U.S. Catches 4 Suspected Iraqi Insurgents
Reckon we have all heard the old saying which instructs us that "the best defense is a good offense". It looks as though US forces in Iraq are back on the offense, becoming the hunters instead of the hunted. Bravissimo! I'm reminded of something G. Gordon Liddy wrote in his book Will: "I refuse to worry abut my enemies, preferring instead to have them worry about me." Well, something like that anyway.
The lesson (in my opinion) in warfare that cost the United States 55,000 lives in Vietnam to learn is that the only way you defeat guerillas in war is with better guerillas. It is possible that Special Forces have been behind the scenes in every conflict since their founding, and we just didn't hear much, but it seems to me that our merciless murderous savages are kicking the shit out of their opponents in Afghanistan and Iraq, moreso than in previous wars. In Somalia, they were handcuffed, largely avoiding conflict and taking a defensive stance. Not this time.
I recall hearing an ex-Special Forces guy being interviewed by Don Imus about eight months ago. He said a couple days after 9/11, his and other units were briefed and told by their superiors: "We don't have time to put a grand plan together. We don't have time to deploy aircraft carriers. We don't have time to call up reserves and deploy a hundred thousand guys. We will, soon, but for now, we're sticking you in. Here's a map of Tora Bora. Here's where we think they are. Go do damage. Any questions?"
And the American guerillas landed in Afghanistan a couple days later and there was no debate and there was no UN council meeting and there was no press conference - there was just a few hundred highly-trained, highly-motivated, well-led, and well-equipped American soldiers in bands of a hundred or so just traipsing through the mountains blowing people away.
For all the technology and equipment we have, the basic principles of warfare have scarcely changed since Howe routed Washington at Brandywine.
Yahoo! News - U.S. Catches 4 Suspected Iraqi Insurgents
Wednesday, August 06, 2003
Hawk Attacks Chihuahua
Seems kind of funny in a slapstick way, but I have a friend Charlie who suffered a similar fate while in college. The school he attended had as its mascot the "Golden Eagle". So the school had one. Charlie was in some veterinary program or club or something like that, so once in a while for the football games he got to handle the eagle. Well one time he got sloppy and didn't put his leather glove on and the eagle went to perch on his hand and one of the talons went right through the webbing between his thumb and hand "like a paring knife into jello".
Charlie said it, uh, hurt.
Trained hawks employed to keep pigeons from making a mess on visitors in a midtown park have been grounded because one of the birds mistook a Chihuahua as its lunch.
Yahoo! News
Seems kind of funny in a slapstick way, but I have a friend Charlie who suffered a similar fate while in college. The school he attended had as its mascot the "Golden Eagle". So the school had one. Charlie was in some veterinary program or club or something like that, so once in a while for the football games he got to handle the eagle. Well one time he got sloppy and didn't put his leather glove on and the eagle went to perch on his hand and one of the talons went right through the webbing between his thumb and hand "like a paring knife into jello".
Charlie said it, uh, hurt.
Flight 93
Everyone has probably read things like this before, but in my opinion this is worth another read.
Of course, given today's media, some of the information herein may be inaccurate. If true though, it certainly does render laughable the notions that I used to hear from American Leftists:
- that the passenger uprising was all a myth
- that there really is no proof that any uprising occurred
- that hijackers may have caused the crash while struggling among themselves after some learned what only their leaders knew - that that day's mission was a suicide mission
Whatever. My intuition tells me the passengers knew they would die if they did nothing. They knew they'd be likely to die if they acted. The only question was would they hasten their deaths by acting to save others on the ground? All jokes about the unending messes in Congress aside - how would things have been different if Flight 93 had reached the Capitol and had killed, say, 200 Congressmen and Congresswomen? What if it had hit the White House?
Anyway - it's worth a reread for those who imagine the best of their fellow Americans.
The Final Moments of United Flight 93
Everyone has probably read things like this before, but in my opinion this is worth another read.
Of course, given today's media, some of the information herein may be inaccurate. If true though, it certainly does render laughable the notions that I used to hear from American Leftists:
- that the passenger uprising was all a myth
- that there really is no proof that any uprising occurred
- that hijackers may have caused the crash while struggling among themselves after some learned what only their leaders knew - that that day's mission was a suicide mission
Whatever. My intuition tells me the passengers knew they would die if they did nothing. They knew they'd be likely to die if they acted. The only question was would they hasten their deaths by acting to save others on the ground? All jokes about the unending messes in Congress aside - how would things have been different if Flight 93 had reached the Capitol and had killed, say, 200 Congressmen and Congresswomen? What if it had hit the White House?
Anyway - it's worth a reread for those who imagine the best of their fellow Americans.
The Final Moments of United Flight 93
Palestinians have their own state
Do I have your attention now?
Good.
Go. Read. This.
Thank you.
Hat tip to Deb of Insomnomaniac.
Also, a post that had me sitting back and thinking for a bit. It's from Analogkid at Random Nuclear Strikes. I've been ranting and raving about the amount of spending going on in the Bush administration, and he takes another look at it.
OK, I haven't been raving on THIS site, per se, but it's been happening.
Good.
Go. Read. This.
Thank you.
Hat tip to Deb of Insomnomaniac.
Also, a post that had me sitting back and thinking for a bit. It's from Analogkid at Random Nuclear Strikes. I've been ranting and raving about the amount of spending going on in the Bush administration, and he takes another look at it.
OK, I haven't been raving on THIS site, per se, but it's been happening.
"Not My Kind"
Sharpton got the biggest ovation when he challenged Bush for taking credit for appointing prominent blacks such as national security adviser Condoleezza Rice and Secretary of State Colin Powell.
Sharpton cited Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas as an example of a prominent black who's out of touch with the majority of black voters.
"Clarence Thomas is my color, but he's not my kind," Sharpton said.
The AFL-CIO hosted a little Bush bashing orgy last night (complete with an NPR reporter playing straight man).
Sharpton got the biggest ovation when he challenged Bush for taking credit for appointing prominent blacks such as national security adviser Condoleezza Rice and Secretary of State Colin Powell.
Sharpton cited Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas as an example of a prominent black who's out of touch with the majority of black voters.
"Clarence Thomas is my color, but he's not my kind," Sharpton said.
The AFL-CIO hosted a little Bush bashing orgy last night (complete with an NPR reporter playing straight man).
"The Bomb & Dad"
As a child growing up in a University town, I heard the claims that the bombs were unnecessary, or vindictive Cold War power plays. In the late 70's I remember my father seething after he came home late from a Faculty Senate meeting where, for some reason, a debate erupted over the bomb.
This is topical today.
As a child growing up in a University town, I heard the claims that the bombs were unnecessary, or vindictive Cold War power plays. In the late 70's I remember my father seething after he came home late from a Faculty Senate meeting where, for some reason, a debate erupted over the bomb.
This is topical today.
Tuesday, August 05, 2003
What were their goals?
They buried what? They buried DOZENS OF FIGHTER JETS we didn't know they had, unprotected IN THE SAND in Iraq. This isn't like covering a family member in sand at the beach......these are JETS! It takes signifcantly more effort to conceal a damned air craft. Despite the ignorance involved in burying Iraqi air force jets in the desert unprotected, this tells us something of their intentions! The might have been extremely ignorant, but I doubt they thought these things were going to sprout roots and grow new planes. Saddam might be evil and he might bluster on and on about how little chance his enemies had to defeat him......but he knew better. He had faced the U.S. military before and we absolutely decimated his military. He KNEW we would win! I'm sure he wanted to inflict untold damage upon the U.S. military. The regular slaughter of small amounts of troops also serves him exactly as he expects it to. He doesn't honestly think that his forces will take back Iraq in this manner. He does know the United States well though....or at least he thinks he does. He knows that U.S. President George W. Bush (in the tradition of Ronald Reagan) will not settle for anything less than absolute victory. And he KNOWS that this country is REPLETE with short-sighted, self-hating, weak-willed, scatter-brained LIBERALS who will relentlessly oppose this resolute Republican President. He KNOWS that by killing one of our soldiers here, another on another day, and two more the next.....the liberals in this country (especially those in the media) will trumpet these losses repeatedly, and that the result will be the erosion of resolution by the American public (let's hope he is wrong). Saddam would love nothing more than for these same simple-minded America-hating liberals to cry for removing our soldiers from Iraq and be successful..........to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. He is fully aware of this possibility. Which brings us back to the title of this post. What was their goal? Saddam knew his military would not be victorious, but if he could survive long enough and if he could use our weaknesses (liberal Americans) to erode our resolution and pull the troops out of his country, he could return to power. He could dig up these jet fighters! He could dig up his weapons of mass destruction. The possibility still exists!! Hell, he doesn't even have to wait for the liberals to whip the country into hysteria about the regular loss of soldiers if G.W. Bush doesn't win re-election in 2004, and he lasts that long. Then St. Dean can walk barefoot across the ocean, feel the pain of our troops, and withdraw our military from his country. You hear liberals blubbering over and over again "where are the weapons of mass destruction". I'm willing to guess they could have been buried somewhere in the sands of Iraq as these jets were. How likely are we to find them if that is indeed the case? If these planes are any indication of Saddam's strategy for he and his weapons of terror to survive the war (as it is of course), then the war at home is directly related to the war in Iraq. Saddam must be found and or destroyed. We must remain resolute! And President Bush must continue to express unwavering faith in our cause. All that must happen even with the albatross of liberal America and it's media hampering our progress and facilitating the goals of our enemies.
They buried what? They buried DOZENS OF FIGHTER JETS we didn't know they had, unprotected IN THE SAND in Iraq. This isn't like covering a family member in sand at the beach......these are JETS! It takes signifcantly more effort to conceal a damned air craft. Despite the ignorance involved in burying Iraqi air force jets in the desert unprotected, this tells us something of their intentions! The might have been extremely ignorant, but I doubt they thought these things were going to sprout roots and grow new planes. Saddam might be evil and he might bluster on and on about how little chance his enemies had to defeat him......but he knew better. He had faced the U.S. military before and we absolutely decimated his military. He KNEW we would win! I'm sure he wanted to inflict untold damage upon the U.S. military. The regular slaughter of small amounts of troops also serves him exactly as he expects it to. He doesn't honestly think that his forces will take back Iraq in this manner. He does know the United States well though....or at least he thinks he does. He knows that U.S. President George W. Bush (in the tradition of Ronald Reagan) will not settle for anything less than absolute victory. And he KNOWS that this country is REPLETE with short-sighted, self-hating, weak-willed, scatter-brained LIBERALS who will relentlessly oppose this resolute Republican President. He KNOWS that by killing one of our soldiers here, another on another day, and two more the next.....the liberals in this country (especially those in the media) will trumpet these losses repeatedly, and that the result will be the erosion of resolution by the American public (let's hope he is wrong). Saddam would love nothing more than for these same simple-minded America-hating liberals to cry for removing our soldiers from Iraq and be successful..........to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. He is fully aware of this possibility. Which brings us back to the title of this post. What was their goal? Saddam knew his military would not be victorious, but if he could survive long enough and if he could use our weaknesses (liberal Americans) to erode our resolution and pull the troops out of his country, he could return to power. He could dig up these jet fighters! He could dig up his weapons of mass destruction. The possibility still exists!! Hell, he doesn't even have to wait for the liberals to whip the country into hysteria about the regular loss of soldiers if G.W. Bush doesn't win re-election in 2004, and he lasts that long. Then St. Dean can walk barefoot across the ocean, feel the pain of our troops, and withdraw our military from his country. You hear liberals blubbering over and over again "where are the weapons of mass destruction". I'm willing to guess they could have been buried somewhere in the sands of Iraq as these jets were. How likely are we to find them if that is indeed the case? If these planes are any indication of Saddam's strategy for he and his weapons of terror to survive the war (as it is of course), then the war at home is directly related to the war in Iraq. Saddam must be found and or destroyed. We must remain resolute! And President Bush must continue to express unwavering faith in our cause. All that must happen even with the albatross of liberal America and it's media hampering our progress and facilitating the goals of our enemies.
Tim's Daily Notes
I've been consuming too much space with piddly little items. Ergo henceforth I shall put my little piddly stuff into a Notes post like this one.
The More I Surf... the more I encounter people who are obsessed with driving religion into basements and caves.
To Wit: Alieniloquent: Separation of Church and State
Tampatantrum: This is really very odd. And unsafe for work.
Scouting needs support.
Run for Governor : At run-for-governor.org, visitors are exhorted to jam up the recall process with more than 1,000 candidates. The reasoning: "Campaign pundits have estimated that the well-heeled candidates will spend as little as $10 million on their campaigns in the special election." Jeepers creepers - protesting an election because the candidates won't spend enough money on getting elected. And it will cost California money to run the election. Ten bucks says this same guy supports taxpayer-funded elections. The more one supports Democrats, the more one must twist one's mind to get around reality into that special world where it's Liberalism Uber Alles.
I've been consuming too much space with piddly little items. Ergo henceforth I shall put my little piddly stuff into a Notes post like this one.
The More I Surf... the more I encounter people who are obsessed with driving religion into basements and caves.
To Wit: Alieniloquent: Separation of Church and State
Tampatantrum: This is really very odd. And unsafe for work.
Scouting needs support.
Run for Governor : At run-for-governor.org, visitors are exhorted to jam up the recall process with more than 1,000 candidates. The reasoning: "Campaign pundits have estimated that the well-heeled candidates will spend as little as $10 million on their campaigns in the special election." Jeepers creepers - protesting an election because the candidates won't spend enough money on getting elected. And it will cost California money to run the election. Ten bucks says this same guy supports taxpayer-funded elections. The more one supports Democrats, the more one must twist one's mind to get around reality into that special world where it's Liberalism Uber Alles.
Cox & Forkum
Nail it. Hit it out of the park. Paint it perfectly. Got it in one. Ect., ect., ad infinitum.
I could post more of their stuff, but I don't want to eat up the bandwidth. So I'll leave you with just one, and let you go look at the others.
Enjoy!
I could post more of their stuff, but I don't want to eat up the bandwidth. So I'll leave you with just one, and let you go look at the others.
Enjoy!
And Just Because
I know that someone is going to take umbrage with my remark about Washington D.C. being the murder capital of the USA (and the reason why).
Guess what, folks? More Americans die on a daily basis in D.C. than in Iraq.
Since President Bush told the nation on May 1 that major combat operations in Iraq had ended, 52 U.S. soldiers have been killed in hostilities, according to statistics complied by Reuters on Thursday.
