Scroll down for current posts and articles.

Be patient please. The blog takes a few minutes to load.
Your computer is not locked up. We don't have the speed of a website. Thanks for your indulgence.



Posts (dated articles with a feature that allows for comments from readers) are below the front page.

Same with links to other websites, videos and blog archives. They are on the right side of the blog where opposite posts in a narrow column.

SCROLL DOWN if you want to research or get sources. Use the "labels" feature and simply click on the topic or person that interests you. An idiosyncracy of this format is that whenever you click on a label or older post, you will again see the front page. Nothing we can do about that.




Website advocating for involvement in your county regulation process and suggestions for county ordinances responding to federal expansion of jurisdiction and authority and global governance.


* * * * * * *
US Capitol switchboard
800-828-0498 or 202-224-3121

* * * * * * *

ORF is now monetized. This means you will see ads on the blog. By clicking on the ads, you help generate revenue for ORF. What is ORF going to do with revenue generated from this blog? We want to buy a blender. A really nice blender with multiple speeds. We also would like to buy a lava lamp. In addition to the items mentioned aforely, we would also like to buy a stuffed Jack-a-lope head. Nothing extravagant.

Uncle Sam

Uncle Sam

The Oath of the President of the United States

US Constitution, Article II, Section 1

Before he enter on the execution of his office, he shall take the following oath or affirmation: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."

The case could be made that Obama has violated the oath of the office of the Presidency of the United States in not closing the borders at the threat of a global pandemic of the Mexican flu, the violations of the U.S. Constitution in the CIFTA, and his refusal to clarify the circumstances of his birth. Think about it.

Link to the White House by Clicking on Photo

Link to the White House by Clicking on Photo


Click on KALH logo for website and to listen to live stream



Catron County Wolf Incident Investigator, Jess Carey, provide ORF with this document. This is what the ranchers in western New Mexico are living with.



Links to past ORF information on the Mexican Gray Wolf re-introduction program. Some of the links to newspaper articles no longer work.




They are watching. We're watching them watcing us watching you.


We've complied the best of the ORF cartoons all in one location.

Natural Climate Change - Real Science, Verifiable

Natural Climate Change - Real Science, Verifiable
Dr. Eric Karlstrom's excellent website on climate change, it's natural. The agenda is truth and the vindication of scientific method.

Title 17 U.S.C section 107

*NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to:

Posts and Comments from Readers

Please include yourself in the discussion. Post a comment.

Friday, February 29, 2008

Dedicated to Laura's Cow and Calf

You have two cows. Your neighbor has none. You feel guilty for being successful. Barbara Streisand sings for you.

You have two cows. Your neighbor has none. So?

You have two cows. The government takes one and gives it to your neighbor. You form a cooperative to tell him how to manage his cow.

You have two cows. The government seizes both and provides you with milk. You wait in line for hours to get it. It is expensive and sour.

You have two cows. You sell one, buy a bull, and build a herd of cows.

You have two cows. Under the new farm program the government pays you to shoot one, milk the other, and then pours the milk down the drain.

You have two cows. You sell one, lease it back to yourself and do an IPO on the 2nd one. You force the two cows to produce the milk of four cows. You are surprised when one cow drops dead. You spin an announcement to the analysts stating you have downsized and are reducing expenses. Your stock goes up.

You have two cows. You go on strike because you want three cows. You go to lunch and drink wine. Life is good.

You have two cows. You redesign them so they are one-tenth the size of an ordinary cow and produce twenty times the milk. They learn to travel on unbelievably crowded trains. Most are at the top of their class at cow school.

You have two cows. You engineer them so they are all blond, drink lots of beer, give excellent quality milk, and run a hundred miles an hour. Unfortunately they also demand 13 weeks of vacation per year.

You have two cows but you don't know where they are. While ambling around, you see a beautiful woman. You break for lunch. Life is good.

You have two cows. You have some vodka. You count them and learn you have five cows. You have some more vodka. You count them again and learn you have 42 cows. The Mafia shows up and takes over however many cows you really have.

You have all the cows in Afghanistan, which are two. You don't milk them because you cannot touch any creature's private parts. You get a $40 million grant from the US government to find alternatives to milk production but use the money to buy weapons.

You have two cows. They go into hiding. They send radio tapes of their mooing.

You have two bulls. Employees are regularly maimed and killed attempting to milk them.

You have one cow. The cow is schizophrenic. Sometimes the cow thinks he's French, other times he's Flemish. The Flemish cow won't share with the French cow. The French cow wants control of the Flemish cow's milk. The cow asks permission to be cut in half. The cow dies happy.

You have a black cow and a brown cow. Everyone votes for the best looking one.
Some of the people who actually like the brown one best accidentally vote for the black one. Some people vote for both. Some people vote for neither. Some people can't figure out how to vote at all. Finally, a bunch of guys from out-of-state tell you which one you think is the best-looking cow.

You have millions of cows. They make real California cheese. Only five speak English. Many are illegals. Arnold likes the ones with the big udders.

Thursday, February 28, 2008


TV news in Canada charges Barak Obama said one thing in a Presidential debate, then called the Canadian Prime Minister and told him the exact opposite regarding NAFTA.

Copy and paste the link above to watch the video of a Canadian news story. You won't see this on the news in the U.S.


Three great articles from New West on how Montana is bracing for a record fire season.

Copy and paste these links to your search engine bar to read them.


"That's also part of the problem. Even proponents of the LEED system, like Randy Hafer of High Plains Architects and green pioneer Bob Berkebile, one of the drafters of the original LEED standards, acknowledge in private that there's more than a little discontent with the LEED system and USGBC's status. With a host of small, sometimes competing sub-sectors like recycled materials and solar infrastructure, and scores of specialty architects and engineers, the green building industry is complex and diverse, and perhaps inherently resistant to a single arbiter.

Some architects and engineers complain about the money and time involved in obtaining one of the four LEED approval ratings (standard, silver, gold, and platinum), and say prescriptive standards don't always foment true innovation.

What's more, LEED now has competition: a rival rating system known as "Green Globes," promoted by the Portland-based Green Building Initiative, claims to be less expensive and less cumbersome than the LEED process. "

Wednesday, February 27, 2008


City fathers have signed a deal with Electronic Pharmaceutical Technology of Wayzeta, Minnesota to open a white male mental health facility in Alamogordo in 2011.
The new mental health facility will house white males who suffer from severe schizophrenia to deranged and sadistic killers. City officials estimate 150 new jobs to the area, replacing jobs lost when the monkey farm closed. The new facility will be more secure than the old monkey farm. "People were always afraid a couple hundred thousand monkeys with metal hats drilled to their heads would escape into the community, spreading monkey viruses we can't cure", one City official said.
"This facility only houses humans who are just mentally ill or psychopathic killers; no monkey viruses here", he continued. The new facility will be a totally green building, utilizing environmentally sound building techniques. Inmates will be treated with 'green' therapy, to include green shock treatment, herbal medications and drumming and chanting groups.

New white male mental health facility to open in 2011.

In the old days monkey escapes were common from the monkey farm.

Escaping monkeys would be shot with a tranquilizer gun before capture.

Racism in ADN Story? Say It Isn't So

In the first sentence of the story Sunday, Feb.24, 2008, under the headline Police arrest one in Friday murder:

"Information released Saturday morning by the Alamogordo Department of Public Safety on a homicide investigation that led officers to a body found at the Hampton Inn Friday night has resulted in the arrest of Ferard Parvilus, a 33-year-old black male."

I was appalled at the first sentence. What does the man's skin color have to do with the accusations? NOTHING.

The Alamogordo Daily News appears to have pulled this article from their website: 2/

The Alamogordo police logs are published in the Alamogordo Daily News and no one's race is mentioned. I have included just a portion of 2/26/08 report as an example:

Alamogordo police logs
Alamogordo Daily News
Article Launched: 02/26/2008 12:00:00 AM MST

Saturday, Feb. 23
Day shift

Charles Dewyze, 59, residing at the Classic Inn, No. 5, was arrested and issued a Municipal Court non-traffic citation for malicious use of the phone pursuant to an investigation. He was also served with a Magistrate Court warrant for conditions of release previously imposed should be revoked. He was jailed on $10,000 bond to appear in each respective court.

Chris Faviell, 31, of 1304 Hendrix, was issued a Municipal Court non-traffic citation for unlawful possession of marijuana. He was stopped at a traffic stop and the officer observed alleged marijuana in the vehicle. He is to appear in Municipal Court.

