Tuesday, May 28, 2013
NEW BIBLE PROPHECY WEBSITE HAS FINISHED ITS FIRST WEEK! End Times Prophecy Report, a new WordPress site, is now up and running--and has finished up its first week.
End Times Prophecy Headlines are posted six times per week. ETP Headlines features commentary and news relating to end times Bible prophecy. The site features headlines, news and commentary as it pertains to the times in which we live. According to the site’s editor, Jeremiah Jameson, it will also focus on:
“End Times Bible Prophecy and News, End Times Deception, Societal Collapse, Apostasy, False Teachers, Mass Hysteria, Demonic Attacks, War, Rumors of War, Famine, Pestilence, Salvation through Jesus Christ, Earthquakes, UFOs, Earth Changes, False Christs, All Roads Lead to Rome, New World Order, Conspiracies, and GMO Frankenfood.”
“We have emphasized news and commentary as it pertains to Biblical prophecy and the times we are living in. This appears to be a topic which a growing number of people want covered and they have been making their way to the site.”
The traffic counts have so far exceed our expectation for END TIMES PROPHECY REPORT, according to Jameson. "We also feature messages of eternal salvation through Jesus Christ," Jameson added.
The site’s plans are to update daily and to add writers as they grow.
“We’re in the middle of putting everything in order, what everyone will be writing about and even the entire list of topics we plan on covering,” Jameson offered. “Check back often to see what we’re up to!’
This writer will be an occasional contributor to End Times Prophecy Report.
Any writer interested in contributing can contact James at email@example.com.
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
John Edwards, Rielle Hunter, Andrew Young, Fred Baron:
"They're all still hiding, but they're hiding in plain sight. We can see them! Don't they know we can all see them hiding?"
--DBKP's LBG on the continued subterfuge in the John Edwards Scandal
Why is everyone in the John Edwards' scandal still hiding?
As LBG emailed recently, "They're all still hiding, but they're hiding in plain sight. We can see them! Don't they know we can all see them hiding?"
In what's likely to be the last story, before the National Enquirer publishs more baby pix to nail John Edwards' confessional lies to the barn door, a few observations and questions about the "99% honest" man:
*** Rielle Hunter continues to be jetted around the country, in an attempt to be kept out of sight of a suddenly-awakened MSM.
After the Edwards PR appearance on ABC's Nighline on August 8, the Enquirer released this information a week afterwards:
And now The ENQUIRER has uncovered that Edwards' political operatives are still paying his mistress Rielle Hunter - and she was whisked away on a private jet two days before he confessed their extramarital affair on national TV!
Again, we ask, "Why?"
Are these the actions of a "99% man"? Perhaps Edwards, who offered gallantly to submit to a paternity test, doesn't know anything about this? Perhaps it is just the actions of Edwards' finance chair, the equally-gallant Fred Baron?
The Enquirer's latest print edition reported, however, that "Trapped like a rat, John Edwards spoke those soothing words to his mistress Rielle Hunter after admitting to their illicit affair." The "soothing words Edwards spoke?
"Of course, I still love you. Don't worry, we'll get through this."
This was not widely--if at all--reported in a MSM that is now chasing the Enquirer's leads in the story after building an impressive wall of silence for months. Perhaps the MSM still handles the Enquirer's leads like days-old garbage?
The Enquirer is good enough to investigate the story, report the story, stay with the story for months and continues to be light-years ahead of the MSM in the quest for the "truth".
Big Media can now report the story of John Edwards, Fred Baron, Rielle Hunter, Andrew Young and details of the cover-up, not because the story was under their noses for the better part of a year: but because John Edwards gave them permission to investigate and report it when he went on ABC's Nightline August 8 and admitted his affair. BM (Big Media, though other, more earthy thoughts are brought to mind by the initials) will be taking its investigative marching orders from the National Enquirer for a while yet.
And likely seething the entire time.
*** John Edwards and Fred Baron's statements belie their actions. If the affair was over and John Edwards is not the father, then why are all the principals in the matter still acting like they have something to hide?
Andrew Young, the man who fell halfway on his sword for Edwards--he claimed in December he was the father, but didn't put his name on the birth certificate--has scooted back to North Carolina with his family.
