CliffyWorld

Heather Mallick, a so called columnist for the Canadian Broadcasting Company wrote several columns maligning Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin with personal attacks on her and family as well as attacking her constituents and supporters.

Calling Palin a hillbilly because of her small town background Mallick fails to remember her history as she says: “I was born in a northern Canadian settlement so small it was accessible most of the year only by a Bombardier, a sort of huge military tank built for passengers. It was like a transport plane, a big iron bulb with caterpillar tracks. I swear we had a paddle-steamer for supplies in the summer. Take that, Sarah Palin. The place was six times smaller than Wasilla” said Mallick. I guess it takes one hillbilly to know another. The CBC had no problem hiring a hillbilly that most Canadians disagree with but the Alaskans had no problem giving Palin an 85% performance approval rating as governor.

As for Republican males, Mallick said: “It's possible that Republican men, sexual inadequates that they are, really believe that women will vote for a woman just because she's a woman. They're unfamiliar with our true natures. Do they think vaginas call out to each other in the jungle night? I mean, I know men have their secret meetings at which they pledge to do manly things, like being irresponsible with their semen and postponing household repairs with glue and used matches. Guys will be guys, obviously.” Mallick may be a product of Immaculate Conception and fails to remember scandals of her own Canadian government proving that misbehavior is not just limited to U.S. Republican males. Here are just a few Canadian male inadequacies to refresh her memory:

-Progressive Conservative Defence Minister Robert Coates was caught up in a scandal exposed by a 1985 story in the Ottawa Citizen. The report focused on a stop Coates and two aides made at a strip club in West Germany while on a NATO tour. It raised questions about the security implications of the minister's actions.

-In 1995, former Nova Scotia premier Gerald Regan was accused of a number of sexual offences dating back to the mid-1950s.
Regan eventually went to trial and was acquitted of eight charges, including rape, attempted rape and forcible confinement. However, the scandal did not end there, and in 1999, more charges were filed. The charges alleged Regan had forced kisses and physical contact on young women between 1968 and 1978. Those charges were eventually stayed as well.

-In 1999 Conservative Senator Wilbert Keon stepped down from his position as the head of the University of Ottawa Heart Institute. Keon was caught in an undercover prostitution sweep in December 1999 when he pulled over his car and began talking to a woman at the side of the road. The woman turned out to be an undercover police officer.

Continuing with her nonsense, Mallick offends all of Palin’s constituents and supporters stating: “She added nothing to the ticket that the Republicans didn't already have sewn up, the white trash vote, the demographic that sullies America's name inside and outside its borders yet has such a curious appeal for the right.” Mallick must approve of “Nippertipping” and probably looses sleep knowing that Quebec is part of Canada.

Mallick circles as one liking to hear herself talk: “Palin has a toned-down version of the porn actress look favored by this decade's woman, the over treated hair, puffy lips and permanently alarmed expression.” Then goes on to agree with herself, “But do they not know that women have been trained to resent other women and that they only learn to suppress this by constantly berating themselves and reading columns like this one? I'm a feminist who understands that women can nurse terrible and delicate woman hatred.”

Another dirty blow from Mallick comes when she insults Palin’s family stating: “Husband Todd looks like a roughneck; Track, heading off to Iraq, appears terrified. They claim to be family obsessed while being studiously terrible at parenting”. Mallick is no raving beauty. Based on her condescending views of woman, Todd Palin would probably look better in a skirt. Insulting Track as he deploys to Iraq is unquestionably the most deplorable thing she spews. Forgetting that our military is completely voluntary, Track is putting his life in jeopardy to defend what he feels is the right thing to do, a feeling shared by many Canadian soldiers who are also deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Canadian’s should feel disgusted and embarrassed that their tax dollars support the Canadian Broadcasting Company who pays a salary to Heather Mallick.

Heather Mallick is a pig.

Your comments on this article are always appreciated.

If you’re a politician running for office it could be advisable to consult God for approval on what you say before debating or making political speeches. Don’t depend on Carl Rove, James Carville, Mark Penn, David Axelrod, Dick Morris and others to provide divine guidance and motivation.

Those who are God-fearing, deeply religious and devout toward their faith and those who do not believe are continuously at odds interpreting 1st amendment rights and the constitutionality of separation of church and state. Then there are the liberal political pundants, commentators and columnists who believe or disbelieve only when it suits their political agendas. They interpret the use of God in political presentations to sway voters towards their objectives without care of insulting others. Mentioning God in any political forum these days will definitely lead to heated debates and controversy instigated by the liberal media.

