550 tons of yellowcake was found in Iraq. From the LA times, dated July 6, 2008:

MONTREAL — The last major remnant of Saddam Hussein’s nuclear program — a huge stockpile of concentrated natural uranium — reached this Canadian port Saturday, completing a secret U.S. operation that included an airlift from Baghdad and a voyage across two oceans.

The removal of about 550 tons of “yellowcake” — the seed material for high-grade nuclear enrichment — was a significant step toward closing the books on Hussein’s nuclear legacy. It also brought relief to U.S. and Iraqi authorities who had worried that the cache would fall into the hands of insurgents or Shiites hoping to advance Iran’s alleged nuclear ambitions.

Read the article for yourself.

Drill, drill, drill !!! This can be done in an environmentally sensitive way. This will create jobs and spur our NC economy. Sue Myrick points out that China is drilling 50 miles off the US coast for oil.

Rep. Sue Myrick is sponsoring a bill to search for oil and natural gas. So far, it has generated both support and opposition. “[The bill] very simply says we will use our own oil and natural gas by drilling off the outer continental shelf,” said Myrick.

A Department of Interior study shows billions of barrels of oil and trillions of cubic feet of natural gas are off the N.C. coast. Under the Deep Ocean Energy Resource Act proposed by Myrick, states could determine whether to allow drilling between 50-200 miles off their coasts.

‘We are the only developed country in the world that does not drill off our coast,” said Myrick, who feels the situation is even worse since China already drills 50 miles away from the Florida coastline. “We can’t do it. China is. China already has our jobs, are we going to give them our oil too?”

Check out this Video for more Information

Finally some common sense. Congressman Robin Hayes is submitting legislation to increase oil and gas exploration and refineries in the US.

A significant problem we are facing this year is that our nation’s ability to refine oil into gasoline has been hurt by a number of outages. Some estimates indicate that our refining capacity is eight times worse than last year. The fact is, we haven’t built a new refinery in this country since the 1970s; however, we have lost several during that time. I have supported legislation that would expand the number of domestic refineries and actually construct a refinery for specifically for our military, HR 3893. Acute problems with our refining ability combined with a rapidly growing global demand for oil is only going to continue (not to mention the fact that 60% of the oil we consume comes from foreign sources). To properly address this problem, we need to take action on three fronts: more conservation and efficiency – more domestic exploration and production of oil and natural gas – and the development of more alternative fuels like ethanol and bio-diesel. As a member of the House Agriculture Committee, I am excited to say that we are going to include a significant energy component in the Farm Bill to help us develop these new alternative fuels, fuels can be grown right here at home – lessening our dependence on the Middle East and creating a new market for our farmers.

Jim Webb used his military record to get elected, but McCain should “calm down” about his military record. I love the way the pundit on this show says McCain has no answers to America’s problems. Excuse me McCain wants to drill which will build a bridge to alternative energy. If we don’t, oil and gas will be double in a few years. While the next new clean energy is at least 15 years away for the masses. If you want even higher gas and food prices, go ahead Libs and continue to stop drilling for oil and gas. I say that the Democrat party has no answers.

Jim Webb uses his military experience to get elected. How convenient that you used your military record to get elected.

General Wesley Clark almost got the US into a Third World War. From the BBC March 9, 2000:

For the first time, the key players in the tense confrontation between NATO and Russian troops talk about the stand-off which jeopardised the entire peacekeeping mission. The Russians, who played a crucial role in persuading Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic to end the war, had expected to police their own sector of Kosovo, independent of NATO. When they did not get it, they felt double-crossed.

As Nato’s K-For peacekeepers prepared to enter the province on 12 June, they discovered the Russians had got there first. A contingent of 200 troops, stationed in Bosnia, was already rolling towards Pristina airport.

‘Third World War’

General Wesley Clark, Nato’s supreme commander, immediately ordered 500 British and French paratroopers to be put on standby to occupy the airport. ”I called the [NATO] Secretary General [Javier Solana] and told him what the circumstances were,” General Clark tells the BBC programme Moral Combat: NATO at War. ”He talked about what the risks were and what might happen if the Russian’s got there first, and he said: ‘Of course you have to get to the airport’. ‘I said: ‘Do you consider I have the authority to do so?’ He said: ‘Of course you do, you have transfer of authority’.” But General Clark’s plan was blocked by General Sir Mike Jackson, K-For’s British commander.

“I’m not going to start the Third World War for you,” he reportedly told General Clark during one heated exchange.

Read the full article for yourself.

General Clark did not stay in his NATO role as long as Commanders before him. He was downsized by Clinton prior to 3 years on the job.

NATO’s General Wesley Clark is the first military leader in our country’s recent history who won a war without receiving a Fifth Avenue parade.

Instead of being lionized, he got just what the rest of the U.S. Army has gotten in the last decade: downsized. The Pentagon’s spin is, “This is a normal rotation, his tour was just shortened.” It was shortened, all right. A review of past NATO skippers shows they had four to five years in the job as opposed to Clark’s less than three.

So what went wrong?

Was it Clark’s apocalyptic order to use NATO forces for blocking Russia’s end run at the Kosovo air base, or his threats to have NATO sea power stop Russian ships from supplying the Serb army with oil? Either act of bad judgement could well have triggered a nuclear war with Russia.

Was it because Clark and his flacks kept crowing about how NATO was destroying the Serb army, when in truth NATO barely laid a glove on its opponent?

Was it because Clark’s $120,000 U.S. Army Mercedes — with a reported highly classified radio system aboard — was car-jacked while his wife used it as a personal vehicle to drive to the golf course?