In the same period of time, however, 66 Americans were attacked and killed on Washington, D.C.'s mean streets.....
The jokes and one liners that could come out of this are endless.
Hat tip to Insignificant Thoughts, a misnomer if I've ever seen one.
Guess what, folks? More Americans die on a daily basis in D.C. than in Iraq.
Since President Bush told the nation on May 1 that major combat operations in Iraq had ended, 52 U.S. soldiers have been killed in hostilities, according to statistics complied by Reuters on Thursday.
In the same period of time, however, 66 Americans were attacked and killed on Washington, D.C.'s mean streets.....
The jokes and one liners that could come out of this are endless.
Hat tip to Insignificant Thoughts, a misnomer if I've ever seen one.
"Hot Towel, Sir?"
Lee over at Right-Thinking sez he thinks the warning about explosive devices or other weapons in small electronic devices leads us sooner or later to a place where one will only be able to fly when naked.
I don't know about you'all but if this is to become the reality then i will be TOTALLY behind the proposed bans on fast food, Oreos, soda, and junk food.
WARNING
that last link is from The New York Times,
so take care not to assume
anything with respect to its veracity
And let's not kid ourselves that such a policy won't create a whole new cottage industry reserving airline seats anywhere within ten rows of (unsafe for work) Carmen Electra, when she chooses to travel.
Meanwhile, residents of South Brunswick, New Jersey are trying to ban fast food restaurants from heavily-traveled Route 1, but not for the reason you might think.
Lee over at Right-Thinking sez he thinks the warning about explosive devices or other weapons in small electronic devices leads us sooner or later to a place where one will only be able to fly when naked.
I don't know about you'all but if this is to become the reality then i will be TOTALLY behind the proposed bans on fast food, Oreos, soda, and junk food.
that last link is from The New York Times,
so take care not to assume
anything with respect to its veracity
And let's not kid ourselves that such a policy won't create a whole new cottage industry reserving airline seats anywhere within ten rows of (unsafe for work) Carmen Electra, when she chooses to travel.
Meanwhile, residents of South Brunswick, New Jersey are trying to ban fast food restaurants from heavily-traveled Route 1, but not for the reason you might think.
And then there was more
I was flipping through some news when I saw this little tidbit. It seems that the NRA is blocking a lawsuit by the CATO institute. This is a lawsuit intended to restore the 2nd Amendment rights to the D.C. residents, who desparately need them. So why is the NRA trying to block it? Because they don't like the fact that A) They're not involved, and B) they don't like the reasons given.
This is why I haven't become an NRA member, folks. It seems like this organization is more interested in politics and power, rather than helping the average Joe (You and I). Is it any wonder that the city with the strictest gun bans has the highest murder rate? The residents cannot protect themselves due to nanny-state regulations and gun bans. And that's what it comes down to, folks. I've seen study after study posted, all of them claiming that by getting rid of guns, you'll reduce crime. And people fall for those studies, and ban guns, and then crime starts going up. In England, even though they have stringent gun control laws, and have been getting rid of private gun ownership, gun crime is spiraling upwards. D.C., where you flat out can't own a handgun, has the highest murder rate in the USA. The facts show those anti-gun studies to be false. Every. Single. Time.
Also, the typical groups are taking aim at the president again. And it's STILL over the SOTU address. I'm going to say something which might help the Democrats right now. And I'm saying it because I know that the Donks will never take my advice.
Drop the uranium thing. There are bigger fish to fry, and more effective methods.
I can't say that I'm happy with the way President Bush has handled domestic affairs. He's done several things that I don't agree with. But the Left, in their blind hatred of all things Bush, have cut off their nose to spite their face. Their only tacticts, it seems, are their full frontal attacks on Bush, and their screams of "I'M NOT AN EEEEEEEEEEEEVIL REPUBLICAN!"
Great message there, Donks. "He's evil and I'm not him" is NOT the way to get elected. I'm looking forward to another Bush administration, unless one of them can reverse their cranial-rectal impaction before 2004. And it's looking like that's not going to happen.
This is why I haven't become an NRA member, folks. It seems like this organization is more interested in politics and power, rather than helping the average Joe (You and I). Is it any wonder that the city with the strictest gun bans has the highest murder rate? The residents cannot protect themselves due to nanny-state regulations and gun bans. And that's what it comes down to, folks. I've seen study after study posted, all of them claiming that by getting rid of guns, you'll reduce crime. And people fall for those studies, and ban guns, and then crime starts going up. In England, even though they have stringent gun control laws, and have been getting rid of private gun ownership, gun crime is spiraling upwards. D.C., where you flat out can't own a handgun, has the highest murder rate in the USA. The facts show those anti-gun studies to be false. Every. Single. Time.
Also, the typical groups are taking aim at the president again. And it's STILL over the SOTU address. I'm going to say something which might help the Democrats right now. And I'm saying it because I know that the Donks will never take my advice.
Drop the uranium thing. There are bigger fish to fry, and more effective methods.
I can't say that I'm happy with the way President Bush has handled domestic affairs. He's done several things that I don't agree with. But the Left, in their blind hatred of all things Bush, have cut off their nose to spite their face. Their only tacticts, it seems, are their full frontal attacks on Bush, and their screams of "I'M NOT AN EEEEEEEEEEEEVIL REPUBLICAN!"
Great message there, Donks. "He's evil and I'm not him" is NOT the way to get elected. I'm looking forward to another Bush administration, unless one of them can reverse their cranial-rectal impaction before 2004. And it's looking like that's not going to happen.
News from yesterday
Some good, some sad.....
Let's get the sad news out of the way. Courtesy of Lee at Right Thinking, we've learned that a Jim Beam warehouse burned down yesterday. No jokes please.... it's too painfull.
However, on a rather nice note, we've found some unexpected support from the Middle East.
THE grandson of the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the cleric who launched an anti-American Islamic revolution in Iran that sparked 25 years of unrest in the Muslim world, has condemned his country’s clerical regime and suggested military intervention by the United States as a possible path to liberation.
Dominos, my friends. Just think of dominos.
Mr Khomeini - in Iraq on a religious pilgrimage to Shiite holy sites in Najaf, Karbala and Baghdad - also praised the US. takeover of Iraq, saying American forces were seen by Iraqis as liberators rather than occupiers.
"I see day-by-day that the country is on the path to improvement," he said. "I see that there’s security; that the people are happy; that they’ve been released from suffering."
Now if only the Dimmy Donk Nine would listen to him.
Let's get the sad news out of the way. Courtesy of Lee at Right Thinking, we've learned that a Jim Beam warehouse burned down yesterday. No jokes please.... it's too painfull.
However, on a rather nice note, we've found some unexpected support from the Middle East.
THE grandson of the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the cleric who launched an anti-American Islamic revolution in Iran that sparked 25 years of unrest in the Muslim world, has condemned his country’s clerical regime and suggested military intervention by the United States as a possible path to liberation.
Dominos, my friends. Just think of dominos.
Mr Khomeini - in Iraq on a religious pilgrimage to Shiite holy sites in Najaf, Karbala and Baghdad - also praised the US. takeover of Iraq, saying American forces were seen by Iraqis as liberators rather than occupiers.
"I see day-by-day that the country is on the path to improvement," he said. "I see that there’s security; that the people are happy; that they’ve been released from suffering."
Now if only the Dimmy Donk Nine would listen to him.
Affirmative action for hurricanes...
Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) is not happy. You see, racism is everywhere in our society, especially in the naming of Tropical Storms. Yes, that's right Tropical Storms. There are too many Anglo, Hispanic, and French names, and not enough "black" names like Lakeisha and Antwon.
Scroll down for the story from thehill.com
“All racial groups should be represented,” said Lee.
I think that she should propose a quota system.
Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) is not happy. You see, racism is everywhere in our society, especially in the naming of Tropical Storms. Yes, that's right Tropical Storms. There are too many Anglo, Hispanic, and French names, and not enough "black" names like Lakeisha and Antwon.
Scroll down for the story from thehill.com
“All racial groups should be represented,” said Lee.
I think that she should propose a quota system.
Monday, August 04, 2003
Uhhhhhhhhhhhhh............
There's only one way the war against Iraq (news - web sites) could have gone worse: if Bush hadn't been lying about Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)'s nuclear program. But short of a Manhattan mushroom cloud, it's hard to imagine a darker scenario than the one we're in. No WMDs. No Saddam. Millions of new enemies. Billions in new debt. And an estimated 35,000 guerillas exacting a terrible tithe--one dead American soldier for every day we stay where we don't belong.
BRING HOME THE TROOPS
There's only one way the war against Iraq (news - web sites) could have gone worse: if Bush hadn't been lying about Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)'s nuclear program. But short of a Manhattan mushroom cloud, it's hard to imagine a darker scenario than the one we're in. No WMDs. No Saddam. Millions of new enemies. Billions in new debt. And an estimated 35,000 guerillas exacting a terrible tithe--one dead American soldier for every day we stay where we don't belong.
BRING HOME THE TROOPS
The Watcher's Council
This is such a cool idea, indicative of the way that the Internet in a large sense and blogs in a smaller sense are really revolutionizing community.
Watcher of Weasels
This is such a cool idea, indicative of the way that the Internet in a large sense and blogs in a smaller sense are really revolutionizing community.
Watcher of Weasels
Miscellaneous Stuff
I was wondering what happened to the New York City Councilman shooting. Now I know.
A strange illness is afflicting servicemen in Iraq.
They banned smoking in New York State. Business in Massachusetts, New Jersey and Pennsylvania is booming.
I was wondering what happened to the New York City Councilman shooting. Now I know.
A strange illness is afflicting servicemen in Iraq.
They banned smoking in New York State. Business in Massachusetts, New Jersey and Pennsylvania is booming.
St. Dean the liberal "conservative".
As more and more people wake up from the spin liberals in the media have been passing off as the dissemination of information, the liberal distortion machine reacts by painting themselves as something they are not. Case in point. St. Dean the every-taxing is being hailed as a "fiscal conservative"..............by liberals.
"Compare that to the Cato Institute’s “Fiscal Policy Report Card on America’s Governors: 2002,” by Stephen Moore and Stephen Slivinski. They gave him a “D.” An excerpt from their evaluation of his tenure in Montpelier: "
Howard Dean, Vermont’s articulate and telegenic governor since 1991, is one of America’s most iconoclastic politicians. On many issues, he is as pro–government intervention as any governor. He supports state-funded universal health care, government-subsidized child care (even for upper-income families), a higher minimum wage, liberal family leave legislation, and taxpayer-financed campaigns. Dean has raised many taxes over the past decade, including the gas tax, the sales tax, the corporate income tax, the cigarette tax, and the property tax. But he also claims to be “Vermont’s most fiscally conservative governor in decades.” He has been receptive to smaller government in a few areas. In his first three terms as governor, state spending rose by less than personal income growth. In 1999, he sought and won support for an across-the-board income tax cut to make the state more competitive. He was dead right on that score: Vermont has one of the highest income taxes in the nation and loses jobs and businesses to its income tax-free neighbor, New Hampshire. He also has also supported electricity deregulation and some limited school choice initiatives for high school students.
By far the most contentious decision of his administration was to back Act 60, a controversial Robin Hood–like school equity financing scheme. Act 60 guarantees $5,000 per student for every school district and delivers that guarantee by soaking up funds from some communities and redistributing dollars to poorer ones. Act 60 has unleashed a taxpayer revolt across the state. Dean has taken the brunt of the anger and nearly lost reelection in 1998 as a result. Vermonters want local control back and their property tax dollars spent on their own kids’ schools. Vermont has been hit hard by the recession, and Dean’s main response has been higher taxes. He raised the cigarette tax by 50 cents a pack and then decoupled the state income tax from the federal tax, so that Vermont would not have to reduce taxes in response to President Bush’s federal tax relief.
After 12 years of Dean’s so-called “fiscal conservatism,” Vermont remains one of the highest taxing and spending states. Dean is said to be a potential Democratic presidential nominee and is a frequent guest on national TV talk shows, usually espousing a more activist government.
For the Cato report in full, in PDF format
"Telegenic"? I have no desire to see his mug in the media. "Articulate"? I guess if you consider the blathering hate-filled ant-Bush rhetoric he pukes out for cameras to be "articulate".......sure. And it's hyperbole to call him "iconoclastic".
Golly gee whiz......ya mean ya can't be for huge entitlement programs and be "fiscally conservative"? ;)
The Valiant Elephant
As more and more people wake up from the spin liberals in the media have been passing off as the dissemination of information, the liberal distortion machine reacts by painting themselves as something they are not. Case in point. St. Dean the every-taxing is being hailed as a "fiscal conservative"..............by liberals.
"Compare that to the Cato Institute’s “Fiscal Policy Report Card on America’s Governors: 2002,” by Stephen Moore and Stephen Slivinski. They gave him a “D.” An excerpt from their evaluation of his tenure in Montpelier: "
Howard Dean, Vermont’s articulate and telegenic governor since 1991, is one of America’s most iconoclastic politicians. On many issues, he is as pro–government intervention as any governor. He supports state-funded universal health care, government-subsidized child care (even for upper-income families), a higher minimum wage, liberal family leave legislation, and taxpayer-financed campaigns. Dean has raised many taxes over the past decade, including the gas tax, the sales tax, the corporate income tax, the cigarette tax, and the property tax. But he also claims to be “Vermont’s most fiscally conservative governor in decades.” He has been receptive to smaller government in a few areas. In his first three terms as governor, state spending rose by less than personal income growth. In 1999, he sought and won support for an across-the-board income tax cut to make the state more competitive. He was dead right on that score: Vermont has one of the highest income taxes in the nation and loses jobs and businesses to its income tax-free neighbor, New Hampshire. He also has also supported electricity deregulation and some limited school choice initiatives for high school students.
By far the most contentious decision of his administration was to back Act 60, a controversial Robin Hood–like school equity financing scheme. Act 60 guarantees $5,000 per student for every school district and delivers that guarantee by soaking up funds from some communities and redistributing dollars to poorer ones. Act 60 has unleashed a taxpayer revolt across the state. Dean has taken the brunt of the anger and nearly lost reelection in 1998 as a result. Vermonters want local control back and their property tax dollars spent on their own kids’ schools. Vermont has been hit hard by the recession, and Dean’s main response has been higher taxes. He raised the cigarette tax by 50 cents a pack and then decoupled the state income tax from the federal tax, so that Vermont would not have to reduce taxes in response to President Bush’s federal tax relief.