Why do politicians use the reference of God in many of their speeches? Obviously they wouldn't want to offend potential supporters who might not authorize their expression of faith. The answer lies within the candidate’s own morality and support of faith and not to appease voters as left wing commentators will lead you to believe. Most of us concur that liberal media displays no morality when expressing their views and will distort just about anything to sway opinion. Fortunately we are much smarter then what they make us out to be.

On September 11th 2008, ABC news was able to boost their dismal ratings by landing the first interview with Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin. Charlie Gibson, the talking head and all around “nice guy” of ABC World News was the interrogator who displayed his lack of knowledge on NATO treaties along with pressing Governor Palin on a so called “Bush Doctrine” a made up list of four different policies created, pieced together and named by the media and which have never been statements of official government policy. Of course Palin was confused as to which set of policies Gibson was asking about. The old “gotcha” technique clearly failed so Gibson then started his ludicrous questioning about Palin’s support of what he characterized a U.S. holy war in Iraq. His misinterpretation of a speech given at her church started a liberal media smear-fest. The actual words spoken by Governor Palin are as follows:

"Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending them out on a task that is from God. That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God's plan."

Palin is clearly praying that we're doing the right thing in Iraq but Palin’s response was not good enough for Gibson and continued pressing her reference to God seemingly emulating Detective Robert Goren (Vincent D'Onofrio) of Law and Order Criminal Intent with side winding head movements and convulsive body movements.

Charlie Gibson is no expert on God nor did he study theology but does hold a graduate degree from Princeton University. At one time Princeton had close ties to the Presbyterian Church but that was way before his attendance. So what gives him the authority to question Sarah Palin’s belief that God controls not only her actions but our countries actions? I surely can't find any credentials.

Mr. Gibson should review the following political excerpts from the Presidential inaugural addresses below and tell us all why having faith in God overseeing and supporting our personal and nation's actions disturbs him so much.

“The world is very different now. For man holds in his mortal hands the power to abolish all forms of human poverty and all forms of human life. And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe—the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God”.
Franklin D. Roosevelt, Inaugural address, Jan 20, 1945

“The American people stand firm in the faith which has inspired this Nation from the beginning. We believe that all men have a right to equal justice under law and equal opportunity to share in the common good. We believe that all men have a right to freedom of thought and expression. We believe that all men are created equal because they are created in the image of God”.
Harry S. Truman inaugural address, January 20, 1949

“The American belief under this covenant of justice, liberty, and union we have become a nation, prosperous, great, and mighty. And we have kept our freedom. But we have no promise from God that our greatness will endure. We have been allowed by him to seek greatness with the sweat of our hands and the strength of our spirit”.
Lyndon B. Johnson inaugural address, January 20, 1965

“We have the chance today to do more than ever before in our history to make life better in America--to ensure better education, better health, better housing, better transportation, a cleaner environment-to restore respect for law, to make our communities more livable--and to ensure the God-given right of every American to full and equal opportunity”.
Richard Nixon inaugural address January 20, 1973

“I'm told that tens of thousands of prayer meetings are being held on this day, and for that I'm deeply grateful. We are a nation under God, and I believe God intended for us to be free. It would be fitting and good, I think, if on each Inaugural Day in future years it should be declared a day of prayer”.
Ronald Reagan inaugural address January 20, 1981

“There's no story more heartening in our history than the progress that we've made toward the brotherhood of man that God intended for us”.
Ronald Reagan inaugural address January 21, 1985

“We have heard the trumpets. We have changed the guard. And now, each in our own way and with God's help, we must answer the call”.
William J. Clinton inaugural address January 20, 1993

“We go forward with complete confidence in the eventual triumph of freedom, not because history runs on the wheels of inevitability - it is human choices that move events; not because we consider ourselves a chosen nation - God moves and chooses as He wills”. George W. Bush January 20, 2005

Your comments on this article are always appreciated.

As we get closer to November 4th, 2008 Americans will eventually sort out the rhetoric spewing from the media and lock in on a candidate that best suits the qualifications to hold the highest position in the country. Of course there are many people that will not research any candidate at all and just vote for one who shares the same religion, color or race. Additionally they will make a decision based upon the looks, hairstyle, dress or sound of the candidate’s articulation.

What is the Role of the US president? (according to Wikipedia)

The President is at the head of the executive branch of the federal government; his role is to enforce national law as given in the Constitution and written by Congress. Article Two of the Constitution establishes the President as commander-in-chief of the armed forces and enumerates powers specifically granted to the President, including the power to sign into law or veto bills passed by both houses of Congress. The President also has the power to create a cabinet of advisers and to grant pardons or reprieves. Finally, with the "advice and consent" of the Senate, the President is empowered to make treaties and appoint federal officers, ambassadors, and federal judges, including Justices of the Supreme Court. As with officials in the other branches of the United States government, the Constitution restrains the President with a set of checks and balances designed to prevent any individual or group from taking absolute power.

