be simple in its explanations, but it is concise in its facts which is refreshing on its face:

You’d hardly know it if you relied on the mainstream media, but the government’s case against the Haditha Marines took another body blow last Friday that may be the beginning of the end for this whole sorry attempt to severely punish eight heroic United States Marines for doing what they are trained to do.

In a surprise development on the day Lance Cpl. Stephen Tatum’s court martial was scheduled to begin, all charges against him were dropped without explanation.

I wonder however, if Time Magazine and Congressman Murtha have an answer to the question posed in the last paragraph of this piece:

And thanks to John Murtha and the liberal media, these Marines can now join my Dad’s wrongly accused Secretary of Labor Ray Donovan in asking where they go to get their reputations back.

I’ve often said politics and war do not make good bedfellows. When you add in a press ready and willing to paint our military in the worst of lights..well it is a true recipe for disaster.

As to where these young men go to regain their reputation I say only, it was lost only to those who refused to wait out the facts. There will be no apologies from the press or Congressman Murtha to be sure.

For those of us willing to believe that even our troops are innocent until proven guilty, there is no reputation to be regained.

There is simply gratitude that we have such men and women who are at the ready always to defend this country and sorrow that they and their families had to endure this ordeal at the hands of those who peddled their wares and political ambitions.

What an incredible specimen this Albino Alligator is.

Albino Whitie would have made a snack for larger alligators because of his colour.

But the 16st five-year-old was rescued from Louisiana swamps and taken to Florida.

Check out the link above for a must see picture.

HT:Ace

When I saw the title of this article, my first inclination was to not take the time to read the copy. It appeared as another run of the mill, pros and cons of the candidates piece.

Well, appearances were deceiving and I found myself engrossed in all three pages of Mr. Miller’s work. He has captured (with a bit of past history included) exactly the feeling I think many have in relation to this election cycle:

It seems clear that Senator Clinton, Senator Obama or Senator McCain will soon become the next President of the United States. Barring a catastrophe of a different sort, this is almost certain to happen to the United States –- which we enjoy calling the most powerful and most important country in the world. While perhaps jingoistic, if this view were totally off the wall the entire world would not be watching with as much fascination as it seems to be (of course, they may just be watching an amusing spectacle, like a cock fight). This makes the basic question even more important than otherwise — if only because others seem so to view us and base some of their policies on this thesis.

Why Clinton, Obama or McCain? There are more than three hundred million people in the U.S., and obviously many of them have the requisite Constitutional qualifications. It is not worth calculating the actual number, but whatever the number may be, it is humongous. I would be willing to bet that there are many millions who are constitutionally qualified and that there are thousands, if not millions, who would make far better presidents than any of the current crop, based on experience, ethics, humility and common sense. As Diogenes discovered, finding an honest person is not easy -– even with a lantern and even if there are scads of such people. We we are stuck with these three, quite possibly because nobody with more experience, ethics, humility and common sense would want the job or even accept it, except based on a rare sense of duty. Or, perhaps, because Diogenes is no longer with us.

At least a modicum of humility is essential, and few people who want to be president have much. There is none to be seen in Senator Clinton, but perhaps a little in Senators Obama and McCain.

Especially if you are among those not sold on any one of the three choices which have been presented to us at the moment (and unfortunately voting out of a sense of duty and partisanship), I don’t think you will be disappointed in the balance of this piece.

The NRCC has released the following video in tribute to House members who have served in the Armed Forces.

Well done!

Not half bad advice in this election season:

You can blame it on Bush, on “read my lips,” or Mary Matalin - bottom line is, Bill Clinton won. I try to remember that when I start getting smug with any prediction.

Please, please, Senator Specter give me reason to take pride in one of my home state Senators:

The slow pace of judicial confirmations may become a big issue in the next few weeks. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and ranking Judiciary Committee member Arlen Specter both have raised the possibility of halting all Senate business unless Harry Reid commits to meeting the number of Clinton appointees confirmed in the last two years of his second term:

It wasn’t clear that John Edwards was in contention for the VP slot on the Democratic ticket but he has confirmed that he is not interested in the job:

LAS VEGAS (Reuters) - Former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards said on Thursday he would not accept the nomination for U.S. vice president as he did four years ago.

General Petraeus has been issued a warning by the Speaker of the House in advance of his testimony to Congress on the progress in Iraq:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) warned Army Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker on Thursday not to “put a shine on recent events” in Iraq when they testify before Congress next week.