Why doesn't Andrew Young issue another statement declaring his paternity of Frances Quinn Hunter? That wouldn't settle any questions, just as his December statement failed to settle any--except for decidedly un-curious MSM editors and reporters, most notably, CBS's Bob Scheiffer.
Scheiffer was rewarded for his infamously un-curious nature by getting a phone call from John Edwards shortly after his statement was released for the press on August 8. Edwards apparently knew he could count on good, ole Bob not to ask any unpleasant questions during that phone conversation.
In his statements, Baron is still treating the press like he's on trial with his carefully-parsed sentences. Who know? Perhaps Baron can see into the future?
John Edwards' carefully-crafted statement and interview answers are his last comments on the affair. It's hard to see how he can say anything at this point that would improve his situation.
Perhaps that's why John Edwards has been hard to see during the last 11 days: Edwards is still in the self-imposed seclusion he entered on July 30, after reporters attempted to question him about his "incident" at the Beverly Hilton on July 21.
*** Rielle Hunter is keeping mum, except to issue a statement through her Baron-suggested attorney that she's not willing to call for Edwards to take a paternity test. Hunter's sister, however, was not as close-lipped and did ask for Edwards to step up to the paternity plate.
Apparently, Melissa and Rielle did not consult on that point. Edwards and Baron did not consult about Rielle Hunter and her living arrangements and numerous private jet trips--according to their statements. [John Edwards Cover-up: Press Releases a Carefully-Orchestrated Affair?]
So, John Edwards, Andrew Young and Rielle Hunter have remained inaccessible to the pleadings of the press for more information.
*** Fred Baron has clarified, but hasn't exactly been a Pigeon O'Brien about appearing before the press to clear up matters, in the last few days.
"The bottom line to it is John Edwards and Elizabeth Edwards had no knowledge of anything I did," Mr. Baron said. "I did it as a friend."
That was Fred Baron's last known utterance on the matter, reported by the Dallas Morning News.
It may be the last for awhile. The Enquirer is expected to publish this week more baby pictures, including, it is supposed, some that also feature John Edwards.
Which may force everyone involved to continue hiding in plain sight.
Deceiver channels the spirit of 19th-century French psychotherapist, Emile Coue: Every Day, in Every Way, the John Edwards Story Gets Better and Better. If you're short of time, a better John Edwards' go-to source is hard to find.
Oh and a shout out to Doc Sanity's latest edition of Carnival of the Insanities: she included pat's Christians in Muslim Countries: Saudi Girl Burned Alive for Being Christian in her weekly roundup of the bizarre and insane.
Outraged Spleen of Zion
Allman Bros. ~ Whipping Post
American crews will control US FBX-band radar granted Israel
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report
August 19, 2008, 12:43 PM (GMT+02:00)
In granting Israel the powerful FBX-T radar system to enhance its early warning resources against incoming missiles, Washington laid down a strict hands-off proviso. The system will be installed at a US base in the southern Israeli Negev. It will be off-limits to Israelis and managed exclusively by American personnel.
This discovery, revealed here for the first time by DEBKAfile's military sources, has aroused astonished rancor in senior Israel army circles. They questioned the judgment of prime minister Ehud Olmert, defense minister Ehud Barak, foreign minister Tzipi Livni, Shaul Mofaz, who leads the Israeli side of the twice-annual strategic dialogue with the US, and chief of staff Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi in accepting this proviso.
Even Poland, one officer commented, looked after its sovereignty and only signed its defense pact with the United States for the installation of missile interceptors on its Baltic coast after the Americans agreed to instruct Polish crews in their future operation.
Yet none of the Israeli officials involved in the radar transaction saw fit to carry this point. The FBX-T was requested to allow Israel's Arrow missile defense system to engage a Shehab-3 missile about halfway through its 11-minute flight from Iran, several times sooner than the Arrow's Green Pines radar is capable of doing.
The FBX-T can track objects in space such as a missile tipped with a chemical, germ or nuclear warhead.
When they swung the deal in Washington last month, Barak and Ashkenazi said the Israeli Defense Forces would acquire a major resource and Israel a valuable shield against enemy missiles.
But they erred badly in failing to demand its integration in Israel's national interceptor system for four reasons:
1. Israel will have no denied direct access to the data gathered by the system and can only hope the American operators will pass on the information as and when Israel needs it for self-defense rather than when it suits US interests.
