Going “green” can be a boost to the economy… if you’re a prostitute. Perhaps this could be a topic for Al Gore’s sequel, “An Inconvenient Booty Call”:
The global climate challenge may have been on the daytime agenda during the recent World Business Summit climate conference in Copenhagen, but in the evenings many businessmen, politicians and civil servants are reported to have availed themselves of the capitalÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s prostitutes.
Ã¢â‚¬Å“WeÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ve been extremely busy. Politicians also need to relax after a long day,Ã¢â‚¬Â says Ã¢â‚¬ËœMiss DinaÃ¢â‚¬â„¢, herself a prostitute.
Good for the economy
Nyhedsbrevet 3F called various escort agencies and prostitutes to hear whether they had been busier than normal during the climate conference Ã¢â‚¬â€œ and all agreed; summits in Copenhagen are good for the economy.
This could be fun to go to just to hear environmentalists pulling up to the curb and saying “What’ll ya do for 50 carbon credits?”
It’s okay though, the hookers are doing it “Gore style,” meaning that they’re using hybrid sex toys, hemp whips, biodegradable condoms, and if you yell Al Gore’s name during an orgasm they give you 10% off — then they get on their private jets and fly home.
As you’re probably aware, President Obama nominated Sonia Sotomayor to replace outgoing Supreme Court Justice and Stan Laurel ringer, David Souter, the man who is George HW Bush’s biggest mistake (second biggest if you’re on the left).
There are a number of troubling issues in the professional career of Sotomayor, but this is one of the biggest clues to the coming activism we’re bound to see on the rise in the Obama Court:
In 2001, Sonia Sotomayor, an appeals court judge, gave a speech declaring that the ethnicity and sex of a judge Ã¢â‚¬Å“may and will make a difference in our judging.Ã¢â‚¬Â
This isn’t a rare opinion, and it’s not a new one either. What other judges in history may have agreed with Sotomayor?
Roger Taney, one-time Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, among others, certainly took their own ethnicity into account when rendering an opinion in Dred Scott v. Sanford.
How about the 1874 SCOTUS ruling in Minor v. Happersett — this decision found that the Constitution does not guarantee the right of women to vote in federal elections. The court was, of course, comprised of all men, none of whom dissented. The sex of the Court certainly “made a difference” in this ruling. Is this what Sotomayor believes to be an acceptable judicial tendency?
Our nation’s history has proven that judges who have to look in the mirror to remind them how they should rule are an affront to justice, not promoters of it — no matter what side of the political aisle they fall on.
But this analysis is off-topic, because the choice of Sotomayor has nothing to do with the Constitution and justice. When you’re supervising the destruction of a Constitutional Republic and the building of a Socialist Nirvana, what use do you have for a blind justice on your work site? They can’t even tell the difference between a hammer, and a sickle.
Update: If you’re up to shenanigans like this, you want friendlies on the court whose rulings have little to do with law and plenty to do with shared agendas.
President Obama is expected to announce late this week that he will create a “cyber czar,” a senior White House official who will have broad authority to develop strategy to protect the nation’s government-run and private computer networks, according to people who have been briefed on the plan.
The adviser will have the most comprehensive mandate granted to such an official to date and will probably be a member of the National Security Council but will report to the national security adviser as well as the senior White House economic adviser, said the sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the deliberations are not final.
The Obama administration is fulfulling its goal of containing more czars than a Russian history book.
In the corridors of power in Washington, DC, they’ve figured out that if you call someone a “czar,” you can side-step any annoying confirmation procedures and other constitutional issues and still create what is in essence a rogue, unchecked cabinet post.
Don’t you wish you could do the same?
IRS: Hey, you cheated on your taxes.
You: I don’t have to follow the prescribed system because I appointed a tax czar to file my return.
Why consider US missile program cuts now? AK military program helps secure US. Now is NOT time to cut our defense.