And, a correct response:

“Gen. Petraeus … is not a political figure,” said Michael Steel, spokesman for House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio). “The testimony he gives reflects the facts on the ground. If he reports that the security situation in Iraq is improving, as we hope he does, he will be echoing the assessment of many Democratic House members who have visited Iraq recently. Our priorities should be learning the facts and acting on them, not using any development as a pretext for irresponsible withdrawal.”

Nice to know the Speaker will arrive at these hearings with an open mind.

I may not be the sharpest tack in the room but even I understand when someone is using double speak to avoid a real answer to a question:

BURBANK, Calif. (AP) - Hillary Rodham Clinton appeared Thursday to deny published reports that she told New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson that Barack Obama cannot win the general election. But her campaign aides later said the New York senator had misunderstood the question.
“That’s a no,” she said at a news conference when asked if she had made the comment to Richardson. “We have been going back and forth in this campaign of who said what to whom and let me say this, that I don’t talk about private conversations but I have consistently made the case that I can win.”

But spokesman Mo Elleithee later said Clinton had misheard the question and thought she was being pressed on whether she’d be willing to disclose what she’d said to Richardson, who eventually endorsed Obama—and not her—for the Democratic presidential nomination.

“Senator Clinton was simply reiterating what she had just said—she doesn’t talk about private conversations,” Elleithee said.

Needless to say, it was a surprise when Governor Richardson threw his support behind Obama considering his past with the Clinton’s (or maybe it was in spite of it), but I see no reason why he would lie about stating that Obama could not win.

Just another day in Campaign 2008.

This 1994 football game between two Texas rival high schools had a finish most real football fans would have been delighted to witness, but the real treat in this video are the announcers.

Have a look and a listen!

Ah, for men like this in Hollywood again!

I received an email from my good friend DavidM yesterday in which he took me back in time to when he and I were both knee-high to a grasshopper.

He asked me if I remembered the great conventions of the past when the winner was not known in advance.

“Mr. Chairman, the great state of (name the state) proudly casts its (name your number) votes for its favorite son (name your candidate)!

That was the first ballot.

The second ballot was usually a nail-biter, and if no candidate emerged as the winner some back room maneuvering took place and the ultimate deal was struck. The winner would ask the second place finisher to be his running mate, whether or not he liked him.

That was when a convention really meant work for the delegates and not just a gathering of friends to rubber-stamp a decision already known while the delegates party all the time.

The perfect example is the Kennedy-Johnson battle for the nomination in 1960. Neither man liked the other, but somehow they took the election. Most believe it was by fraud in Chicago and the story is that President-elect Kennedy called Richard Nixon to thank him for not contesting the election. Nixon told him he didn’t want to put the country through that ordeal.

Too bad Al Gore didn’t think of the country first in 2000 and kept the good of the country foremost in his mind.

He wasn’t robbed of the election, but he convinced enough people of it that President Bush has had a rough time his whole term.

The 1976 Republican primary campaign between Ronald Reagan and incumbent Gerald Ford was a hard-fought and close race.

After President Ford had been given the nomination and he and Bob Dole, his running mate, had made their speeches the delegates called out for Ronald Reagan to speak.

Being the gentleman he was he spoke and was not bitter in his speech.

Listen to it and remember the good old days when candidates were somewhat respectful of each other:

Thank you, Mr. President, for showing us how a person loses gracefully.

As you all know, he came back in 1980 to win the White House. I was proud to have worked in both those campaigns, and my proudest moment was when North Carolina was the first state to go to Reagan in 1976, as I was a resident of North Carolina and got my feet wet in national politics in this election contest.

It’s nice to have a little fun at the expense of a topic which has created much controversy.

While I was reading this Washington Post article about Congress fighting over how to re-do the lights at the Capitol I was reminded that we need to do something about our outside lighting at our house too.

Several years ago we had a new garden done by a landscaper and lighting was included. The lights were put among the newly planted shrubs of various types: in front of the Japanese maple tree and in the front and back of the pear tree and oak trees, including the one in the back yard.

The trees are spotlights and look very nice, but the other lighting is not as good as it should be now that the shrubery and plants have grown.

I’ve been thinking of putting spot lights on two sides of the American flag we fly 24/7 in good weather, because the lights we have are not really bright enough to fully illuminate the flag.

Anyway, as I was reading the referenced article I was thinking of all these things that need to be done when I came across a statement that gave me an idea of starting a business.

Here’s the quote:

The project is part of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s environmentally friendly “Green the Capitol” initiative, which includes using more recycled paper, distributing more documents electronically, purchasing carbon offsets for the House’s greenhouse-gas emissions, and developing a plan to use wind power and other renewable energy sources.

