JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
- Corporate Business English Trainers
- ACT Systems, Inc.（株式会社アクト・システムズ）, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥269,500 ~ ¥280,000 / Month
-
- English Instructor (Osaka, Kyoto, Kobe)
- Berlitz Japan, Inc. (ベルリッツ・ジャパン株式会社), Kansai
- Salary: ¥125,000 ~ ¥250,000 / Month
-
- FT English Teachers for Kids - Osaka
- Kohgakusha Co., Ltd. （株式会社興学社）, Osaka
- Salary: ¥255,000 ~ ¥275,000 / Month Travel Expenses, Encouragement of Japanese learning*
0
WhiteHawk
adaydream:
Too bad that theory doesn't apply to social programs. Oh but how quickly I forget! Those aren't supposed to succeed in their claimed purpose but rather to succeed in buying and securing blocks of voters. In that sense, they certainly have been successful.
And wasn't McCain part of the lead support in the senate for the surge that has been so successful? Why yes, McCain -for all his faults- was right, and Obama was wrong.
Moderator: Readers, please stay on topic. The subject is Obama's decision to visit Iraq.
Posted in: Obama, amid criticism from McCain, says he will visit Iraq
0
WhiteHawk
DanManjt:
Really? Ask Michael Steele.
Every right-pundit I heard address the "whitey" rumor said they doubted its existence, and that it was a moot point anyway considering Obama's circle of friends, advisors, mentors, professors and the like.
As for Obama's call for critics to "lay off his wife", perhaps she should stop making public statements then. But as long as she publicly campaigns for him (or anyone else), she's fair game. Same goes for Chelsea Clinton.
Posted in: Obama campaign: Wife never used the word 'Whitey'
0
WhiteHawk
Madverts, the debate isn't whether violence and attacks exist in Iraq, it's whether such is on the decline.
Focus, my old friend... focus.
Posted in: Iraqi violence down
0
WhiteHawk
RomeoRamenII:
Now now, you know how this works, RR! If things are going bad in Iraq, the submit-at-all-costs left will say "We're in harm's way! We need to leave!" If things are going good in Iraq, they will say "They don't need us anymore! We need to leave!" At no point, no matter what happens, will they ever admit that it was right to remove Saddam and his sons, and open the door for the citizens of Iraq to elect their own leaders.
Obama is providing no "change" on that front.
Posted in: Obama, amid criticism from McCain, says he will visit Iraq
0
WhiteHawk
Madverts:
No, I'm actually commenting on the article. I know, it's something of a novelty for JT.
Which highlights the mindset of the anti-war zealots: Improvement will not be acknowledged, and if acknowledged, it will not be recognized as improvement.
So Madverts, fewer deaths is a turn for the worse? For Obama's campaign, perhaps...
Posted in: Iraqi violence down
0
WhiteHawk
WilliB nailed it. It's great that Obama is calling for this change, but Mr Change will do nothing to help. In fact, he's proposed even more taxpayer-funded "solutions", and even more dependency on the government, which will only make the circumstances worse.
Posted in: Obama urges black fathers to be active in raising their children
0
WhiteHawk
Looks like a cornerstone of the Democrats' presidential campaign is about to vaporize.
Posted in: Iraqi violence down
0
WhiteHawk
Such is life under moral relativism, eh? :)
Posted in: Gore endorses Obama
0
WhiteHawk
Even the left-leaning major news outlets are recognizing that Iraq has reached a turning point and the country is improving substantially, so Barack is too late to see a quagmire.
The Democrats have based their entire campaign on Iraq -which will be over soon anyway- and George Bush, who is not running for re-election. And McCain only differs from the Democrats on three issues -one of those being Iraq- so why are they so opposed to him?
Posted in: Obama, amid criticism from McCain, says he will visit Iraq
0
WhiteHawk
In another account of Gore's endorsement, Big Al was quoted as saying "Take it from me, elections matter".
Both Al and Barry missed the irony, that Hillary beat Barry in the popular vote. Which makes it only more obvious that for leftists, their motto is "the ends justify the means".
Posted in: Gore endorses Obama
0
WhiteHawk
Only if you'll drag Jimmy Carter's ass home. At least Bush is still president and as such, still represents the country. Carter hasn't been president in 27 years, and he only represents Hamas.
Posted in: Bush tries to tighten squeeze on Iran
0
WhiteHawk
Intersting how the article makes no mention of Delahunt's party affiliation (Democrat, of course), but precedes Rohrabacher's name with his party affiliation.