Anthony Montoya, 21, of No. 74 Forsyth, was issued a Municipal Court non-traffic citation for criminal damage to property stemming from an incident that occurred Feb. 21 in the parking lot of Wal-Mart. Montoya allegedly kicked in the driver's side door of someone else's vehicle.

Alex Hill, 18, of no fixed address, was issued a Municipal Court non-traffic citation for shoplifting after he allegedly attempted to take a necklace without paying for it. He was jailed to appear in Municipal Court.

Night shift

Angelina Davis, 22, of 2200 First St. No. 1704, was issued a non-traffic
citation for battery following a disturbance call. She was involved in a physical altercation with a resident on the 2200 block of First Street, and was cited to appear in Municipal Court.

Jahaira N. Parvilus, 23, of 2200 First St. No. 601, was issued a non-traffic citation for battery following a disturbance investigation. She was allegedly involved in a physical altercation and battered a resident on the 2200 block of First Street. She was cited to appear in Municipal Court.

(1) Why did Karl Anderson report the ethnicity of the accused when it was not necessary to locate the accused who turned himself in? The people of Otero County, all shapes and colors, should be outraged.

(2) I can't find this story on the ADN website. Was it pulled? If so, why?

Wolves in Salmon, Idaho Decimate Elk Hunting

This is something I received from an Idaho outfitter regarding the impact on elk in the Salmon, Idaho area. Although it is about Idaho, the same things hold true for Wyoming. There are some in the G&F who like wolves and will go out of their way to skew their studies to let the wolves off the hook. On the other hand, there are some in our Wyoming G&F who hate the wolves for what they are doing to our big game herds. Name withheld.

I am a outfitter in Salmon for over 30 years and have seen the change!

In 1996 our Unit 28 opening week saw 10 hunters harvest 9 bull elk. 1-7x7, 6-6x6's and 2- 5x5's. All Mature bulls,all happy hunters! 11 years later after the wolves have been here, this season (2007) we harvested only 1 spike bull and 4 deer out of 20 total hunters. On my first 3 hunts I went 15 days horseback guiding and never saw an elk!! Almost all of the hunters never wanted to see Idaho again, yes very upset! I wonder what this is doing to the economy of our small towns in Idaho, I hear this from my friends,locals and pretty much everyone I talk to.

I have yet to run into anyone on the trails,dirt roads,paved roads or on Main street that came to our county to see a wolf! I guess most of them are in New York City watching them on TV as I have yet to meet one here, much less spend a dollar in our communities!

I know as a fact there are hundreds or maybe thousands of elk hunters that will not return! Wow, wolves really do impact the economy of small Idaho towns!

I have talked and pleaded with our Fish & Game Dept in Salmon, Region 7 to no avail. They say basically nothing can be done. A few wolves have been taken out by the Feds only because of Beef kills. Not one wolf that I know of has been taken out because of Elk kills.

About 5 - 8 years ago while lion hunting in my area in winter on snowmobile,I found 9 dead elk (8 cow elk & 1-6x6 bull) on Silver Creek road (a 14 mile stretch) all killed within a week in my opinion. All were killed by a pack of about 8 wolves in my opinion, by the tracks around the kills, the way the elk were killed, and the fact I lived with the pack in the area constantly. Wolf tracks everywhere,some of the elk eaten, some not, most had intestines pulled out some didn't. All typical wolf kills I was used to seeing. Not one was covered by snow or brush as lions do. Almost all had their noses pulled off, as usual for a wolf kill as I was used to seeing. A lion had never pulled a nose off an elk that I had ever found. Lions had never killed over 2 to 3 deer ( hardly ever an elk ) on the 14 mile stretch of Silver Creek road ever in a course of a winter the 20 + years I had been there! Also no lion tracks were found by me and my lion hunters over a 2 week period in the area when the elk were found. Obviously a case of binge killing by the wolf pack that was in there. I would swear to this on a stack of Bibles " then and today", they were killed by the pack in the area!

On my way out on snowmachines with my hunter that day I ran into Jason Husselman (now Idaho Fish & Game Wolf biologist in the Salmon office) " then a guy doing a wolf study" under Gary Power (now Idaho Fish & Game commissioner, Salmon area). I told Jason about the 9 dead elk on Silver Creek road and that in my opinion, they were all killed by the pack of 8 wolves in the area. He said he would check the kills, as he was doing the study on the impact of wolves on big game in the area.

On return a few days later, I ran into him on snowmachines again a few days later. I asked him if he saw the elk kills on Silver creek? He said that he did. I asked him what did he write down in his study reports? He said that he determined that all 9 elk were killed by lion! And that he wrote it down as such in his reports on the wolf study he was doing under Gary Power. I was floored, to say the least and asked him if he was for the wolves or against them. He told me he was for the introduction of wolves and wanted them in idaho.

The important thing to remember here is ; If the 9 wolf kills on Silver creek road that week were reported as lion kills, what about the rest of the study in the whole Salmon area that winter? Now both these guys are pulling good wages and have been for years working for the Idaho Fish & Game Dept. I hope that they are proud of their study. I just wanted them to know I didn't forget about that special moment. Believe me I never will.

Thanks for the opportunity to tell you my story. Feel free to send it to anyone you please.
Sincerely, Shane McAfee

Tuesday, February 26, 2008


The Forest Guardians, the wolf protection group, Sinapu and the Sage Brush Sea Campaign have combined to become Wild Earth Guardians. This merging of organizations is probably in response to the growing numbers of Americans fighting back against environmental injustice and fraud.

The Forest Guardians came into existence in 1989. Their mission statement, taken from their webpage, states:
"Founded in 1989, Forest Guardians has emerged as a results-driven group with a proven record of defending and preserving threatened southwestern wildlife and ecosystems. Our approach to conservation features a potent combination of scientific analysis, strategic litigation to enforce existing environmental laws, and efforts to reform misguided public polices."
Other environmental groups have been critical of the Forest Guardians radical environmentalism and have accused the group of deliberate misinformation campaigns.
The following text is taken from Wikipedia’s page on the Forest Guardians:
“Syndicated columnist, Sherry Robinson, called the Forest Guardians "an extremist group with a disinformation campaign" [9]. Another syndicated columnist, Kristen Davenport, said that the organization is "far-reaching" [10]. The Rio Grande Foundation called the group "radical environmentalists." [11] And supporters of biomass energy development have accused the Forest Guardians of “bad faith,” “flip-flopping” and “radicalism.” [12].

On Dec. 15, 2007, I wrote the article “DETRIMENTAL RELIANCE AS TACTIC TARGETING RANCHERS”, on the Otero Residents Forum blog site. I wrote about an article I stumbled upon in my research on wolves. A fellow named Gene Ladd had authored a book titled: AMBER WAVES OF GAIN. I found Mr. Ladd and his book at
In this book, Mr. Ladd describes an incident he alleges occurred in 1999, in Santa Fe.

According to Mr. Ladd, the Minutemen placed a pipe bomb in the mailbox of the Forest Guardians and blew out the window of another environmental group with a shotgun.
I contacted the Santa Fe Police Department with Mr. Ladd’s story. A high ranking official of the Santa Fe PD, with 20 years service on the department said he didn’t recall such an incident. He surely would have remembered a pipe bomb placed in the controversial green organization’s mailbox.

Mr. Ladd went on to portray the New Mexico Farm and Livestock Bureau as a militant organization intent on fueling anti-environmental hatred among ranchers. Mr. Ladd describes a training manual from the New Mexico Department of Public Safety that describes the New Mexico Farm and Livestock Bureau as dangerous and capable of potential terrorist activities. Mr. Ladd goes on to claim the Farm Bureau pressured the New Mexico Department of Public Safety to withdraw the manual; which according to Mr. Ladd, the DPS did.

I sent Mr. Ladd’s allegations to the DPS headquarters in Santa Fe. Today I received a letter from the assistant director refuting Mr. Ladd’s claims and saying the incident never happened. The assistant director also said no such manual depicting the Farm Bureau as a terrorist organization was ever printed.
I searched the FBI eco-terrorism records and found no such pipe bomb incident in Santa Fe in 1999.

Around the time all this was happening an individual who started a forest fire was arrested in Santa Fe county.