Excuse the unintended pun, but when I read this paragraph a light (energy efficient, of course) went off in my head. I immediately knew what kind of business I was going to start that would not require a lot of work and would make a lot of money.

I’m going to start a carbon off-set company. I’ll charge less than Al Gore and I’ll buy the offsets from poor Africans or other third-world people who don’t have electricity and don’t know what it is. They have no carbon footprint, and since they don’t know about it I’ll just use their credits to sell to the gullible public and not pay the people whose carbon credits I’m using.

This will satisfy the people who want to feel guilty about the environment and yet not really do anything to fix it other than pay money to someone to buy another someone’s carbon credits.

I’ll get the checks (certified of course), cash them and send a nice certificate designed on my computer to send back to my customers, telling them they have offset their carbon footprint for one month and a tree has been planted in their honor.

Heck, for a few more bucks I’ll even have a tree planted and tell them exactly where it is. You know, kind of like buying stars and having them named for a friend or loved one when all you have to do is send some silly map with the location of the star (you’ll never find it) and tell them this is named for your friend or loved one who has everything and will just love having a star named after them.

On second thought, maybe I should just have a business that names stars after people and then I won’t have any overhead except for the certificate.

What do you think? Should I do one of these businesses or both?

If someone can give a better business idea to me, why, I’ll even name a star for them and I won’t charge for it.

Was it P.T. Barnum who said, “There’s a sucker born every minute”? He was right, you know.

So, I found this quiz and was able to identify three of the people in the top row and two in the bottom tier.

But I’ll be gosh darned if I could figure out what those in each row had in common until I checked out the answers.

Anyone out there who can name everyone in the grid and what makes them relevant without peeking?

Have fun!

I was shocked, angered and dismayed when I read the story of eleven third-graders plotting to kill their teacher.

They had it planned right down to assigning of the conspirators to clean up the blood!

These are eight and nine year old children—right about the same age as three of my grandchildren.

Parents allow televisions to be babysitters and don’t pay attention to what their children are watching. Or they encourage their children to “fight back” in school if someone does something to them instead of going to the teacher or principal to report that grievous act.

When I was doing some reading tutoring while my older granddaughter was in third grade I had a girl from her class who was definitely not interested in learning. She would lay her head and upper body on the reading table while she was supposed to be reading and I had to keep reminding her to sit up so she could concentrate.

She would mispronounce words and I would tell her the correct pronunciation over and over again to no avail.

When she finished reading a book (a chore in and of itself) she was to take a test to see how much she retained.

I would drill her on the book and what the theme was, who the characters were, what they did etc. She was shaky on the facts and didn’t seem upset but was determined to take the computerized test.

When she took the test she failed it everytime but once.

She caused disruption in the classroom to the point the teacher had to seat her by herself a lot. I was there for a Christmas decoration project where the children were to paint a plaster of paris object and saw her disruptive actions in the group we both happened to be in.

It was then that I heard another boy mention the show “Southpark” and this girl lit up like a Christmas tree and recited all her favorite episodes along with other shows that were not age-appropriate for her.

When asked if she was encouraged to do her homework at home the answer was no.

This was not a deprived child as far as where she lived, the clothing she had etc., but it was obvious her parents didn’t take the responsibility of making sure their child was sociable and educated.

Leave it up to the teachers. If the kids don’t like the teacher then they can form a gang and plot to kill the teacher, right down to planning who cleans up the blood.

What have a segment of our parents done to make our children this violent?

Something has to be done to stop it, but I don’t have the answers. I’m too flabbergasted by what I just read.

It looks as though the Marines in Berkeley recently received some well deserved support:

On March 22, 2008, a coalition of patriotic and veterans’ groups held a large rally in front of Berkeley’s “U.S. Marine Corps Officer Selection Office” (better known as the Marines recruiting office) in support of American troops and their missions.

This rally — with at least 400 participants at any one time and probably well over 500 grand total — was much larger than any of the previous anti-troop protests at the office organized by Code Pink or World Can’t Wait, which usually range from less than ten people to perhaps 50 at most on a few rare occasions.

Great pictures at the link!

From Michael Yon:

Desert Battles are unfolding in hidden and faraway places. Bullets snapp through air, then splap through flesh and men fall. Bodies crumple onto the desert, a fly lands on the lip of an open mouth, fingers twitch as the flesh dies and the winds kick up and dust settles on unblinking eyes. The dry earth drinks their sticky blood and they are forgotten. Their families do not know they are dead. They came to kill Americans and innocent Iraqis. Instead, they were killed themselves. In a des