Updated With Port Authority Chief's Christie Testimony:"Bush-Palin 2016; Historic Compromise"

Update: That should just about end it for former GOP establishment media darling; "Christie Knew About Lane Closings Ex-Port Authority Official Says"

If this does mark the end of Governor Christie as a possible 2016 contender (or even as Governor) then the article I wrote for American Thinker, reproduced below, is even more to the 2016 point. If Christie done then Jeb Bush is the natural Establishment choice. The only thing that could stop him getting the nomination woudl be a Palin run. If she ran, and the grass-roots gave her the nomination then the Palin/Bush combination has a cear imperative for a united party especially against Clinton for all the reasons set out in the article.
*****************************************************

UPDATE: Sean Trende at Real Clear Politics shows exactly why the Bush/Palin formula, under the right circumstances, is possibly the only winning one for the GOP:

"I suspect that to get in the neighborhood of 40 percent with Hispanics, Republicans would need a near-perfect candidate for Hispanic outreach, maybe Jeb Bush"

READ MORE AT THIS LINK

************************************************************************************************************

As also presented at: "The American Thinker" (LINK) under
Michael Sheppard

Bush-Palin 2016;Historic Compromise And The GOP's Only  Answer To Hillary?

Let's talk political reality-Realpolitik-first. To the question "can
the GOP win in 2016?" The answer is "yes, but only if they win
Florida." If by 9 pm on election night 2016 the early results indicate
Florida has gone to the Democrat, then Republicans of all stripes
could simply turn off their televisions as there would be no path to
victory in the Electoral College.

Would Jeb Bush have as good a chance, or better, than any other
prospective GOP candidate? Most certainly he might. As a popular
Governor of Florida, married to an Hispanic, and who garnered a good
proportion of the Hispanic vote, Bush would be in a strong position to
carry the state.

Electoral College reality shows that Florida is an essential
beginning, withNorth Carolina/Virginia also having to be in the GOP's
column as the evening wore on. Bush, as a former Governor of a
Southern state would not, at least, be at a disadvantage to any other
prospective Republican candidates chances in those two states.

Even with those three states in the bag, the GOP would still not be in

a winning position without Ohio and
one from New Hampshire/Iowa/Colorado/Nevada, at which point they
would squeak through by only two electoral votes. It is possible to
win without Virginia, but extremely challenging. Again, on the face of
it, Jeb Bush would not be at a disadvantage to any other prospective
Republican candidate in these states, and might have an advantage over
some in Iowa appealing to Evangelicals, and in New Hampshire appealing
to centrists.

Thus, looking at the 2016 election purely in Electoral College terms,
Jeb Bush would appear to be in a position to do no worse than any
other prospective candidate and, in crucial states, he might do
better.

The Electoral College would be of a secondary consideration should
President Obama be as unpopular as G.W. Bush was in 2008, and the
economy was still in a sub-optimal situation, as regards the
unemployment figures after eight years of a Democrat president. Under
those circumstances it would not necessarily matter who the GOP
candidate was, as electoral victory would be more or less a given. At
that point the GOP establishments call for an "electable" candidate
would have no resonance and a genuine conservative, a Palin for
example, would have every chance for the nomination and subsequent
election as president.

If however the economy has improved, or is seen to be improving, and
especially if Hillary Clinton is the Democrat's candidate, then the
"electability" and Electoral College arguments would have some
substantial force and credibility. But it would be of no avail to have
an "electable" centrist if the Palin-ite, conservative forces didn't
vote. Although Evangelicals turned out for Romney in 2012, two million
Pero-ite White voters stayed home. Running another centrist in the
Dole/McCain/Romney line is no formula for ensuring a maximized
conservative turnout. Neither is running a perceived conservative like
Paul Ryan for VP a guarantee as the Romney/Ryan ticket proved.

In the scenario outlined above, i.e. a Clinton candidacy during a
relatively non-negative economic and political environment, a centrist
presidential candidate with a charismatic conservative VP running mate
may be the GOP's only best hope. A Jeb Bush for president Sarah Palin
for vice-president ticket covers all the Electoral College,
Evangelical, pro-life, centrist-conservative, experienced
governorships, male/female bases.

Both are strongly vetted and most certainly there is nothing in
Palin's life that has not be diced and sliced, disproved and shown to
be a product of leftist hate. Even in liberal circles there has been
grudging acceptance that Jeb Bush ran a successful administration in
Florida and that he is "Not George W."

Palin is not the media inexperienced person she was in 2008, and never
again would be the subject of the astonishing MSM/Blogosphere hate and
ambush that she was then. In effect a Bush/Palin team would be a
candidacy of ideas, from experienced campaigners, which would have to
be addressed by the opposition media and Dem's without the distraction
of lurid media "scandals".

An Hillary Clinton candidacy would make having a woman on the GOP's
ticket essential as "it's time for a woman in the White House" meme
could be negated to a degree by a female VP candidate. With the
balanced ticket, Bush's appeal to Hispanics and, according to Real
Clear Politics, the even more important possibility of a drop off in
Black turnout allied to an increase in White voters to the polls, even
a Clinton candidacy can be overcome.

The GOP establishment shunning Palin to the point of, once again, not
even inviting her to speak to the nominating convention would be the
height of stupidity and a guarantee of a sub-optimal conservative
turnout. Having Palin on the ticket would, as she did for McCain in
the most hopeless of circumstances, bring in a massive energy,
enthusiasm and commitment from her great mass of supporters.

Objections to the Bush/Palin team concept would include "the country
wouldn't want another Bush." That argument had force up until this
year, but as the Obama administration sinks in popularity and
credibility, G.W. Bush rises in both, and by 2016 his administration
would be a memory which might even be seen through rose colored
glasses. Certainly "it's all Bush's fault" would be a ludicrous battle
cry after eight years of Obama.

As for Palin, again, everything possible has been thrown at her and
the "she's dumb and thinks Africa is a country" nonsense is tired and
silly, and would be lampooned if trotted out again. The "heartbeat
away from the presidency" loses its force with Bush being much younger
than McCain, and Palin having been a commentator with authority on all
and sundry during her Fox consultancy years. She would of course be
more than a capable debater as she proved with Biden in 2008.