Mr. Ladd assigns the pipe bomb incident to this individual and places him as a member of the Minutemen. I asked Janet White, co-administrator of this blog and Minutemen member if she knew of this incident or the name I gave her. She did not. She gave the information to Bob Wright, Minutemen head honcho for New Mexico. He has the original roles of who signed up in the early days of the organization. Bob said the Minutemen did not exist in 1999 and the name of the man Mr. Ladd says was a member is not on any of the roles. The individual arrested for the forest fire and Mr. Ladd’s terrorist was never a Minutemen member.

The Forest Guardians are also the environmental group that sued to have Lincoln National Forest ban grazing on public lands and a prohibition on harvesting of timber.
These actions severely impacted Otero county residents. On February 24, 2008, the Alamogordo Daily News published a letter from Bryan Bird from the Santa Fe chapter of the Wild Earth Guardians. In his letter Mr. Bird employs scare tactics warning of environmental disaster in Lincoln National Forests if thinning of the forest is allowed.
I spoke with Dr. John Fowler, professor of Ag Economics and Ag Business at New Mexico State University in Las Cruces. Dr. Fowler warns of a record fire season in 2008 due to the unmanaged condition of the forests. In areas of the forest that can sustain twenty healthy stems, or trees per acre, the forest now have 2000 stems per acre. The result of the environmental litigation to close the forest to realistic management, public grazing and harvesting of timber for several years has created a dry, root dry, top heavy forest of pines and undergrowth. 2008 could become the year the world sees a monumental ‘fire storm’ in our forests of monumental and historical proportions.

Mr. Bird and other Wild Life Guardians extremists insert themselves into state and county land use issues with the intent of closing down rural communities who depend on the land for their economic survival. I immediately challenge the legal standing of these environmental groups who have chapters in Santa Fe, Denver and Boulder, Colorado.
Black’s Law Dictionary defines standing as: “A party’s right to make a legal claim or seek judicial enforcement of a duty or right. To have standing in federal court, a plaintiff must show (1) that the challenged conduct has caused the plaintiff actual injury, and (2) that the interest sought to be protected is within the zone of interests meant to be regulated by the statutory or constitutional guarantee in question”.

The Supreme Court addressed the issue of standing in the 1992 case of Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife. The court ruled the plaintiffs, Defenders of Wildlife, had not shown injury to themselves on the grounds they were not the injured party. The Defenders of Wildlife had sued for protection of an endangered species, as defined in the Endangered Species Act. The court ruled the plaintiffs did not have standing necessary to bring suit because they would not be injured in the likelihood they might not see the endangered species in the wild. The endangered species could be the injured party, not the Defenders of Wildlife.

I conducted an exercise in unwarranted intrusion of wolf reintroduction of my own.
I contacted an Albuquerque radio station and informed them I was advocating for Mexican Gray Wolf reintroduction in Santa Fe and Bernalillo counties in New Mexico.
The radio personality who interviewed me immediately rejected the idea. He very eloquently informed me of the threat to ranching concerns, tourism, recreation and wildlife wolf reintroduction would have in those counties. I then informed him of my real intent of eliciting a response to wolf reintroduction from the very counties where the majority of wolf release advocates live. If wolf release programs are good for Catron county, New Mexico, the same programs should be even better in the counties where the wolf lovers live. My idea was not well received.

I took the opportunity to suggest wolf release programs in Boulder and Jefferson counties in Colorado in a comment section in the Denver Post. The Post had published a story of a proposed Department of Interior program to reintroduce wolves to Rocky Mountain National Park in an effort to control the elk population. Readers of the Denver Post were outraged by the proposal and responded vehemently to my support of wolf reintroduction in Colorado. Sinapu, the wolf advocate group, is headquartered in Boulder, Colorado.
The residents of Boulder, Colorado think wolf release programs are great in southern New Mexico. They did not respond favorably to wolf reintroduction in their backyards.

Apparently environmental justice, re-wilding of the planet and sovereign concerns only apply when the reality of their ideology threatens the communities the extremists live and operate in. Environmentalists operate openly within many of the federal agencies that regulate and enforce land usage. The USDA website has a link to the Nature Conservancy. Would the same federal agency willingly link to the Paragon Foundation website? Federal agencies and environmental groups anticipate ignorance on the part of the American public. Their winning tactic has been to intimidate individuals and communities into federal courts; courts that probably aren’t the proper venue or jurisdiction to hear these cases.

Time and time again the courts have violated state sovereignty and the very United States Codes which define the relationship between the powers of the United States and the 50 states. The MULTILPLE-USE SUSTAAINED-YIELD ACT OF 1960 clearly says in it’s ‘Finding/Policy’ the following, “The Act does not affect the jurisdiction or responsibilities of the states, the use or administration of the mineral resources of national forest lands, or the use or administration of federal lands not within the national forests. § 528”. Title 16 U.S.C.
I cite other definitions of the relationship, as outlined in the United Stated Codes, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the New Mexico Constitution, Bill of Rights.
Sec. 104 [42 USC § 4334].
Nothing in section 102 [42 USC § 4332] or 103 [42 USC § 4333] shall in any way affect the specific statutory obligations of any Federal agency (1) to comply with criteria or standards of environmental quality, (2) to coordinate or consult with any other Federal or State agency, or (3) to act, or refrain from acting contingent upon the recommendations or certification of any other Federal or State agency.

The Environmental Protection Agency policy on the protection of human subjects involved in the implementation of any Federal agency’s program or policy applies to Endangered Species Act 1973, ( U.S.C. 16 1531-1544 87 Stat. 884), as amended -- Public Law 93-205, approved December 28, 1973, repealed the Endangered Species Conservation Act of December 5, 1969 (P.L. 91-135, 83 Stat. 275). The 1969 Act had amended the Endangered Species Preservation Act of October 15, 1966 (P.L. 89-669, 80 Stat. 926).
The state of New Mexico Constitution, Bill of Rights, Article II, Section 3 “Right of self-government” reads: “The people of the state have the sole and exclusive right to govern themselves as a free, sovereign and independent state”.
The continued environmental agenda of fraud and misinformation must be challenged on all fronts. From litigation backed by junk science, wolf reintroduction to danger-creation scenarios like impending forest fire storms; state Citizens must mobilize to confront environmental fraud and take back state sovereignty in the interest of protecting private property rights and the rural economies of America.
Challenge the credibility and stand of extremist groups like the Wild Earth Guardians and others. Question the standing and jurisdiction in any manner involving a federal agency citation or claims of environmental litigation from a non-profit group. The summer 2005 issue of RANGE MAGAZINE has an excellent article about a ranching family that did challenge the junk science and authority of the Fish and Wildlife Service and the Center for Biological Diversity, and won!
Arizona rancher Jim Chilton and his family had combined conservation programs with ranching to create habitat for several wildlife species and abundant grass for their cattle.
The Chilton’s family’s efforts won them the praise of state biologists and scientists who closely monitored success of ranching and wildlife conservation. Despite the proven track record of this ranching families dedication to preserving wildlife, the environment and their family tradition; the Center for Biological Diversity falsified endangered species data, submitted photos of barren land or of mines not on the family’s ranch, and just plain lied in an attempt to close down the ranch in court. The Chilton’s persevered and won in court in a liable case against the Center for Biological Diversity.


This article is a must read for those who are not yet convinced that the environmentalists and the federal FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE lie, distort, and deliberately mislead the public.

This article details the fraud and junk science used by environmentalists to advance their agenda of 'rural cleansing', a term coined by Ron Arnod, author of UNDUE INFLUENCE.

Read why a jury described the actions of the Center for Biological Diversity as conceived by 'an evil mind'.


Bruce Hemming produced the controversial DVD: UNDUE BURDEN: THE REAL COST OF LIVING WITH WOLVES. Here is an email he sent to the blog about his reception on the youtube comments forum regarding wolves.

YouTube Update.

I thought everyone on the blog would like to know about Youtube and the thousands of pro wolf videos. I started posting some facts about wolves most of them have never seen. At first pretty outrages replies like this one. ill kill a farmer give me ur address so i can kill u to! The whole thing I learned was not to get caught in the trap of arguing and personal assaults. But Hey I am human and did a couple of times.