How can we really choose between the two current candidates?

Let's put ourselves in the role of a human resources manager interviewing a person for a management position within a huge company that handles national and international products and services. It requires the candidate to hire a staff of qualified managers to run various departments within the organization and have them report and advise on their operations within a timely schedule. Eventually decisions would have to be made to adjust operations for the corporate good. Knowledge of law is required as all doings of the company must abide by constitutional practices with it's staff members, competing companies, their workers and the consumers that support all. International law is a plus as the company conducts business abroad in many aligned and non-friendly countries. Finally, military experience with a commanding position such as General, Commander or Lieutenant is required as the company may take part in several hostile takeovers with other national and international companies.

Our record on choosing a past president if it were based on the imaginary human resource interview.

Out of 43 presidents, 25 have been lawyers, 31 have had military experience (all with a lieutenant or higher rank) and only 2 studied business but 1 graduated with a business degree. (George W Bush). Additionally, 6 never attended college at all. Most presidents of the past would not meet the qualifications for the position in the company but were still hired and most proved their good.

Abraham Lincoln never attended college but led a divided nation through a civil war.
Franklin Roosevelt was never in the military but defeated Nazi and Japanese aggression.
Harry Truman never graduated with a business degree but formed the “Truman Committee” which investigated the scandal of military wastefulness by exposing fraud and mismanagement saving over 15 billion dollars.

The closest match our imaginary human resource interview obtained was with Ronald Reagan who graduated Eureka College with a degree in Economics and was a Captain in the United States Army Reserve and United States Army Air Corps. Some considered Reagan one of the the greatest presidents in US history.

Don't depend entirely on the media for help choosing a president as they are mostly liberal and one sided.

Reports vs Commentators

Reporters as examples were Walter Cronkite or Edward R. Murrow. They reported the news as it was and as it happened. Commentators are people who bloviate such as Keith Olbermann of the MSNBC cable channel. Andrea Mitchell another so called commentator considers herself queen-like recently stating “that only stupid Hillary supporters will vote for Sarah Palin.” John Roberts of CBS news making with his sexist comment about Sarah Palin's motherly qualifications stating that she would be better off staying home raising her children including her downs syndrome one. Jack Cafferty of CNN makes it very clear his hate for the Republican Party and John McCain. Jack as well as many will be very happy if his democratic party wins and passes the “Fairness Doctrine” giving the conservatives equal or more time to rebut him right after he spews. Commentators have an agenda and will only provide personal or network views with little or no facts. Sadly to say there are no true reporters anymore.

How do I educate myself to choose the most qualified candidate for president?

Take time and study the true facts. Read both conservative and liberal newspapers. Listen to AM talk radio and watch MSNBC, CNN and Fox and analyze the commentators views for truth and clarity. Ask questions to others and debate issues. Use the Internet to obtain facts from confirmed and established sites. Listen to plans, details and facts stated by the candidates and filter the rhetoric.

In the end you will make the right choice. Whether he wins or looses, is black or white, old or young, speaks funny or is more groomed, you will have made an educated choice.

Your comments on this article are always appreciated.

The Los Angeles City Council unanimously approved an ordinance Wednesday 8/13/08 requiring certain home improvement stores to develop plans for dealing with day laborers who congregate nearby in search of jobs.

The ordinance mandates that proposed big-box stores obtain conditional-use permits, which could then require them to build day-labor centers with shelter, drinking water, bathrooms and trash cans.

Home Depot, Lowes and other big box home improvement stores will have to pay 100% of the cost for materials and labor to construct shelters in their store parking lots. Of course you would think that the employers of the Illegal’s would contribute a percentage of funding or that the laborers building the shelters would be those who would use them. As we all know logic does not prevail in California’s state government.

Stores would not have to make a plan if the city determined that there were not significant numbers of day laborers in the area or that they were not expected to generate increased trash or noise or impede traffic. The ordinance would apply only to stores of 100,000 square feet or more.

"We welcome it," said Pablo Alvarado of the Los Angeles-based National Day Laborer Organizing Network. "We need it. The workers deserve it.” Marvin Stewart, president of the Minuteman Project, said the ordinance was another example of how the city condones illegal immigration. "All of this is flying in the face of what the city is supposed to be doing in terms of upholding the law," Stewart said.