Would Palin accept the VP slot again? Only she could answer that, but
given her dedication to America, and if she was given the freedom to

campaign as was denied to her by the McCain team, it is of course a
possibility. It would hold out to her the chance of a run of her own
after eight years, when she would still be relativity young, and would
of course be vastly experienced. Running with a pro-life Catholic
would not be a barrier to Palin's views it could fairly be stated.

Would Palin's supporters accept her being VP? Speaking for myself if
Palin accepted the role then I would, as an uncompromising Palin
supporter, support the ticket wholeheartedly (after a wistful
consideration of the ticket being the other way around). Some Palin
supporters might state now that "Palin would never accept being the VP
candidate again" and raise many valid objections. But none of them can
speak for Palin herself, and time and place, Realpolitik and realistic
assessments can make seemingly impossible pairings e.g. Reagan/Bush
possible.

Immigration and establishment ties would appear to be the main divide

for conservatives. The seemingly impossible Bush/Palin pairing would not, however, be affected by the current immigration controversy which saw Bush plead for more immigrants at the Faith and Freedom Conference. That Palin made a seeming dig at Bush for his "fertile" comment is nothing compared to G.W.H's "voodoo economics" attack on Reagan. Bush self-described himself to Christian Broadcasting News CBN as pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, and pro-tax cuts.

By 2016 the immigration issue will have been addressed, and legislation will have passed, despite conservative objections and be under implementation, or it will have failed to pass. If the former, then the internal GOP divide on the issue could only be patched over with a Bush/Palin pairing (or Cruz if she does not wish to run). If the proposed "gang of eight" legislation fails then the pairing might be the only hope of keeping the GOP establishment on board for the election.

A sure sign that the establishment sees Jeb Bush as a possible candidate is Time Magazine running a major feature: "Has Jeb's time come." What the article doesn't address is how to effect "Jeb's time" without the support of the Palinite rank and file.

Would Bush accept the VP slot? There would be every reason for him to do so. If the ticket won he would be the heir apparent without question. If the ticket lost he would have proven his loyalty to the conservative wing and would be the absolute front runner for 2020.

The Palin/Bush pairing (which works either way) would see the rifts in the GOP healed over, a united team with massive resources in finance, manpower and credibility, and a very real path to Electoral College victory -- an historic compromise for the restoration of a conservative America. All this is moot of course if the immigration crisis splits the GOP asunder -- which might well lead be a Bush versus Palin primary campaign.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/06/bushpalin_2016_the_gops_only_chance.html#ixzz2Y9p1lOFr
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Pro-Abortion Wendy Davis 2.2% Margin Vulnerable To Pro-Life Opponent With Palin/Cruz Support

Pro-abortion Texas State Senator Democrat Wendy Davis whose filibuster so heartened the leftist mob who helped her succeed in stopping the proposed Texas legislation on restricting abortion may find her new found fame fleeting.

Governor Perry has called the legislature back into session on July 1st and no doubt Davis will have another go and receive leftist media kudos. This time the Republicans will have their act together and there will be plenty of time for Davis to do her spiel for death and give up. Then the pro-life legislation will be enacted immediately, and who knows how many people will subsequently be alive to cast their first ballot and raise their own families over the next couple of decades?

Huffington Post reported  LINK on why Davis may have a brief career given the Supreme Court's ruling on states rights to change electoral boundaries without referring to Congress (Section 5) as they had to previously:

"Texas state Sen. Wendy Davis (D), who captivated the country (SIC) with her attempted 13-hour filibuster of a sweeping anti-abortion bill, likely would have lost her seat in 2012 to redistricting if not for the Voting Rights Act that was gutted Tuesday by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Davis and the U.S. Justice Department won the case in August 2012, a few months before elections, and Texas was forced to drop its redistricting plan. Davis was narrowly reelected to her state Senate seat in November.

The future of Davis' Senate district is unclear now that the Supreme Court has removed the legislature's biggest obstacle to redistricting.

“With today’s decision, the state’s voter ID law will take effect immediately," Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott said in a statement on Tuesday. "Redistricting maps passed by the Legislature may also take effect without approval from the federal government.”

It is not clear at this point if the redistricting map  for 2012which was challenged successfully by Davis under Section 5 can be reinstated now that Section 5 has been ruled unconstitutional. If it can't Davis may be "safe" i.e. within her recurrent favorable boundaries until the next 10 year census allows for redistribution.

What is clear is that the Texas voter ID act which was previously unconstitutional will "go into immediate effect" which may have bearing on Davis's election chances. 

Well, here’s a current condition: the ink was barely dry on the Supreme Court’s decision in Shelby County v. Holder when Attorney General Greg Abbott of Texas announced that his state’s voter-ID law, blocked by a federal court last summer, “will take effect immediately.” LINK

Here is result of Davis's LINK electoral run in 2012. She had the benefit of a strong minority composition in her electorate, and the benefit of the turnout associated with a presidential run, especially given the attraction for Hispanics and Blacks that President Obama represented.

That turnout effect may well be missing in 2014, and if the state chooses to adjust her electorate to make it more equitable in respect of population then Davis may find herself with a major challenge. If the Tea Party (Supporting Koni Burton) and Catholic vote gets behind her opponent, and especially if the Palin/Cruz forces do, the result may not be to Davis and her abortion supporters liking. A margin of 2.2% may be a target for the pro-life forces to aim long and hard at.

HERE IS THE LINK TO KONI BURTON'S SITE FOR YOUR SUPPORT

Lala; Budding, Beautiful Pop Diva.

Lala: From a child star in a multi-year run in "South Pacific" on Broadway to budding, beautiful pop Diva. (and yes, she's my Niece)

A Once In A Generation Singer/Songwriter/Poet/Musician/Author-An Outstanding New Talent In Debut CD.

To listen to the lyrical soundscape of music and poetry that this amazing début album brings (the image below does not provide the tracks only the link does) 

CLICK ON THIS LINK

Listeners will be hugely rewarded by the depth of poetical imagery allied to a cascading flow of melodic interplay. This melodic festival runs the gamut from folk to electronica to pop to, in the case of the stunning "Who Can I Turn To" a new classic which will have young ladies swooning.