2. The FBX-T will not only be able to track Iranian and Syrian missiles and aircraft but also keep watch on Israeli operations, giving the Washington a handle for stalling them. DEBKAfile's military sources point out that the Americans are suddenly in a hurry to have the system deployed in the Negev as soon as September. They will then be in position to forestall a possible Israeli pre-emptive attack on Iran's nuclear installations should one be decided in Jerusalem.
3. US experts say the FBX-T radar will lengthen the Israeli Arrow anti-missile system's range for detecting incoming Iranian missiles several times over. This is technically accurate, but in practice this enhanced capability is entirely contingent on a Pentagon order to the American crews in the Negev to activate a link between them.
4. Barak and Ashkenazi said on their return from Washington that they had procured US consent to links between Israel's early warning and missile interceptor systems, the X-band radar (which can pick up a missile 2,000 km from target) and also the American JTAGS satellites (which detects a missile launch).
This is not the case.
Any links between the IDF's radar and interceptors and the JATG satellites must be channeled through the X-band radar base in the Negev and are not direct. The data passed to Israel will be subject to pre-selection by American decision-makers.
Several billion dollars of US and Israeli funds have been sunk into developing the Arrow, which Israeli officials until recently claimed was a match for Iran's Shehab-3 ballistic missiles. It turns out now that the Arrow and its Green Pine radar pick up incoming missiles only when they are 800 km short of their target. Israel applied for the FBX-T radar to extend that range to 2,000 km from its territory. But as long as the system is operated exclusively by American personnel, its usefulness for shielding Israel against enemy missiles will circumscribed.
AUGUST 13, 2008:
U.S. puts brakes on Israeli plan for attack on Iran nuclear facilities
By Aluf Benn
The Americans viewed the request, which was transmitted (and rejected) at the highest level, as a sign that Israel is in the advanced stages of preparations to attack Iran. They therefore warned Israel against attacking, saying such a strike would undermine American interests. They also demanded that Israel give them prior notice if it nevertheless decided to strike Iran. As compensation for the requests it rejected, Washington offered to improve Israel's defenses against surface-to-surface missiles. Israel responded by saying it reserves the right to take whatever action it deems necessary if diplomatic efforts to halt Iran's nuclearization fail.
Senior Israeli officials had originally hoped that U.S. President George Bush would order an American strike on Iran's nuclear facilities before leaving office, as America's military is far better equipped to conduct such a strike successfully than is Israel's. Jerusalem also fears that an Israeli strike, even if it succeeded well enough to delay Iran's nuclear development for a few years, would give Iran international legitimacy for its program, which it currently lacks. Israel, in contrast, would be portrayed as an aggressor, and would be forced to contend alone with Iran's retaliation, which would probably include thousands of missile strikes by Iranian allies Hezbollah, Hamas and perhaps even Syria. Recently, however, Israel has concluded that Bush is unlikely to attack, and will focus instead on ratcheting up diplomatic pressure on Tehran. It prefers to wait until this process has been exhausted, though without conceding the military option.
Israel's assumption is that Iran will continue to use delaying tactics, and may even agree to briefly suspend its uranium enrichment program in an effort to see out the rest of Bush's term in peace. The American-Israeli dispute over a military strike against Iran erupted during Bush's visit to Jerusalem in May. At the time, Bush held a private meeting on the Iranian threat with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Defense Minister Ehud Barak, and the Israelis presented their request for certain specific items of military equipment, along with diplomatic and security backing. Following Bush's return to Washington, the administration studied Israel's request, and this led it to suspect that Israel was planning to attack Iran within the next few months. The Americans therefore decided to send a strong message warning it not to do so. U.S. National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mike Mullen both visited here in June and, according to the Washington Post, told senior Israeli defense officials that Iran is still far from obtaining nuclear weapons, and that an attack on Iran would undermine American interests.
Therefore, they said, the U.S. would not allow Israeli planes to overfly Iraq en route to Iran. The Americans sent a similar message to Iraq, which had objected vociferously to the idea of its air space being used for an Israeli attack on Iran. These private messages were accompanied by a series of leaks from the Pentagon that Israel interpreted as attempts to thwart any possibility of an attack on Iran. For instance, the Americans revealed details of a major Israel Air Force exercise in the Mediterranean; they also said they doubted Israel had adequate intelligence about Iran's nuclear facilities. In addition, Mullen spoke out publicly against an attack on Iran. Two weeks ago, Barak visited Washington for talks with his American counterpart, Robert Gates, and Vice President Richard Cheney. Both conversations focused on Iran, but the two Americans presented conflicting views: Gates vehemently opposes an attack on Iran, while Cheney is the administration's leading hawk.