What set them off so bad was when I stopped arguing and just posting facts. This Bloody attack on a woman and her two children set off a firestorm that I believe got me banned from posting on wolf videos. Wouldn't you like to have the knowledge that shook them up so bad? Here it is the attack that shook the ground from the pro wolf side.
1864 Marion County, Arkansas. 3 dead
The scene where it occurred was sad to look upon by the one that made the discovery. The awful circumstances were in the shape of three human beings slain and eaten by wolves. It was supposed they reached near the base of the hill the first day; they stopped in the timber for the night and were attacked by a pack of wolves during the night and destroyed. Their awful doom and destruction can never be accurately described, but never let us imagine the heart rending shrieks and dying moans of the unfortunate family. This mixed with the noise made by the wolves snapping and snarling was certainly awful.
It was told by those who discovered their remains that the evidence on the ground showed that the woman made a desperate effort to defend herself and her children. She had fought the wolves over the space of half an acre. Stones, clubs and chunks of dead wood that she had used in resisting the attack lay scattered on the down-trodden grass. They were the only weapons of defense and she made desperate use of them to the finish.
Probably she had beaten them back and kept them at bay for some time before the ravenous beasts finally overcome her and gloated in the blood of the helpless human creatures. Their fate was simply awful. Who can imagine the consternation and terror of these poor beings when they were attacked by the vicious and hungry pack, and with loud screams and hard struggles were forced to yield their lives in such a horrible manner. Their destruction is sad to reflect upon.
Here is other fact I was posting.

Janesville Gazette, The 11-19-1891 St Paul Minnesota The large vicious gray wolves from Northern Minnesota killed and ate 3 children. A group of men found the wolves fighting over the bodies. They retreated came back with a large group of armed men the wolves did not leave until 2 were shot. The grizzly discovery shocked the town.

The inconvenient truth about wolves. Here is a study that recommends aggressive wolf control to save woodland caribou from extinction.
Bergerud, Arthur T. The Need for the Management of Wolves–An Open Letter. 2007. Rangifer, Special Issue No. 17, 2007: The Eleventh North American Caribou Workshop, Jasper, Alberta, Canada, 24-27 April, 2006
John Oakleaf study proving ranchers were only being paid for 1 out 7 livestock loses. has the full study. I broke down the truth but then the people would start talking about earth would be better off if all humans were gone. Earth is hell and mankind made it that way. This got me thinking these people are in some type of cult. A did a research on cult mind think and found this.
1.) A destructive cult tends to have an ethical double standard.
Many environmental groups rally against rich ranchers. But they hide the facts that many of their CEOs collect on the average 237,000 a year salary.

2.) A destructive cult has only two basic purposes: recruiting new members and fund-raising.
Youtube pro wolf side is full of only their message to recruit new members and collect more donations

3.) The cult demands that you place your children in its training program.
Many pro wolf groups have full brainwash tactics for teaching courses on wolves

4.) The teachings of the cult become absolute truth over shadowing reason or any logical facts.
All studies showing the truth about wolves have been ignored or deny.

5.) Most cults today resort to extreme measures making death threats to people pointing out the truth about the Wolf cult.
Many extreme members of this wolf cult have made threats on youtube.
The only way they could win was delete me or spam the comments until mine rolled off the page. After that didn't work the cult banned together and blocked me from posting on every wolf video I was on. Interesting maybe you don't agree with me but they sure act like a cult to me.

Copies of UNDUE BURDEN: THE REAL COST OF LIVING WITH WOLVES are available at this link:


Bruce Hemming is probably right about the cult description he gives of those who would advocate for wolf reintroduction. Check out the wolf lovers blog I found.
Note the reference to 'doing Al Pacino', posted right above her daughter's picture.
This blog contains wiccan, Native American, Playboy, and fuzzy wolf imagery.

Here's another group of intolerance we've seen in the past several years. The two groups sound similar in their rhetoric.

Sunday, February 24, 2008

You Don't Need to Be a Body Language Expert!

You beat me to it, Bruce. See next post below.

When I saw the picture in the Daily News I thought Chris Roberts of Sunbaked Biscuits was back. Note the crossed arms, fingers and lack of eye contact. But, it is the govenor, the same guy that brought you Oscar Simpson.

Friday, February 22, 2008

Wolves and Coyotes in Maine – A First-Hand Observation

Submitted by Gary Stevens

ORGAN, NEW MEXICO -- Amid the flurry of activity concerning the wolf re-introduction issue in the Southwest and Rocky Mountain states, I haven't read anything in the blogs about wolf and coyote activity in the Northern New England.

Before moving to the Southwest, I lived in Maine for most of my life. I have some observations about wolves and coyotes in Maine and Quebec Province.

Ninety percent of Maine is covered with deep, dense forest which stretches up through Canada to the St. Lawrence Seaway and Quebec. This vast area is comprised of little more than well maintained logging roads, lakes, rivers and mountains. The towns are few and far between, mostly centered around paper plants, the financial and social lifeblood of the deep north woods. This is prime territory for wolves, coyotes, deer, moose and bear. For the most part, these wild animals have thrived for eons without any human intervention at all.

Traditionally, the deer hunting season is used to balance the deer population from year to year. The number of deer taken varies each year according to the deer population and available food supply. This is one of the few examples of man's meddling and intervention proving to be successful. The deer population has been kept stable for the last century, or so.

The wolves that populate the north woods are of the Canis Lupus Lycaon species, also known as the Eastern timber wolf or Canadian wolf. As far a size goes, the males range 30 to 36" at the shoulder and occasionally weigh in at 100 pounds, although more commonly 80 to 90 pounds. These are formidable animals. Their behavior is much the same as the other wolf species, with the alpha pair and highly social pack behavior.

There have been documented wolf sightings in the Bethel and Moosehead Lake areas in Maine. In 1993, a two-year-old female wolf was shot near Moosehead Lake. The animal was identified as an eastern wolf through DNA comparison with a known wolf from the Quebec region. The wolf density in this region is about one wolf per sixty square miles. Using Google Earth or Topozone the curious can access images or maps of these areas.

In all of my years living at the edge of the Maine wilderness, I have never seen a wolf. Coyotes, however, are a different story. They are much more of a problem, in Maine, than the wolves. The Eastern coyotes, also known as the brush wolf, occupy all regions of the state, including the cities and suburbs in Southern Maine, with a statewide population of 15,000. They are slightly larger than their Western cousins, and just as bold. Although they usually shy away from humans, they are known to attack dairy cattle, sheep and house pets. Occasionally, there is a confrontation with people. When I was living in Bethel, Maine in the late 70's, a lumberjack was treed by an aggressive pack of coyotes. The logger had a rifle, but it was in his truck, a short distance away. He had to remain treed until a work mate came looking for him, shooting at and dispersing the coyote pack. The coyotes were looking for lunch.

For many decades, there has been a $50.00 bounty on the eastern coyote in Maine. The hunter simply presents the left ear of the coyote as evidence of a kill. Over the years, this has proven to be a successful program, as the "problem" coyotes, the ones who lurk in populated areas, are the ones that are thinned out.

The real bottom line here is the fact that wolves haven't been a problem in Maine due to their remote habitat. There has been no need to hunt them or "re-introduce" them to the environment. The best way to "manage" them is to leave them alone.


Reader in Kansas Sent This - So Much for Reading Labels

Chinese honey shipped to U.S. illegally
Feb 19, 2008 10:08 AM, Bee Culture Magazine

"Two companies and three people were convicted in Australia of customs fraud and fined $580,200 over an elaborate international import/export scam involving 1.7 million liters of honey that was shipped to the United States.

The fraud was part of a worldwide scam to circumvent anti-dumping duties imposed on Chinese honey by the U.S.

The honey was exported from Australia to the U.S. as an Australian-made product, but was actually from China."

P.S. Anyone out there have any new information of the health of U.S. bees? Remember the die off reported, was it, last year?

Thursday, February 21, 2008

The Goose and the Gander in Otero County

Many are now finding non-elected regional governments and governing councils enforcing policy and regulations. As these policies are implemented, locally-elected officials are actually losing power and decision-making ability in their own communities. Most decisions are now being made behind the scenes in non-elected "sustainability councils" armed with truckloads of federal regulations, guidelines, and grant money.

In fact, a recent study reported that elected city councils and commissioners have lost approximately 10% of their legislative power during the past 10 years, while, through the consensus process, the power of private groups called Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) has increased by as much as 300%. It is a wrenching transformation, indeed.

What has that got to do with you? Here's what: In the Alamogordo Daily News today, February 21, 2008, under the photo titled Spaceport director feted,you will find in the caption..."Otero County Commission Chairman Doug Moore presented Landeene (Spaceport America Executive Director) with a letter of support, stating the county will back a vote on a one-quarter of one percent tax to fund the spaceport if Sierra County voters back a similar tax."