After 12 years of Dean’s so-called “fiscal conservatism,” Vermont remains one of the highest taxing and spending states. Dean is said to be a potential Democratic presidential nominee and is a frequent guest on national TV talk shows, usually espousing a more activist government.
For the Cato report in full, in PDF format
"Telegenic"? I have no desire to see his mug in the media. "Articulate"? I guess if you consider the blathering hate-filled ant-Bush rhetoric he pukes out for cameras to be "articulate".......sure. And it's hyperbole to call him "iconoclastic".
Golly gee whiz......ya mean ya can't be for huge entitlement programs and be "fiscally conservative"? ;)
The Valiant Elephant
Congressman blames liberals, Bush's open-door policy for immigration crisis
More than 33.1 million immigrants live in the United States, a number unprecedented in U.S. history. Poverty rates for immigrants and their U.S.-born children are two-thirds higher than for native-born Americans and their children and account for approximately 25 percent of those now living in poverty in this country. Twenty-four of the southernmost U.S. states have accrued almost $1 billion in unpaid medical care – all attributed to illegal immigration.
WorldNetDaily: 'Cult of multiculturalism' vs. U.S. sovereignty
More than 33.1 million immigrants live in the United States, a number unprecedented in U.S. history. Poverty rates for immigrants and their U.S.-born children are two-thirds higher than for native-born Americans and their children and account for approximately 25 percent of those now living in poverty in this country. Twenty-four of the southernmost U.S. states have accrued almost $1 billion in unpaid medical care – all attributed to illegal immigration.
WorldNetDaily: 'Cult of multiculturalism' vs. U.S. sovereignty
Is Iraq a Honey Pot?
We have heard it said that the Bush Administration might be using Iraq as a sort of "honey pot" to attract as many Islam Fundamentalists into a single country as is possible, with the intent of immolating them. This is consistent with President Bush's "Bring 'Em On" statement that caused so much self-righteous indignation among the American Left.
We know that American soldiers in Iraq often used loudspeakers to question the manliness of Iraqi soldiers who responded by leaving their bunkers and holes to charge those who questioned their sexuality. Perhaps President Bush was goading the Islamic extreme when he said what he did.
A good friend of mine (let's call him "Bill") thought we would lose the war - he theorized that Iraq was luring American forces into an over-extended position (remember the stretched-thin supply lines?) and then, my friend posited, Iraqi forces would attack from the North, Iran from the East, Syria from the West, and maybe even the Saudis from the South. Bill's negativity was irking my uber-jingo brain, so I replied:
"Good - then we'll be able to kill all of those dirty motherfuckers in one engagement".
Flippant? Well, yeah. But is that kinda sorta what is happening on (albeit) a smaller and more informal (read: Stateless) scale? Dig:
NOTE: There is some neat stuff here where Glenn Reynolds wonders aloud if the Bush Administration is holding back on presenting their finds until election time next year. Like the hetero Iraqi soldiers who ran to their deaths because they had been called homosexual, maybe the Left are running to their political deaths because there's no evidence of WMD or Al Qaeda in Iraq - errrrrr, yet.
Chew, and wonder.
Update: Content Wire speaks to creating a honey pot to attract hackers, thereby luring them away from your really valuable hardware, software, and data. The Justice Department says that's a crime. This guy says that initial "target of opportunity" strike in Baghdad may have been a honey pot.
We have heard it said that the Bush Administration might be using Iraq as a sort of "honey pot" to attract as many Islam Fundamentalists into a single country as is possible, with the intent of immolating them. This is consistent with President Bush's "Bring 'Em On" statement that caused so much self-righteous indignation among the American Left.
We know that American soldiers in Iraq often used loudspeakers to question the manliness of Iraqi soldiers who responded by leaving their bunkers and holes to charge those who questioned their sexuality. Perhaps President Bush was goading the Islamic extreme when he said what he did.
A good friend of mine (let's call him "Bill") thought we would lose the war - he theorized that Iraq was luring American forces into an over-extended position (remember the stretched-thin supply lines?) and then, my friend posited, Iraqi forces would attack from the North, Iran from the East, Syria from the West, and maybe even the Saudis from the South. Bill's negativity was irking my uber-jingo brain, so I replied:
"Good - then we'll be able to kill all of those dirty motherfuckers in one engagement".
Flippant? Well, yeah. But is that kinda sorta what is happening on (albeit) a smaller and more informal (read: Stateless) scale? Dig:
Members of groups linked to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network may have taken part in attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq, a British diplomatic source said on Friday.
The source said that while the attacks were largely the work of Iraqis loyal to deposed dictator Saddam Hussein "there is some evidence that they've been joined by groups that are loosely connected with the al Qaeda network."
Al Qaeda Link to Attacks in Iraq -UK Source (washingtonpost.com)
NOTE: There is some neat stuff here where Glenn Reynolds wonders aloud if the Bush Administration is holding back on presenting their finds until election time next year. Like the hetero Iraqi soldiers who ran to their deaths because they had been called homosexual, maybe the Left are running to their political deaths because there's no evidence of WMD or Al Qaeda in Iraq - errrrrr, yet.
Chew, and wonder.
Update: Content Wire speaks to creating a honey pot to attract hackers, thereby luring them away from your really valuable hardware, software, and data. The Justice Department says that's a crime. This guy says that initial "target of opportunity" strike in Baghdad may have been a honey pot.
Did Loyola University Chicago lose its innocence to the RIAA?
Northwestern University law professor Anthony D'Amato has issued a strong caution to universities, calling on them to consider students' privacy before shipping them off to the RIAA sponsored legal gulag.
The Register
Northwestern University law professor Anthony D'Amato has issued a strong caution to universities, calling on them to consider students' privacy before shipping them off to the RIAA sponsored legal gulag.
The Register
QUESTION OF THE DAY:
Would the far-left rather have a nuclear bomb go off in an American city or have W reelected for another term?
My guess is that some of them would take the nuke so long as it is NIMBY....
OpinionJournal - Featured Article: "We are not eager to see force used on the Korean peninsula. It is better to resolve this crisis without war. However, unless China succeeds in ending North Korea's nuclear weapons development--and we believe this will require a change in regime--Americans will be left with the threat to our existence described by Secretary Perry when he recently said that the North Korean nuclear program 'poses an imminent danger of nuclear weapons being detonated in American cities.'"
Your comments are invited...
....and don't insult my intelligence by saying a Democrat President would take care of North Korea. A Democrat President already had the opportunity and simply deferred payment on the North Korean nuke problem and not one of the 9 dwarves (or however many there are at this point), aside from possibly Lieberman, could be trusted by a reasonable person to negotiate the problem from a position of strength.
Would the far-left rather have a nuclear bomb go off in an American city or have W reelected for another term?
My guess is that some of them would take the nuke so long as it is NIMBY....
OpinionJournal - Featured Article: "We are not eager to see force used on the Korean peninsula. It is better to resolve this crisis without war. However, unless China succeeds in ending North Korea's nuclear weapons development--and we believe this will require a change in regime--Americans will be left with the threat to our existence described by Secretary Perry when he recently said that the North Korean nuclear program 'poses an imminent danger of nuclear weapons being detonated in American cities.'"
Your comments are invited...
....and don't insult my intelligence by saying a Democrat President would take care of North Korea. A Democrat President already had the opportunity and simply deferred payment on the North Korean nuke problem and not one of the 9 dwarves (or however many there are at this point), aside from possibly Lieberman, could be trusted by a reasonable person to negotiate the problem from a position of strength.
Sunday, August 03, 2003
Things that make ya go "Hmmmmm"
Found while on the blog rounds: A nifty little study about charitable contributions.
Just something to make you think, is all.......
Just something to make you think, is all.......
NGO - Notoriously Greedy Offal
Yet another reason for the US to tell the UN to insert a running chainsaw into their nether regions...
It’’s not all monotonous or pointless in Kabul; at one French NGO housed in a stunning antique-laden chalet, I’’ve devoured a seven-course meal prepared by a 4 star chef. Then there’’s always the sumptuous UN House, where one can take a dip, mingle poolside among scandalous bikinis and dowse dehydration with inspired cocktails fashioned by our languid Euro masters. Unfortunately, since "American UN employee" is an oxymoron, our one attempt to storm the formidable barricades is a spectacular failure. We’’re rudely turned away, despite flashing $20 bills to the Afghan UN security. My companion, a fierce Pushtoon-American licensed to pack a very visible Glock 19, glances back at the sunbathers as we’’re escorted out: ““We’’ve paid for all this with our taxes, you bastards!”” One of the Pushto guard’’s shrugs his shoulderssympathetically, muttering an apology that suggests ““someday this will all be ours again.”” For all the heroic American efforts in Afghanistan, truly and deeply appreciated by the indigenous population, we’’re still treated as unwanted nuisances by the predominantly European NGO residents.
And there's more here (not as infuriating) and there's a wonderfull quote from here:
The BBC is a true world service; that is, there is not a region of the planet where the BBC is without a fierce opinion about how things are and should be. The British may have been drummed unceremoniously out of Afghanistan and the colonies in other centuries, but they are returned with a vengeance and an attitude no less condescending or patronizing
The UN shows with every passing day that it is nothing but a powerhungry pack of dicators and thugs, a collection of autocrats and money-grubbing parasites. In short, they disgust me. No wonder France is in love with that group. They get to throw their weight around, suck money off of successful countries, and attempt to make themselves relevant to the rest of the world!
Kick them out and reclaim that space on the Hudson, I say!
It’’s not all monotonous or pointless in Kabul; at one French NGO housed in a stunning antique-laden chalet, I’’ve devoured a seven-course meal prepared by a 4 star chef. Then there’’s always the sumptuous UN House, where one can take a dip, mingle poolside among scandalous bikinis and dowse dehydration with inspired cocktails fashioned by our languid Euro masters. Unfortunately, since "American UN employee" is an oxymoron, our one attempt to storm the formidable barricades is a spectacular failure. We’’re rudely turned away, despite flashing $20 bills to the Afghan UN security. My companion, a fierce Pushtoon-American licensed to pack a very visible Glock 19, glances back at the sunbathers as we’’re escorted out: ““We’’ve paid for all this with our taxes, you bastards!”” One of the Pushto guard’’s shrugs his shoulderssympathetically, muttering an apology that suggests ““someday this will all be ours again.”” For all the heroic American efforts in Afghanistan, truly and deeply appreciated by the indigenous population, we’’re still treated as unwanted nuisances by the predominantly European NGO residents.
And there's more here (not as infuriating) and there's a wonderfull quote from here:
The BBC is a true world service; that is, there is not a region of the planet where the BBC is without a fierce opinion about how things are and should be. The British may have been drummed unceremoniously out of Afghanistan and the colonies in other centuries, but they are returned with a vengeance and an attitude no less condescending or patronizing
The UN shows with every passing day that it is nothing but a powerhungry pack of dicators and thugs, a collection of autocrats and money-grubbing parasites. In short, they disgust me. No wonder France is in love with that group. They get to throw their weight around, suck money off of successful countries, and attempt to make themselves relevant to the rest of the world!
Kick them out and reclaim that space on the Hudson, I say!
Saturday, August 02, 2003
The New Democrats
No, no, no no no! Not those New Democrats!
These New Democrats - Yellowcake Democrats.
No, no, no no no! Not those New Democrats!
These New Democrats - Yellowcake Democrats.
Getting Incendiary With It At the NAACP
"They preach racial neutrality and practice racial division. Their idea of reparations is to give war criminal Jefferson Davis a pardon. Their idea of equal rights is the American flag and Confederate swastika flying side by side."
- Juilan Bond, Chairman of the NAACP
PittsburghLIVE.com - The ugly truth of black hypocrisy
"They preach racial neutrality and practice racial division. Their idea of reparations is to give war criminal Jefferson Davis a pardon. Their idea of equal rights is the American flag and Confederate swastika flying side by side."
- Juilan Bond, Chairman of the NAACP
PittsburghLIVE.com - The ugly truth of black hypocrisy
Friday, August 01, 2003
QUESTION OF THE DAY:
Do you ever wonder why the Lefties, who railed against the US for having a tepid alliance with Saddam during his war against the Khomenites and never hesitated to assert the spurious notion that we armed Saddam with chemical and biological weapons, never similarly condemn the former Soviet Union for the aid and support given to their former client state, North Korea?
Do you ever wonder why the Lefties, who railed against the US for having a tepid alliance with Saddam during his war against the Khomenites and never hesitated to assert the spurious notion that we armed Saddam with chemical and biological weapons, never similarly condemn the former Soviet Union for the aid and support given to their former client state, North Korea?
Uhhhhhh, The BBC
Heard about those stories from the BBC that purport to demonstrate that Tony Blair lied?
Well, it looks like maybe those reports are, ummm, errrrrrrrrr, well, lies.
Heard about those stories from the BBC that purport to demonstrate that Tony Blair lied?
Well, it looks like maybe those reports are, ummm, errrrrrrrrr, well, lies.
The Stance on Iraq
Oh, dear!
What Liberals used to say about Iraq.
Also: I have updated The Resources with a section for Media Bias (Thanks, TVE).
Oh, dear!
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002
"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002
What Liberals used to say about Iraq.
Also: I have updated The Resources with a section for Media Bias (Thanks, TVE).
Future Rather Strives to Match the Original's Biased Reporting
It seems John Roberts wants to be just like his "Rather" Biased C.B.S. comrade.*
Roberts reported that he'd asked G.W. a question and that the he'd tried to dodge his penetrating inquiry. "When asked by this reporter why he took the world to war on what critics say was shaky evidence, Mr. Bush promptly changed the subject."
To prove the point, Roberts played a short, 28-word clip that was taken from the 300+ words the president used to reply to his question.
GEORGE W. BUSH: ...people of the Middle East. A free Iraq will show what is possible in a world that needs freedom, in a part of the world that needs freedom.
Based on these 28 words where Bush was not talking about weapons of mass destruction, Roberts proclaimed, "It was a clear example of how the White House is shifting the goalposts on Iraq: from weapons as a rationale for war to liberating the Iraqi people to now promoting global security." But that was far from the truth. Contrary to Roberts's pronoucement that the president had "promptly changed the subject," Bush did address his query.