Barak presented Israel's assessments of the Iranian situation and warned that Iran was liable to advance its nuclear program under cover of the endless deliberations about sanctions - which have thus far produced little in the way of action. He also acknowledged that effective sanctions would require cooperation from Russia, China and India, all of which currently oppose sanctions with real teeth. Russia, however, is considered key to efforts to isolate Iran, and Israeli officials have therefore urged their American counterparts in recent months to tone down Washington's other disputes with Moscow to focus all its efforts on obtaining Russia's backing against Iran. For instance, they suggested that Washington offer to drop its plan to station a missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic - a proposal Russia views as a threat, though Washington insists the system is aimed solely at Iran - in exchange for Russia agreeing to stiffer sanctions against Iran.
However, the administration rejected this idea. In an attempt to compensate Israel for having rejected all its proposals, Washington then offered to bolster Israel's defenses against ballistic missiles. For instance, Gates proposed stationing an advanced radar system in Israel and linking Israel directly into America's early warning satellite network; he also offered increased American funding for the development of two Israeli missile defense systems - the Arrow-3, an upgrade of Israel's existing Arrow system for intercepting ballistic missiles, and Iron Dome, a system designed to intercept short-range rockets. In addition, Washington agreed to sell Israel nine Super Hercules long-range transport aircraft for $2 billion.
However, it would not agree to supply Israel with any offensive systems. Now, Israel is awaiting the outcome of the latest talks between the West and Iran, as well as a formal announcement of the opening of an American interests section in Tehran. Israel views the latter as sure proof that Washington is not planning a military strike.
7/31/08: Olmert to Quit AFTER ELECTIONS IN SEPTEMBER
8/17/08: Israel to free 200 MORE prisoners as Rice visits Mideast
Ian Gillan ~ Gethsemane
I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse;
~ Genesis 12:3
Want more Babba Zee and scenes from the Outraged Spleen? Try these recent posts:
* Missing Links vs the Fall of Night & the Mares it Rides in on
* 3 Wood: Dollars vs Euros
* INTELLIGENCE BRIEFING UPDATE : GEORGIA
by Babba Zee
images: Outraged Spleen of Zion
Source: US & Israel Sign Murder-Suicide Pact
A Conservative In Los Angeles
Conservatives are not allowed in Los Angeles. At least not in what is termed 'polite society." I found this out the hard way.
I spent 33 years calling Los Angeles home. Most of those years were spent blindly accepting the assumptions portrayed by the spare headline or sound bite on the nightly news: Christians are bad, government is good, and America is the cause of all the world's woes.
Advocating the spending of tax dollars for any and all social problems was the mark of a good and moral person. Professing concern for those less well off was mandatory for financially successful people and it was de rigueur to have a least one 'best friend' of color. Wearing an AIDS awareness ribbon, at that time, signaled your inclusion in the community of man.
In return for inclusion in this community, members had a free pass to substitute intentions for actions. One was free to indulge in hedonistic behavior under the guise of empowerment. Discovering one's 'inner self' validated what used to be termed sexual promiscuity. Labels were confining so members had license to create their own. Who wouldn't prefer being labeled a free spirit instead of a selfish tramp? And in LA, labels, not substance, determined the social pecking order.
Any opinion at variance with the herd was considered judgmental, which was a definite no-no. Debate was redefined as argument, which was also a no-no. These rules were made clear to me only in the breach.
At age 39, six words spoken on TV changed my life forever. In 1992, I chanced to see H. Ross Perot on TV one night. He was holding up a toilet seat as he said, "The military paid $700.00 for this." OK. Then he said the words that would change my life forever. "And this is all public knowledge."
Not where I lived. For some reason, this motivated me, for the first time in my life, to investigate and question all the 'public knowledge' I had absorbed over the years. The results shocked and angered me. The good news, however, was that my days as a 'useful idiot' came to a screeching halt.
Somehow, I found National Review, then Human Events, then the Washington Times. Their message was new to me. I was amazed that I had managed to live my whole without any glimmer that there was another, more valid, point of view out there. The conservative point of view.