Nicholas plays every instrument, wrote every song and sings all tracks a tour de force unseen since, perhaps, the debut album of Bob Dylan who he resembles in his command of wordsmithing.

"An outstanding debut"

If further evidence were required of this man's extraordinary  "Renaissance Man" capabilities

he is an author of note with three books on subjects ranging from human trafficking to rugby 

currently available (LINK)

The Sunken Cathedral (A human trafficking novel)[Kindle Edition]

Nicholas Sheppard (Author)

4.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (4 customer reviews)

---

Digital List Price:	$2.99 What's this?
Kindle Price:	$2.99 includes free international wireless delivery via Amazon Whispernet

---

Length: 234 pages (estimated)  Don't have a Kindle? Get your Kindle here.

‹  Return to Product Overview

Book Description

Publication Date: October 27, 2011

Lilya, a young girl from a derelict district in Moldova, and Makena, living with her mother in an impoverished part of Nairobi, are lured into human trafficking rings, and forced into prostitution amidst the dazzle and congestion of Soho, London. Exploited, unrecognized without the official documents their minders have stolen, they endure suffering they could never have imagined; but when they meet, they form a special bond, find imaginative ways to cope, and dream of regaining their freedom.
The Sunken Cathedral explores the darker side of globalization, multiculturalism and economic migration; the perceptions of the West towards foreigners, and of foreigners towards the West. It gives expression to the horrors of sexual slavery and exploitation, and the courage of the young women who endure it, by focusing on the humanity and courage, and above all the unique inner-lives of two girls, out of the thousands embarking on journeys into hell every day.

The Communist Manifesto:What Marx Says On Marriage/Family /Women/Home Schooling Is Right On Track. Read And Be Warned

The Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels
MANIFESTO OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY

Abolition of the family! Even the most radical flare up at this infamous proposal of the
Communists.
On what foundation is the present family, the bourgeois family, based? On capital, on
private gain. In its completely developed form this family exists only among the
bourgeoisie. But this state of things finds its complement in the practical absence of the
family among the proletarians, and in public prostitution.
The bourgeois family will vanish as a matter of course when its complement vanishes,
and both will vanish with the vanishing of capital.

Do you charge us with wanting to stop the exploitation of children by their parents? To
this crime we plead guilty.

But, you will say, we destroy the most hallowed of relations, when we replace home
education by social.

And your education! Is not that also social, and determined by the social conditions under
which you educate, by the intervention, direct or indirect, of society, by means of
schools, etc.? The Communists have not invented the intervention of society in
education; they do but seek to alter the character of that intervention, and to rescue
education from the influence of the ruling class.

The bourgeois clap-trap about the family and education, about the hallowed co-relation of
parent and child, becomes all the more disgusting, the more, by the action of Modern
Industry, all family ties among the proletarians are torn asunder, and their children
transformed into simple articles of commerce and instruments of labour.

But you Communists would introduce community of women, screams the whole
bourgeoisie in chorus.
The bourgeois sees in his wife a mere instrument of production. He hears that the
instruments of production are to be exploited in common, and, naturally, can come to no
other conclusion than that the lot of being common to all will likewise fall to the women.
He has not even a suspicion that the real point is to do away with the status of women as
mere instruments of production.
For the rest, nothing is more ridiculous than the virtuous indignation of our bourgeois at

the community of women which, they pretend, is to be openly and officially established
by the Communists. The Communists have no need to introduce community of women; it
has existed almost from time immemorial.
Our bourgeois, not content with having the wives and daughters of their proletarians at
their disposal, not to speak of common prostitutes, take the greatest pleasure in seducing
each other's wives.

Bourgeois marriage is in reality a system of wives in common and thus, at the most, what
the Communists might possibly be reproached with, is that they desire to introduce, in
substitution for a hypocritically concealed, an openly legalized community of women.
For the rest, it is self-evident that the abolition of the present system of production must
bring with it the abolition of the community of women springing from that system, i.e., of
prostitution both public and private.

Belvedere;"Left must destroy core of Culture,part of which is Family."Who are the "Left"?

 Belvedere: "As part of it’s plan to reduce Western Civilization to rubble, the Left understands that it must destroy the core of our Culture, part of which is the Family.  Normalizing perverse behavior is one of it’s most effective weapons in this offensive."

                      The Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels 
                              MANIFESTO OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY 

                                         Abolition of the family!

Bob Belvedere, at The Camp of the Saints (LINK)  quotes and links the noted journalist Stacy McCain who has been running a major campaign highlighting the paedophilia perversions allegedly associated with the "FreeKate" movement. For McCain's current comments, which go beyond the particulars of the case, and explore the wider societal ramifications please go to THIS LINK.

McCain states that, far from being, as paedophilia defenders state, (some being paedophiles)  the perversion being of rare occurrence and little note, it is in fact with the internet as one measure, significant. McCain identifies the perversions practitioners as including liberals.

Bob Belvedere considers this point and stresses, as I see it, that the legalization (and perhaps celebration) of such perversion, and many others, is just a matter of time. He, rightly points out that till recently homosexuality was illegal, (along with anal intercourse between heterosexual couples). I recall headline news that Vanessa Redgrave (a far far left Marxist/Leninist)  was "openly living with a man whilst unmarried." 

Now "stars" like Kardashian are celebrated for getting pregnant to one man whilst still married legally to another. Such is the march of "social equality and progress" which sees horrors like Gosnell,  "partial birth abortions" and Gays being openly allowed into the Boy Scouts.

All these societal changes are not the result of efforts by conservatives (except in the UK where homosexuality amongst the privileged classes has been  a public spectacle since James 1st but an abhorrence amongst the working class). They are driven by leftists in America and elsewhere (notably in France where the leftist government just legalized it).

Whilst it is fair to say that this "liberality' pervades all aspects of leftism the main driving force comes from one area. The acting profession, and allied areas such a producing, directing, clothing, set design etc are historically associated with homosexuality. It is also associated with leftism. whilst one would struggle to compile a list of famous actors (as Doonesbury noted with glee) who are conservatives, it would exhaust readers time and patience to supply a list of leftist actors, or even leftist homosexual actors.