Here is the exchange:
Q Thank you, Mr. President. Building sort of on that idea, it's impossible to deny that the world is a better place in the region, certainly a better place without Saddam Hussein. But there's a sense here in this country, and a feeling around the world, that the U.S. has lost credibility by building the case for Iraq upon sometimes flimsy or, some people have complained, non-existent evidence. And I'm just wondering, sir, why did you choose to take the world to war in that way?
THE PRESIDENT: You know, look, in my line of work, it's always best to produce results. And I understand that. The -- for a while the questions were, could you conceivably achieve a military victory in Iraq? You know, the dust storms have slowed you down. And I was a patient man because I realized that we would be successful in achieving our military objective.
Now, of course, the question is, will Iraq ever be free, and will it be peaceful? And I believe it will. I remind some of my friends that it took us a while to go from the Articles of Confederation to the United States Constitution. Even our own experiment with democracy didn't happen overnight. I never have expected Thomas Jefferson to emerge in Iraq in a 90-day period.
And so, this is going to take time. And the world will see what I mean when I say, a free Iraq will help peace in the Middle East, and a free Iraq will be important for changing the attitudes of the people in the Middle East. A free Iraq will show what is possible in a world that needs freedom, in a part of the world that needs freedom.
Let me finish for a minute, John, please. Just getting warmed up. I'm kind of finding my feet. (Laughter.)
Saddam Hussein was a threat. The United Nations viewed him as a threat. That's why they passed 12 resolutions. Predecessors of mine viewed him as a threat. We gathered a lot of intelligence. That intelligence was good, sound intelligence on which I made a decision.
And in order to placate the critics and the cynics about intentions of the United States, we need to produce evidence. And I fully understand that. And I'm confident that our search will yield that which I strongly believe, that Saddam had a weapons program. I want to remind you, he actually used his weapons program on his own people at one point in time, which is pretty tangible evidence. But I'm confident history will prove the decision we made to be the right decision.
Hold on for a second. You're through. John.
So Bush did not try to change the subject and avoid charges of "shaky evidence." At the end of the president's explanation, Roberts demanded another question, even though Bush had already given him more than 300 words and addressed his complaint. The president silenced him: "Hold on for a second. You're through."
It must have boiled Roberts blood to be told he was through with his slanted questioning. >:D
Entire news conference
Examples of bias at C.B.S. are abundant at the ratherbiased.com ....check it out!
What liberal media? OH! THAT LIBERAL MEDIA!
* I would have preferred a link to the story that didn't expire. This news item was posted to the website on 2003-08-01 03:02:40 ET for future reference.
The Valiant Elephant
It seems John Roberts wants to be just like his "Rather" Biased C.B.S. comrade.*
Roberts reported that he'd asked G.W. a question and that the he'd tried to dodge his penetrating inquiry. "When asked by this reporter why he took the world to war on what critics say was shaky evidence, Mr. Bush promptly changed the subject."
To prove the point, Roberts played a short, 28-word clip that was taken from the 300+ words the president used to reply to his question.
GEORGE W. BUSH: ...people of the Middle East. A free Iraq will show what is possible in a world that needs freedom, in a part of the world that needs freedom.
Based on these 28 words where Bush was not talking about weapons of mass destruction, Roberts proclaimed, "It was a clear example of how the White House is shifting the goalposts on Iraq: from weapons as a rationale for war to liberating the Iraqi people to now promoting global security." But that was far from the truth. Contrary to Roberts's pronoucement that the president had "promptly changed the subject," Bush did address his query.
Here is the exchange:
Q Thank you, Mr. President. Building sort of on that idea, it's impossible to deny that the world is a better place in the region, certainly a better place without Saddam Hussein. But there's a sense here in this country, and a feeling around the world, that the U.S. has lost credibility by building the case for Iraq upon sometimes flimsy or, some people have complained, non-existent evidence. And I'm just wondering, sir, why did you choose to take the world to war in that way?
THE PRESIDENT: You know, look, in my line of work, it's always best to produce results. And I understand that. The -- for a while the questions were, could you conceivably achieve a military victory in Iraq? You know, the dust storms have slowed you down. And I was a patient man because I realized that we would be successful in achieving our military objective.
Now, of course, the question is, will Iraq ever be free, and will it be peaceful? And I believe it will. I remind some of my friends that it took us a while to go from the Articles of Confederation to the United States Constitution. Even our own experiment with democracy didn't happen overnight. I never have expected Thomas Jefferson to emerge in Iraq in a 90-day period.
And so, this is going to take time. And the world will see what I mean when I say, a free Iraq will help peace in the Middle East, and a free Iraq will be important for changing the attitudes of the people in the Middle East. A free Iraq will show what is possible in a world that needs freedom, in a part of the world that needs freedom.
Let me finish for a minute, John, please. Just getting warmed up. I'm kind of finding my feet. (Laughter.)
Saddam Hussein was a threat. The United Nations viewed him as a threat. That's why they passed 12 resolutions. Predecessors of mine viewed him as a threat. We gathered a lot of intelligence. That intelligence was good, sound intelligence on which I made a decision.
And in order to placate the critics and the cynics about intentions of the United States, we need to produce evidence. And I fully understand that. And I'm confident that our search will yield that which I strongly believe, that Saddam had a weapons program. I want to remind you, he actually used his weapons program on his own people at one point in time, which is pretty tangible evidence. But I'm confident history will prove the decision we made to be the right decision.
Hold on for a second. You're through. John.
So Bush did not try to change the subject and avoid charges of "shaky evidence." At the end of the president's explanation, Roberts demanded another question, even though Bush had already given him more than 300 words and addressed his complaint. The president silenced him: "Hold on for a second. You're through."
It must have boiled Roberts blood to be told he was through with his slanted questioning. >:D
Entire news conference
Examples of bias at C.B.S. are abundant at the ratherbiased.com ....check it out!
What liberal media? OH! THAT LIBERAL MEDIA!
* I would have preferred a link to the story that didn't expire. This news item was posted to the website on 2003-08-01 03:02:40 ET for future reference.
The Valiant Elephant
Hahahahahahahaaa!
The Onion | Gigli Focus Groups Demand New Ending In Which Both Affleck And Lopez Die
Thanks be to Kyle.
The Onion | Gigli Focus Groups Demand New Ending In Which Both Affleck And Lopez Die
Thanks be to Kyle.
So you say you disdain Reuters???
"The Reuters news group and one of its US subsidiaries is being sued for racial discrimination over allegations that a 'white, public school attitude' tolerated and encouraged a racist environment in which black employees were abused and persecuted."
Reuters accused of widespread racism in US class-action lawsuit
via Instapundit
"The Reuters news group and one of its US subsidiaries is being sued for racial discrimination over allegations that a 'white, public school attitude' tolerated and encouraged a racist environment in which black employees were abused and persecuted."
Reuters accused of widespread racism in US class-action lawsuit
via Instapundit
Reading the Minds of the Unemployed
How's this for a spot of sleight of hand?
"...much of decline's July represented the exodus of 470,000 discouraged people who abandoned job searches because they believed no jobs were available."
Yahoo! News - Unemployment Rate Declines 6.2 Percent
How's this for a spot of sleight of hand?
"...much of decline's July represented the exodus of 470,000 discouraged people who abandoned job searches because they believed no jobs were available."
Yahoo! News - Unemployment Rate Declines 6.2 Percent
A clear piece about not only the liberal bias in the media but the general hostility to religion by the mainstream press. For those irrational leftists who insist there is no left-wing bias in the mainstream press, you must answer how it is that the only positive press about religious nuns occurs when they take an extreme left-wing position? Religious nuns who much more quietly eschew abortion are just lucky to escape the label of 'extremist.' It's simply amazing how callous the automatons on the left are. We have reached the point where those who honestly believe they are saving lives are called, "extremists." Talk about spiritual bankruptcy. But I digress....
OpinionJournal - Taste
OpinionJournal - Taste
Thursday, July 31, 2003
Tony Blankley makes a great point.
Whose side are you on? - The Washington Times: Editorials/OP-ED: "Democratic Sen. Lieberman has said that Democrats Howard Dean, Richard Gephardt and John Kerry are sending a message that they are 'not prepared to use our military strength to protect our security and the cause of freedom.' Would it be unfair for a fearless Washington press corps to ask those men, 'Whose side are you on?' "
It really is time for those of us who are serious about maintaining the American way of life to ask those who work assiduously to undermine our efforts in Iraq: "Whose side are you on?"
While none of the Jackals in the Democratic party have demanded that we pull the troops out of Iraq, they would like the American people to believe we are there on false pretenses. If they had their wish, that a substantial majority here believed such things, would it be even conceivable that W could keep the troops there? How could a political leader keep over 150,000 troops in hostile territory taking casualties everyday if 75% of the country believed we were fooled into going there in the first place? The point is that even though the Dems do not have to call for us to retreat from Iraq, the implications of their irresponsible attacks are clear.
Retreating from Iraq would be worse than never ousting Saddam in the first place. I don't believe it is hyperbole to say that if we retreated now the end of the 'American Century' would be near. Our credibility would be worse than the Dems falsely claim it is now. The terrorists would be more empowered than if they had committed a dozen 9/11s. The global madmen of the world would plunge forward their nuclear programs without caution. The serene notion that freedom is slowly winning the global battle against tyranny by proving it is more powerful and secure would evaporate to reveal a deep sense of doom and fatalism.
This is what would happen if most in the party of the Apocalypse won over the American people with their ideas on the war.
It is indeed time to ask Dean, Kucinich, McAuliffe, and Kerry, whose side are you on?
Whose side are you on? - The Washington Times: Editorials/OP-ED: "Democratic Sen. Lieberman has said that Democrats Howard Dean, Richard Gephardt and John Kerry are sending a message that they are 'not prepared to use our military strength to protect our security and the cause of freedom.' Would it be unfair for a fearless Washington press corps to ask those men, 'Whose side are you on?' "
It really is time for those of us who are serious about maintaining the American way of life to ask those who work assiduously to undermine our efforts in Iraq: "Whose side are you on?"
While none of the Jackals in the Democratic party have demanded that we pull the troops out of Iraq, they would like the American people to believe we are there on false pretenses. If they had their wish, that a substantial majority here believed such things, would it be even conceivable that W could keep the troops there? How could a political leader keep over 150,000 troops in hostile territory taking casualties everyday if 75% of the country believed we were fooled into going there in the first place? The point is that even though the Dems do not have to call for us to retreat from Iraq, the implications of their irresponsible attacks are clear.
Retreating from Iraq would be worse than never ousting Saddam in the first place. I don't believe it is hyperbole to say that if we retreated now the end of the 'American Century' would be near. Our credibility would be worse than the Dems falsely claim it is now. The terrorists would be more empowered than if they had committed a dozen 9/11s. The global madmen of the world would plunge forward their nuclear programs without caution. The serene notion that freedom is slowly winning the global battle against tyranny by proving it is more powerful and secure would evaporate to reveal a deep sense of doom and fatalism.
This is what would happen if most in the party of the Apocalypse won over the American people with their ideas on the war.
It is indeed time to ask Dean, Kucinich, McAuliffe, and Kerry, whose side are you on?
Wednesday, July 30, 2003
Is there a drug that can cure Liberals of the "Berlin Wall Syndrome"?
Liberals have always suffered from a mental disorder that I call "Berlin Wall Syndrome". I have named it this, because during all of the years that the Berlin Wall was standing, Liberals never took it as a sign that Communist Europe was a place that you might not want to live, or that Communism was a force worth fighting. The suffering and oppression that victims of Communist tyranny had to live under was so great, that their masters had to erect a wall to keep them imprisoned. Lord only knows how many people risked and/or lost their lives trying to escape to The West, and freedom.
I keep waiting for the day when Liberal revisionist historians will write that the Berlin Wall was built to keep people out, not in. These are people who think that the most evil men of the 20th Century have been:
1. Adolf Hitler
2. Ronald Reagan
3. George W. Bush
Which brings us next to Cuba, and its universal health care system. Liberals have always loved Cuba, and by God, they absolutely love that health care system. For example, during the Elian Gonzales saga, Michael Moore wrote this Marx-inspired piece about how Elian would be so much better off in Cuba, thanks in large part to their wonderful health care system, and how his mother "kidnapped" him so that she could make more money. Liberals just can't get enough of government health care. Jimmy Carter, who has Pathological Dictator Appeasement Disorder, can't get enough of Fidel Castro, period.
I mention this, because last week I saw this story , which proves that the "Berlin Wall Syndrome" is still alive and well amongst Liberals. Some Cuban refugees were so desperate to escape the misery and oppression of Cuba, that they fashioned a makeshift raft out of a '51 Chevy and attempted to float to Miami. Yes, that's right, a '51 Chevy, mounted on a bunch of empty 55-gallon drums. It's amazing how hard people will try to escape from Jimmy Carter's favorite vacation spots.
They came close to getting to America, but they failed, and were turned back. It proves, once again, the desperate measures that Cubans will take to risk their lives and escape to America, and it proves, once again, who the real oppressors of the world are. If people risk their lives time-and-time again so that they can escape from one country to another, it says an awful lot about the governments and lifestyles of those two countries. When we defeat a sadistic, murderous tyrant, we are not the liberators, not the oppressors. Don't expect Liberals to figue that out any time soon.
Liberals have always suffered from a mental disorder that I call "Berlin Wall Syndrome". I have named it this, because during all of the years that the Berlin Wall was standing, Liberals never took it as a sign that Communist Europe was a place that you might not want to live, or that Communism was a force worth fighting. The suffering and oppression that victims of Communist tyranny had to live under was so great, that their masters had to erect a wall to keep them imprisoned. Lord only knows how many people risked and/or lost their lives trying to escape to The West, and freedom.
I keep waiting for the day when Liberal revisionist historians will write that the Berlin Wall was built to keep people out, not in. These are people who think that the most evil men of the 20th Century have been:
1. Adolf Hitler
2. Ronald Reagan
3. George W. Bush
Which brings us next to Cuba, and its universal health care system. Liberals have always loved Cuba, and by God, they absolutely love that health care system. For example, during the Elian Gonzales saga, Michael Moore wrote this Marx-inspired piece about how Elian would be so much better off in Cuba, thanks in large part to their wonderful health care system, and how his mother "kidnapped" him so that she could make more money. Liberals just can't get enough of government health care. Jimmy Carter, who has Pathological Dictator Appeasement Disorder, can't get enough of Fidel Castro, period.