1. Did Chairman Moore, Commissioners McGinn and Nivison ask their constituents their opinions of the spaceport tax?

2. Who signed the letter?

3. Just how does Otero County "back a vote on a new tax"? Is this wiggle room or an assumption of power to represent the will of the voters without their input?

4. The contradiction between Chairman Moore's position in the above quote and his position with the other commissioners in the World Heritage Ordinance, Release of Wolves, Jaguars and Bears Ordinance, Forest Service issues and more is BREATHTAKING.

5. Was Chairman Moore misquoted? That is possible. We invite him to correct the ADN quote or explain further. This invitation is also extended to Clarissa McGinn and Michael Nivision.

6. If the above quote is accurate, how is this any different than Gloria Vaughn and Don Carroll sending letters of support of the U.N.World Heritage Site designation for White Sands National Monument? At least Congressman Stevan Pearce took the time to correct the record on his behalf.

7. After the events of the Republican Convention last Saturday, it should be becoming abundantly clear what is going on in Otero County. If all this is okay with you voters and taxpayers, it will be okay with me, too. Keeping our representative Republic is my agenda. It is the law. If you want a democracy, go change the Constitution and have at it and good luck.

Wednesday, February 20, 2008


One of the selling points advocates for World Heritage Sites use for designation of White Sands National Monument is the guarantee in increased visitation. For those globalist green hounds that equates to increased tourist dollars spent in Alamogordo (and increased carbon deposits on White Sands Blvd). Does WHS designation really increase tourism?
Would a new sign out at White Sands National Monument help increase tourism?
Below are a series of stats showing the tourism decline at Chaco Canyon, a WORLD HERITAGE SITE. A friend of mine visited there recently and reported visitors are very restricted in their visitation to Chaco. Not like it used to be.

Thanks to John Turney for providing these stats for the blog.




When Jack Kennedy debated Richard Nixon on TV in 1960, the nation was introduced to what I call ‘Poledia’. TV brought the debate into the homes of Americans in a way never before experienced in our nation. The impact of packaging the candidate as an image proved to be more powerful than the substance of the political platforms. We see the same phenomenon occurring with Obama. Whatever Obama stands for in the eyes of his supporters and the reasons Hillary is fighting for her political life, one thing is clear; the image is sold regardless of the credibility and worthiness of an individual to be President of the United States. Neither Hillary nor Obama are qualified to be President. The players in Tammany Hall will be burning the long stogies as they plot the next ‘deal’ for the Democrat candidate in 2008. We as a nation are preparing to turn another corner in the American progressive march of poledia glamorization of ideology vs. reality.
After eight years of Bush it appears we are electing the best singer on the stage of globalist idols rather than an individual who might assume nationalism is best for a nation.

If you're curious about Obama and Tammany Hall, I've provided some links to some interesting websites below:

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

Bruce Gets Probation, 182 Days in Jail Suspended. Wonder What He Will Get on the Unlawful Hunting of a Protected Species

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

Official Gets Fine, Probation

By Charles D. Brunt
Journal Staff Writer
State Department of Game and Fish Director Bruce C. Thompson was placed on probation Monday for 182 days and ordered to pay a $500 fine for shooting a deer on private land without the landowner's permission.
Lincoln County Magistrate Judge Martha M. Proctor sentenced Thompson to 182 days in jail before suspending the jail time, a court clerk said Monday from Carrizozo.
The conditions of Thompson's unsupervised probation require that he not violate any local, state or federal laws for 182 days.
Thompson, who was also ordered to pay $67 in court costs, had pleaded no contest to the misdemeanor charge.
He still faces a related misdemeanor count of unlawful hunting/possession of protected species, which was filed in state District Court. He has pleaded not guilty to that charge; a jury trial is set for April 21 in Carrizozo.
The charges stemmed from a Nov. 17 hunt in Lincoln County during which Thompson, who had a valid deer hunting license, shot a deer on the privately owned Diamond T Ranch.
It is illegal to hunt on private property in New Mexico without written permission from the landowner, and Thompson had not received permission to hunt on the Diamond T.
Thompson issued a news release Nov. 21 saying he used incorrect Global Positioning System coordinates during his hunt and unwittingly wound up on the privately owned ranch instead of public land.
In January, District Attorney Scot Key of Alamogordo sought dismissal of the unlawful hunting/possession charge in Magistrate Court and refiled it in District Court, citing a need to have the case heard in a court of record.
Key said Thompson's District Court case was assigned to District Judge Karen Parsons.


From the 'GREEN WEALTH' website home page:
"Welcome to Critical Habitats
Critical Habitats is an execution-oriented environmental banking company that specializes in the full line of services from feasibility studies, to bank creation and certification, to partnering and financing. We specialize in wetland, carbon, endangered species, stream bank, water quality, water rights, and biodiversity banking.

Whether it is analyzing the potential of your environmental banking opportunity or creating a bank within a partnership, Critical Habitats provides a broad breadth of experience, technical expertise, and proven methods. We execute innovative strategies that will identify and achieve the full potential of your banking idea.

Working With Critical Habitats
Environmental Bank Feasibility Studies

Bank Certification and Creation

Wetland Mitigation Banking

Carbon Banking

Endangered Species or Conservation Banking

Stream Bank Banking

Water Quality Banking
Water Rights Banking
Biodiversity Banking"

Essentially: how to protect your green investments after acquiring the land by whatever means from the original owners.
Welcome to Critical Habitats

Monday, February 18, 2008


I've devised a system of threat assessment rating to be used on posts and articles. The threat assessment measures the danger to the United States in terms of errosion of sovereignty, global agenda, illegal immigration, threat to national security or political corruption and fraud. I've drawn a picture of a Roman soldier's helmet. We all know the history of Rome and how it was essentially defeated from within. Thus, I use the Roman helmet as an icon to use to measure a threat assessment to the United States. The Roman helmets will appear at the top of each article with content worthy of 'threat assessment'.

1 Roman Helmet: Threat assessment: Keep an eye on this

2 Roman Helmets: Threat assessment: LOW

3 Roman Helmets: Threat assessments: MODERATE

4 Roman Helmets: Threat assessment: HIGH

5 Roman Helmets:

Barrasso takes on congressmen over wolves‏

Barrasso takes on congressmen over wolves
By MJ Clark

January 16, 2008 --
CHEYENNE – Sen. John Barrasso fired a salvo yesterday in response to a letter on wolves written by five members of the House Natural Resources Committee to Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne.

The five members of Congress asked Kempthorne to delay a plan to remove grey wolves in the Northern Rockies from the federal endangered species list. In the letter, the congressmen note that states “hostile to wolf conservation” could reduce today’s 1.500 wolves to “as few as 300” if wolves lose protected status.

The Dec. 17 letter was signed by Natural Resources Committee Chair Nick Rahall D-W. Va., Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Wash., Rep. Jim Saxton R-N.J; and Rep. Wayne Gilchrest, R-Md.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which Kempthorne oversees, plans to announce the delisting of wolves next month. Removing wolves from the endangered species list would allow Idaho, Wyoming and Montana to host public hunts for the animals. The states are already setting hunting seasons and quotas.

Barrasso’s response: “This is an issue that directly affects the lives of Wyoming ranchers, energy producers and sportsmen. It has a direct impact on Wyoming livestock and wildlife, not Washington’s. These congressmen don’t even live in our time zone. They have no concept of the damage gray wolves do.”

Wyoming’s wolf management plan, which was approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on Dec. 13, was determined to have an “adequate regulatory mechanism” that meets the requirements of the Endangered Species Act. Wyoming’s plan contains dual classification for wolves: as trophy animals where the harvest is monitored by the Wyoming Game and Fish Department in certain areas of the state, and as predatory animals (subject to unregulated harvest) in remaining portions of the state.

The Fish and Wildlife Service determined that 15 breeding pairs of wolves within the state will ensure Wyoming’s share of a fully recovered population. The majority of the breeding pairs will be within Yellowstone and Grand Teton National parks and the John D. Rockefeller Memorial Parkway. Seven pairs will be maintained by the Game and Fish Dept. elsewhere in the state.

On the Web: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s letter approving Wyoming’s wolf plan:


Hi all, just a quick note to make sure the truth is out. The Dunn campaign might have swept up a few delegates in Otero and Lincoln, but the fact is, that's all they have right now. They did not sweep anywhere else. That is fact. Just trying to set the record straight before the rumor mill works overtime.

You may post this on your blogs.

Marcia Stirman
Chairman, Republican Women of Otero County

For those of you who don't know what this is about, the Republican Party of Otero County held its convention Saturday to elect delegates. JW

National Heritage Site or World Heritage Site, What is the Difference?