I explored this at the time of the Academy Awards, which saw an Oscar go to the Palin hate film "Game Change" Palin being the utter antithesis of all Hollywood "values". I reproduce the salient points which, I believe identify "the Left" of the McCain/Belvedere despair and warnings. It is why the 2016 election may be America's last chance to reverse the immoral tide of perversion coming to a cinema near you.




*********************************************************************************
Reproduced with permission and thanks to Bob Belvedere

The Left’s Campaign To Normalize Perversion

23 JUNE 2013 @ 18:38

by bobbelvedere

In the Comments section of a well-reasoned post by Stacy McCain entitled Perverts, Degenerates, And Sociopaths, Dana  comments:

‘Twon’t be long before we’re being told that pedophilia and hebephilia and ephebophilia just “different orientations,” and that we shouldn’t regard them as realcrimes, don’t you know?  Or, as Roman Polanski — whom Whoopi Goldberg defended as not having committed “rape-rape” — put it, “everyone wants to f*** young girls!“

Keyboard Jockey responded:

Pedophile’s have been trying to sell child sexual abuse as normal like forever .  Have you found any states that have changed their laws to indulge them? In fact lawmakers passed a federal law that US citizen’s can be arrested for child sexual abuse in foreign countries, and tried in US courts.

This state of affairs will not last long [although I do believe it will be harder for this part of the Leftist program to succeed for obvious reasons].

Recall that some four to five decades ago Homosexuality was a prosecuted crime in most states.  Then we were worn down over the ensuing decades to the point where now Homosexuals are celebrated everywhere, especially in the popular arts, and many otherwise Common Sensical people are okay with ‘same-sex marriage’.

Getting back to the subject at hand: our children are getting sexualized at earlier and earlier ages these days.  If the Left has it’s way, Age Of Consent Laws will be abolished.  They’re pretty patient about such things.

As part of it’s plan to reduce Western Civilization to rubble, the Left understands that it must destroy the core of our Culture, part of which is the Family.  Normalizing perverse behavior is one of it’s most effective weapons in this offensive.

Leftism Delenda Est.

***************************************************************

  "The kids are not all right."  

Once again the denizens of Hollywood are using their unique propaganda tool, the Academy Awards, in the aid of their warped social philosophy.

It is a fair assumption, one only has to peruse the cover of  a gossip magazine,that a higher proportion of neurotics,drug users, out and out societal misfits, and the just plain mad who compose a proportion of the entertainment industry in numbers well  above the national average will be gathered together on awards night.

On top of their collective neuroses, and surely actors by their very profession are subject to various manifestations of eccentricity, they have, through the massive reach of their medium, enormous power, wealth and great influence on the average person.

Thus what just a few years ago would have been considered a gross perversion, if not illegal and generally not even possible, same sex couples adopting, or creating via the loving mechanics of a turkey baster, babies.

High profile entertainment industry types, can, through their wealth and media power, undertake actions which if a normal person attempted it they would be castigated or even arrested for breaking societies taboos. Over the years we have seen these structures of society attacked and then broken and then made commonplace by actors.

"Shock horror" newspaper headlines follow, then the glossies started to make it "interesting' and shortly after it became "normal" irrespective of what example it set for society and the effect it would have on children of such relationships. Of course such unstable relationships composed of unstable people break up one after another with untold harm on the innocents who are caught up in such horrors.

That aspect of normal society undermined, the next attack, Gay and lesbian same sex relationships adopting children hove into view. Again, the unthinkable becomes, via the wealth,"prestige", and power of entertainment types, perfectly acceptable to society. Elton John and partner adopts, how is it possible for men of their age in the first place to adopt an infant? Cynthia Nixon's "fiancee' gives birth amongst recent examples.

There are no long term studies on how children who grow up in these unnatural parenting relationships adjust in society.What sort of difficulties to they encounter at school amongst their peers? Do the have trouble establishing an heterosexual relationship? 

What effect will this have on population trends amongst Western nations and if they decline what will be the economic effects and the social effects as more third world labor is needed to take up the slack?

Hollywood doesn't care-all the denizens care about is satisfying their ego's, carnal nature and their hedonism "Cocaine is God's way of telling you you have too much money" Robin Williams is quoted as saying, Lohan, Sheen-well the list of examples is endless. Now having children has become their latest status symbol. It started with the adopting out of Africa craze and now has spread to same sex couples.

There are no barriers to satisfying their needs for those in the entertainment industry. Same sex parenting a no no? The propaganda machine starts. The first foray was The Birdcage with lovable characters, then "The kids are all right" whose premise is " look we lesbian parent couples are not weird, we have all the "normal" family problems and squabbles just like everyone else so our parenting is "normal"-just like everyone else.

Original post at THIS LINK

6 Month Metal Charts Show Massive Downturns.How Long Can The Economic Shell Game Continue?

I'm no economist or metal price expert but I know that when every single chart of these major metals plus oil is charting downwards, in many cases substantially so, something is wrong in the economy.

This after trillions of dollars have been printed by the Fed which means the underlying  problems must be massive. Of course the true nature of the economy is kept from the man in the street as in 2008 and if there is a collapse it will be a "black swan' which "no one could have foreseen". How long this apparent shell game can continue is a matter of conjecture and what would happen in there is another 1929 is also a moot point.

Most certainly the rise of fascism or communism can't be discounted.

If there is a further massive downturn on top of what some European countries e.g. Spain/Greece/Portugal are experiencing it seems inconceivable that their governments could keep the lid on the social unrest. With 50% youth unemployment it is astonishing that the pressure hasn't blown the lid of the social structures there.

If these charts presage a massive downturn the Obama administration will go into history along with Herbert Hoover. This time there would be a massive swing to the conservative right. If this does happen the scene would be set for a Palin-ite revolution as nobody else in the GOP has been sounding the tocsin with such credibility and for so long as has Palin.



  
  
  

Desperate Wonkette Resorts To Photo Of Editor's Mammaries As Nobody Comes To Their Road Party

Wonkette's editor, one Rebecca Schoenkopf, has resorted to the truly desperate means of trying to garner attendance at her sad and lonely Wonkette "Wonk Off"  Road Show. Knowing that her audience of layabouts and perverts includes lesbians and older males, and she has, once again, thrown them pink meat in a scandalous and shocking display of her breasts.



