Another Reason To Leave Nature Alone...

Lawsuit: Couple Claims Fertility Clinic Used Wrong Sperm



My wife and I know who the parents of our kids are. There was no possible way for our kids to be anyone's but mine.



Hmmm.....



Maybe God knew what He was doing after all!

powered by performancing firefox

Watch "The Great Global Warming Swindle - Documentary Film" on Google Video

Global Warming is a fact, but what causes it?

The Great Global Warming Swindle - Documentary Film

1 hr 13 min 32 sec - Mar 19, 2007
Average rating:   (11 ratings)
Description: Accepted theories about man causing global warming are "lies" claims a controversial new TV documentary. 'The Great Global Warming Swindle' - backed by eminent scientists - is set to rock the accepted consensus that climate change is being driven by humans. The programme, to be screened on Channel 4 on Thursday March 8, will see a series of respected scientists attack the "propaganda" that they claim is killing the world's poor. Even the co-founder of Greenpeace, Patrick Moore, is shown, claiming African countries should be encouraged to burn more CO2. Nobody in the documentary defends the greenhouse effect theory, as it claims that climate change is natural, has been occurring for years, and ice falling from glaciers is just the spring break-up and as normal as leaves falling in autumn. A source at Channel 4 said: "It is essentially a polemic and we are expecting it to cause trouble, but this is the controversial programming that Channel 4 is renowned for." Controversial director Martin Durkin said: "You can see the problems with the science of global warming, but people just don't believe you - it's taken 10 years to get this commissioned. "I think it will go down in history as the first chapter in a new era of the relationship between scientists and society. Legitimate scientists - people with qualifications - are the bad guys. "It is a big story that is going to cause controversy. "It's very rare that a film changes history, but I think this is a turning point and in five years the idea that the greenhouse effect is the main reason behind global warming will be seen as total bollocks.

Want to see more cool videos?
Go to video.google.com/?hl=en

Think you have an even cooler video?
Add it at video.google.com/videouploadform?hl=en

If you're having trouble watching the video, try copying the following URL into your browser:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4499562022478442170&q=Great+Global+Warming&pr=goog-sl&hl=en

A Good Read

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258498,00.html



I'll post more when I have time. Feel free to post your thoughts here.



Soup



PS - To prevent SPAM I moderate all responses, sorry for the inconvenience.

powered by performancing firefox

Freedom of Speech?

We need to support General Pace's beliefs. It will be a sad commentary on the state of our Nation if he is urged to rescind his comments.



We offer freedom of speech and freedom of religion in this country. I agree with his views, but more importantly, I support his right to voice his views. This is America, and we need to put an end to the tyranny that is 'political correctness'. Forcing him to recant is the same as forcing him to denounce his faith. This is wrong and un-American.



I have included a copy of the article from FOXNews.com

Gay Advocacy Group Wants Apology From Pentagon Top General After Homosexuality Comment



Tuesday , March 13, 2007



AP



WASHINGTON —

A gay advocacy group Tuesday demanded an apology from the Pentagon's top general for calling homosexuality immoral.



In a newspaper interview Monday, Marine Gen. Peter Pace had likened homosexuality to adultery and said the military should not condone it by allowing gays to serve openly in the military.



"General Pace's comments are outrageous, insensitive and disrespectful to the 65,000 lesbian and gay troops now serving in our armed forces," the advocacy group Servicemembers Legal Defense Network said in a statement on its Web site.



The group has represented some service members dismissed from the military for their sexual orientation.



Pace, chairman of the military Joint Chiefs of Staff, made his remarks in an interview Monday with the Chicago Tribune. He was responding to a question about the "don't ask, don't tell" policy that allows gays and lesbians to serve if they keep their sexual orientation private and don't engage in homosexual acts.



Pace said he supports the policy, which prohibits commanders from asking about a person's sexual orientation. Over the years thousands have been dismissed under this policy, signed into law by President Clinton in 1994.



"I believe homosexual acts between two individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts," Pace said in the interview. "I do not believe the United States is well served by a policy that says it is OK to be immoral in any way."



Pace, a native of Brooklyn, N.Y., and a 1967 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, said he based his views on his upbringing.



"As an individual, I would not want (acceptance of gay behavior) to be our policy, just like I would not want it to be our policy that if we were to find out that so-and-so was sleeping with somebody else's wife, that we would just look the other way, which we do not. We prosecute that kind of immoral behavior," Pace was quoted as saying.



The newspaper said Pace did not address concerns raised by a 2005 government audit that showed some 10,000 troops, including more than 50 specialists in Arabic, have been discharged because of the policy.

powered by performancing firefox

No, You May Not Leave The Country

From the State Department web site:

Passport Fees

March 8, 2005

Routine Services (Form DS-11)

Non-Refundable

Age 16 and older: The passport application fee is $67. The execution fee is $30. The total is $97 .

Under Age 16: The passport application fee is $52. The execution fee is $30. The total is $82 .

The passport application fee includes the $12.00 Security Surcharge, which became effective March 8, 2005.

