Day by Day

Friday, August 26, 2005

Islamic Extremism: Common Concern for Muslim and Western Publics

Intriguing poll results here: Pew Global Attitudes Project

Most interesting results: In which of he following two countries are Muslims least likely to be looked upon unfavorably: United States, Canada, Great Britain, France, Germany, Netherlands, Russia, Poland, China, India? Don't peek!



The numbers on Germany, China, and Jordan are most notable.

It is 60 Meg....

....but if you have the bandwidth you should watch the video linked to by The Volokh Conspiracy. It's Cindy Sheehan on a bus and on the road in Crawford. It is really something to see, if you can stand it. She's actually a lot less annoying than her supporters, although her endless complaining and feigned tears are remarkable abrasive.

UPDATE: it is at mark 06:01 of the video that she refers to those who are coming into Iraq and killing Iraqis as "freedom fighters":

INTERVIEWER: You know that the President says you're wrong. That the central is terrorism. Don't you believe that?

SHEEHAN: Uh, no, because it's not true. You know, Iraq was no threat to the United States of America and we invaded. I mean, they're not even a threat to the United States of America. Iraq was not involved in 9/11. Iraq was not a terrorist state. But now that have decimated the country, the borders are open, freedom fighters from other countries are going in and they have created more terrorism by going to an Islamic country, devastating the country and killing innocent people in that country. The terrorism is growing and people who never thought of being car bombers or suicide bombers are now doing it because they want the United States of America out...out of their country.
Now that is a world class ramble.

The political circle

Someone (I can't remember who but I think it was Drumwaster who told me) once forwarded a theory about politics. Don't think of politics as a straight line, think of it as a circle. Communism and facism are right next to each other on the bottom, with complete and total anarchy at the top. The reason for thinking of politics like this is that even though communism and facism supposedly are at opposite ends of the political spectrum, the end results of both ideologies are damn near identical.

Well, that theory has been floating through my head for several years now, and I keep seeing more proof that this particular model is the correct one. Witness Casey Sheehan's mother, who is currently spewing her anti-American, anti-Isreal, pure Democrat Party spew down in Crawford, TX. This is the same woman who told people to "pull Isreal out of Palestine". Got it?

Guess who has the exact same message as Casey Sheehan's mother?

The Neo-Nazi Skinheads.

Let The World Know That White Patriots
Were First & Loudest To Protest This War For Israel

We don’t want leftist Johnny-come-latelys who are misleadingly protesting this war as if the war is about oil (not true), or as if it’s right-wing patriots who launched this war (not true) to hijack the issue from us.

We want to challenge these leftists with the fact that their leftist leaders, like Hillary Clinton, are on the same War for Israel team as the cowardly Republicans who have been bought and paid for in the Senate, House, White House, and Media by the Jewish Neocon political machine.


Hell, that's practically word for word out of the Dummocratic Underpants or the Klueless Kos Klan! And let's not forget that David Duke was in Crawford supporting Casey Sheehan's mother as well! You know, the white supremecist fuckhead from Louisiana? Yep, his message and Casey Sheehan's mother's message are hand in hand. If you don't want to dirty your computer with that last link, I'll just tell you that it goes to David Duke's homepage, with the story line of "Why Cindy Sheehan is Right!" Doesn't that give you the warm fuzzies?

Yeah, right. It makes me want to vomit. I would rather castrate myself with a fucking CHAINSAW than have David Duke sing my praises. I'd rather have my scrotum turned into goo by two large bricks than have fucking skinheads try to "support" me. But when Sheehan's tirades are damn near word for word off of the white-power groups websites........

I wonder why the MSM hasn't broadcast THAT story all over the news yet.

Nah, I'm not really wondering.

Found at RNS.

A lesson in bias

For those who didn't click the link the John Cross' deconstruction of the media on Drumwaster's Rants, here's a quick overview:

Oh.....one last comparison over the last week:

Cindy Sheehan: 4680 pages

Tammy Pruett: 5 pages.

Casey Sheehan (you know, who this is REALLY all about): 1020 pages

“Cindy Sheehan’s Mother” (remember HER?): 4 pages

UM..I’m sorry....who’s this about, again? What balanced media? No slant to speak of here.

Move along. Nothing to see…


For a little more ammunition, jkelly at Irish Pennants has yet another little tidbit of information, aka "Fun with Google!"

I did a Google search a few minutes ago. The "storied" LtCol. Kurilla has been mentioned 5,420 times. The most decorated Marine in this conflict, Capt. Brian Chontosh, drew 10,700 hits. There were 14,500 for Sgt. Leigh Ann Hester, the first woman to win the Silver Star since World War II. Sgt. Paul Smith, the only Medal of Honor winner in the conflict has drawn 1,010,000 hits. But all their mentions together pale into insignificance compared to the 4,970,000 hits for Cindy Sheehan. I think this tells us all we need to know about the priorities of the "mainstream" media.