I mention this, because last week I saw this story , which proves that the "Berlin Wall Syndrome" is still alive and well amongst Liberals. Some Cuban refugees were so desperate to escape the misery and oppression of Cuba, that they fashioned a makeshift raft out of a '51 Chevy and attempted to float to Miami. Yes, that's right, a '51 Chevy, mounted on a bunch of empty 55-gallon drums. It's amazing how hard people will try to escape from Jimmy Carter's favorite vacation spots.
They came close to getting to America, but they failed, and were turned back. It proves, once again, the desperate measures that Cubans will take to risk their lives and escape to America, and it proves, once again, who the real oppressors of the world are. If people risk their lives time-and-time again so that they can escape from one country to another, it says an awful lot about the governments and lifestyles of those two countries. When we defeat a sadistic, murderous tyrant, we are not the liberators, not the oppressors. Don't expect Liberals to figue that out any time soon.
Tuesday, July 29, 2003
Visiting Iraq
I found this at Sgt. Stryker's place.
A note of thanks to those who serve
I found this at Sgt. Stryker's place.
When I told friends about my pilgrimage to Iraq to thank the U.S. troops, reaction was underwhelming at best.
Some were blunt. "Why are you going there?" They could not understand why it was important for me, a 9/11 widow, to express my support for the men and women stationed today in the Gulf.
But the reason seemed clear to me: 200,000 troops have been sent halfway around the world to stabilize the kind of culture that breeds terrorists like those who I believe began World War III on Sept. 11, 2001. Reaction was so politely negative that I began to doubt my role on the first USO/Tribeca Institute tour into newly occupied Iraq where, on average, a soldier a day is killed.
Besides, with Robert De Niro, Kid Rock, Rebecca and John Stamos, Wayne Newton, Gary Sinise, and Lee Ann Womack, who needed me?
Did they really want to hear about my husband, Neil Levin, who went to work as director of the New York Port Authority on Sept.11 and never came home? How would they relate to the two others traveling with me: Ginny Bauer, a New Jersey homemaker and the mother of three who lost her husband, David; and former Marine Jon Vigiano, who lost his only sons, Jon, a firefighter and Joe, a policeman.
A note of thanks to those who serve
Thanks, Lee!
Strongly suggest you email Lee at Right-Thinking from the Left Coast for blogrolling us.
Strongly suggest you email Lee at Right-Thinking from the Left Coast for blogrolling us.
ALLU ACK---AH CRAP!
Courtesy of the Anti-Idiotarian Rott, we find out that some of the turbaned twits had a rude awakening while they were supporting the Mass-Murdering Mustachioed Moron of Mesopotamia.
Some choice quotes....
However, one of the many news features highlighted a Palestinian jihad warrior who went to Iraq for the sake of Allah only to discover, to his shock, the Iraqi people rejected him and were intent on getting rid of Saddam Hussein.
....
A Lebanese volunteer who returned from Iraq said Iraqi officials isolated the volunteers and the Iraqis themselves "hunted them whenever they could, reported the Arabic newspaper Al-Sharq Al-Awsat of London.
....
One volunteer from Lebanon said he was exposed "to more Iraqi friendly fire than American fire."
"The Iraqi people refused to accept the volunteers among them and betrayed them by leaving them exposed," he said.
....
"Exhausted, tense and with almost no food or drink for several days, I reached a house where I thought I could finally find shelter," he said. After an Iraqi man opened the door, Abu Khaled announced proudly his identity as an Arab jihad fighter. "The man slapped the door in my face and said, 'Go away we do not want you in our country,'" he said.
....
"To his astonishment," the paper said, "he was later told that the Iraqis wanted to get rid of the dictatorship and oppression of Saddam Hussein at any cost." In this context, said the paper, "the Arab volunteers were regarded by them as supporters of the regime, who are cashing dollars, only to prolong the Iraqi suffering."
BWAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAA! Ow, my ribs....... I love it when the stupid and ignorant get a dose of reality. Welcome to the real world, you idiots!
Some choice quotes....
However, one of the many news features highlighted a Palestinian jihad warrior who went to Iraq for the sake of Allah only to discover, to his shock, the Iraqi people rejected him and were intent on getting rid of Saddam Hussein.
....
A Lebanese volunteer who returned from Iraq said Iraqi officials isolated the volunteers and the Iraqis themselves "hunted them whenever they could, reported the Arabic newspaper Al-Sharq Al-Awsat of London.
....
One volunteer from Lebanon said he was exposed "to more Iraqi friendly fire than American fire."
"The Iraqi people refused to accept the volunteers among them and betrayed them by leaving them exposed," he said.
....
"Exhausted, tense and with almost no food or drink for several days, I reached a house where I thought I could finally find shelter," he said. After an Iraqi man opened the door, Abu Khaled announced proudly his identity as an Arab jihad fighter. "The man slapped the door in my face and said, 'Go away we do not want you in our country,'" he said.
....
"To his astonishment," the paper said, "he was later told that the Iraqis wanted to get rid of the dictatorship and oppression of Saddam Hussein at any cost." In this context, said the paper, "the Arab volunteers were regarded by them as supporters of the regime, who are cashing dollars, only to prolong the Iraqi suffering."
BWAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAA! Ow, my ribs....... I love it when the stupid and ignorant get a dose of reality. Welcome to the real world, you idiots!
Realizations about Reuters
Since 9-11, we Americans have learned a lot. One unpleasant truth that I have become aware of is just how Left Wing and anti-American foreign media are. I first got a taste of this when I went to Australia during the Gulf War this year, and the Australian newspapers openly rooted for Iraq. When I was in Sydney, the morning newspaper gleefully posted pictures of American POW's on the front page, and boasted about how they were showing pictures that you couldn't see in America. Later, the BBC laughably reported that the entire Jessica Lynch rescue was a phony incident that was staged for the cameras. People overseas worship Michael Moore, and they actually think that "Bowling for Columbine" is a legitimate documentary. It's impossible for foreigners to get a remotely accurate picture of America and its policies with the deck so stacked against it.
And then there's Reuters, the British news service whose anti-American, Left Wing agenda makes The New York Times look Conservative. Reuters has provided us with Liberal Commandments like "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter". It openly editorializes with its "news", and routinely sticks anti-American digs in places where they don't belong. Here is a little blurb from their Bob Hope obituary yesterday:
During the Vietnam war Hope was criticized for being a "hawk" who supported the conflict. But he said he was really a middle-of-the-road supporter who wanted the war ended and even tried twice to visit Hanoi and arrange prisoner releases. His support of the Vietnam played a major part in eroding his national reputation with many Americans questioning whether he was funny anymore.
Here is another much less subtle example:
Recovery and debris removal work continues at the site of the World Trade Center known as "ground zero" in New York, March 25, 2002. Human rights around the world have been a casualty of the U.S. "war on terror" since September 11. REUTERS/Peter Morgan
This is why America is right to ignore overseas public opinion about her foreign policy. People who receive such unbalanced news cannot possibly make an informed judgement.
Since 9-11, we Americans have learned a lot. One unpleasant truth that I have become aware of is just how Left Wing and anti-American foreign media are. I first got a taste of this when I went to Australia during the Gulf War this year, and the Australian newspapers openly rooted for Iraq. When I was in Sydney, the morning newspaper gleefully posted pictures of American POW's on the front page, and boasted about how they were showing pictures that you couldn't see in America. Later, the BBC laughably reported that the entire Jessica Lynch rescue was a phony incident that was staged for the cameras. People overseas worship Michael Moore, and they actually think that "Bowling for Columbine" is a legitimate documentary. It's impossible for foreigners to get a remotely accurate picture of America and its policies with the deck so stacked against it.
And then there's Reuters, the British news service whose anti-American, Left Wing agenda makes The New York Times look Conservative. Reuters has provided us with Liberal Commandments like "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter". It openly editorializes with its "news", and routinely sticks anti-American digs in places where they don't belong. Here is a little blurb from their Bob Hope obituary yesterday:
During the Vietnam war Hope was criticized for being a "hawk" who supported the conflict. But he said he was really a middle-of-the-road supporter who wanted the war ended and even tried twice to visit Hanoi and arrange prisoner releases. His support of the Vietnam played a major part in eroding his national reputation with many Americans questioning whether he was funny anymore.
Here is another much less subtle example:
Recovery and debris removal work continues at the site of the World Trade Center known as "ground zero" in New York, March 25, 2002. Human rights around the world have been a casualty of the U.S. "war on terror" since September 11. REUTERS/Peter Morgan
This is why America is right to ignore overseas public opinion about her foreign policy. People who receive such unbalanced news cannot possibly make an informed judgement.
NOT THE TIMES AGAIN!
Dowd is a gifted writer with a trenchant wit, though her talent is largely squandered: She seldom expresses a constructive thought. As I put it in an earlier column, she is mainly a standup comic specializing in insults -- Don Rickles with an exceptionally high language quotient.
The disgusting and puerile Maureen Dowd gets her ass torn, but good.
Dowd is a gifted writer with a trenchant wit, though her talent is largely squandered: She seldom expresses a constructive thought. As I put it in an earlier column, she is mainly a standup comic specializing in insults -- Don Rickles with an exceptionally high language quotient.
The disgusting and puerile Maureen Dowd gets her ass torn, but good.
Are Things Going Well in Iraq?
The errrr, "mainstream" media seem to be unable to report anything but the deaths of American soldiers and innocent Iraqi citizens. They seem to always find a way to manage to get some disenchanted Iraqi in front of a camera to bemoan the lack of jobs, water, and electricity. Is the news being slanted?
That was a rhetorical question. Let's try some cheerier stuff:
Paul Wolfowitz says progress is slow, as many Iraqis blanch from thneir newfound freedom the way someone trapped in a cave for ten days will find sunlight painful. Andrew Sullivan says the Left are using "the future [of the Iraqi people] and their lives as pawns in a domestic political squabble". Paul Gigot sounds off: "Most reporting from Iraq suggests that the U.S. "occupation" isn't welcome here. But following Mr. Wolfowitz around the country I found precisely the opposite to be true." Michael Barone lists the accomplishments thus far.
If you read any of these, read this one: U.S. Army Maj. Eric Rydbom in Iraq.
Good stuff, all.
The errrr, "mainstream" media seem to be unable to report anything but the deaths of American soldiers and innocent Iraqi citizens. They seem to always find a way to manage to get some disenchanted Iraqi in front of a camera to bemoan the lack of jobs, water, and electricity. Is the news being slanted?
That was a rhetorical question. Let's try some cheerier stuff:
Paul Wolfowitz says progress is slow, as many Iraqis blanch from thneir newfound freedom the way someone trapped in a cave for ten days will find sunlight painful. Andrew Sullivan says the Left are using "the future [of the Iraqi people] and their lives as pawns in a domestic political squabble". Paul Gigot sounds off: "Most reporting from Iraq suggests that the U.S. "occupation" isn't welcome here. But following Mr. Wolfowitz around the country I found precisely the opposite to be true." Michael Barone lists the accomplishments thus far.
If you read any of these, read this one: U.S. Army Maj. Eric Rydbom in Iraq.
Good stuff, all.
"Thank God my ancestors got out."
And the meaning of it all, for Richburg, the feelings: "Revulsion. Sorrow. Pity. These sentiments began nagging me soon after I first set foot in Africa. It's a gnawing feeling that I was really unable to express out loud until the end, as I was packing my bags to leave, a feeling I felt pained to admit, a sentiment that, when uttered aloud, might come across as callous, even racist. And yet I know exactly this feeling that haunts me; I've just been too embarrassed to say it. So let me drop the charade and put it as simply as I know how: There but for the grace of God go I."
No return? Thank God
And the meaning of it all, for Richburg, the feelings: "Revulsion. Sorrow. Pity. These sentiments began nagging me soon after I first set foot in Africa. It's a gnawing feeling that I was really unable to express out loud until the end, as I was packing my bags to leave, a feeling I felt pained to admit, a sentiment that, when uttered aloud, might come across as callous, even racist. And yet I know exactly this feeling that haunts me; I've just been too embarrassed to say it. So let me drop the charade and put it as simply as I know how: There but for the grace of God go I."
No return? Thank God
Celebrating The Death of Tyrants
Here in America, the killing of Uday and Qusay was seen by many Liberals as a barbaric act.
In Baghdad, there was celebration.
"It was the capital's most raucous celebration since the government fell April 9," reported Brian MacQuarrie, writing from Baghdad for The Boston Globe. "From a high-story balcony at the Palestine Hotel downtown, blasts of machine-gun fire echoed against the tall buildings for more than 30 minutes. Flares rose from the rooftops, as people scampered up to the tops of buildings to join in the celebration."
Two bad dudes
Here in America, the killing of Uday and Qusay was seen by many Liberals as a barbaric act.
In Baghdad, there was celebration.
"It was the capital's most raucous celebration since the government fell April 9," reported Brian MacQuarrie, writing from Baghdad for The Boston Globe. "From a high-story balcony at the Palestine Hotel downtown, blasts of machine-gun fire echoed against the tall buildings for more than 30 minutes. Flares rose from the rooftops, as people scampered up to the tops of buildings to join in the celebration."
Two bad dudes
They're Bored, They're Stupid, They'll Probably Vote For Howie Dean
''I guess it's hard to see the point,'' said David Danzig, 32, who has attended the last three flash mobs in New York. ''For me, that's a reason to keep going and to try and figure out the point. It's art.''
Flash Mobs
''I guess it's hard to see the point,'' said David Danzig, 32, who has attended the last three flash mobs in New York. ''For me, that's a reason to keep going and to try and figure out the point. It's art.''
Flash Mobs
This poll is hardly surprising. What it means is that either the Dems continue to slide left and lose to Bush in 2004 or the party continues to fracture and Nader gets more votes in 2004 than in 2000 leading to another Bush win. The election is a light-year away in political time, and anything can happen, but unless Bush really screws up or there is another 9/11 his reelection seems very likely.
Yahoo! News - Moderate Democrats Warn Party on 2004 Prospects
Yahoo! News - Moderate Democrats Warn Party on 2004 Prospects
Monday, July 28, 2003
For those of you who enjoy forums:
Former Detroit Free Press Politics Forum
This one is populated by a few lucid Conservatives who find themselves in the minority, opposed by some of the most noxious and nefarious nimrods ever to call themselves "Democrat".
Former Detroit Free Press Politics Forum
This one is populated by a few lucid Conservatives who find themselves in the minority, opposed by some of the most noxious and nefarious nimrods ever to call themselves "Democrat".
Pay no attention to that funny glow....
During the blogsurf, I found this little piece over at the Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler.