During the summer 0f 2001, my wife and I took our 8-month-old son with us on a quick over-night stay in Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada. It was an inexpensive but fun side-trip on our vacation to visit family in Illinois and Ohio. Our son and daughter have both expressed interest, after looking at old photos, in a return trip to the falls (when our newborn is old enough to enjoy it). As beautiful as the American side is, the Canadians have a better overall view of the falls.

With the new decision by our wise and benevolent "Department of Homeland Security" an American family like ours will need to cough-up $440 for the privilege to cross into Canada.

I have to apologize to Canada for the certain loss in tourism dollars they will feel due to this measure. Surely we have a better relationship with Canada than this. These fees are ridiculous, excessive, and unnecessary. It is truly a shame that our government feels they need to charge citizens such an exorbitant amount for the privilege to leave our country.

powered by performancing firefox

Why I Respect Ben Nelson

Senators Hagel and Nelson always respond to serious e-mails. Senator Hagel generally sends a quick e-mail followed by a detailed letter. Senator Nelson usually goes with e-mail only. Here's the latest reponse:



____________________________________________________________



Dear Joseph L.:



Thank you for contacting me to make English the national language of the

United States. appreciate your concerns.



In May 2006, I supported Senator James Inhofe's amendment to the

Immigration Reform Bill, S. 2611, to declare English as the national

language of the United States and to promote the patriotic integration of

prospective U.S. citizens. Inhofe's amendment was included in the

final version of this bill, which the Senate passed on May 25, 2006. />there were amendments in the legislation I supported, I was unable to vote

for the final version of the S. 2611, due to its inability to adequately secure

our borders, which I continue to believe Congress must handle first in order

to resolve the problems of illegal immigration. the end, this legislation

failed to become law after a conference committee (a temporary panel

composed of Senate and House members, formed for the purpose of

reconciling differences in legislation which has passed both chambers) failed

to work out the differences with the House immigration bill, the Border

Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act, H.R. 4437.



Joseph L., I am aware how frustrated you are, as is the case with many

Nebraskans, with the handling of the contentious issue of immigration

reform. we begin addressing our nation's challenges in the 110th

Congress, immigration is certain to be at the forefront of the discussion.

Representative Steve King has recently introduced the English Language

Unity Act of 2007, H.R. 997, to declare English as the official language of

the United States. this bill is pending before the House Education

and Labor and Judiciary Committees. will keep your thoughts in mind

should this legislation come before me in the full Senate.



Thank you again for contacting me with your comments. legislative

process will only work with the input of concerned citizens, and I encourage

you to continue sharing your thoughts and ideas.



Sincerely,



Ben Nelson

U.S. Senator

powered by performancing firefox

GOP is abandoning Bush? Not quite

By Richard Benedetto - USA Today

The Washington punditocracy has proclaimed far and wide that Republicans, disenchanted with the war in Iraq, are abandoning President Bush in droves, leaving him the lamest of lame ducks. However, the latest USA TODAY/Gallup Poll suggests Bush might not be as wounded as he appears — at least not among his party faithful.



The Feb. 9-11 poll puts Bush's job approval at 37%, but among people who identify themselves as Republican or leaning Republican, his approval rating is 76%.



Thus, despite bad news from Baghdad and carefully crafted hand-wringing by high-profile GOP war critics in Congress such as Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, three of four Republicans in the country are hanging in there with the president.



The poll also shows that rank-and-file Republicans have higher regard for the president than they do Republicans in Congress. They gave GOP lawmakers a 63% job-approval rating, 13 points below Bush's. And 72% of Republicans do not think Bush made a mistake sending U.S. troops to Iraq.



So if congressional Republicans figure the key to re-election in 2008 is taking a hard line against Bush on Iraq, they could be dead wrong. They might lure some independents, but they risk alienating their GOP base. To win, you need solid support from your base plus independents, not independents alone.





Conventional wisdom also says the presidential ambitions of Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., could be derailed by his strong support for the war. This poll, however, shows that his stance could be a plus among the base.



What does this high approval among Republicans mean for Bush? It means that as long as his party support remains that strong, he won't fall below 30% approval, a depth that would virtually extinguish his political power. The lowest Bush has fallen is 31%, still enough to make him a significant, although wounded, force in legislative battles with the Democratic-controlled Congress.



The latest congressional skirmish over Iraq underscores the point. In the House's non-binding vote to oppose the president's deployment of more troops to Baghdad, 17 Republicans voted with 229 Democrats to pass the measure. Four GOP representatives didn't vote. Lost was the fact that 180 Republicans stuck with Bush. By that count, Bush gets a 92% loyalty standing among House Republicans who voted. Hardly a GOP exodus.



In the Senate, Democrats fell four votes short of the 60 needed to force a vote on an identical Iraq resolution. Why? Not enough Republicans would go along. Indeed, seven GOP senators broke with the president, and nine didn't vote, yet 33 held firm. Among GOP senators who voted, that's an 83% Republican loyalty rating for Bush.



Though the president may have lost the country on the issues of the day, rumors of his demise among Republicans voters and lawmakers are greatly exaggerated.



Richard Benedetto retired last year as White House correspondent for USA TODAY. He teaches journalism and politics at American University in Washington and is author of Politicians Are People, Too.

powered by performancing firefox