For those who like to count these things, there were 1,040,620 total hits on soldiers rightly decorated for their bravery and actions. That's a little more than ONE FUCKING FIFTH of the hits on an anti-war loony moonbat who's only claim to fame is having a son who stood for everything this bint is badmouthing die in Iraq.

At this point the media is not only rooting for an American failure, they are actively pushing for that failure with everything they've got.

Flip Flop

Seen on a message board:

You know, used to be that the libbies would take a couple of months before changing positions.

But it was a mere week ago that lefties were deriding repubs for trying to 'push a western-style democracy' on Iraq. Ask them today (since the news that they are tweaking the iraqi constitution in order to make it more 'arab') and they'll tell you that the iraqi constitution is a failure because the arabs are 'arabizing' their democracy.

One week.

A total about-face.
Well, yeah.

I got an email today

From Stuart. Since he was rather polite, I'm keeping his email confidential, as to not have any trolls use it for nefarious purposes.

I don't think you understand that the United States
> invited this terrorism by our intervention in the
> Middle East? I mean the Gulf War and before that,
> for half a century, our relationship with the
> Saudis.
>
> S.


My response:

No offense, but what planet have you been living on for the past few years? The list of Osama bin Laden's complaints includes the christian domination of Andelusia - as in SPAIN. Do you understand how long ago the Spaniards retook their country? The beliefs and complaints of the terrorists go back long before America was even a nation. The difference of today is that world-wide travel within 24 hours is not only possible but commonplace, allowing the terrorists greater access to the world at large, and the weapons that the terrorists can use are much more destructive. When Al-Queda and the Taliban were in control of Afganistan, they spoke of attacking other Islamic countries because those countries were not Islamic enough! They weren't under Shari'a law, which is what the Facist Islamic terrorists claim they want. Their goals are not limited to just the USA, we're simply a convinient excuse. Try reading what the radical muslims were saying years ago. Their goals were the same, they just blamed their problems on different people.

Perhaps you need to stop reading the Left's talking points and start thinking for yourself. Take a look at every major conflict that is happening in the world today. The terrorists are not just attacking the USA. They also are attacking India, the Phillipines, Australia, everywhere. The two great sources of conflict in the world today are Communist vs. Democracy, and Facist Islam vs. anyone who gets in their way. We didn't "invite" terrorism by our involvement in the ME, we "invited" it by not forcing our women to wear burkahs. We "invited" it by not converting to Islam. We "invited" it by allowing people in this country to have freedoms previously unimaginable in the rest of the world. If it were as simple as just having the USA pack our bags and get the hell out of the Middle East, I'd be all for it. I'm one of the people who's in line to get sent over to the Sandbox, and I don't want to be separated from my family over something that's simple and easy to fix. But it's not that simple, it never has been, and it never will be.


I think that about covers it, don't you?

Well, I guess that's one way to put it.

Here's a list of link roundups from a few people who I admire quite a bit, and I can't say that they're particularly friendly.

First up, Mrs. du Toit, one of the most intelligent people on the web, comes up with a series of questions for you in a "screw with your head a lil' bit" post.


Exercise 1:
Think of the smartest person you’ve ever met—.......

Exercise 2:
Think of the most dynamic person you’ve ever met—.......

Exercise 3:
Think about the best sales person you ever met—.......

Exercise 4
Think about the most honest person you’ve ever known—.......

Done? Got all four? Don’t cheat and read on until you’re done.

OK… here we go.

Was it the same person in all four examples?

Chances are it wasn’t the same person. Again, your mileage may vary.

Now, here’s the screw with your head part:

Of the four you thought of, which one would be best President of the United States?

Exercise 5 (last one):

Rank, in order of importance, the qualities most important in the POTUS.


The Mrs. then goes into a nice clear wakeup call later on in the same post:

Quit telling the President to present his case better. He’s not our Grampa. He’s not our therapist. He’s not selling anything. He’s representing us. If you think the President’s policies are good or bad, it is YOUR job as a citizen to present the case to your neighbors.

If you’re not doing that, if you think the President’s duty is to put you or your neighbor on in his knee and explain how things work, GROW UP. The President isn’t our mascot. His job is not to conduct pep rallies.


Now, I know that we can all formulate arguments when we're sitting behind a keyboard. And I'll admit that screaming arguments with foaming-at-the-mouth leftists isn't my forte. But how many of us, when we hear a mistruth being said, step up and try to (gently) correct that person? I used to do it all the time when I worked in the hospital in Seattle. I wouldn't jump all over the person, but I would start listing off facts and sources for my facts. I did it all the time with guns and gun control topics. I spoke out quite a bit about the Army when people make uninformed judgements.

But how many of us are doing things like that today? I must admit, living on an Army base doesn't give you too many chances to argue with an anti-war nutcase. Other than blogging, there's not too many arguments to be had around my house or neighborhood. The question still stands, however: Why aren't WE the ones pushing the President's agenda. Why are we waiting for him to come out and give us a "Yay-rah-rah sis-boom-bah" speech?

Perhaps we are the ones that need to do a little more cheerleading and less waiting.

The Mrs. then goes onto a post that reminds everybody what support is supposed to be. And as much as I agree with certain premises she makes, I can't completely agree with her final outcome.

The best head of state the world has ever seen in a time of war was Winston Churchill. He was brilliant at war time, but he was perfectly dreadful when it came to the day-to-day affairs of the British government on issues of home. Bush is proving to be somewhat the same. Do NOT mix the two. Your support for our troops and winning this war should have nothing to do with how the President is handling anything else.

The opinion polls are showing a fading support for the war. Now the Left is thrilled with this, but of course the poll results are skewed. Assuming normal averages, 60% not happy with the President’s handling of the War, 30% (half) are likely to be against it because they don’t want us there. The other 30% (the other half) are likely to be negative because they think the President isn’t using enough force.

And you know what our troops see? Do you know what our enemy sees? SIXTY PERCENT AGAINST. And if you’re not happy because you think the President is not using enough force, SHUT UP ABOUT IT.

So get the duct tape, put it across your mouth, close the posts that are critical of the President, and get behind the troops and against the enemy, which, last I looked was NOT President Bush, but a group of megalomaniacs, using the guise of Islam, trying to dominate the world.

This isn’t a Holy War. This isn’t a time when you get to put down a religion you believe to be inferior and replace with one you feel better suited to the region. This isn’t a time for punishing the Arab world for all the hell its put Israel through.

Come the next election The People will vote on a new President. That is when The People get to share their two cents. We are not a strict democracy. We are a Republic. That means we elect officials to act on our behalf. If we don’t like how they’ve acted on our behalf, we don’t undermine them while they’re in office, we vote for someone else next time.

I do not want to hear one more “conservative” blathering on about how horrid Bush is, how he’s a sell out to this or that. If you continue this, you will cease to be “conservative”, cease to be “patriotic” and you’ve become the “digital brown shirts” the Right has been accused of being.

Now SHUT UP.


One thing I will never shut up about is the way the border has pretty much been opened up. If I hear "amnesty" mentioned for illegal immigrants by a conservative one more time, I'm going to vomit into a bag and mail it off to them as a way to express how I really feel.

But support for the war is dropping? I can't say that I'm surprised. Think about this:

There is almost no reporting on the successes that America has accomplished in Iraq or Afghanistan. Why is that? Because the Leftist media will not portray anything that could be construed as a victory for President Bush.

Casualty reports are run daily, if not hourly, by the Leftist press. Why? Because that's one of the tactics they used to change support for the Viet Nam war, and they are USING THAT TACTIC AGAIN. To them, it's Viet Nam all over again. It doesn't matter if we've removed two terrorist supporting regimes, freed millions of people from tyrants and thugs, removed the financial and logistical support from a terrorist network, and brought democracy and a chance for peace to an area that has never had that, it's all being done by a REPUBLICAN, so it has to be evil. Neveryoumind the fact that we had ample reasons to go into both countries, to the Left it's all one big illegal BusHitlerCheneyHalliburtanChimyMcRoveNeoCon plot to ruin their vision of global peace. And so they'll fight the president with everything they have. And one weapon that has proven effective in the past is casualty reports without context. Casualties, casualties, and more casualties, every hour on the hour without any other information. What if the media had simply stated "2,500 soldiers killed on Normandy Beach in one day" and left it at that?

How about "Over 10,000 soldiers dead since D-Day" without any other information?

How about "Over 200,000 casualties since begining of war efforts" without any other information?

Do you think we would have won WWII with todays media? I don't. Let's face it, the media today will do what they can to cause President Bush to fail, or at least get embarassed once in a while. When the only news you hear is "DEATH! FAILURE! QUAGMIRE! DEAD SOLDIERS! EVIL WAR! EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEVIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIL!" then you're going to get a little down in the dumps. And let's face it, as good as the blogosphere is at getting other information out, it only works when people come to read it. You can't force anyone to sit down and read Powerline, or Right Wing News, no matter how important you think the news is. Short of buying our own network and broadcasting the successes of Iraq on network TV, there's no way those stories are going to reach the main part of America. How many people in America know that the Army's re-enlistment rates are above what was expected? The re-enlistment rates are over 100% of quota. How many people in America know that? Did you see that on the nightly news? OF COURSE NOT! But when the Army had problems recruiting, it was on every damn show, every night.

Because the media wants us to lose.

Treasonous, lying shitheels at home: The Left has never let the truth get in the way of their lust for power. Ted (hic!) Kennedy, Chucky Schumer, Jim "Baghdad" McDermott, Charlie Rangle, they all lie with abandon if it'll help their cause. Remember when Baghdad McDermott warned about a draft during Bush's presidency, only to have people find out that MCDERMOTT HIMSELF SPONSORED THE DRAFT BILL? Remember that? The Left is populated by lying, worthless, cowardly, traitorous parasites who have elected more lying, worthless, cowardly, traitorous parasites to represent them on the national stage, and these people will say anything and everything they can in order to cause Bush to fail in some way. They don't care about success in Iraq, because they equate Iraqi success or failures as Bush's success or failures. Thus, if the terrorists win in Iraq, and the Middle East goes into spasms of terror, despotism and death, the Left will cavort with glee and shriek "BUSH LIED, PEOPLE DIED!" while never caring that they are responsible for the failures. The Left would sacrifice every man, woman and child in Iraq for one big stick that they could beat President Bush for, and it's showing in how they comport themselves in America.

I'd say the real surprise isn't how low the support for the war is, it's how HIGH the support is after dealing with the lies, the hatred, the simple foulness of the Left and all it's tactics in this country. The only thing we can do is keep on keepin' on. Keep debating the Left and proving them wrong. Don't allow yourself to be shifted to a different topic when you're debating. Keep proving the Left to be nothing more than traitorous worms.

Bush never said that this was going to be quick and easy. He said it would be a long, hard process. I believed him then, and I believe him now.

Keep on keepin' on, folks. Don't let the Left win. The results will be horrible if they do.

Thursday, August 25, 2005

Lies Lies Lies Lies Lies

It's amazing. It truly is amazing.



As anyone who has followed this story knows, this claim is utterly false. Sheehan has always been a "vocal opponent of the war;" her opposition had nothing to do with "reports of faulty prewar intelligence." By her own account, as we noted here, Sheehan was bitterly opposed to the war before her son Casey re-enlisted in August 2003...
It really is something to see - the canonization of Cindy Sheehan.

More here: Power Line: If the Facts Don't Fit, Make Them Up

Counting Pages

John Cross over at Drumwaster's notes some inequities in Mom Coverage.

Home from Iraq, Assaulted in Seattle

Police ask help in finding assault suspects

Water is wet, sunlight is bright, and other newsflashes

Lower taxes, raise revenues.

I can't believe that there are people out there who haven't learned enough macroeconomics to understand how this works. Hell, I haven't had a single course in economics beyond what I was taught in highschool, and I can still grasp the concept that if you let people keep their own money, the economy kicks it up a notch!

Yet few are asking what caused the cash flow. To read the papers, you would think that the fact that the Treasury is now swimming in revenue is like a cool August day at the shore after a number of hot ones: just another pleasant surprise.

But there should be no surprise. For the inflows are the direct result of the Bush administration's commitment to a concept: individuals respond to incentives. Not merely targeted ones -- a break, say, for a specific group of manufacturers -- but overall incentives for enterprise. The administration deduced from this concept that cuts in taxes on capital and work would inspire citizens and businesses to transact more. The Bush team then proceeded to make those cuts amid jeers about incurring deficits.


It's as simple as a history lesson: Every time the tax rates have dropped, the amount of money changing hands in the open market increased. And since many if not all transactions in this country are taxed in one form or another, more transactions means more tax revenue. EVERY TIME the tax rates were slashed, our tax revenues have risen in preceeding years.

Earlier, President Bill Clinton and Robert Rubin, his Treasury secretary, also cut the capital gains tax. The business activity and extra revenues helped create the surprise of that era, a federal budget surplus. Yet earlier, in 1978 and 1981, the US slashed its capital gains rate twice, moving from 35 per cent (or sometimes higher) to 20 per cent. With each cut, the inflows jumped, and "the magnitude of the response clearly shocked some of the staff" recalls Mr. Entin, then at the Treasury. What those involved would recall forever was a wistful feeling -- a new awareness of the likelihood of economic growth forgone in the 1970s, the period of higher rates.


If it weren't for President Bush's tax cuts, the Clinton-era recession (it started in 2000, before Bush was sworn into office) would have lasted for years. As it was, we made it through 2001, and started going like gangbusters in 2002. The proof is in the pudding, and it's been that way with every president who cut taxes, not just Bush Jr.

But the Democrats wail and whine and gnash their teeth, and talk about the rich getting richer, and how the poor are getting shafted, and all that other class warfare which has become part and parcel to the Democrat Party platform. Kim du Toit (from whom I got the link) puts it better than I can:


Of course, had the BushCheneyHalliburtonPuppets done the same as Rubin, we’d be hearing wails of how all this was done to help Bush’s rich conservative buddies, but such wailing was noticeably absent when Rubin, who was an ex-Wall Streeter, made the cuts.

So when it comes to the Evil Party’s caterwauling, we are left with two inescapable options.

Either: the Democrats are stupid because they didn’t remember how well tax cuts had spurred the economy in the past.

Or: the Democrats knew full well that the economy would benefit from tax cuts, but were prepared to sacrifice the well-being of the country in order to score socialistic economic points against “the rich” (and of course, against GWB).

When it comes to the Democrat Party, and one has to choose between evil motives and stupidity, the “evil” option is almost always the correct assumption. Hence their title at this site (when I’m not calling them the Socialist Party or the Gun Control Party).

The reverse is true, of course, for the Republicans, hence their nickname of the “Stupid” Party.


I'll go him one better, and say that the Democrats will sacrafice anything and everything they can in order to gain and control more power of any sort. Socialism is about control. And the Donks are socialists to the bone now, with more and more communists brought into the fold. The few remaining capitalist Democrats are either dying off or getting kicked out of the Democrat Party. And the main goal of socialism and communism is to control everything via the state. Since the Democrats in power are already controlling the state, who do you think will be the recipients of more state power?

Yeah. The Democrats don't care one whit about this country unless they can put it under their thumb.

Ooooooo, that's gotta sting!

The wife of murdered journalist Steven Vincent has apparently had enough of the professional whores like Juan Cole taking potshots at her deceased husband. So she wrote the simpering jellyfish an email and sent it off, and posted said email in the comments of M.O.

Yes, Steven was aggressive in criticizing what he saw around him and did not like. It's called courage, and it happens to be a tradition in the history of this country. Without this tradition there would have been no Revolutionary War, no Civil War, no civil rights movement, no a lot of things that America can be proud of. He had made many friends in Iraq, and was afraid for them if the religious fundamentalists were given the country to run under shari'a. You may dismiss that as naive, simplistic, foolish, but I say to you, as you sit safely in your ivory tower in Michigan with nothing threatening your comfy, tenured existence, that you should be ashamed at the depths to which you have sunk by libeling Steven and Nour. They were on the front lines, risking all, in an attempt to call attention to the growing storm threatening to overwhelm a fragile and fledgling experiment in democracy, trying to get the world to see that all was not right in Iraq. And for their efforts, Steven is dead and Nour is recuperating with three bullet wound in her back. Yes, that's right - the "honorable" men who abducted them, after binding them, holding them captive and beating them, set them free, told them to run - and then shot them both in the back. I've seen the autopsy report.

You did not know him - you did not have that honor, and you will never have the chance, thanks to the murderous goons for whom you have appointed yourself an apologist.


It's an asskicking bar none, and I can't think of anyone who might deserve it more than a pampered nitwit like Cole. But it gets better, because in the comments a SFC sounds off. Since I can't link to the comment, I'm cutting and pasting the entire thing. It's that damn good.

You sniveling little twit. I just love the way you liberal moonbats bitch about "censorship" and "shutting down debate" whenever someone counters your agitprop with facts and opinions of their own. Hate to burst your bubble sweetpea, but the 1st Amendment is not exclusive to the leftist fringe.

And as for your views of the war on terrorism:

We all know how difficult it is for you socialist "activists" with your post-election trauma and the weekly trips to your therapist, but the rest of America is getting sick and tired of your pissing, moaning, and imbecilic regurgitations ie: "Bush Lied". If you removed your head from your ass and stopped fawning over bin Laden and repulsive simps like Michael Moore, you might get that clue you so desperately need.

Hell, if all we wanted was "oil" we could have bombed the Middle East back to the Stone Age, which would only set them back about 2 weeks, and simply TAKEN every single oil well in the region. Meanwhile, we're paying about 3 bucks a pop at the pump.

You've conveniently forgotten about the 3000 Americans who were slaughtered on September 11th 2001. That was a Pearl Harbor of the 21st Century, and all you can do is spew Norman Mailer quotes.

Included in the war on terror equation is Afghanistan, the success of which is virtually ignored by the leftist media. We kicked the crap out of the Taliban. That success is reflected in the fact that bin Laden and whatever little band of thugs he still has, are scurrying like cockroaches back and forth across the mountainous region between Pakistan and Afghanistan hiding in caves to avoid detection.

As for Iraq: Saddam Hussein filled hundreds of mass graves with men, women and children, and slaughtered 5000 Kurds with “non-existent” chemical weapons. He thumbed his nose at the pusillanimous UN for 12 years, while he continued to research, develop, and hide the evidence of his WMD program. In addition, Iraqi intelligence met with al Qadea operatives and he provided them with training camps in Northern Iraq.

"About the oil", my ass.

Let me give you first hand experience as to how the war is going: We are kicking the shit out of the terrorists to the extent that they are getting desperate, and it shows. The Iraqis are starting to wake up and realize that the future of their country depends on how much they assist in their own reconstruction and protection. We are getting an increasing number of people who walk up to American troops and literally take them to weapons caches and terrorist hiding places. If you've been paying attention, you'll note the numerous press reports of captures/kills of high ranking Zarqawi Lieutenants.


The Afghan and Iraqi people are constructing fledgling democracies, can vote, run for office, and speak freely for the first time in their existence. Nothing threatens Islamofascists more than a democracy.

Oh, and this little gem of yours is a real side-splitter:
"It is sick how you warmonger chickenhawks keep sending our children to die. As Norman Mailer pointed out, Americanism as an ideology can be seen in the light of the apparent fabrications which lead to the police state which has come to pass."

I'm no "chickenhawk", toots. I've served in 2 wars and a so-called "peace keeping mission"; Desert Storm, Operation Iraqi Freedom, and a stint in Clinton's wag-the-dog tactic in Bosnia.

We're fighting Islamofascist thugs who would gladly subject the entire planet (including you) to their oppressive theocracy. Before you hit the sack tonight you should get down on your knees and give thanks to whatever God you pray that we are out front making sure that doesn't happen.

You can thank Bubba Clinton for giving al Qaida the green light. His total indifference to the terrorist attacks on his watch; the first attack on the World Trade center, Khobar Towers, and the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania went without retribution. He and algore (one word) were too busy using the Oval Office as their personal conduit for unethical, immoral and illegal activities. His Chinese/Indonesian friends Charlie Trie, John Huang, and James Riady bought the 1996 “election” in exchange for information on, among other items, classified satellite technology, He illegally obtained FBI files on political adversaries, and fired the Travel Office and threatened them with surveillance if they talked.

Oh, wait, he did have a response--he bombed Kosovo and an aspirin factory in Iraq. Abetted by lap-dog Janet Reno’s obstruction of justice, Clinton flushed the integrity of the Office as well as national security down the toilet, and not a peep out of you liberal shitbags.

Dedicated, brave Soldiers of the United States Army are fighting and sacrificing their lives in Iraq and Afghanistan so that ingrates like you won’t have to worry about another 3000 deaths on this soil.

You lefties are comprised of pseudo-anarchists, nihilists, and spineless MoveOn.org sycophants who would never let the facts get in the way of a good Bush bashing. The adults, thank God, are still in charge of the country. You ought to follow the lead, remove the nose rings and grow up.

Sergeant First Class Cheryl McElroy
US ARMY
Posted by: SFC McElroy US ARMY at August 23, 2005 01:51 PM


Damn, I'd love to buy that Sergeant a beer!

Found via Kim du Toit.

Wednesday, August 24, 2005

Open Invitation to Senator Hagel

Senator Hagel,

You are a disgrace to the Republican Party. Your defeatism is being trumpeted by Aljazeera. I invite you to act on your deep seated beliefs and become a true media darling by leaving the Republican party. I don't care where you go. As far as I am concerned, you are no longer welcome in the GOP. Leave. In the event that you are unable to find the courage within yourself to do so, I call upon the Nebraska Republican Party to replace you in the next election. They would be better served if they had a trustworthy Republican Senator rather than a back stabbing defeatist that sides with the views of the extreme left and provides aid and comfort to our nation's enemies.

Also Posted at Curiouser and Curiouser

Is the momentum gone?

Links and commentary galore at Instapundit. The central gist is that support for the war has waned and the President isn't out there beating the drums as he had been, up until about six months ago. Insofar as waning support draws power from the men and women at risk, I agree that the momentum needs to be regained.

There are points made that the President might be just plum tuckered out. I'm into that, and it makes me wonder: Where are our Senators? Why must the President carry the rhetorical ball all by his lonesome? Are our GOP Senators not out there? Do they not support the war? Are they afraid for their political lives and jockeying (like Senator Hagel)? Or are they out there and supportive but cannot get coverage?

I'll be damned if I'd not give my proverbial eye teeth for a couple GOP fellas (or gals) who'd be willing to go Zel Miller on Hardball or CNN or Today or wherever and snarl a bit, raised voice, angry-eyed, and remind Americans just who it is that we are facing in this war. Seems like an easy task, pointing out the necessity of fighting Radical Islam. It's not like there's a dearth of fodder to feed to rhetoric.

Alas but instead we see GOP 2008 polls and at the top is Rudy Giuliani. I like him but hot damn can't we get a couple ravers out there to pound the message home?

Some Thoughts on Casualties

From Powerline:

"We are conducting an experiment never before seen, as far as I know, in the history of the human race. We are trying to fight a war under the auspices of an establishment that is determined--to put the most charitable face on it--to emphasize American casualties over all other information about the war.

Sometimes it becomes necessary to state the obvious: being a soldier is a dangerous thing.
...

Even in peacetime. The media's breathless tabulation of casualties in Iraq--now, over 1,800 deaths--is generally devoid of context. Here's some context: between 1983 and 1996, 18,006 American military personnel died accidentally in the service of their country. That death rate of 1,286 per year exceeds the rate of combat deaths in Iraq by a ratio of nearly two to one.

That's right: all through the years when hardly anyone was paying attention, soldiers, sailors and Marines were dying in accidents, training and otherwise, at nearly twice the rate of combat deaths in Iraq from the start of the war in 2003 to the present. Somehow, though, when there was no political hay to be made, I don't recall any great outcry, or gleeful reporting, or erecting of crosses in the President's home town. In fact, I'll offer a free six-pack to the first person who can find evidence that any liberal expressed concern--any concern--about the 18,006 American service members who died accidentally in service of their country from 1983 to 1996."

Three HaHas

Start here and proceed to the links. Excerpting now:

Along with two other detainees, we made plans for a daring assault on the Olive Garden Bottomless Pasta special. It was a risky gambit. We disguised ourselves as visitors and maneuvered past two night counselors and out the front door.
Haw!

UPDATE: Make that four: lgf: Some Things Don't Change

Gold Star Mothers

Gold Star Moms........I know......You're waiting to read "For Peace", right? Nothing doing. These moms understand that peace is not the absence of war, but the presence of justice and that this country is worth dying for.

Monday Evening tears the Democrats a new one

Again. It's painful, but necessary.
The national party has become increasingly hostile to anyone who is not a defeatist and/or conspiracist. It is no longer a question of the discreditable slogan, 'America, right or wrong.' It's that the Democratic party has come to be dominated by people who believe, 'America, wrong no matter what.'

The last war these people won is Vietnam; Are they so eager to recapture their youth that they will support any anti-American insurgency?
Not even John F'n Kerry (who by the way served in Vietnam and won three purple hearts without shedding a drop of blood or spending one day in a hospital and whose wife paid less than one half of one one-hundredth of one percent of her net worth in income tax in 2003) could tell you what his party stands for anymore other than higher taxes and keeping abortion legal. They've become nothing more than the anti-Bush vote-fraud party.

Tuesday, August 23, 2005

Why War, and Why Eroded Support For War

I believe I have not seen it stated any better than this.

"Don't dishonor me, don't walk on my grave."

I have to say - the more I read about Cindy Sheehan, the more I loathe her for the despicable pig that she is. I know that's callous.

Just The News

Being a Man, or something like it.

Somebody sent Kim du Toit an article on how men can reclaim their manhood.

It's written by women and homosexual Public Relations desk jockeys.

Do I really need to say more?

Coming out of their holes

The Clintonistas are coming out of the woodwork to defend Jamie Gorelick, and Captain Ed keeps smacking 'em down. Just start at the top and keep scrolling.

The bottom line is this: The Clintons are to blame for so much that went wrong, it's beginning to get a little insane. Until you remember that their fuck-ups are responsible for the deaths of 3000 people on September 11th.

Monday, August 22, 2005

There's Nothing About Cindy...

...that's new. More of the same American Leftist blather:

"Well, you know what? I ache for her blindness and for the millions of sheeple who have had the wool pulled over their eyes by this bunch of hypocritical, bad shepherds who are running a disastrous herd over the world. I have distressing news for the Soccer Safety Moms and the NASCAR Dads who are such ardent supporters of this administration and war:

"Your grandchildren and children who will be entering Kindergarten this fall will be fighting George's endless war if he gets his way and is allowed to continue spreading the cancer of imperialism in the Middle-East."
There you have it.

Mom, Who Lost Son In Iraq, Talks About 'Disgusting' White House Private Meeting With Bush

"In Iraq, Grace takes amazing hold"

You just can't find stuff like this if you stick to the networks.

"Liberal Scum"

Lee:

I say this honestly, and without hyperbole: there is absolutely nothing about San Francisco that is worth saving. The entire city is a disgusting stain on this great nation. The people are revolting, their ideology is disgusting, and if a massive earthquake ever levels the city, we’ll be better off for it.
What have those Bay Area Leftists done to earn so much ire?

Read on!

Because she had breast cancer....

...and because her son died in an automobile accident, Elizabeth Edwards sez: "I feel a connection with Cindy Sheehan. The president is wrong."

Oy.

One thing I read (likely amongst the material Dave and DW have already presented): If only military families can legitimately comment about the war, shall we have a referendum on the war only among military families? If we did, the talk of a pullout would end post haste.

It is another of those two-faced stances that the American Left seems to love so much - when military personnel were polled about the 2004 Presidential election, those polled overwhelmingly supported President Bush. The Left responded: "Well, only a small sample were polled!"

But one woman from California now speaks for all military Mothers.

Those wacky Leftists.

Bingo

Mark Styne nails it.

They're not children in Iraq; they're grown-ups who made their own decision to join the military. That seems to be difficult for the left to grasp. Ever since America's all-adult, all-volunteer army went into Iraq, the anti-war crowd have made a sustained effort to characterize them as "children." If a 13-year-old wants to have an abortion, that's her decision and her parents shouldn't get a look-in. If a 21-year-old wants to drop to the broadloom in Bill Clinton's Oval Office, she's a grown woman and free to do what she wants. But, if a 22- or 25- or 37-year-old is serving his country overseas, he's a wee "child" who isn't really old enough to know what he's doing.

(.....)

The infantilization of the military promoted by the left is deeply insulting to America's warriors but it suits the anti-war crowd's purposes. It enables them to drone ceaselessly that "of course" they "support our troops," because they want to stop these poor confused moppets from being exploited by the Bush war machine.


Every time I hear some leftist mouth the words "I support the troops" I want to vomit. There are very few leftists in this country who support the troops, because damn near the whole Democrat Party base is anti-military. During the 70's, 80's and 90's the Left made it OK for their political supporters to sneer at the military and denigrate military service. Hell, it was part of what you had to do in order to fit in with the Left, just like you had to think that the USSR was really gonna win and Ronnie Raygun was gonna start world war four.

But once you start to incorporate hatred into your political philosophy, you can't dig it out without revamping your politics and admitting that you were wrong, two things that the current Left refuse to do. And so that hatred of the military seeths in the Left, only now it's not fashionable to hate the military any more. The Left can't call us babykillers and spit on returning soldiers anymore without serious repercussions. So they make their "We support the troops" statements while wildly trying to think of ways that they can undermine us without too much public fuss. And calling us a bunch of misled dolts is on of the ways that they try to undermine the military.

The Wall Street Journal's Best of the Web had this snippet from the Seattle Times (not surprised here, nope).

America's purpose in Iraq is over. The soldiers should be brought home. It can be done, as has been proven in Vietnam, Somalia and other places.


STOP! FULLSTOP! SLAMTHEFUCKINGCARINTOREVERSEANDJUMPONTHEFUCKINGBRAKESSTOP! VIET FUCKING NAM?!?!?!?! DID THIS NEWSPAPER JUST TELL US TO PULL OUT LIKE WE DID IN VIET FUCKING NAM AND SOMALIA????

Yes dear readers, they did. To the Left, it would be a wet dream. America's military, running away and hiding, giving up, throwing in the towel. THAT is what the Left wants for our troops, and yet they claim to support them?

The whole leftist dominated MSM has been trumpeting defeat, bloodshed, loss and hopelessness for two years in Iraq. Most soldiers don't bother reading the newspapers or watching nightly news, because they know what they see in those outlets is unmitigated bullshit. Everywhere a military member looks, they can see exactly what the Left thinks about them, and what the Left wants. Miserable failure, death and dishonor. The Left wants the military to cave in and give up. The Left desparately wants the military to be the infantilized morons that they call us oh so often.

But we aren't, and we never will be, and it's driving the Left further insane. Witness Cindy Sheehan. Cindy is so far mentally gone that she can't understand the fact that her son was an adult who signed up for the military, re-enlisted in the military three years later, and volunteered for the mission that ultimately killed him. To Cindy, he was just a lost little boy, a mislead half-wit. To the Democrats, the military mindset is as alien as the free-market system. And I can't think of any better example of how the Left not only can't figure the military out, but the reason why they will not support us.

Sunday, August 21, 2005

My first and last word on Cindy and Casey

If I could choose one Cindy Sheehan article that sums up my view, this would be it. The way the MSM has used Cindy to bash Bush is despicable though predictable. Mostly, it's the things they left out, like asking "Why won't Bush meet with Cindy Sheehan?" without noting that he already did, or filtering out the psycho things that Cindy has been saying, quite publicly, and not mentioning the letter that her family wrote to Cindy asking her to stop what she is doing and come home. And I find it interesting that the MSM has not found any other military family member newsworthy.

Cindy has said a lot of crazy things, but one statement in particular that seemed to resonate with the left bothers me: Cindy said, on camera, that "this country is not worth dying for." I am deeply offended by that statement. I think her son Casey would have been offended by that statement as well. Casey was not a child when he signed up nor was he a child when he reenlisted. (I guess if you think the government is supposed to take care of everyone then it must follow that its citizens are reduced to the status of children - but I digress.) He was fully aware, just like all soldiers know when they enlist, that it was possible that he would be in dangerous situations where he could die. People join the armed forces partly because they love their country and are willing to put their lives on the line for it. That is part of what makes you human - being willing to risk your life for the people you love. And it is the people of this country, the families, that are the country. FDR didn't win World War II, millions of Americans did. For anyone, including his own mother, to imply that Casey Sheehan died for no reason or worse, for a lie, is repulsive. Casey died in the most honorable way possible - defending that which he loved.