I had to read it twice, just to make sure that I was actually seeing it correctly.
"French President Jacques Chirac said decades of controversial nuclear tests in the South Pacific did not give islanders cancer, as hundreds of former test site workers and relatives protested in the capital."
So let me get this clear.... this same asshat is in the group screaming about how the US military's DU rounds are causing cancer in Iraq, but setting off 193 nuclear weapons is just fine and dandy? Am I reading this correctly?
"There are no health consequences, either in the short-term or long-term," he (Chirac) told daily newspaper Les Nouvelles de Tahiti in an interview published on Friday, adding the IAEA experts had concluded detailed radiation surveys were not needed.
I. Am. Almost. Speechless.
I say almost, because my boss just walked in and told me that my cussing was creating a blue cloud that was fogging up the building. This slimy, lying, worthless, hipocritical, spineless, corrupt, two-faced, dictator-felching, money grabbing, communist appeasing, bloviating, walking pile of shit deserves to have every joint in his body broken with a baseball bat. I want to be wielding said bat. This overblown waste of skin has shown himself ONCE AGAIN to be nothing but a runty parasite clinging to the anus of humanity, and in desperate need of a flushing. Are there any depths to which this choad-sucking worm won't lower himself? Just so we're clear on why this oxygen theif needs to be removed from the gene pool in a permanant fashion:
He blocked all US attempts to deal with Iraq in the UN.
Negotiated the sale of a nuclear reactor to Saddam in the 80's.
Sold Iraq weapons and supplies in violation of the UN sanctions he claimed to support.
May have given members of the Baa'thist regiem EU passports during Gulf War 2. (still unsubstantiated)
Presided over one of the most virulent Anti-American french governments in modern times.
I'm not even going to get into the TotalFinaElf scandal, (with ties to Canada's own Cretin) and I won't mention his preference for a genocidal dictator (Mugabe), or the way his country accepts the most repulsive vermin known to man (You raped a 14 year old girl? Welcome to Paris, friend!). I won't get into how 1/3 of the french population was rooting for Saddam. I won't get into the socialist/economic hellhole that this leech on humanity has put france into. I won't mention his treatment of the former Eastern Bloc countries ("They missed a good opportunity to shut up", is it Jaq?) or how this country of surrender monkeys wields it's power in the EU as a club to bend other countries to france's will. I won't mention how this blathering fuckwit calls America an "imperialist power" while maintaining control over it's colonies in the South Pacific.
But I will say this: It's time for someone to put this half-rate country back into it's place as the global whipping boy. France is a joke. A very old, very bad joke. And it needs to be treated as such.
(Yes, I know the name is spelled "Chretien", but "Cretin" fits to a tee. You elected him up there, now you deal with it.)
I had to read it twice, just to make sure that I was actually seeing it correctly.
"French President Jacques Chirac said decades of controversial nuclear tests in the South Pacific did not give islanders cancer, as hundreds of former test site workers and relatives protested in the capital."
So let me get this clear.... this same asshat is in the group screaming about how the US military's DU rounds are causing cancer in Iraq, but setting off 193 nuclear weapons is just fine and dandy? Am I reading this correctly?
"There are no health consequences, either in the short-term or long-term," he (Chirac) told daily newspaper Les Nouvelles de Tahiti in an interview published on Friday, adding the IAEA experts had concluded detailed radiation surveys were not needed.
I. Am. Almost. Speechless.
I say almost, because my boss just walked in and told me that my cussing was creating a blue cloud that was fogging up the building. This slimy, lying, worthless, hipocritical, spineless, corrupt, two-faced, dictator-felching, money grabbing, communist appeasing, bloviating, walking pile of shit deserves to have every joint in his body broken with a baseball bat. I want to be wielding said bat. This overblown waste of skin has shown himself ONCE AGAIN to be nothing but a runty parasite clinging to the anus of humanity, and in desperate need of a flushing. Are there any depths to which this choad-sucking worm won't lower himself? Just so we're clear on why this oxygen theif needs to be removed from the gene pool in a permanant fashion:
He blocked all US attempts to deal with Iraq in the UN.
Negotiated the sale of a nuclear reactor to Saddam in the 80's.
Sold Iraq weapons and supplies in violation of the UN sanctions he claimed to support.
May have given members of the Baa'thist regiem EU passports during Gulf War 2. (still unsubstantiated)
Presided over one of the most virulent Anti-American french governments in modern times.
I'm not even going to get into the TotalFinaElf scandal, (with ties to Canada's own Cretin) and I won't mention his preference for a genocidal dictator (Mugabe), or the way his country accepts the most repulsive vermin known to man (You raped a 14 year old girl? Welcome to Paris, friend!). I won't get into how 1/3 of the french population was rooting for Saddam. I won't get into the socialist/economic hellhole that this leech on humanity has put france into. I won't mention his treatment of the former Eastern Bloc countries ("They missed a good opportunity to shut up", is it Jaq?) or how this country of surrender monkeys wields it's power in the EU as a club to bend other countries to france's will. I won't mention how this blathering fuckwit calls America an "imperialist power" while maintaining control over it's colonies in the South Pacific.
But I will say this: It's time for someone to put this half-rate country back into it's place as the global whipping boy. France is a joke. A very old, very bad joke. And it needs to be treated as such.
(Yes, I know the name is spelled "Chretien", but "Cretin" fits to a tee. You elected him up there, now you deal with it.)
The New York Times: At It Again
The Times sez: "The SEC said most of the money would go to victims of Enron's collapse amid allegations of massive accounting irregularities -- the first in a string of scandals that have tainted corporate America since 2001."
Since 2001?
Enron Fraud started in 1998, of course: http://www.enronfraud.com/
ALL OF THE FRAUD DISCOVERED DURING THIS BUSH ADMINISTRATION BEGAN DURING THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION. All of it. Of course, the Times would be loathe to concede that much of Clinton's "Eight Years of Prosperity" was steeped in fraud and deceit.
Clinton, Fraud, and Deceit.
Go figure.
Here's the Times piece: Banks Settle With S.E.C. for Roles in Enron's Fraud
The Times sez: "The SEC said most of the money would go to victims of Enron's collapse amid allegations of massive accounting irregularities -- the first in a string of scandals that have tainted corporate America since 2001."
Since 2001?
Enron Fraud started in 1998, of course: http://www.enronfraud.com/
ALL OF THE FRAUD DISCOVERED DURING THIS BUSH ADMINISTRATION BEGAN DURING THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION. All of it. Of course, the Times would be loathe to concede that much of Clinton's "Eight Years of Prosperity" was steeped in fraud and deceit.
Clinton, Fraud, and Deceit.
Go figure.
Here's the Times piece: Banks Settle With S.E.C. for Roles in Enron's Fraud
QUARANTINE THEM!
It is working for SARS...
"The number of gay and bisexual men diagnosed with HIV , the virus that causes AIDS, climbed for the third consecutive year in the United States in 2002, fueling fears that the disease might be poised for a major comeback in this high-risk group."
HIV Cases Climb Among Gay, Bisexual Men in U.S.
It is working for SARS...
"The number of gay and bisexual men diagnosed with HIV , the virus that causes AIDS, climbed for the third consecutive year in the United States in 2002, fueling fears that the disease might be poised for a major comeback in this high-risk group."
HIV Cases Climb Among Gay, Bisexual Men in U.S.
Be careful what you wish for....
"The people of Puerto Rico are facing some unanticipated consequences from a victory they won in 2001.
"For several years, Puerto Rican protesters demanded that the U.S. Navy leave the island of Vieques (search). Groups staged violent protests outside the main gate of 'Camp Garcia,' saying they were sick and tired of the live-fire bombing exercises.
"The violence resulted in the gates of the base being torn down. Several U.S. troops and police dogs were injured in the demonstrations.
"In response to the years of protest, former President Clinton agreed to stop Navy exercises there. Congress and President Bush ratified the deal and live-fire exercises were halted last May. But with its mission muzzled after 60 years, the Navy has decided to pull out of Puerto Rico completely.
That means the largest employer on the island, the Roosevelt Roads Naval Station, is now slated for closure that could come as early as October."
FOXNews.com
"The people of Puerto Rico are facing some unanticipated consequences from a victory they won in 2001.
"For several years, Puerto Rican protesters demanded that the U.S. Navy leave the island of Vieques (search). Groups staged violent protests outside the main gate of 'Camp Garcia,' saying they were sick and tired of the live-fire bombing exercises.
"The violence resulted in the gates of the base being torn down. Several U.S. troops and police dogs were injured in the demonstrations.
"In response to the years of protest, former President Clinton agreed to stop Navy exercises there. Congress and President Bush ratified the deal and live-fire exercises were halted last May. But with its mission muzzled after 60 years, the Navy has decided to pull out of Puerto Rico completely.
That means the largest employer on the island, the Roosevelt Roads Naval Station, is now slated for closure that could come as early as October."
FOXNews.com
Sunday, July 27, 2003
While on the Daily Blog Rounds
I found something at Obnoxious Fumes, an interesting blog by someone who actually sounds as pissed off as me. It seems that the Dimmy Donk nine haven't been doing their jobs, while they bitch and moan about the President.
The job of an elected official is, in part, to vote on legislation put before them. The job of a political candidate is, in part, to campaign so as to meet as many people as possible. Therein lies the conflict. Several Democrat presidential candidates have missed a significant number of votes on Capitol Hill, including important votes dealing with Iraq, while campaigning for the White House and attacking President George W. Bush for his handling of the Iraq conflict.
(....)
So far it's the same old news. But it gets better, once you see the numbers.
Congressional Quarterly has been tracking votes in both the House of Representatives and the Senate during this session. There have been 397 votes cast in the 108th session in the House and 290 votes cast in the Senate. So far, Gephardt has missed 356 (90%) House votes.
He missed 90% of the frigging votes?!?!?! And yet he thinks he has the right to bitch about government policy? "I stand against this bill on the strongest terms!" Well then, you voted against it, right? "Um, well, I stand against this bill on the strongest terms!" Right. WHY THE HELL ARE WE PAYING THIS BUTTNUGGET?
Kerry and his fellow White House hopefuls have been pressing hard against the Bush administration on Iraq and the war on terror. Kerry, however, missed votes this year that dealt with Iraq's reconstruction and the Iraqi Intelligence Commission. In total, Kerry has missed 52 percent of the votes cast in the Senate this year
So he had a chance to say something, but didn't do a damn thing! Now he just bitches at the president. Hey, great leadership there, you worthless non-working partisan puke! Maybe just once you could take time out of your busy schedual from raping the unsuspecting taxpayer with a sandpaper condom and DO YOUR FRIGGING JOB!
Most of the others among the Democrat field have also missed votes this year. Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT) has missed 115 votes as of Monday. Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL), who announced his candidacy in May, has missed 72 votes. Sen. John Edwards (D-NC) has missed 20 percent of the votes cast this year.
I guess it would be too much to expect these walking wastes of oxygen to actually work for a living, but when they can't even be bothered to cast votes on policies and bills that decide the fate of our nation, they've stopped being just annoying poster children for retro-active abortion and gone to blood-sucking parasites that simply need to be eradicated. Preferably with a 12 guage shotgun.
And who is the only one of the Loony Left Nine to actually show up to work? Dennis Kucinich. Quite possibly the farthest left of the bunch. It really makes you wonder just how the Donks plan on running the country, doesn't it?
The job of an elected official is, in part, to vote on legislation put before them. The job of a political candidate is, in part, to campaign so as to meet as many people as possible. Therein lies the conflict. Several Democrat presidential candidates have missed a significant number of votes on Capitol Hill, including important votes dealing with Iraq, while campaigning for the White House and attacking President George W. Bush for his handling of the Iraq conflict.
(....)
So far it's the same old news. But it gets better, once you see the numbers.
Congressional Quarterly has been tracking votes in both the House of Representatives and the Senate during this session. There have been 397 votes cast in the 108th session in the House and 290 votes cast in the Senate. So far, Gephardt has missed 356 (90%) House votes.
He missed 90% of the frigging votes?!?!?! And yet he thinks he has the right to bitch about government policy? "I stand against this bill on the strongest terms!" Well then, you voted against it, right? "Um, well, I stand against this bill on the strongest terms!" Right. WHY THE HELL ARE WE PAYING THIS BUTTNUGGET?
Kerry and his fellow White House hopefuls have been pressing hard against the Bush administration on Iraq and the war on terror. Kerry, however, missed votes this year that dealt with Iraq's reconstruction and the Iraqi Intelligence Commission. In total, Kerry has missed 52 percent of the votes cast in the Senate this year
So he had a chance to say something, but didn't do a damn thing! Now he just bitches at the president. Hey, great leadership there, you worthless non-working partisan puke! Maybe just once you could take time out of your busy schedual from raping the unsuspecting taxpayer with a sandpaper condom and DO YOUR FRIGGING JOB!
Most of the others among the Democrat field have also missed votes this year. Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT) has missed 115 votes as of Monday. Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL), who announced his candidacy in May, has missed 72 votes. Sen. John Edwards (D-NC) has missed 20 percent of the votes cast this year.
I guess it would be too much to expect these walking wastes of oxygen to actually work for a living, but when they can't even be bothered to cast votes on policies and bills that decide the fate of our nation, they've stopped being just annoying poster children for retro-active abortion and gone to blood-sucking parasites that simply need to be eradicated. Preferably with a 12 guage shotgun.
And who is the only one of the Loony Left Nine to actually show up to work? Dennis Kucinich. Quite possibly the farthest left of the bunch. It really makes you wonder just how the Donks plan on running the country, doesn't it?
Quotes Needed
The folks over at Random Nuclear Strikes have come up with a contest/research project/curiosity that might be of some interest. For years now, we've heard the Left scream about how "hatefull" and "full of rage" we on the Right are. (Well, I am full of rage, but not because of MY politics) Here's what they want. They want a list of documentable quotes, from both the Left and the Right, of derogitory statements. The statements MUST HAVE documentation, otherwise they don't count.
Let's see if we can get this thing going, because I'm interested in the results!
Update: The link is fixed now. My apologies.
Let's see if we can get this thing going, because I'm interested in the results!
Update: The link is fixed now. My apologies.
This is truly sick. It is beyond description. You must read it for yourself to get the unavoidable chilling sense of what would still be going on today if the Dems had their way. What's most amazing is that the mainstream press never ever covers the manifest implications for Iraqis and human decency had the anti-Bush feckless Dems won the Iraq war debate.