I assumed that my friends, family and co-workers would be just as outraged as I to find they had only been exposed to one side of most issues. That was my first mistake. My second mistake was believing that facts counted.
I lost business and friends before I realized I had to keep my mouth shut and my opinions to myself. I remember having dinner one night with Eric and Brenda in their beautiful Bel Air mansion. This couple had the best our country has to offer. I'll never forget Brenda exclaiming over her shrimp cocktail, "America? 150 years of slavery!" By challenging her, and others like her, I slowly lost my membership in the LA community of man.
After a few years, the only place I could be myself in public was while attending conservative functions held by the few conservative organizations that were based in Los Angeles.
Meanwhile, my (one and only) husband of three years left me, due in large part to my inability to stifle my opinions. (He owed his living to the very liberal trial lawyers and his friends made clear to him my views were not welcome) I also found it increasingly hard to attend family functions, as the barely concealed tolerant patronizing of my out-of-bounds views started to grate.
The final straw was an ordinary news article. Our government schools, under the guise of 'safe sex' and 'tolerance' hosted a "Leather Fest" in San Francisco. Attended by seventh graders, some of the exhibits actually taught these kids how to fist. I won't go into details, except to explain that it is a homosexual practice...having nothing to do with tolerance or safe sex. And my tax dollars were paying for it.
Enough. After 33 years, I decided to leave Los Angeles. In 2002, I sold my business, my home, everything. I set off to find a place in the world where I could be myself without ticking everyone off. I found it in a small fishing village, Murrells Inlet, South Carolina. It was the best decision I ever made. The few times I've looked back, I feel only regret that I spent so many years of my life allowing others to define me.
by Nancy Morgan
Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina.
Article may be reprinted, with attribution.
Monday, August 18, 2008
Two signs the Democrats are about to descend on your city
* Hair-prefect Homeless
* Outbreak of Boll Weevil Democrats
You say you're homeless and in Denver for the Democrat National Convention?
Have a haircut--on the house!
It seems to be a first -- don't move the homeless, clean them up. That was the work of one salon and the recipients didn't even seem to care if the Democrats were coming to town. Sly's Salon at 17th and Grant was offering free haircuts to the homeless Monday.
"To give them haircuts and make them all spiffed up for the Democratic National Convention, because they are part of our community as well," said Ghandia Gohnson, co-owner of Sly's Salon.
RidesAPaleHorse observes, "We're not gonna hide 'em..we're gonna clean 'em up and act like they're productive citizens."
Productive or not, the haircuts seem to be proof of the old adage, "Look good, feel good!"
One homeless man agress.
Rusty Johnson hasn't had a haircut in three-to-four months. He said his appearance during the convention made no difference to him.
"I just want to look good and feel good for myself, that's all," Johnson said.
Denver is also restricting airspace during the convention.
The feds are closing airspace over Denver during the convention, even if the plane has no engine or no pilot at all. The Federal Aviation Administration is also warning pilots--or model enthusiasts--that any who stray into the restricted area "result in the use of force".
The details — spelled out in a "notice to airmen," or NOTAM, issued by the Federal Aviation Administration — also restricts everything from hang-gliders to model airplanes during the convention, which opens Aug. 25 at the Pepsi Center and runs for four days.
"How many pounds of TNT can a Cessna carry? How many pounds of nitroglycerine can a model plane carry?" Fergus asked. "We don't know, but the point is the risk is there."
Of course, one might ask the question--assuredly rhetorical: Why would terrorists blow up the convention of a party who has professed it would rather talk than fight?
It seems an unlikely scenario.
Previously, most terrorists have not been known for being giants of logic. Don't voice that thought at the Dem Denver event, however.
It most likely would be branded "sterotypically racist" by the denizens of the Pepsi Center.
The Rocky Mountain News also reports that the restriction will affect "crop dusters, hot air balloons and model rockets."
Sounds like Boll Weevil Democrats might thrive in Denver.
by Mondoreb & RidesAPaleHorse
August 18, 2008
Edwards to editor on Hunter story last year: Did I mention my wife has cancer?
AllahPundit's wrath is a sight to behold. AP relates a story from John Edwards' hometown newspaper, The Raleigh News & Observer.