Is Pablo Alverado correct when he says that illegal alien day laborers deserve shelter? Illegals are using our schools, hospitals, welfare, housing and legal systems so why not provide them with free shelter at the local Home Depot or Lowes as well.

There is a bigger problem here rather than the immigration issue. Home Depot and Lowes have to define what a safe shelter is, how to build it and what is should contain.

Here are some quotes from the U.S. Army Field Manual, No. 21-76, “Shelters.” I hope this helps the CEO’s and contractors working for Home Depot and Lowes.

“A shelter can protect you from the sun, insects, wind, rain, snow, hot or cold temperatures, and enemy observation. It can give you a feeling of well-being. It can help you maintain your will to survive. In some areas, your need for shelter may take precedence over your need for food and possibly even your need for water. For example, prolonged exposure to cold can cause excessive fatigue and weakness (exhaustion). An exhausted person may develop a "passive" outlook, thereby losing the will to survive. The most common error in making a shelter is to make it too large. A shelter must be large enough to protect you. It must also be small enough to contain your body heat, especially in cold climates.”

Additionally:

It must be large enough and level enough to lie down comfortably, have camouflaged escape routes, provide protection against wild animals and rocks and dead trees that might fall, be free from insects, reptiles, and poisonous plants and blend in with the surroundings

A warning to all Big Box home improvement centers located in US sanctuary cities. Get ready to build. While drawing up your blueprints consider building overnight accommodations with plenty of amenities such as: televisions, radios, stoves, refrigerators, food, magazines, scenic views and personal assistants so your Illegals can be entertained well enough to stay off the streets at night reducing the crime in your communities. If you’re not sure if your store is in a sanctuary city, click on this link: http://www.ojjpac.org/sanctuary.asp

Consumers of Lowes and Home Depot who support sanctuary cities should consider helping these stores foot the bill and labor costs by purchasing building supplies from these stores to build additional shelters on your driveways and in your backyards.

Your comments on this article are always appreciated.

A military jury on August 6, 2008 convicted Osama bin Laden's driver of supporting terrorism but acquitted him on more serious charges of conspiring with al Qaeda to wage murderous attacks, in the first U.S. war crimes trial since World War Two.

The ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero stated "Any verdict resulting from such a flawed system is a betrayal of American values. The rules for the Guantánamo military commissions are so flawed that justice could never be served. From start to finish, this has been a monumental debacle of American justice. The judgment against Hamdan undoubtedly will be challenged in legitimate courts, but there is no appeal from the judgment of future generations. This system was devised to permit the prosecution of alleged wrongdoing by detainees, while continuing to cover up the wrongdoing by government interrogators. Trials that are shrouded in secrecy and tainted by coercion are the very antithesis of American justice."

Not mentioned by most of the media was that Yemeni captive Salim Hamdan was transporting two surface to air missiles in the trunk of his car. In his defense he could have said that he didn't know how they got there or they weren't his, just like a drug dealer getting busted for speeding with the goods stowed in the glove box of his automobile. Carrying two missiles, well I guess that defense wouldn't hold any water. They are just to big to not know they are there.

So why was Salim Hamdan transporting these weapons in the first place? You know as well as I what the master plan was but the ACLU and the US military court failed to comprehend the meaning of conspiracy. For those few who need a definition: Conspiracy (political), a plot to overthrow a government or other power.

Defense lawyers said the partial acquittal affirmed their faith in the military officers on the jury but did nothing to remedy fundamental flaws in a system designed to convict on all counts.

Here in the USA citizens are protected by code Sec. 926A, Interstate transportation of firearms:

Not withstanding any other provision of any law or any rule or regulation of a State or any political subdivision thereof, any person who is not otherwise prohibited by this chapter from transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm shall be entitled to transport a firearm for any lawful purpose from any place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm to any other place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm if, during such transportation the firearm is unloaded, and neither the firearm nor any ammunition being transported is readily accessible or is directly accessible from the passenger compartment of such transporting vehicle: Provided, That in the case of a vehicle without a compartment separate from the driver's compartment the firearm or ammunition shall be contained in a locked container other than the glove compartment or console.

So, fair warning to all...If you are planing to transport any number of surface to air missiles in the future, make sure to safely put them in a locked box somewhere that can not be readily accessed and by all means make sure they are unloaded. If you are still unsure of the rules and regulations, call ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero or the US military court system for advice. Maybe they will come over and inspect your vehicle for compliance and while they are there, (just to be safe) tell them you are not conspiring to do anything wrong.

Your comments on this article are always appreciated.