Times Online: "He was also involved in barbarous “pyramid” executions in which the victims were split down the middle. Using a special vice to hold the head, a swordsman split victims as they kneeled; another executioner carved the body into two, like a slaughterman in an abattoir. "
Times Online: "He was also involved in barbarous “pyramid” executions in which the victims were split down the middle. Using a special vice to hold the head, a swordsman split victims as they kneeled; another executioner carved the body into two, like a slaughterman in an abattoir. "
This simple sentence explains the phenomenon of the media's biased and bloodthirsty coverage of not only Iraq but just about any conflict where a modern-day democrat's ass is not on the line:
"Because shipwrecks make news, headlines about sinking ships are not a reliable measure of maritime safety. "
I love that sentence. It falls into what I call: WDIST (Why Didn't I Say That?)
Read the whole op-ed, it's pretty good.
"Because shipwrecks make news, headlines about sinking ships are not a reliable measure of maritime safety. "
I love that sentence. It falls into what I call: WDIST (Why Didn't I Say That?)
Read the whole op-ed, it's pretty good.
Saturday, July 26, 2003
The New French, same as the Old French
The new French, same as the old French
Through several different people, such as Lee from Right Thinking, come a list of 112 Gripes about the French. The kicker? It was written in 1945. Nice to see things haven't changed much. We should have let the Germans keep that country.
I could go on a French bashing spree, but I'll just let you read the list.
Through several different people, such as Lee from Right Thinking, come a list of 112 Gripes about the French. The kicker? It was written in 1945. Nice to see things haven't changed much. We should have let the Germans keep that country.
I could go on a French bashing spree, but I'll just let you read the list.
Friday, July 25, 2003
Charles Krauthammer explains how much the Middle East region has improved since 9/11 thanks to the determination of W. It is this determination that the Democrats want to destroy. The future safety of America depends upon taming the flames that smolder in the Middle East by helping the forces of freedom shed the shackles of tyranny (As we did in Iraq with no help from the Democratic Party).
The caveat, as Krauthammer says, is that "it all hinges on success in Iraq. On America's not being driven out of Iraq the way it was driven out of Lebanon and Somalia -- which is what every terrorist and every terrorist state wants to see happen. And with everything at stake, what is the left doing? Everything it can to undermine the enterprise. By implying both that it was launched fraudulently (see yellowcake) and, alternately, that it has ensnared us in a hopeless quagmire."
The caveat, as Krauthammer says, is that "it all hinges on success in Iraq. On America's not being driven out of Iraq the way it was driven out of Lebanon and Somalia -- which is what every terrorist and every terrorist state wants to see happen. And with everything at stake, what is the left doing? Everything it can to undermine the enterprise. By implying both that it was launched fraudulently (see yellowcake) and, alternately, that it has ensnared us in a hopeless quagmire."
Wednesday, July 23, 2003
Oftentimes, the spoiled brats on the left, just make you laugh. Lefty George Gedda over at the AP actually wrote an article that the deaths of Odai and Qusay were in violation of the executive order ban on political assassination, a law the Bush administration has chosen to not enforce. Is this all they can come up with? Even the wackos on the left who are elected are pushing this. Rep Charles Rangel said so on Hannity & Colmes last night. Who votes for these jackasses?
Somehow I doubt any serious person in America was blaming the allies for Hitler's suicide. If the Left's complaining about the killing of these two murderous rapists does not show you how decayed and addled a good 35% of America has become, I do not know what will. That sane people vote to have these degenerates run our country is simply stunning.
If you want a good legal analysis of Rangel and Gedda's assertion check out The Volokh Conspiracy.
Somehow I doubt any serious person in America was blaming the allies for Hitler's suicide. If the Left's complaining about the killing of these two murderous rapists does not show you how decayed and addled a good 35% of America has become, I do not know what will. That sane people vote to have these degenerates run our country is simply stunning.
If you want a good legal analysis of Rangel and Gedda's assertion check out The Volokh Conspiracy.
Does anyone remember the vice presidential debate in 2000 when VP Cheney made Joe Lieberman look like a tongue-twisted pig-tailed school girl? Here Lieberman had the advantage of running off of a record that included record prosperity and relative peace, but Cheney made what the left-wing mainstream press calls, "the conscious of the Senate" look like a child. I remember being very impressed and energized as Cheney articulated the argument against liberalism like no one had done for years.
Well, the word is that Cheney is giving a speech tomorrow where he will respond to all the irresponsible Jackals criticizing Bush and the defense of America's strategic interests. I hope this is the case as the administration has waited far too long to respond to the lies coming from the jihadists on the Left. If Cheney will respond on Thursday, two things are certain:
1. He will expose the whining Democrats who disparage Bush and the war for the mindless, politically obsessed irresponsible hacks that they are; and
2. The mainstream press will barely cover the substance of his speech.
If I can catch his speech, I will respond soon afterward.
Well, the word is that Cheney is giving a speech tomorrow where he will respond to all the irresponsible Jackals criticizing Bush and the defense of America's strategic interests. I hope this is the case as the administration has waited far too long to respond to the lies coming from the jihadists on the Left. If Cheney will respond on Thursday, two things are certain:
1. He will expose the whining Democrats who disparage Bush and the war for the mindless, politically obsessed irresponsible hacks that they are; and
2. The mainstream press will barely cover the substance of his speech.
If I can catch his speech, I will respond soon afterward.
The mind of a progressive
This has probably been blogged to death, but it's still got me so pissed off that I can't see strait.
For those who don't know, there are a few Berkleyites who felt the urge to try to find out what made a person conservative.
Now, let's try to forget the slant and bias of two uber-liberals from Berkley trying to point out what makes one conservative. Let's try to overlook the waste of money on a study that does absolutely nothing. And let's try to accept the fact that these two "academics" have probably never met a conservative in their soft, cushy, non-working lives. Let's check out the points that they THINK make someone conservative.
1) Fear and aggression
2) Dogmatism and intolerance of ambiguity
3) Uncertainty avoidance
4) Need for cognitive closure
5) Terror management
Well, to say the least, all the liberals are in one big self-congradulatory circle jerk, nodding their heads and saying "Mmm-hmmm, I knew it all along!" While the anger that this display of arrogance, condesention, and outright idiocy has made a good portion of the country spitting mad. However, there was someone who could put it into words much better than me. The Imperial Paladin. And he came out with a few points of his own, on what makes a person liberal.
1) Hatred of the United States of America
2) Complete support for the "Palestinian Arab" point of view
3) Belief in suicide bombing as a legitimate means of political self-expression
4) Inability to make an actual decision on what is good or bad
5) Appreciation of the terrorist point of view on 9/11
6) Hatred of anyone from the West who expresses a desire of self-defense
And this is only the tip of the iceberg. Now I ask you, after watching the protests of the past year, and looking at the people rioting and screaming and acting like loons.....
Can you say that he's wrong?
For those who don't know, there are a few Berkleyites who felt the urge to try to find out what made a person conservative.
Now, let's try to forget the slant and bias of two uber-liberals from Berkley trying to point out what makes one conservative. Let's try to overlook the waste of money on a study that does absolutely nothing. And let's try to accept the fact that these two "academics" have probably never met a conservative in their soft, cushy, non-working lives. Let's check out the points that they THINK make someone conservative.
1) Fear and aggression
2) Dogmatism and intolerance of ambiguity
3) Uncertainty avoidance
4) Need for cognitive closure
5) Terror management
Well, to say the least, all the liberals are in one big self-congradulatory circle jerk, nodding their heads and saying "Mmm-hmmm, I knew it all along!" While the anger that this display of arrogance, condesention, and outright idiocy has made a good portion of the country spitting mad. However, there was someone who could put it into words much better than me. The Imperial Paladin. And he came out with a few points of his own, on what makes a person liberal.
1) Hatred of the United States of America
2) Complete support for the "Palestinian Arab" point of view
3) Belief in suicide bombing as a legitimate means of political self-expression
4) Inability to make an actual decision on what is good or bad
5) Appreciation of the terrorist point of view on 9/11
6) Hatred of anyone from the West who expresses a desire of self-defense
And this is only the tip of the iceberg. Now I ask you, after watching the protests of the past year, and looking at the people rioting and screaming and acting like loons.....
Can you say that he's wrong?
I want to take an opportunity to compliment the individuals that contribute to this blog. The struggle for accuracy in information undertaken by my fellow right-wing-wackos has resulted in some excellent contributions. I appreciate the opportunity to join you in this endeavor.
David recently posted some stuff I want to emphasize. First, he makes a very astute observation regarding our liberal opponents incessant claim that President Bush told the nation that Saddam was an immenent threat. It is entirely baseless. The President never made the claim. Rather he made it perfectly clear that we should not allow the situation to develope into one where Saddam could pose an "immenent threat". Take the opportunity to challenge the next liberal you catch perputating this lie, to cite one time "the President told us that Saddam was an immenent threat". As I said, David already covered this. I just felt it deserved a little more daylight.
The other topic David mentions (and I wish to add to) in the same post, is the DNC ad assailing G.W.'s SOTU address comment: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."........Oh but wait. The DNC ad plays a clip of that statement......not the whole statement. NO. The clip begins with the word "Saddam". Why wouldn't they play a video clip of the entire sentence from beginning to end? It was done to intentionally mislead the audience to believe that the President had made a statement of fact unsupported by any other source than the one that has come under scrutiny. They don't want to remind you that Tony Blair still stands by that statement. Michael Moore-on would be proud. Perhaps he even helped to craft this nugget of liberal subterfuge. ;) And of course Terry McAuliffe must be pleased that CNN’s Woodruff Fails to Point Out Distortion in the DNC Ad She Plays. This is yet another example of the morally vacuous tactics liberals use to dupe those who are as yet oblivious to their nature and their methods. It is our responsibilty to use the examples they provide us to educate those that will listen. Do not allow yourselves to depreciate the effectiveness of these tactics. Recognize them and swiftly confront anyone who perpetuates them with the truth!
The Valiant Elephant
David recently posted some stuff I want to emphasize. First, he makes a very astute observation regarding our liberal opponents incessant claim that President Bush told the nation that Saddam was an immenent threat. It is entirely baseless. The President never made the claim. Rather he made it perfectly clear that we should not allow the situation to develope into one where Saddam could pose an "immenent threat". Take the opportunity to challenge the next liberal you catch perputating this lie, to cite one time "the President told us that Saddam was an immenent threat". As I said, David already covered this. I just felt it deserved a little more daylight.
The other topic David mentions (and I wish to add to) in the same post, is the DNC ad assailing G.W.'s SOTU address comment: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."........Oh but wait. The DNC ad plays a clip of that statement......not the whole statement. NO. The clip begins with the word "Saddam". Why wouldn't they play a video clip of the entire sentence from beginning to end? It was done to intentionally mislead the audience to believe that the President had made a statement of fact unsupported by any other source than the one that has come under scrutiny. They don't want to remind you that Tony Blair still stands by that statement. Michael Moore-on would be proud. Perhaps he even helped to craft this nugget of liberal subterfuge. ;) And of course Terry McAuliffe must be pleased that CNN’s Woodruff Fails to Point Out Distortion in the DNC Ad She Plays. This is yet another example of the morally vacuous tactics liberals use to dupe those who are as yet oblivious to their nature and their methods. It is our responsibilty to use the examples they provide us to educate those that will listen. Do not allow yourselves to depreciate the effectiveness of these tactics. Recognize them and swiftly confront anyone who perpetuates them with the truth!
The Valiant Elephant
Tuesday, July 22, 2003
If Republicans in the largest state in the Union tried something like this, it would be all over the mainstream press. Let's see if this is even covered.
Yahoo! News - Open Mic Catches California Democrats: "Unaware that a live microphone was broadcasting their words around the Capitol, Assembly Democrats meeting behind closed doors debated prolonging California's budget crisis for political gain. "
Yahoo! News - Open Mic Catches California Democrats: "Unaware that a live microphone was broadcasting their words around the Capitol, Assembly Democrats meeting behind closed doors debated prolonging California's budget crisis for political gain. "
Talk about good news:
Let D.C. Try Vouchers (washingtonpost.com): "We all know D.C. public schools need improvement. According to the most recent census, the District spends $10,852 per student annually -- the third highest level of per-pupil spending in the nation -- yet test scores lag far behind. In the most recent math and reading assessments administered by the National Assessment of Educational Progress:
• Seventy-six percent of D.C. fourth-graders performed below grade level in math, and only 10 percent read proficiently.
• Seventy-seven percent of eighth-graders performed below grade level in math, and only 12 percent were proficient in reading.
Based on the substantial amount of money pumped into the schools and the resultant test scores, I do not believe that money alone is going to solve the problem. This is why I believe the District should be allowed to try this pilot -- particularly for the sake of its low-income students."
This is the first crack in the damn of the unholy alliance between the teachers' unions and the Democratic Party which has worked to imprison poor children in one of the most anti-consumer monopolies: government schools. Someday, the simple notion of competition will free the poor who actually want to succeed from a decadent public school system that in many places has been destroyed by left-wing social engineering and teacher union inspired job protectionism.
Dianne Feinstein deserves some credit for breaking away from the teachers' lobby and the liberal establishment. She finally recognizes what many of us realized long ago, that the problems in public education cannot be solved by money because they are systemic and go to the heart of leftist teachers' union racket that has damaged the public school system since, at least, the 1960s.
Let D.C. Try Vouchers (washingtonpost.com): "We all know D.C. public schools need improvement. According to the most recent census, the District spends $10,852 per student annually -- the third highest level of per-pupil spending in the nation -- yet test scores lag far behind. In the most recent math and reading assessments administered by the National Assessment of Educational Progress:
• Seventy-six percent of D.C. fourth-graders performed below grade level in math, and only 10 percent read proficiently.
• Seventy-seven percent of eighth-graders performed below grade level in math, and only 12 percent were proficient in reading.
Based on the substantial amount of money pumped into the schools and the resultant test scores, I do not believe that money alone is going to solve the problem. This is why I believe the District should be allowed to try this pilot -- particularly for the sake of its low-income students."
This is the first crack in the damn of the unholy alliance between the teachers' unions and the Democratic Party which has worked to imprison poor children in one of the most anti-consumer monopolies: government schools. Someday, the simple notion of competition will free the poor who actually want to succeed from a decadent public school system that in many places has been destroyed by left-wing social engineering and teacher union inspired job protectionism.