This blatantly posed photograph, obviously and seductively designed to titillate her readers, includes a clearly phallic pole, a ball, and alludes to a "rack". Why has Schoenkopf resorted to such "come on" methods of promoting her tour?

The answer clearly is in the lack of attendance at her road stop jaunts at various bars (where she no doubt rightly would expect Wonkette readers to congregate). Further, the comments on her various posts about her meetings run into the sorry 60's (the exception being the photo above which of course received twice as many drool covered comments).

 It appears that only about a dozen lost souls, at most, attended (and in ultra-leftist Chicago!) despite the supposed attractions on offer. At least in this stop some of the attendees were youngish as compared to the fossils in previous stops (shocking photo evidence
AT THIS LINK )

This is not the first time the site, in its desperate attempt to gain readership has resorted to the blatant use of feminine flesh (see HERE   ) which led me to expose Wonkette as the Beast of the Apocalypse HERE. This is the site that attacks Sarah Palin for her demure and modest feminine appearance, whilst blatantly admitting its 400 Palin posts are solely there to get their rabid readership to froth and gibber whilst collecting "all your lovely munies."

The left proves there is no level of hypocrisy andmisogyny they will not stoop to, even to the level of basically using their own bodies, in the effort to denigrate hard working ordinary Americans.

After "World's Most Beautiful Women" Post "The Coolest Men Of All Time"

I wrote a series of posts on "The World's Most Beautiful Women" which started off as a reminiscent indulgence. After the first one, I did one on Jewish actresses and then a French lady. On reflection, and to make the heading clearer it should have been, long winded (as readers know is my wont) "The World's Most Beautiful Romantic Visaged Women" as that is how I described my personal predilection.

All these romantic ladies are  AT THIS LINK obligatory  and are well worth a view-even if some wish to critique my choices, and, more positively, suggest others to add to the rose gallery.

That leads me now away from the distaff side to the masculine. It is not my predilection to have a similar gallery of handsome men-that's not my relationship choice. Rather, here are the guys that I thought were the coolest on earth. If I couldn't be them, I could try and look like them or, who knows, anything is possible, hang out with them and get reflected coolness (and chicks of course). 

"Pretty boys" like Jim Morrison/Tony Curtis don't come into the equation. Nor does Johnny Depp who is too obvious in his coolness. Nor do impossibly charismatics like Dylan/Jagger. No, ultra-coolness rules.
*********************************************************************
The late Ray Manzarek ultra-cool musician whilst Morrison self-destructed.

George Harrison, another great musician.The cool one in the blazing sun of Lennon and McCartney

John Sebastian in the early days of The Lovin Spoonful

The young Christopher Walken  as he appeared in "The Deer Hunter" and a few years later-youthful angst personified!

Joan Baez's husband Dave Harris; '60's personified

And of course  Marlon Brando and James Dean 

Daily Telegraph"Verizon scandal: Barack Obama's national security state is now beyond democratic control"

Tim Stanley at the prestigious "Daily Telegraph" LINK says

Verizon scandal: Barack Obama's national security state is now beyond democratic control

Tim Stanley

Dr Tim Stanley is a historian of the United States. His biography of Pat Buchanan is out now. His personal website is www.timothystanley.co.ukand you can follow him on Twitter @timothy_stanley.

Verizon scandal: Barack Obama's national security state is now beyond democratic control"

"Sometimes it feels like Obama could be discovered standing over the body of Sarah Palin with a smoking gun in his hand and liberals would scream “racist!” if anyone called him a murderer. Their capacity for self-delusion knows no bounds."

The sheer number of scandals exposes Obama's inner authoritarianism

Those crazy American conspiracy theorists who live up trees with guns and drink their own pee don’t seem quite so crazy anymore. It turns out that a “secret court order” has empowered the US government to collect the phone records of millions of users of Verizon, one of the most popular telephone providers – a massive domestic surveillance programme and a shocking intrusion into the lives of others. For the first time in history, being an AT&T customer doesn’t seem such a bad thing after all.

Of course, it isn't the first time that a US administration has spied on its own people. The origins of this particular order lie first in the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and then in Section 215 of the Patriot Act, backed by George W Bush and passed by Congress after 9/11. Normally, domestic surveillance only targets suspicious individuals, not the entire population, but in 2006 it was discovered that a similarly wide database of cellular records was being collected from customers of Verizon, AT&T and BellSouth. There was plenty of outrage and plenty of lawsuits, but the National Security Agency never confirmed that the programme had been shut down. It would appear that it’s still in rude health: the latest court order for collecting data runs from April 25 to July 19.

A few observations. First, America is so conscious and proud of its history as a beacon of liberty that it often overlooks the tyranny that occurs on its own shores in the name of safeguarding democracy. The national security state has expanded to the point whereby it now functions outside of democratic control and with clear disregard for the Constitution. What’s especially creepy about this case is that the state felt no legal obligation to tell citizens that it was spying on them – or at least considering it. The result is a disturbing paradox: it’s legal to collect information from companies but illegal for the companies to try to tell their customers about it. It seems that the law prefers to take the side of the state.

Second, you get what you vote for – and both Republicans and Democrats keep on voting for authoritarians. There’s a frustrating hypocrisy that many conservatives applauded the accrual of state power under Bush for the sake of fighting the War on Terror only to scream blue murder about it now that it’s happening under Obama. Likewise, many liberals resented the domestic espionage programme of Bush but have been less vocal about opposing it under Obama. The journalist Martin Bashir has gone to far as to claim that the IRS scandal is a coded attack upon the President’s race, that “IRS” is the new “n word”. Sometimes it feels like Obama could be discovered standing over the body of Sarah Palin with a smoking gun in his hand and liberals would scream “racist!” if anyone called him a murderer. Their capacity for self-delusion knows no bounds.

