Speaking to Hear Myself Talk

Arrrgh! iPhone issues!!!

nobody@vox.com(Eric) — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 11:08:36 -0500

I downloaded the iPhone 2.0 software, installed it but now the servers are down and I cannot reactivate my phone. No phone? How will I survive?

IPhone error

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

My Cousin

nobody@vox.com(Eric) — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 23:10:47 -0600

Picture 18

That is my cousin on the left side of the picture. You can get a better look here.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Bekah with Kaylynne and Abby

nobody@vox.com(Eric) — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 21:05:47 -0500

photo.jpg

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

I know I am slacking

nobody@vox.com(Eric) — Mon, 16 Jul 2007 10:52:12 -0500

Sorry I have not posted in a while. My son has gotten me addicted to this stupid World of Warcraft game and I think I know what a crack head must feel like. I want to stop but I can't!

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Terrorists Have No Balls

nobody@vox.com(Eric) — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 09:50:33 -0500

Alex McIlveen is a cabbie at the Glasgow airport and was there during the latest Terror attack. Not only was he there he was up close to the terrorist that was doing the Human Torch impression, so close that he kicked the terrorist in the balls.

Alex McIlveen, 45, kicked the man, whose body was in flames, so hard that he tore a tendon in his foot.
But he said last night: "He didn't even flinch. I couldn't believe he didn't go down.

Now I do understand that this guy was on fire and so any kick to the nuts would not be his only pain, however, for anyone who has been kicked in the privates knows that the pain is right up there with being on fire or any other such pain that one could dream up. So I think it is safe to assume that terrorists, or at least this terrorist, has no balls. So if that is the case what was his incentive? What would he do with his 72 virgins?

UPDATE: Cabbie gets a new pair of shoes!

A HERO taxi driver was given a new pair of trainers yesterday to replace the ones he used to kick a terror suspect in the privates.
Alex McIlveen, 45, had to hand over his £50 Nike gutties for forensic examination.
The Glaswegian walloped the flaming man so hard he tore a tendon in his foot.

Glad to see this guy is being taken care of. He also commented:

"It's great to get this new pair, I've gone for Lacoste instead of Nike, but I reckon they will do just as good a job if I have to deal with any more terrorists."

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

The Audacity of Clinton

nobody@vox.com(Eric) — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 12:51:22 -0500

Clintonlies

The Clintons are the scum of our political society and the sad part is that many of the liberals love them and would love to see them in power again. I knew when President Bush commuted the sentence of Scooter Libby that the Democrats and media would be all over him for it. I knew we would see the standard double standard that we always see from the left, why should this be any different? What did catch me slightly off guard was the arrogance from the Clinton’s regarding Bush’s decision. You see a strong case could be made for commuting and/or offering a full pardon to Scooter Libby.

Before Fitzgerald ever questioned Libby he already knew that Richard Armitage was the one who gave up her information to the press.
She (Plame) was not a covert CIA agent at the time so how was she “outed”?
If she was not covert and Libby did not tell the press, and if Fitzgerald already knew who did leak it why put Libby on trial? And is it possible that Libby truly forgot what was said to whom on what exact date? Could it not be an innocent mistake and not a cover up of a crime that did not happen?

These are valid questions where one could argue that 30 months in prison is too much time to serve. So how is it that the arrogant Clinton trash would have the audacity to question Bush’s decision to commute the sentence for Libby when he is guilty of far worse?

“Yeah, but I think the facts were different,” Mr. Clinton said. “I think there are guidelines for what happens when somebody is convicted. You’ve got to understand, this is consistent with their philosophy; they believe that they should be able to do what they want to do, and that the law is a minor obstacle.”

Are you kidding me? If I am not mistaken (and I am not) Mr. Clinton pardoned his own half brother on his last day in office! His half brother!! So who is it that has the philosophy that they can do whatever they want and that the “law is a minor obstacle”? Clinton issued 140 pardons his last day in office alone! That is 27 more that George W. Bush has granted in his whole entire term in office! Now he and his wife want to criticize Bush for commuting Libby’s sentence as if they have any moral grounds to do so? Clinton was pardoning his own family and that is ok but Bush better not pardon anyone for covering up a non-crime! Clinton also pardoned Marc Rich thanks to his former wife’s large campaign contributions to Clinton and his library. The list goes on to include a few drug dealers, several involved in fraud, tax evasion, possession of stolen goods and on and on. Take a look for yourself, Clinton pardoned all kinds of criminals including terrorists and yet he still has the audacity to question President Bush?

Now I am willing to debate the case of Libby and the questions of the Federal Sentencing guidelines as I agree that Bush’s decision brings up some valid questions about others in similar situations. If this is too harsh of a sentence for Scooter then should not the same hold true for all Americans? Here are some examples of that.

What I cannot deal with is the hypocrisy from the Clintons and the left that somehow justifies his actions but condemns those of President Bush. But then whoever claimed that the left held themselves to the same standards? If they did then Clinton would need a pardon himself for his lies under oath in the Jones case where he was was held in contempt! I know, the liberals always say that does not count because it was about sex and everyone lies about sex. So who gets to make the decisions about what it is ok to lie about? If it is ok to lie about sex in a sexual harassment case is it ok to lie about a non crime in a non crime case? Who gets to decide? Does this mean that Clarence Thomas could have lied if he needed to (although he was not the one caught in lies, it was his accuser Anita Hill that was caught lying)? Liberals will try to justify anything as we have seen evidence of all too many times.

