This is with thanks to Gateway Pundit… great info! This is originally from Peter Suderman:





The Daily Caller says this:
Actor Larry Hagman, best known for his role as Dallas’s Machiavellian oil baron J.R. Ewing, died Friday at age 81, after complications from cancer.
Hagman’s career spanned over 60 years, and included not only Dallas and its revival series, which launched earlier this year on TNT, but also the seminal 1960s comedy series I Dream of Jeannie, where he played Major Anthony “Tony” Nelson opposite Barbara Eden’s titular character. Hagman had, according to The Hollywood Reporter, filmed six of the new Dallas’s 15 episodes at the time of his death, with the second season scheduled to start on January 28. How the show will incorporate Hagman’s death remains to be seen….
More than a half century ago, famed writer C.S. Lewis warned about how science (a good thing) could be twisted in order to attack religion, undermine ethics, and limit human freedom. In this documentary “The Magician’s Twin: C.S. Lewis and the Case Against Scientism,” leading scholars explore Lewis’s prophetic warnings about the abuse of science and how Lewis’s concerns are increasingly relevant for us today.
Gateway Pundit passes on some key information of why Obama likes Susan Rice:
Black Is Right discovered this in a CNN article published in 2008.
President-Elect Barack Obama has picked Dr. Susan Rice to be the new United Nations Ambassador. Rice served as Bill Clinton’s Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs and later worked as foreign policy advisor to John Kerry and John Edwards during their 2004 presidential campaign. Terrorism experts blame Rice for having played a key role in blocking efforts to neutralize Osama bin Laden in the 1990s.
According to Mansoor Ijaz, a former trouble shooter for Clinton, the FBI had their efforts to capture bin Laden “overruled every single time by the State Department, by Susan Rice and her cronies, who were hell-bent on destroying the Sudan.” In a Washington Post Op-Ed published in 2002, Mansoor Ijaz and Tim Carney, U.S. Ambassador to Sudan blamed Susan Rice for being a major obstacle to accepting offers of help from Sudan and to share their intelligence on bin Laden’s terror network.
Rice was also influential in the Clinton Administration’s remaining uninvolved in the Rwandan genocide that took place in that nation in 1994. The Atlantic (September 2001) published an article by Samantha Power titled: “Bystanders to Genocide,” and outlined Rice’s role in the do-nothing policy of the Clinton Administration.
Of course, Democrats will say this is just a racist attempt to smear the ambassador.
UPDATED on 11/26/2012
Doctors pronounced Camacho dead on Saturday after he was removed from life support at his family’s direction. He never regained consciousness after at least one gunman crept up to the car in a darkened parking lot and opened fire. (source)
UPDATED!!! While Hector Camacho was shot Tuesday in Puerto Rico that left his driver dead, the boxer is expected to live. Doctors at San Juan Medical Center listed Hector “Macho” Camacho in critical condition after a bullet entered his face and neck and fortunately missed his brain. The drive-by shooting is under investigation.
Hector “Macho” Camacho was shot in the neck and face this evening during a drive by shooting in Puerto Rico. His driver was killed. Hector was transported to the hospital in critical condition. Just moments ago Boricua Boxing reported on their twitter page that they have confirmed Macho had passed away. He was 50 years old.
(TMZ) The former boxing champ was reportedly in the passenger seat of a car around 7 PM local time … when another vehicle rolled up and someone opened fire … striking Camacho several times in the neck and face.
Dennis Prager Comments on the NYTs reporting of the Middle-East “Good vs. Evil”
The way in which the New York Times reports good vs. evil is one of the most important stories of our time.
Take the war between Israel and Hamas that is taking place right now.
This war is as morally clear as wars get. Hamas is a terrorist organization dedicated to annihilating the Jewish state. It runs a theocratic totalitarian state in Gaza, with no individual liberty and no freedom of speech or press. In a nutshell, Hamas is a violent, fascist organization.
Israel, meanwhile, is one the world’s most humane states, not to mention a democracy that is so tolerant that Arab members of its parliament are free to express admiration for Hamas.
Over the past decade, Hamas had launched thousands of rockets into Israel with one aim: to kill and maim as many Israeli citizens as possible — Israelis at work, at play, asleep in their homes, in their cars. Finally, Israel responded by killing Ahmed al-Jabari, the chief organizer of Hamas violence, the Hamas “military commander” as he was known among Palestinians.
The next day, three more Israelis were killed by rockets.
Then Hamas targeted Tel Aviv, Israel’s most densely populated region, and Israel shelled Hamas rocket launching sites.
In other words, an evil entity made war on a peaceful, decent entity, and the latter responded.
How has the New York Times reported this?
On Friday, on its front page, the Times featured two three-column wide photos. The top one was of Gaza Muslim mourners alongside the dead body of al-Jabari. The photo below was of Israeli Jews mourning alongside the dead body of Mira Scharf, a 27-year-old mother of three.
What possible reason could there be for the New York Times to give identical space to these two pictures? One of the dead, after all, was a murderer, and the other was one of his victims.
The most plausible reason is that the Times wanted to depict through pictures a sort of moral equivalence: Look, sophisticated Times readers, virtually identical scenes of death and mourning on both sides of the conflict. How tragic.
If one had no idea what had triggered this war, one would read and see the Times coverage and conclude that two sides killing each other were both equally at fault.