I haven't addressed National Heritage Sites because we have our hands full here in Otero County with World Heritage Sites. But now would be a good time to point out the differences:

National Heritage Sites are a gigantic land grab.

World Heritage Sites are a colossal land grab.

Inherent in both programs is the removal of land use decisions from the local level to national and world levels. Accompanying the lack of control over what occurs in your neighborhood is the adjudication of disputes in federal and international courts.

Tom DeWeese has more detailed info at: from an article entitled; National Heritage Areas: Assault on Private Property and Local Community Rule, January 21, 2008.

"One of the dangerous pieces of legislation lying in wait as Congress reopens for business is the "Celebrating America’s Heritage Act." The bill has already passed the House (H.R.1483) by a vote of 291-122 and now awaits action in the Senate. Why is it so dangerous?

If passed, it would create six new national Heritage Areas and increase federal funding for nine existing heritage areas by 50 percent. The bill would send over $135 million of federal pork to special interests to be used to influence local zoning laws and help lock away private land in the name of historic preservation...."

Thank you, Ronnie, for sending this my way.

Sunday, February 17, 2008


The way we view TV and movies at home is changing. Soon we will be watching enhanced visuals of our favorite TV sitcoms, weekly episodes, news and DVD movies on a new format. In Feburary of 2009 broadcast TV signals will be switching to HD TV signals. The old antenna/rabbit ears method of capturing broadcast TV signals out of the atmosphere will no longer work for non-cable/satellite viewers. Viewers will have to buy a new HDTV technology, capable of picking the new HD broadcast signal or be forced to buy a converter to pick up the new signal. Those unfortunate souls who cannot afford the new technology will simply be deprived of watching broadcast TV. This could have serious consequences on the American economy and the culture of Jerry Springer adherents and non-working Americans. Viewers who rely on broadcast TV to watch their 3AM community college courses on public TV will be immediately kicked out of ‘class’. Nor will they be able to watch morning shows, soaps, cartoons, American Idol or their favorite gritty crime series. What we will have is another segment of the population disenfranchised from the media blitz of how horrible their lives are; thanks to Bush and the anti-UN crowd. These people rely on their TVs for accurate and empathetic news and information for their perception of world affairs. To be honest we’re talking about American coinsures of day time and prime time TV! Such commitment to an art should not be threatened because of technological advances. Or should it? Anybody know what the average number of hours sitting in front of a TV is for the stay at home non-working American is?

Americans who subscribe to cable or satellite services already receive much of their programming in HDTV. They won’t be affected by the transition in 2009. But don’t despair! In February, 2009 the federal government will be mailing out $140 million in checks to Americans who can’t afford the new HD technology. The average check will be $40, meant to offset the cost of the converter box which costs about $60. There are those enlightened critics of this attempt to bridge the HDTV gap who complain its going to be an inconvenience for poor people to shop for a converter box they can afford and then hook it up to their TV. I do remember the complexities I encountered hooking up rabbit ears to my RCA back in the 70’s. Critics suggest the government should just buy new HDTV television sets for poor people. I could expand on this suggestion. Why doesn’t the federal government subscribe to NetFlix for these people, buy DVD players for them and have chips and dip delivered in time for Judge Judy? In British Columbia non-working Canadians without bank accounts will be receiving debit cards every month. This new program will eliminate the embarrassing ordeal of having to cash a government check at some sleazy check cashing joint and alleviate long lines on Friday afternoons at the customer service counter at the super market. We already have something similar to this in the U.S. for recipients of government entitlements. I imagine the gap between HDTV viewers and non-working Americans will be short lived.

Now comes the advent of Blu-Ray technology. Blue-Ray movie discs will replace HD DVD and the current crop of DVD’s on the shelves in Wal Mart and other stores in the U.S. Blu-Ray discs hold 25GB of storage on a single side disc and a whopping 50GB of your favorite gratuitous sex and violence on a double sided disc. Compare this to the paltry 15GB of storage on an HD DVD.

Blu-Ray DVD players are on the market now. The new machines are going for $1000-$1500 off the shelf. HD DVD players hit the market late last year at an average price of $500 a machine. How will we accommodate the Blu-Ray gap in the future? I think in all fairness our government should be dropping leaflets and broadcasting Spanish language announcements over loud speakers on the U.S./Mexican border. ‘YOU MUST HAVE ACCESS TO BLU-RAY DVD PLAYERS AND HDTV TO WATCH TV AND MOVIES IN THIS COUNTRY!’ We should at least give those northern migration pilgrims seeking only to improve their quality of life a fair warning; the new technology is here to stay in the United States.

For those of you who indulge in conspiracy, here is the hidden agenda of Blu-Ray. The United Nations is secretly beaming a mind-control signal from each Blu-Ray player into your home. The secret signal contains a message to accept globalist control and advocate for World Heritage Site designation of your premise. Wrapping your head in foil will not protect you from this covert, hidden signal. You have to wear red-sunglasses while viewing your favorite movie and sit on paper towels soaked in Falstaff beer to become immune to the U.N. brainwashing device in your Blu-Ray DVD player.

Saturday, February 16, 2008

Mixed Emotions About This One Because I am Just PLAIN Angry

In election 2008, don’t forget Angry White Man
Gary Hubbell
February 9, 2008

There is a great amount of interest in this year’s presidential elections, as everybody seems to recognize that our next president has to be a lot better than George Bush. The Democrats are riding high with two groundbreaking candidates — a woman and an African-American — while the conservative Republicans are in a quandary about their party’s nod to a quasi-liberal maverick, John McCain.

Each candidate is carefully pandering to a smorgasbord of special-interest groups, ranging from gay, lesbian and transgender people to children of illegal immigrants to working mothers to evangelical Christians.

There is one group no one has recognized, and it is the group that will decide the election: the Angry White Man. The Angry White Man comes from all economic backgrounds, from dirt-poor to filthy rich. He represents all geographic areas in America, from urban sophisticate to rural redneck, deep South to mountain West, left Coast to Eastern Seaboard.

His common traits are that he isn’t looking for anything from anyone — just the promise to be able to make his own way on a level playing field. In many cases, he is an independent businessman and employs several people. He pays more than his share of taxes and works hard.

The victimhood syndrome buzzwords — “disenfranchised,” “marginalized” and “voiceless” — don’t resonate with him. “Press ‘one’ for English” is a curse-word to him. He’s used to picking up the tab, whether it’s the company Christmas party, three sets of braces, three college educations or a beautiful wedding.

He believes the Constitution is to be interpreted literally, not as a “living document” open to the whims and vagaries of a panel of judges who have never worked an honest day in their lives.

The Angry White Man owns firearms, and he’s willing to pick up a gun to defend his home and his country. He is willing to lay down his life to defend the freedom and safety of others, and the thought of killing someone who needs killing really doesn’t bother him.

The Angry White Man is not a metrosexual, a homosexual or a victim. Nobody like him drowned in Hurricane Katrina — he got his people together and got the hell out, then went back in to rescue those too helpless and stupid to help themselves, often as a police officer, a National Guard soldier or a volunteer firefighter.

His last name and religion don’t matter. His background might be Italian, English, Polish, German, Slavic, Irish, or Russian, and he might have Cherokee, Mexican, or Puerto Rican mixed in, but he considers himself a white American.

He’s a man’s man, the kind of guy who likes to play poker, watch football, hunt white-tailed deer, call turkeys, play golf, spend a few bucks at a strip club once in a blue moon, change his own oil and build things. He coaches baseball, soccer and football teams and doesn’t ask for a penny. He’s the kind of guy who can put an addition on his house with a couple of friends, drill an oil well, weld a new bumper for his truck, design a factory and publish books. He can fill a train with 100,000 tons of coal and get it to the power plant on time so that you keep the lights on and never know what it took to flip that light switch.

Women either love him or hate him, but they know he’s a man, not a dishrag. If they’re looking for someone to walk all over, they’ve got the wrong guy. He stands up straight, opens doors for women and says “Yes, sir” and “No, ma’am.”

He might be a Republican and he might be a Democrat; he might be a Libertarian or a Green. He knows that his wife is more emotional than rational, and he guides the family in a rational manner.

He’s not a racist, but he is annoyed and disappointed when people of certain backgrounds exhibit behavior that typifies the worst stereotypes of their race. He’s willing to give everybody a fair chance if they work hard, play by the rules and learn English.