Finally, totaling every scandal up – IRS, AP phone records, Fox journalists being targeted, the Benghazi mess – this has to be the most furtively authoritarian White House since Nixon’s. We don't yet have a "smoking email" from Obama ordering all of this, but it can’t be said often enough that there is a correlation between Obama’s “progressive” domestic agenda and the misbehavior of the other agencies governed by his administration – forcing people to buy healthcare even when they can’t afford it, bailing out the banks, war in Libya and the use of drone strikes to kill US citizens. This is exactly what the Tea Party was founded to expose and oppose. All the laughter once directed at the “paranoid” Right now rings hollow.

Palin's 2008 Convention Speech Warnings About Obama-Reproduced To Chilling Effect

As even  at the Washington Post  the scales have, 5 years too late, fallen from their eyes, it is timely to reflect on Governor Palin's historic speech to the 2008 convention. All she said has come to pass, her prescience was clearly a reason for the worst pile on in political history by a lickspittle left-to America's loss. Palin still stands strong though it just means the mess she has to clear up in 2016 is infinitely worse;

The Fact Checker

Obama’s pledge that ‘no one will take away’ your health plan

Four Pinocchios

**********************************************************************************************************************************

... I was mayor of my hometown. And since our opponents in this presidential election seem to look down on that experience, let me explain to them what the job involved.

(APPLAUSE)

I guess -- I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a community organizer, except that you have actual responsibilities.

(APPLAUSE)

I might add that, in small towns, we don't quite know what to make of a candidate who lavishes praise on working people when they're listening and then talks about how bitterly they cling to their religion and guns when those people aren't listening.

(APPLAUSE)

No, we tend to prefer candidates who don't talk about us one way in Scranton and another way in San Francisco.

(APPLAUSE)

Well, I'm not a member of the permanent political establishment. And...

(APPLAUSE)

... I've learned quickly these last few days that, if you're not a member in good standing of the Washington elite, then some in the media consider a candidate unqualified for that reason alone.

Americans expect us to go to Washington for the right reason and not just to mingle with the right people. Politics isn't just a game of clashing parties and competing interests. The right reason is to challenge the status quo, to serve the common good, and to leave this nation better than we found it.

(APPLAUSE)

No one expects us all to agree on everything, but we are expected to govern with integrity, and goodwill, and clear convictions, and a servant's heart.

Suddenly, I realized that sudden and relentless reform never sits well with entrenched interests and power-brokers. That's why true reform is so hard to achieve.

And now, I've noticed a pattern with our opponent, and maybe you have, too. We've all heard his dramatic speeches before devoted followers, and there is much to like and admire about our opponent.

But listening to him speak, it's easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or even a reform, not even in the State Senate.

But when the cloud of rhetoric has passed, when the roar of the crowd fades away, when the stadium lights go out, and those Styrofoam Greek columns are hauled back to some studio lot...

(APPLAUSE)

... when that happens, what exactly is our opponent's plan? What does he actually seek to accomplish after he's done turning back the waters and healing the planet?

(APPLAUSE)

The answer -- the answer is to make government bigger, and take more of your money, and give you more orders from Washington, and to reduce the strength of America in a dangerous world.

Government is too big; he wants to grow it. Congress spends too much money; he promises more. Taxes are too high, and he wants to raise them. His tax increases are the fine print in his economic plan.

And let me be specific: The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes, and raise payroll taxes, and raise investment income taxes, and raise the death tax, and raise business taxes, and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars.

My fellow citizens, the American presidency is not supposed to be a journey of personal discovery.

***************************************************

September 3, 2008

The following is a transcript of Gov. Sarah Palin's speech at the Republican National Convention in St. Paul.

 View the video of this speech

PALIN: Mr. Chairman, delegates, and fellow citizens, I will be honored to accept your nomination for vice president of the United States.

(APPLAUSE)

I accept the call to help our nominee for president to serve and defend America. And I accept the challenge of a tough fight in this election against confident opponents at a crucial hour for our country.

And I accept the privilege of serving with a man who has come through much harder missions, and met far graver challenges, and knows how tough fights are won, the next president of the United States, John S. McCain.

(APPLAUSE)

It was just a year ago when all the experts in Washington counted out our nominee because he refused to hedge his commitment to the security of the country he loves.

With their usual certitude, they told us that all was lost, there was no hope for this candidate, who said that he would rather lose an election than see his country lose a war. But the pollsters...

(APPLAUSE)

The pollsters and the pundits, they overlooked just one thing when they wrote him off. They overlooked the caliber of the man himself, the determination, and resolve, and the sheer guts of Senator John McCain.

(APPLAUSE)

The voters knew better, and maybe that's because they realized there's a time for politics and a time for leadership, a time to campaign and a time to put our country first.

(APPLAUSE)

Our nominee for president is a true profile in courage, and people like that are hard to come by. He's a man who wore the uniform of his country for 22 years and refused to break faith with those troops in Iraq who now have brought victory within sight.

(APPLAUSE)

And as the mother of one of those troops, that is exactly the kind of man I want as commander-in-chief.

(APPLAUSE)

PALIN: I'm just one of many moms who will say an extra prayer each night for our sons and daughters going into harm's way. Our son, Track, is 19. And one week from tomorrow, September 11th, he'll deploy to Iraq with the Army infantry in the service of his country.

My nephew, Casey (ph), also enlisted and serves on a carrier in the Persian Gulf.

My family is so proud of both of them and of all the fine men and women serving the country in uniform.

(APPLAUSE)

AUDIENCE: USA! USA! USA! USA! USA!

PALIN: So Track is the eldest of our five children. In our family, it's two boys and three girls in between, my strong and kind- hearted daughters, Bristol, and Willow, and Piper.

(APPLAUSE)

And we were so blessed in April. Todd and I welcomed our littlest one into the world, a perfectly beautiful baby boy named Trig.

You know, from the inside, no family ever seems typical, and that's how it is with us. Our family has the same ups and downs as any other, the same challenges and the same joys.

Sometimes even the greatest joys bring challenge. And children with special needs inspire a very, very special love. To the families of special-needs...

(APPLAUSE)

To the families of special-needs children all across this country, I have a message for you: For years, you've sought to make America a more welcoming place for your sons and daughters. And I pledge to you that, if we're elected, you will have a friend and advocate in the White House.

(APPLAUSE)

And Todd is a story all by himself. He's a lifelong commercial fisherman and a production operator in the oil fields of Alaska's North Slope, and a proud member of the United Steelworkers union. And Todd is a world champion snow machine racer.