Which actually demonstrates the problem. Most teachers, like most journalists, are left-of-center. The elitist nature of the jobs attracts leftists better than jam bands and Che t-shirts. If you're a leftist, you'll have a natural tendency to be anti-American (as far as America's traditional values go) no matter where you are on the planet. If you're a teacher or a journalist, your job is to teach people about the world. So your worldview will be imprinted on those you teach, whether they like it or not.
The journalist saw no need to inform the reader of Delahunt's party affiliation, but saw the need to advise the reader of Rohrabacher's party affiliation prior to relaying the man's opinion to the reader. So the journalist tried to give the impression that Delahunt was neutral and had no agenda, while attempting to paint Rohrabacher as a partisan. And I'll bet that the journalist never conciously was aware of his manipulation. Such is the nature of ingrained bias.
The bit about "Washington's hypocrisy in abiding by its own democratic values" is quite true, unfortunately. Here we are, traveling around the world displacing dictators and their sons so the citizens of a distant country can choose their government and leaders, all while America's own irnoically-named Democratic Party utilizes a primary election system which allows super delegates to pick nominees regardless of the popular vote.
As far as I'm concerned, let the world's leftists hate America all they want. You are known by the company you keep, after all. Just ask the current DNC nominee...
Posted in: Anti-Americanism at record levels worldwide, report shows
0
WhiteHawk
Oh, and SezWho2? I'm still waiting for your list of how Obama and Carter differ on policies.
Posted in: Obama says Iraq war makes Iran stronger, but U.S. and Israel less secure
0
WhiteHawk
Madverts:
Apparently, you're not aware of the fact that America has local, state and federal taxes on each gallon of fuel sold (and it's three times the profits of the "evil" companies that retrieve, refine and supply that fuel), while China, India and Venezuela subsidize fuel costs to their citizens and corporations in order to promote their own economic development.
Has America taxed its fuel as heavily as Europe? No. But is the American government just as addicted to those tax revenues as European governments? You betcha.
WilliB:
Really? And here I thought that taxes were revenue generated to spend on programs designed to buy votes. Hmmm.
Posted in: 2 truck drivers die as fuel protests spread across Europe
0
WhiteHawk
I've seen sample images from these scanners. Remember the woman who demonstrated the technology to security officials at airports? The images are really nothing to be upset over. Unless you're the type who refuses to take off your religious mask so your face can be seen in your driver's license photo.
Posted in: Scanners that see through clothing installed in U.S. airports
0
WhiteHawk
SezWho2:
Excuse me? Those stated views of Obama's give no indication of the direction he would take as president? Then why did he state them? Didn't Carter's similar views shape his disastrous policies?
They both think that the mullahs are reasonable enough to have unconditional talks with them, these supporters of terrorism and murderers of American civilians and troops. Such a mindset is either reckless naivety or reckless ignorance, but it's reckless all the same.
Just what legitimate grievances do the mullahs have? That Israel still exists? That the entire planet doesn't adhere to Islamic law? That most of the rest of the world doesn't want Iran to have nuclear weapons? And what is your evidence that they are reasonable?
Maybe we should have a smaller country. Maybe we should pack the entire country into stacked cities, creating mega heat islands with excessive traffic lights. Or instead maybe we should bring back the passenger rail service industry (which would be a private sector venture, not the government's responsibilty).
You might be a tad young to remember this, but cars didn't always create CO2 with their emissions. It used to be CO, carbon monoxide. But now they create CO2, which is still treated like a poison instead of what it realy is, what plants and trees breath in. There hasn't been a news report for years in the U.S. about acid rain, it's safer to swim in more U.S. rivers than ever before (even the Hudson is clean!), and yet it's still not enough. America must pay and sacrifice, while the increasing thirst and pollution of "developing" countries gets ignored by self-proclaimed environmentalists.
Voluntary conservation is one thing, but forcing higher energy prices (through "windfall profit" tax schemes and imposing restrictions on increasing existing energy supplies) on Americans in an attempt to make them conserve is policy.
Besides, I don't know a single person who keeps their thermostat at some ridiculous temperature. We have to pay our own bills, after all.
No, that was his projection. Wait, you're not suggesting that he doesn't plan to follow through on his campaign promises, are you? ;)
Okay, you've got me there. Yes, I think it was stupidity. After all, a taxpayer voting for a Democrat is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders, as the old saying goes. But you have to remember the times we were in. Carter ran after Nixon's resignation and Ford serving as the first unelected president in America's history. Karl Marx himself could've run on the DNC ticket and been elected, for crying out loud.
Oh, wait...
Y'know, if you replaced "defense" with "welfare" or "entitlement" (same thing to a conservative like me), you would have one of my posts. Considering that Iraq is less than 7% of our budget and welfare/entitlement programs are 60%...