Most important, the Angry White Man is pissed off. When his job site becomes flooded with illegal workers who don’t pay taxes and his wages drop like a stone, he gets righteously angry. When his job gets shipped overseas, and he has to speak to some incomprehensible idiot in India for tech support, he simmers. When Al Sharpton comes on TV, leading some rally for reparations for slavery or some such nonsense, he bites his tongue and he remembers. When a child gets charged with carrying a concealed weapon for mistakenly bringing a penknife to school, he takes note of who the local idiots are in education and law enforcement.

He also votes, and the Angry White Man loathes Hillary Clinton. Her voice reminds him of a shovel scraping a rock. He recoils at the mere sight of her on television. Her very image disgusts him, and he cannot fathom why anyone would want her as their leader. It’s not that she is a woman. It’s that she is who she is. It’s the liberal victim groups she panders to, the “poor me” attitude that she represents, her inability to give a straight answer to an honest question, his tax dollars that she wants to give to people who refuse to do anything for themselves.

There are many millions of Angry White Men. Four million Angry White Men are members of the National Rifle Association, and all of them will vote against Hillary Clinton, just as the great majority of them voted for George Bush.

He hopes that she will be the Democratic nominee for president in 2008, and he will make sure that she gets beaten like a drum.

The word shill comes to mind as a response to this article. However, their is a grain of truth here. JW

Friday, February 15, 2008

Lookie What Jerome Corsi Found

Another notch in his gun for Dr. Corsi since exposing SPP, NAU, amensty, etc. Sadly, we are not getting tips like this from Democrats. Very angered or saddened Republicans are sending us the links. "Reform Institute" is wordsmithing for "Deform Institute". Don't you just hate the way our Republic is being destroyed from the inside? I do.

John McCain funded by Soros since 2001
Candidate's Reform Institute also accepted funds from Teresa Kerry

Posted: February 12, 2008
1:00 am Eastern

By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2008 WorldNetDaily

George Soros

As Sen. John McCain assumes the GOP front-runner mantle, his long-standing, but little-noticed association with donors such as George Soros and Teresa Heinz Kerry is receiving new attention among his Republican critics.

In 2001, McCain founded the Alexandria, Va.-based Reform Institute as a vehicle to receive funding from George Soros' Open Society Institute and Teresa Heinz Kerry's Tides Foundation and several other prominent non-profit organizations.

McCain used the institute to promote his political agenda and provide compensation to key campaign operatives between elections.

In 2006, the Arizona senator was forced to sever his formal ties with the Reform Institute after a controversial $200,000 contribution from Cablevision came to light. McCain solicited the donation for the Reform Institute using his membership on the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. In a letter to the Federal Communications Commission, he supported Cablevision's push to introduce the more profitable al la carte pricing, rather than packages of TV programming.

Yet, the Reform Institute still employs the McCain campaign's Hispanic outreach director, Juan Hernandez, as a senior fellow of its Comprehensive Immigration Reform Initiative.

As WND reported, Hernandez serves as a non-paid volunteer for the McCain campaign. A dual Mexican-U.S. citizen, he was a member of former President Vicente Fox's cabinet, representing an estimate 24 million Mexicans living abroad. Hernandez, with a "Mexico first" message, has argued aggressively against building a fence on the Mexican border, insisting the frontier needed to remain wide open so illegal immigrants could easily enter the U.S.

If you have the stomach to read on:


Immediate Release

For Information contact

Nicole Krebs



ALAMOGORDO, NM: PARAGON Foundation Executive Director, GB Oliver announced the Foundation’s filing of an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in support of a court of appeals ruling regarding the case – District of Columbia v. Heller. The Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case, which is shaping up to be a landmark case regarding the meaning and application of the Second Amendment.

On March 9, 2007, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit marked the first time that a federal appellate court used the second amendment to invalidate a gun-control regulation. In response, the District of Columbia has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to resurrect a city ordinance containing the firearms ban, which also requires owners to secure rifles and shotguns with trigger locks or keep them disassembled. Opponents to the D.C. ban allege the ban prohibits a citizen within the District from having a firearm for self-defense within one’s home, and is an unconstitutional violation of the Second Amendment. The simplicity of the wording of the Second Amendment, which contains only 27 words, continues to be a source of endless debate, “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

In its amicus filing, PARAGON’s counsel Paul Kienzle argues, “ ‘The Right of the People,’ to keep and bear arms existed before the formation of any government and exists not because of the government but is preserved by it … The Second Amendment must be interpreted in conjunction with the historical use of firearms by individuals for self-defense, hunting and other practical purposes.” Good public policy is squarely in favor of an individual right to keep and bear arms. Quoting a memorable line from Louis L’Amour’s novel, Heller with a Gun, “[o]ut here a gun is a tool. Men use them when they have to . . . Where there’s no law, all the strength can’t be left in the hands of the lawless, so good men use guns, too.”

The PARAGON Foundation, Inc. is a New Mexico 501 c (3) non-profit organization created to support and advance the fundamental, non-partisan principles set forth in the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. The PARAGON Foundation, Inc. has thousands of citizen members nationwide of a diverse demographic including ranchers and landowners.

For more information, please contact:

PARAGON Foundation, Inc.

1209 Michigan Ave.

Alamogordo, NM 88310




These are hits on the blog from around the world.

Thursday, February 14, 2008

Cub Reporter Marcia Caught This One

Where is Johnny's toboggan? Get it out and get it waxed. I spoke for a seat on it a long time ago. (This is local, inside stuff but the information below affects the whole United States of America.)

Global Poverty Act of 2007 (H.R.1302, S.2433)
H.R.1302 introduced Reps. Adam Smith (D-WA) and Spencer Bachus (R-AL).*
S.2433 was introduced by Senators Barack Obama (D-IL), Chuck Hagel (R-NE), and Maria Cantwell (D-WA).**

What the Global Poverty Act Would Do
It seeks to eliminate extreme poverty by:

Declaring it official U.S. policy to promote the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the U.N. Millennium Development Goal of cutting extreme global poverty in half by 2015.

Requiring the president to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to carry out that policy. Including guidelines for what the strategy should include — from aid, trade, and debt relief, to working with the international community, businesses and NGOs, to ensuring environmental sustainability.

Requiring that the president’s strategy include specific and measurable goals, efforts to be undertaken, benchmarks, and timetables.

Requiring the president to report back to Congress annually on progress made in the implementation of the global poverty strategy.

*The Global Poverty Act passed out of the House Foreign Affairs Committee on July 31, 2007 and was passed by a unanimous voice vote by the full House on September 25. For more information, please contact Katy Quinn with Rep. Adam Smith at or (202) 225-8901 or Jason Britt with Rep. Spencer Bachus at or (202) 225-4921.

** The bill was passed by unanimous consent by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on February 13, 2008.

Click on the link below to see list of all U.S.representatives, including one New Mexican, who voted for yet another way to get in bed with the United Nations and the International Court.


Illegal immigration not the real issue
Alamogordo Daily News
By Bill English
Article Launched: 02/14/2008 12:00:00 AM MST

When former Mexican President Vicente Fox made his first state visit to the United States and the White House, it's rumored that one of the first things he did was demand the return to Mexico the states of Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, California and Nevada.

It's my understanding that every time President Bush eats a burrito he still gets a good laugh out of that one. Upon his return to Mexico, President Fox created a cabinet position entitled Ministry of Affairs in Azatlan. What? We've been invaded by animals from Narnia and no one bothered to tell us?

And what right does a foreign president have in creating a ministry to attend to the affairs of illegal aliens from his country? One of the ministry's apparent responsibilities is to ensure the safety and well-being of those crossing the border. You know, make sure that they have enough food, water, maps and clear directions to rest areas set up by sympathizers on this side of the border. Someone care to tell me what's wrong with this picture?

With the current political climate, it seems that one issue we haven't heard a lot about, with the exception of candidate Ron Paul, is that of illegal immigration. For some reason, it is not being openly discussed, with the exception

of Hillary saying that "they are necessary to our economy", or words to that effect. The problem is, while it can't be ignored, it also can't be discussed in an open and logical fashion because of the emotional connotations that the issue has taken on since 9/11. Even then, we aren't exactly sure what those connotations are.
The majority of the illegal immigrants who come across our southern borders are Mexican nationals seeking employment. One of the many arguments that we have heard is that these illegals are the ones who steal our services, our Social Security and are the cause for our loss of industry through such things as NAFTA. It really doesn't matter if the facts are mixed-up or true, that's what people want to believe.