(APPLAUSE)

Throw in his Yup'ik Eskimo ancestry, and it all makes for quite a package. And we met in high school. And two decades and five children later, he's still my guy.

(APPLAUSE)

My mom and dad both worked at the elementary school in our small town. And among the many things I owe them is a simple lesson that I've learned, that this is America, and every woman can walk through every door of opportunity.

And my parents are here tonight.

(APPLAUSE)

PALIN: I am so proud to be the daughter of Chuck and Sally Heath (ph).

(APPLAUSE)

Long ago, a young farmer and a haberdasher from Missouri, he followed an unlikely path -- he followed an unlikely path to the vice presidency. And a writer observed, "We grow good people in our small towns, with honesty and sincerity and dignity," and I know just the kind of people that writer had in mind when he praised Harry Truman.

I grew up with those people. They're the ones who do some of the hardest work in America, who grow our food, and run our factories, and fight our wars. They love their country in good times and bad, and they're always proud of America.

(APPLAUSE)

I had the privilege of living most of my life in a small town. I was just your average hockey mom and signed up for the PTA.

(APPLAUSE)

I love those hockey moms. You know, they say the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull? Lipstick.

(APPLAUSE)

So I signed up for the PTA because I wanted to make my kids' public education even better. And when I ran for city council, I didn't need focus groups and voter profiles because I knew those voters, and I knew their families, too.

Before I became governor of the great state of Alaska...

(APPLAUSE)

... I was mayor of my hometown. And since our opponents in this presidential election seem to look down on that experience, let me explain to them what the job involved.

(APPLAUSE)

I guess -- I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a community organizer, except that you have actual responsibilities.

(APPLAUSE)

I might add that, in small towns, we don't quite know what to make of a candidate who lavishes praise on working people when they're listening and then talks about how bitterly they cling to their religion and guns when those people aren't listening.

(APPLAUSE)

No, we tend to prefer candidates who don't talk about us one way in Scranton and another way in San Francisco.

(APPLAUSE)

As for my running mate, you can be certain that wherever he goes and whoever is listening John McCain is the same man.

(APPLAUSE)

Well, I'm not a member of the permanent political establishment. And...

(APPLAUSE)

... I've learned quickly these last few days that, if you're not a member in good standing of the Washington elite, then some in the media consider a candidate unqualified for that reason alone.

(AUDIENCE BOOS)

PALIN: But -- now, here's a little newsflash. Here's a little newsflash for those reporters and commentators: I'm not going to Washington to seek their good opinion. I'm going to Washington to serve the people of this great country.

(APPLAUSE)

Americans expect us to go to Washington for the right reason and not just to mingle with the right people. Politics isn't just a game of clashing parties and competing interests. The right reason is to challenge the status quo, to serve the common good, and to leave this nation better than we found it.

(APPLAUSE)

No one expects us all to agree on everything, but we are expected to govern with integrity, and goodwill, and clear convictions, and a servant's heart.

And I pledge to all Americans that I will carry myself in this spirit as vice president of the United States.

(APPLAUSE) This was the spirit that brought me to the governor's office when I took on the old politics as usual in Juneau, when I stood up to the special interests, and the lobbyists, and the Big Oil companies, and the good-old boys.

Suddenly, I realized that sudden and relentless reform never sits well with entrenched interests and power-brokers. That's why true reform is so hard to achieve.

But with the support of the citizens of Alaska, we shook things up. And in short order, we put the government of our state back on the side of the people.

(APPLAUSE)

I came to office promising major ethics reform to end the culture of self-dealing. And today, that ethics reform is a law.

While I was at it, I got rid of a few things in the governor's office that I didn't believe our citizens should have to pay for. That luxury jet was over-the-top.

(APPLAUSE)

I put it on eBay.

(APPLAUSE)

I love to drive myself to work. And I thought we could muddle through without the governor's personal chef, although I got to admit that sometimes my kids sure miss her.

(APPLAUSE)

I came to office promising to control spending, by request if possible, but by veto, if necessary.

(APPLAUSE)

Senator McCain also -- he promises to use the power of veto in defense of the public interest. And as a chief executive, I can assure you it works.

(APPLAUSE)

Our state budget is under control. We have a surplus. And I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending, nearly $500 million in vetoes.

(APPLAUSE)

PALIN: We suspended the state fuel tax and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress, "Thanks, but no thanks," on that Bridge to Nowhere.

(APPLAUSE)

If our state wanted to build a bridge, we were going to build it ourselves.

(APPLAUSE)

When oil and gas prices went up dramatically and filled up the state treasury, I sent a large share of that revenue back where it belonged: directly to the people of Alaska.

(APPLAUSE)

And despite fierce opposition from oil company lobbyists, who kind of liked things the way that they were, we broke their monopoly on power and resources. As governor, I insisted on competition and basic fairness to end their control of our state and return it to the people.

(APPLAUSE)

I fought to bring about the largest private-sector infrastructure project in North American history. And when that deal was struck, we began a nearly $40 billion natural gas pipeline to help lead America to energy independence.

(APPLAUSE)

That pipeline, when the last section is laid and its valves are open, will lead America one step farther away from dependence on dangerous foreign powers that do not have our interests at heart.

The stakes for our nation could not be higher. When a hurricane strikes in the Gulf of Mexico, this country should not be so dependent on imported oil that we're forced to draw from our Strategic Petroleum Reserve. And families cannot throw more and more of their paychecks on gas and heating oil.

With Russia wanting to control a vital pipeline in the Caucasus and to divide and intimidate our European allies by using energy as a weapon, we cannot leave ourselves at the mercy of foreign suppliers.

(APPLAUSE)

To confront the threat that Iran might seek to cut off nearly a fifth of the world's energy supplies, or that terrorists might strike again at the Abqaiq facility in Saudi Arabia, or that Venezuela might shut off its oil discoveries and its deliveries of that source, Americans, we need to produce more of our own oil and gas. And...

(APPLAUSE)

And take it from a gal who knows the North Slope of Alaska: We've got lots of both.

(APPLAUSE)

Our opponents say again and again that drilling will not solve all of America's energy problems, as if we didn't know that already.