This is a good point, albeit an unfortunately obvious one to have to make. Since it’s likely that all we can expect in the form of direct action from President Obama’s beloved “international community” (which is why we elected an “international community organizer”) is the obligatory “strongly worded letter,” the only thing that might save us is missile defense, which Obama wants to cut.
Obama has proven to be pragmatic for selfish political reasons on Gitmo, CIA files, detainee photos and other issues, so my guess is he ultimately flip-flops on missile defense and nukes.
As soon as Obama realizes that his exclusive national defense policy of “unclenching the fists of those who disagree with America” was a bad idea (mainly because it could get millions of registered Democrat voters killed before the next election), we may get a shield — if it’s not too late already.
But maybe we won’t get a shield, even if the president wants one — we’re out of money.
As with every other Palin-related post these days, we have to run the “Bear in the woods” remix that will make a great ad for the 2012 campaign:
Today’s column at WorldNetDaily revolves around the recent “waterboarding” stunt by radio host “Mancow” Muller.
Muller said the procedure is torture, but in today’s column I take a larger look at the growing fad that is entertainers and media types having themselves waterboarded in order to find out if it’s torture or not.
The Washington Times has partnered with the Internet company Footnote.com on a new project that transforms Washington’s Vietnam war memorial wall into an interactive, personal journey on the Web. The Interactive Vietnam Veterans Memorial allows you to search the names on the wall and to drill down into the government’s official war records to learn details about each of the 58,000-plus heroes enshrined on the wall.
Christopher Hitchens was waterboarded last year and concluded that the interrogation procedure is torture (possibly because the water didn’t have any Scotch in it — the horror).
Not long ago, Sean Hannity offered to be waterboarded for charity. This prompted some on the left — who say that waterboarding should never, ever be used on any human being whatsoever because it goes against every principle we as Americans hold dear — to gladly step up and offer to waterboard Sean Hannity. Keith Olbermann offered $1,000 for every second Hannity was waterboarded. I offered $2,000 for every second Hannity could stand to listen to Keith Olbermann. Both offers remain in limbo.
Then, just this week, radio host “Mancow” Muller was waterboarded and he concluded it was torture. Muller claims he went into it with the intention of saying it wasn’t torture, but changed his mind two seconds into waterfall that kept him from running his mouth for a record six seconds — one man’s torture is music to another’s ears.
The question as it pertains to willingly subjecting one’s self to waterboarding isn’t “is it torture?” It’s, “is demanding that you shouldn’t consider its use unless you could undergo it yourself and claim it isn’t torture a good idea?” This is like saying that I shouldn’t be for life sentences for convicted murderers unless I’m willing to prove it ain’t so bad by willingly spending the rest of my life in prison.
If making something illegal just because I might consider it torture is the issue, then “Fear Factor” would have been cancelled halfway through the very first episode and Yoko Ono’s larynx would be rotting in a jail cell.
The relevant question as it pertains to waterboarding is “did it prevent attacks on people who loathe the idea of waterboarding terror suspects?” The answer, according to the CIA, is “yes.” This now makes us ask the question: Is “irony-boarding” torture?
If any pollsters want to make liberal heads asplode, then go to Los Angeles and ask the following question: “Would you rather die in a terrorist attack, or have your life, and most importatly, film career, saved because of waterboarding?”
Below is “Mancow” Muller doing something that, if there was beer instead of water in that pitcher, happens every weekend at frat parties:
Update: I cross-posted this at HotAir, and one of the comments there is interesting and sums up the joke that these waterboard wannabes are:
ItÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s a wonder he wasnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t injuredÃ¢â‚¬Â¦
The Ã¢â‚¬Å“procedureÃ¢â‚¬Â demonstrated is not the waterboarding procedure used on the three AQ subjects, and is not in the least as it is done in SERE training.
This is what has really screwed up the entire Ã¢â‚¬Å“debateÃ¢â‚¬Â on waterboarding.
Yes, Mancow thought he was drowningÃ¢â‚¬Â¦pouring water directly into the mouth and nose of a subject is not how waterboarding is doneÃ¢â‚¬Â¦the method shown is an attempt to drown a subject.