I honestly don't believe that illegal immigration is an issue. Oh, it may be one for you and me, but I don't think that it really is one for our government, despite what they say or would have us believe.

We all know and realized a long time ago that one of the principle underlying issues of our border security is that of possible invasion by terrorists. Simply put, if an illegal Mexican can make it across our border, find employment of some type or, for that matter, transport illegal drugs, and have nothing more happen than be sent back to his or her country of origin, then it stands to reason that a terrorist can do pretty much the same thing. So where is the security?

I've often wondered if this isn't something our government wants to happen. Nothing like a good old-fashion bombing or possible nuclear explosion to get the American people stirred up.

Not to long ago, the state of Arizona began to prosecute business owners who knowingly hired illegal Aliens. The same business owners went to federal District Court, claiming that the state could not do this. Much to their consternation, the court agreed with Arizona and said they could be prosecuted. This was a bit of a surprise to everyone, since apparently the federal government has yet to follow their own ruling, and bring charges against Hormel Foods for doing the exact same thing.

Seems that the INS pulled a raid on several Hormel packing and processing plants and arrested several hundred illegal immigrants they had hired. Yet everyone seems to be more concerned with the welfare of those arrested rather than enforcing the law.

At this rate, we'll never solve the problem of illegal immigration. We can't or won't enforce laws that are on the books, but then that seems to be our record as a nation for some time now.

What are we hoping for? Maybe that the Mexican government will disband and cede Mexico to the United States while they take everything they can and immigrate to the Bahamas or Venezuela? If you think about it for a minute, the idea does have merit. It would certainly solve the problem of NAFTA, illegal immigration and bolster the Social Security fund.

Then again, maybe not. But if they ever do, you can wax my legs and use me as a surf board.

English is a semi-retired journalist and Alamogordo resident.

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Outrageous Doesn't Even Begin To Describe This

The White House wants a $1.4 billion stimulus/national security package…for Mexico
By Michelle Malkin • February 11, 2008 01:54 PM

A reader asked me to check into information that President Bush was pushing a massive foreign-aid package to Mexico to help them secure their southern border against the flow of illegal aliens from Central America.

“We can’t even get our own border straight, and we are going to provide Mexico with funding so they can solve their problem,” the reader fumed. “I doubt the Central Americans are staying very long in Mexico anyway. We know where they are going!”

Too outrageously outrageous to be true?

Well, I checked it out and it’s even worse than the reader described. Far worse.

The plan is called “The Merida Initiative.” Seems that the White House has had this plan in the works for nearly a year with little congressional input on either side of the border.

We can’t finish our own border fence, properly supply our immigration agents and border patrol with all the equipment and resources they need, or get our house in order. Yet, the Bush administration wants to fork over $1.4 billion to Mexico and Central America–with much of it going into the hands of corrupt law enforcement officials and government bureaucrats who have worked tirelessly to undermine our immigration laws. The funding is tucked into the 2008 supplemental budget.

Naturally, the State Department has taken a lead role. They’ve held meetings in secret and cut out members of Congress from discussion. You’ll love the explanation for the secrecy: Mexico is “sensitive,” you see. Also, according to one expert, “Mexico is very protective of its sovereignty and very worried about any incursion of U.S. security forces or private contractors—like Blackwater—coming in to train Mexicans.” Yeah, they’re worried about incursions and sovereignty.

Click on the link above to access the whole story which includes details of State Department's plan and Brookings Institute analysis.

Monday, February 11, 2008


There is also a book out, titled: UNDER THE SAME MOON: MY LIFE WITH FRANK ZAPPA.

Gov. Asks for Belen Project Funds Again

Subject: Gov. Asks for Belen Project Funds Again


Monday, February 11, 2008

Gov. Asks for Belen Project Funds Again

By Trip Jennings

Journal Capitol Bureau

For the second year in a row, the Richardson administration has sought money for an Interstate 25 interchange project that is integral to a large development planned by a California firm for Belen's north edge.

The development envisions 15,000 homes along with schools, parks, community centers and industrial and office space.

The California firm planning the development— which has gone by the names RS Investments and Coast Range Investments— is a large campaign contributor to Gov. Bill Richardson and gave to the governor's

2006 re-election campaign as well as his presidential run.

J.D. Bullington, a lobbyist for the firm, confirmed Friday that the company is seeking the state capital outlay appropriation, along with the city of Belen and the state Department of Transportation.

The $3 million in state money would supplement $5 million the firm plans to spend of its own money to improve the interchange, Bullington said.

Richardson requested $4 million for the project in last year's capital outlay bill but got only $1 million.

This year's request is among the hundreds of projects listed in the Legislature's $348 million capital outlay proposal. Over the last two and a half years, officers in the California firm have given Richardson political campaign contributions and donated use of aircraft for his gubernatorial and presidential runs.

The governor's office, when contacted, declined to respond to a question about whether the firm's contributions influenced the govenor's decision to request the money.

"The governor is committed to economic development and he has consistently prioritized capital outlay funding to invest in transportation infrastructure as a way to promote a stronger economy,"

spokesman Gilbert Gallegos said.

Jim Foster, the president of RS Investments, since renamed Coast Range, made a $75,000 contribution to Richardson's 2006 re-election campaign and donated use of his personal jet to the governor for two campaign trips to California in 2006, records show.

Foster also provided the use of his four-passenger Cessna Citation jet to Richardson's presidential campaign on three dates in March 2007. The entries were listed under Foxtrot Partners, and Richardson paid Foxtrot nearly $6,000.

A company lobbyist said last year that the $4 million sought for the interchange was reduced to $1 million by lawmakers and that the lower amount was approved by Richardson.

Sunday, February 10, 2008


YouTube Censorship

A friend on mind put up a You Tube video called Save Not the Wolf. It show the true price of living with wolves and the destruction they cause. Reading the comments was quite telling of the Pro Wolf people. They are human haters and don't care if small family ranchers are being put of business. They believe in some Fairy Tale land and the wolf is a perfect little dog.

I mail comments to You tube asking the following. Why was the video taken down? Was it pressure from the Pro wolf side? Is this censorship? Still waiting for an answer. I search there guidelines and the following was all I could find that might cause it to be removed.

Don't post videos showing bad stuff like animal abuse, drug abuse, or bomb making.
Graphic or gratuitous violence is not allowed. If your video shows someone getting hurt, attacked, or humiliated, don't post it.
YouTube is not a shock site. Don't post gross-out videos of accidents, dead bodies and similar things.

The last bullet might be why it was taken down. It is quite shocking to see the real world of the wolves. They are vicious brutal killers. It gross to see what they do to other animals. But then Youtube has an overabundance of videos only showing the loving caring pro wolf side.

Censorship and shielding the public from the reality of living with wolves is not a community service it only further buries the truth in all the lies put out by the Pro wolf side. When human are attacked the Pro wolf side will rolled a wheel barrel full of excuses how it was the victims fault. Just like blaming the rape victim for being too pretty was the reason she was raped. The Pro wolf side are evil people that play dirty tricks and only care about their hidden agenda of destroying America from within.

Please watch the new version and pass it on before it is yank down again blinding the public from seeing the truth again.

If you Tube gives me an answer I will update the blog.


Bernie, This Blog's For You

Rubens gives full play to the savagery that tradition accorded the wolf, as we saw in regard to the large wolf and which is no less evident in the smaller one. Indeed, the smaller beast displays its claws, which the stance of the larger wolf does not allow. Rubens portrays them in considerable detail, showing the pointed nail embedded in a thick pad, and with comparable accuracy he depicts the wolfs saw-toothed maw. The special prominence that Rubens accords to these features, whose proximity to the picture plane causes the viewer instinctively to retreat to a safer zone, is more than merely a matter of characterizing the wolf according to its distinctive traits. These features intimate another consequential issue, that nature (or providence or God) endows each animal with the weaponry it needs to protect itself. Rubens illustrates this point when he shows the wolf biting down on the blade. The fang is the wolfs natural weapon, which it wields against the arms that man crafts. In this clash, fierce though it may be, man will ultimately triumph; Rubens leaves no doubt about human ascendancy, which is founded on the exclusive possession of the rational faculty. This anthropocentric position maintains that God granted man stewardship of his creation with the expectation that he would wield power wisely, benevolently, without injustice or abuse.

The link under the Paul Rubens painting above will take you to the entire article. What you might not expect is some discussion of politics in art. Take a stab at it. Some "egghead academics" do get it.