I am just getting tired of these liberals and their double standards. I am especially tired of the Clintons, and they should be the last ones to ever question any pardon from any president!

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Bush makes a smart choice

nobody@vox.com(Eric) — Mon, 02 Jul 2007 17:02:56 -0500

I just read that President Bush will commute Scooter Libby’s Prison sentence. While it is not as good as a pardon which was what I would have preferred it is still nice to know that Scooter will not go to prison for a non crime.

I know that the press will rail on Bush for this but I actually think this will help his poll numbers. The liberals already hate him and his base (including me) have been growing more and more frustrated with him, by commuting the sentence I think this will help him with his base. It really cannot hurt him. I guess it could backfire and his numbers could sink down to the level of the Democrat controlled Congress. I doubt it though.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Darn, we have upset some Mexicans

nobody@vox.com(Eric) — Fri, 29 Jun 2007 20:21:10 -0500

Unless you have been living under a rock or you are another brain dead idiot who has no time to keep up with current events you know that the immigration bill is dead. Well, south of the border there are some who are not very happy that we refused to give 12 million law breakers amnesty.

"This is very bad news for Mexican migrants in the U.S.," said Jorge Bustamante, special rapporteur to the human rights commission for migrants at the United Nations and former president of El Colegio de la Frontera Norte in the city of Tijuana, across the border from San Diego, California.

Bad news for the Mexican migrants (aka border jumping law breakers) huh? Well then it must be good news for America. Somone should tell Jorge Bustamante (and Jorge Bush) that we are not in the business of passing laws that will benefit Mexicans but rather laws that benefit Americans. I know, seems like common sense, but for some reason it is not.

The Rev. Luis Kendziersky, director of "Casa del Migrante," a shelter for migrants in the city of Tijuana across the border from San Diego, California, said it appeared senators "are focused more on the political game than on the real needs of the people."

Needs of what people? No I am pretty sure they got this one right, they were focused on the needs of the American people.

Editorials in Mexico's major newspapers said the Senate action was hypocritical.
"It's obvious that the politicians of that country want laborers, but they are not willing to legalize the labor that they need," declared an editorial in the national daily newspaper El Universal, whose front page headline announced that the U.S. had "buried" immigration reform.

Well if you guys feel that way I have an idea. How about all 12 million of you grab your stuff and scurry back home and protest this travesty by refusing to come back until we stupid Americans pass a bill that would allow Mexicans to come and work here legally! Show us how important that America needs you and we will be forced to step up to the plate and get a legalized worker bill implemented pronto!

Migrants "will continue to be subjected to extraordinary means of discrimination," the editorial said, adding that maintaining "this subculture of illegality" in border crossings also does nothing to aid the United States' fight against terrorism.

Well that is just wrong. Migrants, legal migrants, will be treated with respect and afforded all of the rights that they have coming to them I think what they meant to say was illegal aliens. See there is a difference.

Since Fox left office Calderon has not been engaged as Fox was with the U.S. for various reasons.

In the wake of Fox's failure to revive the issue, Calderon has spoken in favor of a reform, but refrained from engaging the U.S. on the matter, instead focusing on what Mexico should do at home to strengthen its economy and stem the flow of its workers north.

What? Did I read that right? Fix the problem at home in Mexico?!? Now we are talking. If those clowns down there would clean up their corrupt government then maybe they would have an economy that could support them so that we would not have to.

Calderon did speak out forcefully, however, against the 700-mile (1,130 kilometers) fence Congress approved to increase security on the U.S. border with Mexico.

Ah, the true colors come shining through. Why does he care if we build a fence on our side of the border? I would suggest he heed his own advice and clean up his country and not worry about what we are doing up here.

But not everyone in Mexico was disappointed by the death of the bill, which would have creating a system to weed out illegal workers from U.S. jobs.
Al Rojas, spokesman for the Front of Mexicans Abroad, an advocacy group for Mexicans living in the U.S. and other countries, said the law "would have imposed prejudices, treating migrants like criminals and judging them."

Treating "migrants" (actually criminals) like criminals. Yeah, that is about right, just as it should be.

"We didn't think the law lived up to what migrants deserved," he said in a telephone interview. "Faced with a bad law, we preferred that they approved nothing."

Well, we can all agree on that.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Ouch!! My Eyes, My Eyes!!!

nobody@vox.com(Eric) — Thu, 28 Jun 2007 22:11:46 -0500

It is like a train wreck, you want to look away but it is hard to.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Bipartisanship is alive and well

nobody@vox.com(Eric) — Thu, 28 Jun 2007 18:32:53 -0500

Who says the Republicans and Democrats cannot work together? Given the right motivation they can all work together to accomplish things of pressing national interests. Take for example a $4,400 pay raise!

Despite low approval ratings and hard feelings from last year's elections, Democrats and Republicans in the House are reaching out for an approximately $4,400 pay raise that would increase their salaries to almost $170,000.

See that? Despite their 14% job approval rating, despite their bickering and failed (thank God) attempt to pass the ~~immigration~~ amnesty bill, despite all that they can still come together and hike their pay another $4,400 bucks! Good for them, I will sleep better knowing they are well compensated.

These guys are so smart they actually voted a few years ago to have their cost of living pay raises happen automatically every year unless they vote to stop it. So Representatives Jim Matheson, D-Utah, and Lee Terry, R-Neb. attempted to block the raise and the vote came down 244 to 181 to not block the annual COLA.

Working together. What a beautiful thing.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend