Friday, May 26, 2006

Galloway Gone Crazy!


The Respect MP George Galloway has said it would be morally justified for a suicide bomber to murder Tony Blair.

In an interview with GQ magazine, the reporter asked him: "Would the assassination of, say, Tony Blair by a suicide bomber - if there were no other casualties - be justified as revenge for the war on Iraq?"

Mr Galloway replied: "Yes, it would be morally justified. I am not calling for it - but if it happened it would be of a wholly different moral order to the events of 7/7. It would be entirely logical and explicable. And morally equivalent to ordering the deaths of thousands of innocent people in Iraq - as Blair did."
I reckon my only question is this: "If such an act were "equivalent" to "ordering the deaths of thousands of innocent people" and "justified", does that mean Galloway thinks "ordering the deaths of thousands of innocent people" is justified?

Independent Online

Reinventing Reality

"Hostage taker"


Thursday, May 25, 2006


So I was over at Cold Fury, reading Al's rant on "art".

Wanna dunk a huge crucifix upside down in dung & urine? Sorry, it’s been done. How ’bout you make an image of the Virgin Mary out of shit? That’ll scare the rubes. That’s been done too? Hmmmm… Okay. How ’bout pictures of people with whips up their asses. (NSFW). Sorry, that’s been done too? Hmmm… this is getting hard.

Okay, I got it. We’ll have a film of some gay guy getting slammed by his buddy, and while that’s going on, the wide receiver in this little game of catch will sing the Star Spangled Banner as a brilliant, artistic slam on President Bush. Oh, sorry, forgot. That’s been done too. Um, okay, how ’bout we have sex with holy communion, pay prostitutes to stamp on the rosary beads, and dare God to strike us down? Now that will be a work of art, right? Sadly, it’s been done. A long time ago. It’s not new.

The idea that art is only worthy if it transgresses some perceived social norm is something the elites have foisted on us for a long time.
Would you like to know more?

Leftist critical theory - specifically Marcuse and Gramsci - tells us we need to champion the outlaw over the cop, the prostitute over the priest, the profane over the reverent. In this way the existing social order may be destroyed, and some new Rousseauian Natural Man utopia created. Thing is, this wasn’t new to leftism, leftism was instead the embodiment of a lot of older bad thinking by half bright drunks and malcontents. Prior levelers are often called crypto-marxists, but if you really dig around, you discover that these early communists - dating back to around the 12th century AD or earlier - were basically either lunatics, malcontents, con-men, or crazed millenarians. Modern Marxism just put an industrial age glow on the whole anti-civilizational philosophy of the diggers and levellers and others of their ilk.

As a result, the triumph of leftism in our schools and other social institutions has resulted in an attempt to undermine what have long been believed to be objective standards of beauty and truth in representation, in the mimetic process by which art describes something in the real world. The turning of art’s purposes to the destruction of civilization, first by destroying the standards that governed art, then by attacking social norms and the fabric of society itself, has coincided with a sharp decline in interest in fine art.

It's a well done piece. But then I got to the bottom, and saw a link to the Rottweiler (which you know I love reading) and clicked on over.


So we hear that “Madonna”’s latest “brave” and “provocative” act in defiance of established religion involves, yawn, stretching herself out on a cross.

How innovative. How positively shocking. How brave. How “speaking truth to powery.”

How utterly, fucking, predictable.

Listen, Madonna, your shtick is as tired, flabby and old as your vulcanized labia. The same labia that are affectionately known as “7-11? on account of the fact that they, too, are open 24/7.

You want to really impress us with your “bravery?”

Take a hint from LC & IB Bill Quick.

Stretch your naked, skanky, aging body out on a crescent. Urinate on a prayer rug. Make a picture of yourself performing cunnilingus on a replica of the vagina of the black rock in Mecca.

You want to really turn yourself into an icon against established religion? You want to hear your name whispered in awe of your bravery? You want to become a crusader against dogma and the establishment? Go ahead, because there’s your chance. Stand up, just for once in your miserable, useless life, to something and somebody likely to actually strike back rather than shake their heads in pity.

But of course you won’t do such a thing. That would require actual bravery and, as we all know, the only “bravery” exhibited among the feckless, “progressive” cowards is the kind that doesn’t involve any actual, you know, risk.

I think that right now, Madonna is rubbing her scorched buttcheeks and wondering just what the hell caused her spandex pants to catch on fire.

I think of the rag tag band of farmers that grabbed their muskets in 1776, who risked their lives and every single thing they’d struggled to build with their blood, sweat and tears to throw off the yoke of Imperialism, to be allowed to live and breathe freely when accepting the status quo would have cost them nothing but an ideal.

I think of the hundreds of thousands who died on the bloody battlefields of the Civil War to end slavery.

I think of the young men who stormed the beaches in Normandy to defeat Naziism and liberate people they didn’t even know, much less had a reason to care about. My family happens to be one of the beneficiaries of that entirely selfless sacrifice so yes, I’m a little biased there, as anybody who had a total stranger risk his life for him should be.

I think of the young men who did the same in the Pacific.

Then I look at you. You sorry, cowardly, pathetic Band of Losers who never saw a risk you wouldn’t run screaming from. I look at your self-righteous, condescending, self-worshipping carcasses and I wonder why the Hell those fine men even bothered.

They bothered because of people like you, Misha.

The Da Vinci Hoax

Alrighty folks - here's my big hint for the day:

If you want to know what "The Da Vinci Code" says, go buy the book that "Code" was based on (some say plagiarised), "Holy Blood, Holy Grail".

Dan Brown is a make-believe intellectual who hates Christianity. BFD. I really don't give two shits about him, and I'm not going to waste any money on his book or the movie. Especially when I know that the ideas and thoughts behind his book aren't really his.

Having said that, check out this piece, The Trashing of the Christ, by Tim Graham. Graham makes the shocking discovery that the Has-Been Media practically performed fellatio on their guests involved with "The Da Vinci Code", while they broke out the whips and thumbscrews for Mel Gibson when he made "The Passion of the Christ".

Duh. No kidding? Gosh, who woulda thunk it?

Look folks, I hate to break this to you, but the media exhibits all the predictable character traits that Leftists have, because THE MEDIA IS MADE OF LEFTISTS! And one trait of the Left is their hatred of Christianity. There are probably a number of reasons for this, and many of them are open to debate. My opinion is that their problems with Christianity are related to their socialist (i.e. communist lite) backgrounds. Marx hated religion in general. The Communists knew that in order to make people subject to the state, they had to remove anything else that might interfere with their plans. Religion was one of those things that interfered. Socialism is just a few steps down from Communism. And let's be honest, the only reason more people don't actively advocate for communism in America is because of people like you, or myself, who can see what communism does, and did for the world in the past century. The goals of a socialist and a communist are the same. The only difference is the degrees of control by the State.

Now, that's my opinion. You wanna debate it, cool. But the Left's hatred of Christianity cannot be debated. It's on display all around this country. Crosses removed from a city's seal? A cross removed from a Korean War Memorial?

What's next, are they going to demand that Arlington Cemetery remove all the crosses they have on Federal land? Perhaps the City of Los Angeles, (Full name of L.A. = La Ciudad de la Riena de los Angeles, or The City of the Queen of the Angels) needs to change it's name to something more secular. Same with San Francisco (St. Francis), San Juan (St. John), San Jose (St. Joseph), Santa Barbara (St. Barbara) Santa Monica, yada yada yada you get my point. Half of California should change it's name to fit with the Left's goals of wiping religion off the map.

That ties in with the fact that "Code" is a direct assault on Christianity, more specifically the Roman Catholic Church. Since all other Christian denominations are derived from the Catholic Church from one time or another, and hold many (if not damn near all) of the same views, an assault on the Catholic Church's basic doctrine is an assault on all of Christianity.

Of COURSE the Left is going to drool over "Code"! It indulges in one of their favorite pastimes! Hell, it was only two years ago that the Left blamed the downfall of their man, John Kerry, on the great, vast stretch of land they titled "Jesusland". Us Jesus-freaks are just so backwards, you know? The Left can't understand why us knuckle-dragging Neanderthals believe in some fake god, when their religion of environmentalism, multiculteralism, and communism could make the world such a better place, man! Like, really! Yeah! Don't bogart the bong, man!

As if our religion had anything to do with the fact that John "Flipper" Kerry was a ginormous assclown that couldn't be trusted to tie his shoes correctly, much less run a country. But that's what the Left focused on. "God, Guns, and Gays" is what we care about, according to Howard Dean. Because to the Left, God is so yesterday!

And yes, I meant to spell "ginormous". It's a cross between "gigantic" and "enormous". Deal with my idiosyncracies for a moment longer, please.

I swear, if George Cloony got up on national TV and said "You know what, all you Jesus-freaks out there need to grow up and get modern, because you're just a bunch of relics that are dragging us enlightened saviors of the world down" the collective media would stop doing the verbal equivalent of a blow-job and move on to the full-blow, on-air knob-slobbing. Complete with a facial money-shot and a "ThankyousirmayIhaveanother!" from Katie Couric. Meanwhile, Mel Gibson tells people, "You know, some of us actually believe in God the Father" and he's getting the secular version of the Spanish Inquisition on live TV.

Tim Graham shouldn't be surprised that the Media gave their "Code" guests cushy interviews. Graham shouldn't be surprised that the Media gave flaming ass-loads of free publicity to the movie. Graham shouldn't be surprised that the Media is anti-Christianity.

But it is rather nice of him to document everything for us.

A great reminder

Deroy Murdock has a post up with all of Saddam's links to international terrorism.

There are still people, like my emailer "Ken", who flat out refuse to believe that Saddam Hussein had anything to do with terrorism. In these people's little make-believe world, Saddam was a little fuzzy puppy who wouldn't hurt anyone, just as long as the big, mean US of A would leave him alone.

Sadly, I think these people are too far gone into mental deviancy to be of any use to the real world. There is simply too much evidence linking Saddam Hussein to international terrorism to be ignored, unless one is willing to forgo truth and reality in an attempt to remain a partisan zealot. And willful ignorance is a trait that can no longer be tolerated, unless you want another smoking crater in the middle of an American city. L.A. perhaps, or Boston. Miami? Maybe. But for those of us who live in the real world, willful ignorance of the type displayed by Ken, by the DU lunatics, Kos, San Francisco, and the Democrat Party is a sign that we have to push their lies back even harder. Bludgeon the Left with facts. Force them to deal with reality. I don't think we can win the War on Terror if half of our country is running around with wet diapers and their fingers in their ears going "LA LA LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU LA LA LA LA LA LA!"

Which, in essence, is what the Left has been doing for decades now. The proof of that is in their elected leadership. The people elected by the Left to speak for them are some of the biggest lunatics of all. You can make all the claims you want about how the Far Left isn't representative of the Democrat Party, or how the Far Left doesn't speak for the party. That's fine, but if that's your opinion I'm going to point to Michael Moore sitting in the Presidential Box at the DNC Convention, 2004. I'm going to point to Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein, Russ Feingold, John Murtha, Howard Dean, Dennis Kucinich, Cynthia McKenney, Dick Durbin, Harry Reid, and every other ELECTED DEMOCRAT OFFICIAL who share the very same talking points with Kos, DU, and the rest of the Far Left.

All you people who say that the Democrats aren't represented by the Far Left.... fine. Mince your words if you wish. But the honest assessment is that the Far Left controls the Dimocrat party. The Far Left tells the Dimocrats what to say, how to act, and how to think. The Far Left calls the tune, and the Dimocrats start dancing. The Dimocrats "aren't represented by the Far Left" is an empty platitude used to cover the fact that the Dimocrats simply represent the Far Left.

If the Dimocrats don't like that, then maybe they should change their leadership. But you know what? It's not going to happen. Because the Dimocrats know that they're headed off of a cliff, and rather than trying to stop it, they're screaming "FASTER, FASTER! CHIMPYMCHALIBURTON! NOBLOODFOROIL! EVILNEOCONGOYPUPPETFORJEWISHRACISTS!" and various other slogans that easily fit onto a 2 X 2 piece of cardboard.

The Left of today is a scary thing. The fact that Deroy Murdock even needs to put up a webpage should make sane people shake their heads.

Oh, and for a real mind-bending treat, check out protein wisdom's recital of Peter Wehner. And while you're reading the article (With Jeff's comments spliced in) see if you can tell - Did Jeff make those comments up, or did he copy and paste them from a Leftist website?

I honestly couldn't tell.

I can be heartless

Because I read this news:

Federal drug agents and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are stepping up the investigation of dozens of fatal overdoses linked to heroin laced with a strong prescription painkiller.

The synthetic painkiller fentanyl has tainted the illegal heroin supply in Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Maryland, Delaware, Pennsylvania and New Jersey, authorities said. In Detroit, the drug combination has been linked to at least 23 deaths in less than a week, officials said Tuesday.

And my reaction was "So what? Let the dopers die."

I have such a visceral reaction to drug users that I really couldn't care less if all the heroin users in Chicago OD'd and kicked the bucket. You know what? That's the chance you take when you do an illegal narcotic. I hope the high was worth it.

At least if they die, we don't have to waste any more time or money on them, short of a coffin and a plot of ground.

I think I'll sit back and wait for the hate mail from this one.....

UPDATE: Just another example - I read this story:

A judge said a 5-foot-1 man convicted of sexually assaulting a child was too small to survive in prison, and gave him 10 years of probation instead.

His crimes deserved a long sentence, District Judge Kristine Cecava said, but she worried that Richard W. Thompson, 50, would be especially imperiled by prison dangers.

And I say "Too fucking bad! If he didn't want to go to jail, then he SHOULDN'T BE HAVING SEX WITH YOUNG CHILDREN! Gosh, he can't survive in prison? Not my problem. That's his problem, and it became his problem when he stuck his dick into a child.


Lock his ass up and throw away the key. Let the other prisoners let him know how they deal with kiddy-diddlers.

Wednesday, May 24, 2006

Good question

Dave asks a good one. Sounds like Hastert & Company think CONGRESS > JUDGE + FBI

On the other hand, at least the President has made good on being "a uniter". The Congressional Wagons are circled nicely around one of their crooks.

Oh sure, NOW they take a stand!

Because if we allow congresscritters to get investigated, we might actually find out what a corrupt group of asscannons they all are! And the vermin can't allow that!

WASHINGTON (AP) -- House leaders of both parties stood in rare election-year unanimity Wednesday demanding the FBI surrender documents it took and remove agents involved in the weekend raid of a congressman's office.

"The Justice Department must immediately return the papers it unconstitutionally seized," House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi said in a statement.

The leaders said that the congressman, William Jefferson, a Louisiana Democrat, should then cooperate with the investigation.

Earlier, Hastert had said any FBI agents involved "ought to be frozen out of that (case) just for the sake of the constitutional aspects of it."

Both parties have protested the Saturday night search of Jefferson's office on Capitol Hill, which they said violated the Constitution's separation of powers doctrine.

Separation of powers? Someone with a bit more legal background than I have please explain to me how the investigation of a corrupt congressman is a violation of the separation of powers? Can anyone explain that to me?

Kick the bums out. Kick all of the worthless, feckless, corrupt, power-hungry, money-grubbing, spineless, incompetant bums out. Get rid of them all. And then let's start over. But I have a feeling that until we rid ourselves of the parasites currently infesting Capitol Hill, none of the problems facing this country will be dealt with in a satisfactory manner.

Trunk Monkey




Hastert demands FBI return documents - Yahoo! News


Amazing peole, these Congressfolk.

I noted this while reading:

FBI agents searched Jefferson's office in pursuit of evidence in a bribery investigation. The search warrant, signed by U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Hogan, was based on an affidavit that said agents found $90,000 in cash wrapped and stashed in the freezer of Jefferson's home.
So it wasn't overreaching by the Executive, but by the Judicial as well.

Sounds like an Imperial Politcongress.

Yahoo! News

Last night in Edmonton

O Canada


Jesse Macbeth and the Left

Tim has a few posts down below about MacBeth. I'd just like to point out a little bit about how this is an example of the Left's hatred for the military.

I guess if you come forward and claim that you were in the military and committed atrocities against civilians, the Left will take you at your word, point blank, and use you to spread their agenda. How long did it take people to check some of his stories and find out he was a fraud?

Not very long. Anyone with a military background could look at his pictures (posted at Michelle Malkin) and see that if he was a soldier at all, he was a piss-poor one.

Here's a clue for those who don't know - if you make it through Ranger training, you will NOT... let me repeat that, YOU WILL NOT be a Private E-2. Which is the rank that MacBeth is wearing on his uniform collar. And the other mistakes in that photo are so obvious that the only explanation for them is that MacBeth never served in the Rangers, probably never served in the Army, and is lying out his ass. I'm not a Ranger. Probably never will be, thanks to my eyesight being crappy. But I can look at that photo and tell you that the guy wearing it is full of shit.

So the people who used MacBeth to push their anti-war, anti-military agenda couldn't even be bothered to do a basic check on him. No, he came forward with tales about murdering civilians, so heck, put him on film! Credibility? Who cares, he makes America look bad!

It's the Left's desire to hurt the military that makes them push people like MacBeth forward without even doing some basic footwork on him. He's a fraud, a scam, but the Left is so desperate to trash the military and the country that the military protects that they'll toss any crap they can, no matter how preposterous the claims, or how fake the people making those claims. And it shows just how deep a hatred the Left has for the military, and for America in general.

If this were just an isolated incident, I would brush it off as moonbats being moonbats.

But it has happened before.

Yes, it has happened before.

The Left hates the military. From Murtha's latest smears against the Marines, to the systematic attempt to portray the military as deranged, murdering lunatics, the Left has proven to me without a doubt that it hates the military with a passion that is rather frightening. From the people in Seattle waving "Baby-Killer!" signs, to the Leftists calling me an unthinking tool (check out DU's reproduction of Time's Person of the Year cover featuring three soldiers), to the unquestioned support of wild, hysterical claims such as we're seeing today, and as we've seen in the past, the Left hates the military with every little drug-addled bone in their bodies.

And quite honestly, the military is starting to hate them back. Or even worse, simply becoming indifferent to them. And that's something that the Left should be quite frightened about.

Afghanistan not falling apart

Granted, it ain't Wiakiki Beach, but if you listen to the MSM, Afghanistan is a hellhole about to sink below the Earth's crust into Hell.

The reality is something much, much different.

May 24, 2006: The last two weeks have seen an ambitious Taliban offensive shot to pieces. As many as a thousand Taliban gunmen, in half a dozen different groups, have passed over the Pakistani border, or been gathered within Afghanistan, and sent off to try and take control of remote villages and districts. The offensive was a major failure, with nearly half the Taliban getting killed, wounded or captured. Afghan and Coalition casualties were much less, although you wouldn't know that from the mass media reports (which made it all look like a Taliban victory). The Taliban faced more mobile opponents, who had better intelligence. UAVs, aircraft and helicopters were used to track down the Taliban, and catch them. Thousands of Afghan troops and police were in action, exposing some of them to ambush, as they drove to new positions through remote areas.

The good news is not that we're killing the bad guys. The good news is that the AFGHANISTAN MILITARY is killing the bad guys, something that the MSM doesn't want you to know, something that the MSM is going to attempt to prevent you from learning. They don't want you to know that Afghanistan, while not a tourist hotspot, is not a pit of hellish warfare.

The Afghan and British governments are both accusing Pakistan of looking the other way as Taliban groups set up shop and openly operate in Pakistani border areas. Pakistan denies this, but anyone who is bold enough to travel to these areas, will see evidence of Taliban presence (including enforcement of conservative Islamic lifestyle practices.) In truth, the Pakistani government has never controlled many areas along the border, and is only now, for the first time in its history, trying to exert control.

When the USA buddied up to Pakistan, it was for pragmatic reasons. We needed (and still need) help destroying al Queda. We've caught some of the big fish in al Queda with Pakistan's help, including the #3 man in charge of operations. Who was captured IN Pakistan, by Pakistani troops and our boys working together. But we also need to keep in mind that there is a huge segment of Pakistan's population who has more in common with the turbaned tumblefucks than with any kind of modern world. Remember a few months ago when we bombed a house in Pakistan, trying to kill some high level terrorist poo-bahs? We didn't get the people we wanted, but that was because the terrorists we were aiming for showed up late, and thus escaped the bombs. However, we DID get some of the lower level al Queda goathumpers, and the fact that these people in the hills of Pakistan were inviting the upper-level al Queda turds shouldn't surprise anyone. The reason we support President Musharaff is because he's the lesser of two evils, not because he's some great liberating force in the Middle East.

May 21, 2006: Coalition forces found that about a hundred Taliban gunmen were staying at a religious school near Kandahar in southern Afghanistan. Smart bombs hit the school in the middle of the night, but several dozen of the Taliban fled to nearby homes. As Afghan and Coalition forces closed in, the surviving Taliban fired back from nearby homes. So smart bombs were used on the homes as well, which killed about 16 civilians and wounded another twenty. Over 80 Taliban were killed, with no Afghan army or Coalition dead. The Taliban promptly spun their use of civilian homes, as human shields, as a Coalition atrocity.

The quote I remember most about this incident is the Afghan Defense Minister telling the people of Afghanistan NOT to help the Taliban, because if they do "then this is what happens."

I'd say that the Afghani people have a few less moral inhibitions than we Americans do, eh?

I hate it when Blogspot is weak

This morning, DANEgerus notes an issue with the First Amendment as quoted by the ACLU. Quel suprise. I know we posted about something similar about a year ago, but I cannot find it. Searching Blogspot is not helpful.

Tuesday, May 23, 2006

Carnival of the Duped [ Jessie Macbeth | Jesse MacBeth ]

Who is desperate to believe the worst about the men and women of the American Armed Forces?


*** World Can't Wait

* Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (, ironically)

*** Peace House

* After Downing Street


* Dying to Preserve the Lies

* Media Monitors

<*** TPM Cafe

And this classic running commentary:

* LiveJournal

CLASSIC STUFF here. Click and then search for "Jesse". There are even posts by "jesse". I was crying in laughter.

*** al Jazeerah

* Step Down Bush in Seattle

* MetroEast Community Media (Oregon) Jesse was on air somewhere between Democracy Now and Cannabis Common Sense.

* Progressive Independent


Why the hell did this guy have all this information in his damn HOUSE?!?!

"Hmmmm, let's see here.... I have the Social Security Numbers, Names, and Birth Dates of over TWENTY-SIX MILLION VETERANS here in this e-file. What should I do with it? Let's see.... Keep it locked up at work? Nah. Put it in a safe place? Nah. Gosh, I think I'll take it home with me so a fucking BURGLAR CAN STEAL IT FROM MY HOME! Yeah, that's a GREAT idea!"

If the employee isn't fired yet, I want to know why. This isn't just negligence, this is CRIMINAL negligence, and if any veterans end up effected because of this asshole, the Dept. of Veteran's Affairs needs to make sure everything is put right.

Of course, I'm not holding my breath on any of this. Being a federal employee means never having to say you're sorry if you completely screw up other people's lives. Gah. GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!

Oh, and if your outrage quotient hasn't been filled up, check out this piece in the Examiner.

You would think members of Congress would learn from the onslaught of public outrage generated last year when the nation first heard about wasteful boondoggles like the "?Bridges to Nowhere"? earmark for Alaska. But just when they seemed to have taken a step forward last week, we find out they also took a giant leap backward.

First, the good news. The House of Representatives adopted on a voice vote an amendment offered by Rep. Scott Garrett, R-N.J., that limits official attendance at the overseas conference junkets so popular with federal civil servants. The Garrett measure says no more than 50 employees of the U.S. Department of Interior or the Environmental Protection Agency can attend such conferences at one time. The Senate still must approve the measure and President Bush must sign it for it to become law.

Interior Department officials admitted in a letter last year to Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., that they don'?t know how many employees actually attend such conferences, which are often conveniently held in attractive vacation spots around the world. Even so, the Interior officials estimated that their department spent $6.2 million on overseas conferences attended by 30 or more Interior staffers in 2004. At EPA, the estimate was $22.4 million to send staffers to 400 such conferences.

Stop. Think about those numbers - $6.2 million for the Interior Department. $22.4 Million for the EPA. $28.6 million for two departments alone, sending their employees to nice cushy "conferences".


And then there is this: Most cheered earlier this month when the House approved a lobbying reform bill that included provisions requiring greater public disclosure of earmarks and names of the members seeking them. But then people started looking at the fine print and discovered lots of earmark loopholes. That means lots of representatives were playing a legislative game of three-card Monte.

On the one hand, many of these representatives stood before America and crowed about the importance of lobbying reforms. On the other, they were busily inserting exceptions like the one that exempts from disclosure the identity of the author of an earmark that directs tax dollars to a federal agency. About half of the thousands of earmarks approved in recent years would thus be exempted from public knowledge!

That's a favorite tactic of Congress - make a law, then exempt themselves from that law. Just another reason why we should bulldoze the Capitol Building with all the congresscritters inside it, and start over.

There'?s another huge loophole that can exempt from disclosure the authors of earmarks directing tax dollars to state and local governments. Example? Funding for Alaska'?s infamous bridges goes to the state government, which means if the lobbying reform were in effect last year, we probably would never have heard about that boondoggle.

This sort of legislative sleight-of-hand was properly condemned by Republicans when they were the minority before 1994. Now it appears many of them have learned to love playing three-card Monte with our tax dollars.

I say it's time to start kicking the incumbants out of their seats during the primaries. Maybe if we flush the waste, we can get some decent people in Congress.

But considering how long Ted (hic) Kennedy has been in office, I don't see that happening any time soon.

The more I see my government in action, the more I want to seceed from the Union. The more I see of Congress, the more I see that the people in Congress are nothing but rancid turds dressed up in suits, voting to give them a bigger cesspool to swim in.

I really don't know what I'm going to do this November. I hear people shrieking "DON'T LET THE DEMOCRATS BACK IN POWER!" and they all bring up good points for why we should keep a republican majority. But looking at the Republicans in office, I don't know if I could vote for them without vomiting. But voting for a Democrat right now would make me puke so hard I'd probably snap my own spine with my convulsions. Democrats are the sarin gas of politics.

I'm hoping the Republicans give me a reason to vote for them before November.

The Legend of Jessie Macbeth

Jesse is a guy who says he was an Army Ranger who witnessed war crimes in Iraq.

Find his video here:

Debunking here and here.

But they support the Troops...