By the way, Clinton cut back on defense programs too. And like Carter, he did so in a reckless and ill-informed manner. All of which hurt us badly in 2001, and prevented a better, faster, more thorough response in Afghanistan. Do you trust Obama to cut defense programs in the best way? He certainly hasn't given me any reason to believe he would.
Would you like me to name those reasons? No, you probably don't. It's not very flattering.
No argument there, and you've listed just one reason why Bush fell out of favor with conservatives like myself.
Not true. What I presented was a list of similarities between Obama's stated views and plans, and Carter's proven views and policies. I have a separate list of why I despise Marxists and socialists. Would you like to see it? Why try to paint me as an Obama hater? Is it my fault that people like Obama, Clinton, Carter, Roosevelt and Wilson line themselves up with those tenets?
Posted in: Obama says Iraq war makes Iran stronger, but U.S. and Israel less secure
0
WhiteHawk
adaydream, your source(s) would be...?
Posted in: Obama slams McCain, Bush on economy, gasoline prices
0
WhiteHawk
SezWho2, how about this for a start?
Carter like Obama, ran on a message of "change".
Carter, like Obama, thought people like the mullahs of Iran, and Hamas, and Hezbollah were reasonable people you could trust at their word and have a productive dialogue with and who had legitimate greivances.
Obama thinks americans eat and drive too much, Carter wanted us to "slip on a sweater, and turn down our thermostats."
Obama thinks the Oil companies are the problem, and wants to "go after them", likely followed by price controls (how else would confiscating their money not result in higher prices?), Carter tried price controls, it was a disaster.
Carter thought there was something inherently wrong with the American mindset (malaise), so does Obama and his wife. (clingers, meanspirited)
Carter eviserated defense programs, Obama has already promised to do the same.
Carter never met a tax he didn't like, and believed the government could do more to help people by "holding" their money for them. Obama? Well, I think you see the pattern already.
Posted in: Obama says Iraq war makes Iran stronger, but U.S. and Israel less secure
0
WhiteHawk
DanManjt:
Must've been a shotgun wedding! LOL!
Sorry, couldn't help it. ;)
SezWho2:
If they were truly capable of "critical analysis", you would think they would see how and why the socialist policies of the modern American leftist are designed to fail, just as they have when implented anywhere else in the world. Maybe it's because -like leftist politicians- they feel they have to pander to certain demographics so people will like them. Or maybe it's because -like leftists themselves- they've changed the definition of "critical analysis" to 'spinning the truth to justify one's preconceived notions'. Changing a definition is common practice for leftists.
If you'd like a true critical analysis, look to an expert on the subject instead of a newscaster with a God complex. On economic policies, for example, check with a noted economist. Somebody like, say, Thomas Sowell.
Really? Where in the DoI or BoR are "progressive" federal taxes and wealth redistribution called for? Gun control? Partial-birth abortion 'rights'? the National Endowment of the Arts? Labor unions? The carbon credit scam?
But you're right that modern American Democrats are not liberal in the traditional sense of the term. A more accurate term would be leftist. Others would be socialist, Marxist, communist, collectivist, etc.
SushiSake3:
And we all know it's more important to feel good about ourselves than to have a safe country with a strong economy.
Yeesh.
How many of those donors are employed by lobbyists? How many of those registering Democrat in the primaries were actually Republicans doing so to drag out the process? If Obama has generated so much excited, how come Hillary still got more votes?
Even though Hillary is pledging her support to Obama, enough of her supporters have promised to vote for McCain or practice electoral abstinence (Like that one? I just made it up.) that any attempts at predicting the general election would still be premature. Similarly, there were many Obama supporters who likewise promised to stay home on election day. Notice that they didn't threaten to vote for McCain. Considering each DNC candidate's demographics, one could suggest that middle-aged white women are more open-minded than blacks and college students. But then, one might be labeled a sexist or racist for doing so. Such is the trap of identity politics as created by the superficial PC left.
Back on the GOP side, many conservatives have threatened to stay home on election day in protest of their party being represented by someone who sides with Teddy Kennedy on too many issues. Which makes wonder how Democrat voters could be so opposed to McCain and, in turn, opposed to George W. Bush, since they've alleged that McCain would be a "third Bush term".
Considering the scale of threatened protest votes on each side, we could be seeing a low turnout. The critical vote would then be decided by the illegal aliens registered to vote by the DNC at last year's protest rallies.
Posted in: Clinton ends campaign, urges supporters to work to elect Obama
0
WhiteHawk
Funny how Bush is being labeled "yesterday's man", yet democrats are still campaigning against him.
Posted in: Bush seen as yesterday's man in Europe