Read the full article for yourself.

How can Obama be more ready to command the Armed Forces when he never even wore the uniform? John McCain wore the uniform, enough said. I’m a Veteran myself. Wesley Clark, you are an idiot, a Democrat hack. What about Obama’s good judgment? He didn’t realize his pastor was a racist after 20 years? Please tell me about good judgment.

Democrat Congressman Delahunt is for the terrorists. He wants them to kill Cheny’s aid. Sounds like a traitor to me. We are in a War declared by Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri. On page 47 of the 9/11 Commission section 2.1, it states “A Declaration of War.” In February 1998, Osama bin Laden and Ayman al Zawahiri together issued a worldwide fatwa to all Muslims. The fatwa called for “the murder of any American, anywhere on earth.” Three months later bin Laden went on the say that “it was more important for Muslims to kill Americans than to kill other infidels.” “We do not differentiate between military or civilian. As far as we are concerned they are all targets.”

The reality is there is no precedence for allowing enemy combatants the right of habeas corpus. In fact the opposite is true. In the Johnson v. Eisentrager, 339 U. S. 763 (1950) case the US Supreme Court ruled that habeas corpus should not be given to WWII enemy combatants.

JUSTICE SCALIA, with whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE, JUSTICE THOMAS, and JUSTICE ALITO join, dissenting. Today, for the first time in our Nation’s history, the Court confers a constitutional right to habeas corpus onalien enemies detained abroad by our military forces inthe course of an ongoing war. My problem with today’s opinion is more fundamental still: The writ of habeas corpus does not, and never has, run in favor of aliens abroad; the Suspension Clause thushas no application, and the Court’s intervention in this military matter is entirely ultra vires. America is at war with radical Islamists. The enemy began by killing Americans and American allies abroad: 241 at the Marine barracks in Lebanon, 19 at the Khobar Towers in Dhahran, 224 at our embassies in Dar es Salaam and Nairobi, and 17 on the USS Cole in Yemen. See National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States, The 9/11 Commission Report, pp. 60–61, 70, 190 (2004). On September 11, 2001, the enemy brought the battle to American soil, killing 2,749 at the Twin Towers in New York City, 184 at the Pentagon inWashington, D. C., and 40 in Pennsylvania. See id., at 552, n. 9. It has threatened further attacks against our homeland; one need only walk about buttressed and barricaded Washington, or board a plane anywhere in the country, to know that the threat is a serious one. Our Armed Forces are now in the field against the enemy, in Afghanistan and Iraq. Last week, 13 of our countrymen in arms were killed. The game of bait-and-switch that today’s opinion playsupon the Nation’s Commander in Chief will make the warharder on us. It will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed. That consequence would be tolerable if necessary to preserve a time-honored legal principle vital to our constitutional Republic. But it is this Court’s blatant abandonment of such a principle that produces thedecision today. The President relied on our settled precedent in Johnson v. Eisentrager, 339 U. S. 763 (1950), whenhe established the prison at Guantanamo Bay for enemy aliens. have transported prisoners there, but would have kept them in Afghanistan, transferred them to another of our foreign military bases, or turned them over to allies for detention.  Those other facilities might well have been worse for the detainees themselves.

On the leftist web sites any scientist that speaks out against Global Warming has been bought and paid for by the big Oil companies. Well this kook has been bought and paid for by Heinz (yes, Kerry’s wife), George Soros, and none other than Al Gore himself the inventor of the internet.

James Hansen, Director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS)….Hansen now seems to be calling for the chief executives of Big Oil to be tried for high crimes against humanity. Their crime? Spreading doubt about global warming.

Actually, it is Hansen who is guilty. Guilty of abusing the public trust. Examine the largess culled by Hansen.

In 2001, the Heinz Foundation “awarded” James Hansen with a payment of $250,000 for his work on global warming. According to the foundation: “It was Dr. Hansen who, in the sweltering, drought-scorched summer of 1988, went where few scientists were willing to go-before Congress, to explain just how serious the potential for global warming truly was.” The Heinz Foundation, directed by the wife of U.S. Senator and former presidential candidate, John Kerry, is widely known for its support of liberal causes. Is it any surprise that James Hansen also endorsed John Kerry for President in 2004? The quarter of a million was just a tease of additional monies to come.

In 2007, Hansen split a $1 million prize from the Dan David prize category of “Future Quest for Energy” (layman’s translation: a world without oil). In addition he also reported to have acted as a consultant to Gore’s global whining slide show, which was the impetus to the Prince of Peace’s film, “An Inconvenient Truth.” In fact, in 2006 Hansen had the gall to appear on a New York City stage with Mr. Gore to promote the then upcoming film-though he did reportedly inform the audience, “I’m not speaking as a government employee.”

Topping it all, Hansen has allegedly received hundreds of thousands of additional dollars to further politicize the issue of global warming. According to Investors Business Daily, “How many people, for instance, know that James Hansen, a man billed as a lonely ‘NASA whistleblower’ standing up to the mighty U.S. government, was really funded by [George] Soros’ Open Society Institute (OSI), which gave him ‘legal and media advice’? That’s right, Hansen was packaged for the media by Soros’ flagship ‘philanthropy’ by as much as $720,000, most likely under the OSI’s ‘politicization of science’ program.” Hansen denied any relationship with OSI, but Investor’s Business Daily refused to back off on their story, “claiming the funding first passed through the Government Accountability Project, which then used it to package Hansen for the media.”

Read the article for yourself.