(LAUGHTER)

But the fact that drilling, though, won't solve every problem is no excuse to do nothing at all.

(APPLAUSE)

Starting in January, in a McCain-Palin administration, we're going to lay more pipelines, and build more nuclear plants, and create jobs with clean coal, and move forward on solar, wind, geothermal, and other alternative sources. We need...

(APPLAUSE)

We need American sources of resources. We need American energy brought to you by American ingenuity and produced by American workers.

(APPLAUSE)

And now, I've noticed a pattern with our opponent, and maybe you have, too. We've all heard his dramatic speeches before devoted followers, and there is much to like and admire about our opponent.

But listening to him speak, it's easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or even a reform, not even in the State Senate.

(APPLAUSE)

PALIN: This is a man who can give an entire speech about the wars America is fighting and never use the word "victory," except when he's talking about his own campaign.

(APPLAUSE)

But when the cloud of rhetoric has passed, when the roar of the crowd fades away, when the stadium lights go out, and those Styrofoam Greek columns are hauled back to some studio lot...

(APPLAUSE)

... when that happens, what exactly is our opponent's plan? What does he actually seek to accomplish after he's done turning back the waters and healing the planet?

(APPLAUSE)

The answer -- the answer is to make government bigger, and take more of your money, and give you more orders from Washington, and to reduce the strength of America in a dangerous world.

(AUDIENCE BOOS)

America needs more energy; our opponent is against producing it. Victory in Iraq is finally in sight, and he wants to forfeit. Terrorist states are seeking nuclear weapons without delay; he wants to meet them without preconditions.

Al Qaida terrorists still plot to inflict catastrophic harm on America, and he's worried that someone won't read them their rights.

(APPLAUSE)

Government is too big; he wants to grow it. Congress spends too much money; he promises more. Taxes are too high, and he wants to raise them. His tax increases are the fine print in his economic plan.

And let me be specific: The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes, and raise payroll taxes, and raise investment income taxes, and raise the death tax, and raise business taxes, and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars.

(AUDIENCE BOOS)

My sister, Heather, and her husband, they just built a service station that's now open for business, like millions of others who run small businesses. How are they...

(APPLAUSE)

How are they going to be better off if taxes go up? Or maybe you are trying to keep your job at a plant in Michigan or in Ohio...

(APPLAUSE)

... or you're trying -- you're trying to create jobs from clean coal, from Pennsylvania or West Virginia.

(APPLAUSE)

You're trying to keep a small farm in the family right here in Minnesota.

(APPLAUSE)

How are you -- how are you going to be better off if our opponent adds a massive tax burden to the American economy?

Here's how I look at the choice Americans face in this election: In politics, there are some candidates who use change to promote their careers, and then there are those, like John McCain, who use their careers to promote change.

(APPLAUSE)

PALIN: They are the ones whose names appear on laws and landmark reforms, not just on buttons and banners or on self-designed presidential seals.

(APPLAUSE)

Among politicians, there is the idealism of high-flown speech- making, in which crowds are stirringly summoned to support great things, and then there is the idealism of those leaders, like John McCain, who actually do great things.

(APPLAUSE)

They're the ones who are good for more than talk, the ones that we've always been able to count on to serve and to defend America.

Senator McCain's record of actual achievements and reform helps explain why so many special interests, and lobbyists, and comfortable committee chairmen in Congress have fought the prospect of a McCain presidency from the primary election of 2000 to this very day.

Our nominee doesn't run with the Washington herd. He's a man who's there to serve his country and not just his party, a leader who's not looking for a fight, but sure isn't afraid of one, either.

(APPLAUSE)

Harry Reid, the majority of the current do-nothing Senate...

(AUDIENCE BOOS)

... he not long ago summed up his feelings about our nominee. He said, quote, "I can't stand John McCain."

Ladies and gentlemen, perhaps no accolade we hear this week is better proof that we've chosen the right man.

(APPLAUSE)

Clearly, what the majority leader was driving at is that he can't stand up to John McCain and that is only...

(APPLAUSE)

... that's only one more reason to take the maverick out of the Senate, put him in the White House.

(APPLAUSE)

My fellow citizens, the American presidency is not supposed to be a journey of personal discovery.

(LAUGHTER)

(APPLAUSE)

This world of threats and dangers, it's not just a community and it doesn't just need an organizer. And though both Senator Obama and Senator Biden have been going on lately about how they're always, quote, "fighting for you," let us face the matter squarely: There is only one man in this election who has ever really fought for you.

(APPLAUSE)

There is only one man in this election who has ever really fought for you in places where winning means survival and defeat means death. And that man is John McCain.

(APPLAUSE)

You know, in our day, politicians have readily shared much lesser tales of adversity than the nightmare world, the nightmare world in which this man and others equally brave served and suffered for their country.

And it's a long way from the fear, and pain, and squalor of a six-by-four cell in Hanoi to the Oval Office.

(APPLAUSE)

PALIN: But if Senator McCain is elected president, that is the journey he will have made. It's the journey of an upright and honorable man, the kind of fellow whose name you will find on war memorials in small towns across this great country, only he was among those who came home.

To the most powerful office on Earth, he would bring the compassion that comes from having once been powerless, the wisdom that comes even to the captives by the grace of God, the special confidence of those who have seen evil and have seen how evil is overcome. A fellow...

(APPLAUSE)

A fellow prisoner of war, a man named Tom Moe of Lancaster, Ohio...

(APPLAUSE)

... Tom Moe recalls looking through a pinhole in his cell door as Lieutenant Commander John McCain was led down the hallway by the guards, day after day.

And the story is told, when McCain shuffled back from torturous interrogations, he would turn towards Moe's door, and he'd flash a grin and a thumbs up, as if to say, "We're going to pull through this."

My fellow Americans, that is the kind of man America needs to see us through the next four years.

(APPLAUSE)

For a season, a gifted speaker can inspire with his words. But for a lifetime, John McCain has inspired with his deeds.

(APPLAUSE)

If character is the measure in this election, and hope the theme, and change the goal we share, then I ask you to join our cause. Join our cause and help America elect a great man as the next president of the United States.

Thank you, and God bless America. Thank you.