This is the mainstream (i.e., liberal) media’s approach. The Los Angeles Times headline on the same day was: “Israel and Gaza veering down familiar, bitter path,”
Same presentation: two scorpions fighting in a bottle.
Examples are endless. Here is one more:
Breitbart has this great story on the BBC lying, cheating, and stealing emotions:
A BBC reporter helped spread a photo of a child supposedly injured by an Israeli attack on Gaza. In reality, the photo is three weeks old and was taken in Syria.
The photo of a wounded Syrian child was posted here on October 28th. Early Monday morning, a Palestinian journalist named Hazem Balousha tweeted the photo with the misleading description “Pain in #Gaza.” It was retweeted more than 90 times, including by BBC Gaza correspondent Jon Donnison. Donnison added the word “Heartbreaking” and sent it to his 8,000 followers.
After the error was pointed out, Donnison apologized, saying, “A photo I retweeted from another journo yesterday showing children injured was NOT in Gaza as I said but apparently from Syria. Apologies.” The original tweet by Mr. Balousha appears to have been deleted.
BBC has already been caught once in the past week running fake footage of supposedly injured Gazans. In an incident noted last Thursday, a man is shown being carried by a group of men. He appears to be wounded. But moments later, the same man can be seen walking around — apparently nothing wrong with him.
CNN and the AP also ran an image of a 4-year-old killed in the conflict, strongly implying he died in an Israeli airstrike. However, Israel carried out no strikes the day the child died. According to the those who examined the site, the blast that killed the little boy was the result of a “Palestinian rocket,” not an Israeli bomb.
Via Firearm Blog:
Hunt Brothers Pizza of Nashville, TN have new hunting themed Pizza boxes featuring Realtree camo on the front and targets printed on the back so you can take the boxes to the range and pump ’em full of lead.
I love the Bible verse on the back with the Christian symbol!
HotAir talks about the recent question GQ Magazine asks Marco Rubio a question I have never heard asked of a Democrat:
GQ: How old do you think the Earth is?
Marco Rubio: I’m not a scientist, man. I can tell you what recorded history says, I can tell you what the Bible says, but I think that’s a dispute amongst theologians and I think it has nothing to do with the gross domestic product or economic growth of the United States. I think the age of the universe has zero to do with how our economy is going to grow. I’m not a scientist. I don’t think I’m qualified to answer a question like that. At the end of the day, I think there are multiple theories out there on how the universe was created and I think this is a country where people should have the opportunity to teach them all. I think parents should be able to teach their kids what their faith says, what science says. Whether the Earth was created in 7 days, or 7 actual eras, I’m not sure we’ll ever be able to answer that. It’s one of the great mysteries.
The Telegraph has this great insight!
Marco Rubio, GQ and the age of the Earth: the mainstream media “anti-science” smear returns
What would you do if in the middle of a job interview someone asked you, “How old do you think the Earth is?” Not wanting to look a fool, chances are that you’d give an answer as banal and evasive as this, “I’m not a scientist, man. I can tell you what recorded history says, I can tell you what the Bible says, but I think that’s a dispute amongst theologians and I think it has nothing to do with the gross domestic product or economic growth of the United States.” That’s what Marco Rubio offered when asked the age of the Earth in a recent GQ interview – and it’s a clever person’s way of saying, “I don’t have a clue, dude. Can we move on?”
But you can bet your last Obamadollar that the dreaded rationalists in the liberal press won’t move on. They’ll interpret Rubio’s innocuous answer to translate as “I think the Earth probably began in 1922 – but Jesus put fossils in the ground to keep us guessing.” They’ll take this as further evidence that all conservative Christians are Creationists and Young Earthers – and they’ll try to embarrass ordinary Americans out of voting for them by playing an intellectual snobbery card that is as cruel as it is inaccurate. The inference is this: every time you vote for a religious conservative, a witch gets burned.
A few questions. First, why did GQ ask this question, and would they ask a Democrat the same thing? It always seems to be Republicans that the mainstream media fires these curious, pointless salvos at. Sarah Palin calls them “gotcha” questions – and she’s more than familiar with ’em.
Second, does not knowing an answer to a science question bar someone from running for office? If that’s the case, pick up the phone to your local Democratic Senator and ask them the chemical symbol for sulphuric acid. If they get it wrong, demand a recall.
More importantly, if it’s okay for Barack Obama to say that abortion is “above my paygrade” and refuse to offer a guess as to when life begins, why is it not okay for Rubio to dodge a bullet when asked a question about the origins of the Earth? Considering that the question posed to Obama back in the 2008 election had serious moral consequences and Rubio’s does not, I can’t understand why Obama’s evasion is heralded as a victory for common sense but Rubio’s is treated like a declaration of war on science. The hysteria and hypocrisy are tiring at best….
Again, this question is never asked of Democrats even though a large percentage believes in creation ex nihilo:
Highly religious Americans are more likely to be Republican than those who are less religious, which helps explain the relationship between partisanship and beliefs about human origins. The major distinction is between Republicans and everyone else. While 58% of Republicans believe that God created humans in their present form within the last 10,000 years, 39% of independents and 41% of Democrats agree.

In his first Afterburner since the election, Bill Whittle weighs in. Now that Barack Obama has been reelected president, ObamaCare is certain to remain unchanged. Bill thinks this is the first step towards massive tax increases, socialized health care, and a citizenry more dependent on the federal government than ever. So although the foreseeable future of our great country may seem grim, hear why Bill thinks patriots must continue to fight the good fight for the duration.