"Via Byron York, who calls it “breathtaking” when it’s really just par for the course."
By the time Edwards called, we had decided not to publish the story in the Friday paper. But Edwards didn’t know that. I wanted to hear what he had to say. We still could have reversed our decision.
Edwards told me that the allegations were not true.
He said The N&O was the paper that arrived on his doorstep every day, the one read by friends of him and his wife, Elizabeth.
He said he’d never called before to complain or state his case. Given Elizabeth’s health — she has cancer — he said it was especially important to him that the story not run in The N&O.
He was calling from an airport, and we spoke only a few minutes.
I made no promises.
Edwards’ comments were off the record. Because he has acknowledged he lied, I feel free to report them.
Allah hits a couple nails on the head with the same hammer in the following paragraph.
Anything wrong with a guilty husband doing what little he can to protect his sick wife after the fact? Nope — except that, as we now know by Edwards’s own admission, Elizabeth Edwards had already learned about the affair by that point. He claims he told her in 2006; HuffPo’s timeline says it was April 2007 at the latest, fully six months before the Enquirer story broke. Which makes what he told the N&O a lie, and a bad lie at that. Was he seriously suggesting that she wouldn’t have found out about the story if their hometown paper hadn’t mentioned it when it was already screaming from every checkout counter in America?
Questions are being asked--and unlike December 2007, a horde of MSM reporters are not only on the story: they're upset that they swallowed John Edwards et.al.'s lies "hook, line and stinker", as LBG pointed out.
Deceiver has its daily dose of John Edwardsibilia, including these interesting finds:
- First things first: According to no less an authority than Pigeon O’Brien, Rielle is pronounced “Ree-elle.” Not “Riley” or “Real” or “Cosmic Babymaker McGee” or anything else. So that’s one unanswered question down, a zillion to go…
- When you’re campaigning for president and you think your hometown newspaper is about to run with a story about your infidelity — and, inevitably, the intricate and expensive coverup of that infidelity — you know what’s a good weapon to have in your arsenal? Your wife’s cancer.
- McSweeney’s presents: Edwards! The Musical.
Also, Deceiver has the answer to all those who write that "Nobody in the general public actually cares about John Edwards or his unsavory behavior. Edwards became ancient history the first five minutes after this thing broke."
From CNN RELIABLE SOURCES: John, Elizabeth Edwards Speak Out on Tawdry Affair; Hillary Clinton's Paper Trail
HOWARD KURTZ, HOST: So, are journalists going to keep chasing this story even though Edwards is out of politics, perhaps forever?
Joining us now in New York, Lola Ogunnaike, entertainment correspondent for CNN's "AMERICAN MORNING"; Mark Feldstein, former CNN investigative correspondent who now teaches journalism at The George Washington University"; and Lois Romano, "Washington Post" reporter who has been covering this story.
Lois, John Edwards gave a heartfelt performance on "Nightline," said he was lying before but he's telling the truth now.
Do most journalists believe he's telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
LOIS ROMANO, "THE WASHINGTON POST": No. Most journalists do not. And basically, we're seeing kind of death by a thousand cuts now.
Or maybe even Death by 1000 Papercuts?
[hat tip: Dossier]
Dossier adds in another comment to the same story [John Edwards Cover-up: Press Releases a Carefully-Orchestrated Affair? ]
Could the biggest story of the whole John Edwards Lovechild story be the exposé that Trial Lawyers have covertly purchased control of the Democratic Party?
Barack Obama may be extremely vulnerable on the issue of Tort Reform in this election.
Is there a top secret ATLA agenda? Have the tinfoil hat guys been right all along?
As a Democrat, I am outraged that I have been sold this bill of goods under the false assumption that factors other than the highest bidder were planning my society!!!
That would be too bad: trial lawyers reined in?
No more 24/7 commercials on daytime television with the not-so-subliminal meme that everyone in America has been wronged and needs to consult the talking head ambulance chaser sponsoring the come-on?
That's not the America I knew...
August 18, 2008
China, on the other hand, appears to be cheating. The age of their gymnasts is in question, they faked parts of the opening ceremony and the little cutie who sang was apparently lip synching. The actual singer had buck teeth and wasn't cute enough.
Till next Monday, keep smiling,
by Nancy Morgan
Culture Watch may be reprinted, with attribution to Nancy Morgan and RightBias.com