Dianne Feinstein deserves some credit for breaking away from the teachers' lobby and the liberal establishment. She finally recognizes what many of us realized long ago, that the problems in public education cannot be solved by money because they are systemic and go to the heart of leftist teachers' union racket that has damaged the public school system since, at least, the 1960s.
MY WORDS TO THE ANTI-BUSH NAYSAYERS ON THE LEFT: YOU LOSE, PATHETIC REPROBATES!
The news that Qusai and Odai Hussein have been killed in a raid by Special Forces and the 101st Airborne is not only great news for Americans, the troops, and Iraqis, but it is terrible news for the Democrats who have been whining about the war and relying on American failure and death for their political success.
I wonder if the loony Jackals on the Left will claim that these two butchers were killed on false pretenses when they make their next mad rush to the cameras.
Here is just a little information about Odai and Qusay Hussein:
"Iraqi exiles say Odai murdered at will and tortured with zeal, and routinely ordered his guards to snatch young women off the street so he could rape them. The London-based human-rights group Indict said Odai ordered prisoners to be dropped into acid baths as punishment."
"Qusai also oversaw Iraq's notorious detention centers and is believed to have initiated "prison cleansing" — a means of relieving severe overcrowding in jails with arbitrary killings. Citing testimony from former Iraqi intelligence officers and other state employees, New York-based Human Rights Watch said several thousand inmates were executed at Iraq's prisons over the past several years."
The troops deserve a lot of our gratitude for doing a great job. The least we can do is fight back against those forces back home who demoralize them in an attempt to destroy our country's will and President Bush.
If you anti-Bush, anti-war left wingers had your way, these two sickos would still be raping women, torturing Iraqis, and dropping innocents into acid baths. You should be ashamed of yourselves for carping and making disingenuous claims about the causes for this war. Your ideas are not only dangerous for Iraqis, but Americans as well.
The news that Qusai and Odai Hussein have been killed in a raid by Special Forces and the 101st Airborne is not only great news for Americans, the troops, and Iraqis, but it is terrible news for the Democrats who have been whining about the war and relying on American failure and death for their political success.
I wonder if the loony Jackals on the Left will claim that these two butchers were killed on false pretenses when they make their next mad rush to the cameras.
Here is just a little information about Odai and Qusay Hussein:
"Iraqi exiles say Odai murdered at will and tortured with zeal, and routinely ordered his guards to snatch young women off the street so he could rape them. The London-based human-rights group Indict said Odai ordered prisoners to be dropped into acid baths as punishment."
"Qusai also oversaw Iraq's notorious detention centers and is believed to have initiated "prison cleansing" — a means of relieving severe overcrowding in jails with arbitrary killings. Citing testimony from former Iraqi intelligence officers and other state employees, New York-based Human Rights Watch said several thousand inmates were executed at Iraq's prisons over the past several years."
The troops deserve a lot of our gratitude for doing a great job. The least we can do is fight back against those forces back home who demoralize them in an attempt to destroy our country's will and President Bush.
If you anti-Bush, anti-war left wingers had your way, these two sickos would still be raping women, torturing Iraqis, and dropping innocents into acid baths. You should be ashamed of yourselves for carping and making disingenuous claims about the causes for this war. Your ideas are not only dangerous for Iraqis, but Americans as well.
Due to a lack of time this morning, I will provide the links for a few posts on Andrew Sullivan's blog that are as clear and reasoned as you can find.
Here is Andrew's response to the BUSH LIED!!!!! lobbyists.
In this one, Sullivan provides some evidence he has found that points to what most of us already know, that the mainstream media's depiction of what is going on in Iraq leans heavily toward the foreboding and less toward the truth.
Here is Andrew's response to the BUSH LIED!!!!! lobbyists.
In this one, Sullivan provides some evidence he has found that points to what most of us already know, that the mainstream media's depiction of what is going on in Iraq leans heavily toward the foreboding and less toward the truth.
Navy to Puerto Rico: Bye bye!
Remember all the screaming and fussing over the Navy's bombing range in PR? Well the Lefties won that battle. No more bombing. Yay. Until the brain-dead twits were reminded of one cold hard fact.
If you take away the purpose of a military installation, the military will leave, since they have no reason to stay.
Here's a few choice quotes:
Rep. Serrano, (D) NY - "I think it's punishment" for the protests, Mr. Serrano said. "We are being punished for winning an issue against the federal government. The Navy said, 'Oh yeah. We're going to fix you. We're going to close the base.' "
Acevedo-Vila spokesman Paul Weiss would not disclose what kind of aid will be sought for Puerto Rico, and still held out hope the Navy would reconsider "rushing away from such a strategic location."
Idiots. No, scratch that, these wastes of oxygen are so sand-poundingly idiotic and ignorant that I'm struggling to find ways to describe them without cussing a blue streak that would make a sailor blush! What the hell do you mean "rushing away from a strategic location"? YOU'VE MADE IT SO IT WASN'T STRATEGIC ANY MORE, YOU BLOVIATING ASSHAT! How much longer are we going to suffer a group of politicians who are so blindly ignorant to what the military needs and does? How much longer are we going to suffer the blunderings of elected idiots who can't even connect the dots? How much longer will we suffer the fools who cannot understand actions and their consequences? If you were to gather the total IQ of the Donks who were screaming about the Navy's eeeeeeeeeeevil bombing range, you wouldn't have brain power enough to tie your own shoes! People like Rep. Serrano have the mental capacity of a rutabega for thinking that we're going to spend HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS to keep a base open when we cannot use it for any real reason! If these representatives are any real indication of the people who elected them, then we need to cut off that section of the country and let it die, because these jerks are too stupid to be allowed to steal my oxygen!
Let me spell this out in very plain terms, for all those people screeching because of this base closure.
The single reason for that base being there was to support the bombing training range. When you removed the reason for that base, the USA no longer needed to keep troops there. Therefore, the base is being closed. It. Is. That. Simple.
(hat tip to RNS)
As an aside to the people of Puerto Rico: Either shit or get off the pot. Become a state, or become your own country. One or the other, please, but you've become too accustomed to the USA giving you everything you want, without having to pay for it.
Remember all the screaming and fussing over the Navy's bombing range in PR? Well the Lefties won that battle. No more bombing. Yay. Until the brain-dead twits were reminded of one cold hard fact.
If you take away the purpose of a military installation, the military will leave, since they have no reason to stay.
Here's a few choice quotes:
Rep. Serrano, (D) NY - "I think it's punishment" for the protests, Mr. Serrano said. "We are being punished for winning an issue against the federal government. The Navy said, 'Oh yeah. We're going to fix you. We're going to close the base.' "
Acevedo-Vila spokesman Paul Weiss would not disclose what kind of aid will be sought for Puerto Rico, and still held out hope the Navy would reconsider "rushing away from such a strategic location."
Idiots. No, scratch that, these wastes of oxygen are so sand-poundingly idiotic and ignorant that I'm struggling to find ways to describe them without cussing a blue streak that would make a sailor blush! What the hell do you mean "rushing away from a strategic location"? YOU'VE MADE IT SO IT WASN'T STRATEGIC ANY MORE, YOU BLOVIATING ASSHAT! How much longer are we going to suffer a group of politicians who are so blindly ignorant to what the military needs and does? How much longer are we going to suffer the blunderings of elected idiots who can't even connect the dots? How much longer will we suffer the fools who cannot understand actions and their consequences? If you were to gather the total IQ of the Donks who were screaming about the Navy's eeeeeeeeeeevil bombing range, you wouldn't have brain power enough to tie your own shoes! People like Rep. Serrano have the mental capacity of a rutabega for thinking that we're going to spend HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS to keep a base open when we cannot use it for any real reason! If these representatives are any real indication of the people who elected them, then we need to cut off that section of the country and let it die, because these jerks are too stupid to be allowed to steal my oxygen!
Let me spell this out in very plain terms, for all those people screeching because of this base closure.
The single reason for that base being there was to support the bombing training range. When you removed the reason for that base, the USA no longer needed to keep troops there. Therefore, the base is being closed. It. Is. That. Simple.
(hat tip to RNS)
As an aside to the people of Puerto Rico: Either shit or get off the pot. Become a state, or become your own country. One or the other, please, but you've become too accustomed to the USA giving you everything you want, without having to pay for it.
"The Neal Boortz Commencement Speech"
You've never heard it, but you should. Neal Boortz is a Conservative/Libertarian radio talk show host based out of Atlanta. Of course, he has never been invited to speak at a University commencement, but he still has a speech written for that day, if it ever happens. You must click on this link and read this speech. Print it out and save it. It is one of the best summations of Liberal and Conservative philosophies that you will ever see.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am honored by the invitation to address you on this august occasion. It's about time. Be warned, however, that I am not here to impress you; you'll have enough smoke blown your way today. And you can bet your tassels I'm not here to impress the faculty and administration.
You may not like much of what I have to say, and that's fine. You will remember it though. Especially after about 10 years out there in the real world. This, it goes without saying, does not apply to those of you who will seek your careers and your fortunes as government employees.
This gowned gaggle behind me is your faculty. You’ve heard the old saying that those who can - do. Those who can't - teach. That sounds deliciously insensitive. But there is often raw truth in insensitivity, just as you often find feel-good falsehoods and lies in compassion. Say good-bye to your faculty because now you are getting ready to go out there and do. These folks behind me are going to stay right here and teach....
You've never heard it, but you should. Neal Boortz is a Conservative/Libertarian radio talk show host based out of Atlanta. Of course, he has never been invited to speak at a University commencement, but he still has a speech written for that day, if it ever happens. You must click on this link and read this speech. Print it out and save it. It is one of the best summations of Liberal and Conservative philosophies that you will ever see.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am honored by the invitation to address you on this august occasion. It's about time. Be warned, however, that I am not here to impress you; you'll have enough smoke blown your way today. And you can bet your tassels I'm not here to impress the faculty and administration.
You may not like much of what I have to say, and that's fine. You will remember it though. Especially after about 10 years out there in the real world. This, it goes without saying, does not apply to those of you who will seek your careers and your fortunes as government employees.
This gowned gaggle behind me is your faculty. You’ve heard the old saying that those who can - do. Those who can't - teach. That sounds deliciously insensitive. But there is often raw truth in insensitivity, just as you often find feel-good falsehoods and lies in compassion. Say good-bye to your faculty because now you are getting ready to go out there and do. These folks behind me are going to stay right here and teach....
Monday, July 21, 2003
The stunning daily hypocrisy of the Left is yet again difficult to deny. The Democrats have been lying to America with raging frequency for the better part of 3 decades. A left-leaning media has covered for their lies, which only enabled more lying. Finally, a more diverse media marketplace (yet hardly balanced) calls Democrats on their lies and deceptions, the same sorts of lies they used to get away with. As a result, the Left has been losing elections both on the local and federal level. Moreover, the Dems are on to this and have attacked Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly because they have the temerity to actually call them on their lies. The left expected that the days of the media looking the other way in the face of their mendacious words would simply continue. Thankfully, the internet empowers those of us without the vast resources of a media empire to expose the lies of the Left. It took me less than 5 minutes to find the goods that expose another lie the Left is peddling that has been annoying me for a week or so now.
With more and more frequency, the Jackals on the Left are attacking the credibility of W by making the claim that W scared the public with the warning that Iraq represented an imminent threat and that we now know, since no WMDs have yet been discovered, that there was no imminent threat. This is not only an outrageous lie, but it is a convenient one since it is the flip side of an argument the Left used against the war a few months ago. Of course, the mainstream media will never call the Left on their brutal deception even though it takes only a few minutes to see how dishonest they are. Bush never said the threat was imminent; in fact, he took on those who used the non-imminence of the threat from Iraq as an argument against the war in his State of the Union speech from this year. The same speech the Left has hysterically been parsing looking for a way to call W a liar.
Look toward the bottom of the speech text and you will find the following:
"Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words and all recriminations would come too late."
Remember this? Bush said, in fact, that waiting for the threat to become imminent is reckless and irresponsible, yet the Left now claims that Bush tried to scare us by imploring how imminent the threat actually was. Don't believe me? You don't think the Dems have a bent for dishonesty that has become institutionalized because the media has not called them on it for decades? Well then start listening, I know it's like fingernails on a chalkboard, to the various Dems on television. You will notice they subtly throw out the notion that Bush falsely stated the threat was imminent. This is done to slowly but surely change the public perception to believe that Bush did indeed press the imminence of the threat from Saddam. The Dems have done this so many times. From "it's just about sex" to cover perjury in a civil rights sexual harassment lawsuit to having their operatives throwing out military ballots in Florida while claiming that "Bush stole the election" a claim they could never substantiate but have convinced millions of its veracity.
And if you still think I do not have the facts correct, then check this out from the DNC. This is an ad by the DNC now running in Wisconsin.
There is your proof folks. If you don't realize that the left is gravely more dishonest than they are even accusing Bush of, you simply are not paying attention. They do this on issue after issue after issue. They have absolutely no integrity. They will willingly put the country at risk for the sake of their own ambitions of power. They need to be marginalized until they figure out how to be political leaders and value America at the same time.
With more and more frequency, the Jackals on the Left are attacking the credibility of W by making the claim that W scared the public with the warning that Iraq represented an imminent threat and that we now know, since no WMDs have yet been discovered, that there was no imminent threat. This is not only an outrageous lie, but it is a convenient one since it is the flip side of an argument the Left used against the war a few months ago. Of course, the mainstream media will never call the Left on their brutal deception even though it takes only a few minutes to see how dishonest they are. Bush never said the threat was imminent; in fact, he took on those who used the non-imminence of the threat from Iraq as an argument against the war in his State of the Union speech from this year. The same speech the Left has hysterically been parsing looking for a way to call W a liar.
Look toward the bottom of the speech text and you will find the following:
"Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words and all recriminations would come too late."
Remember this? Bush said, in fact, that waiting for the threat to become imminent is reckless and irresponsible, yet the Left now claims that Bush tried to scare us by imploring how imminent the threat actually was. Don't believe me? You don't think the Dems have a bent for dishonesty that has become institutionalized because the media has not called them on it for decades? Well then start listening, I know it's like fingernails on a chalkboard, to the various Dems on television. You will notice they subtly throw out the notion that Bush falsely stated the threat was imminent. This is done to slowly but surely change the public perception to believe that Bush did indeed press the imminence of the threat from Saddam. The Dems have done this so many times. From "it's just about sex" to cover perjury in a civil rights sexual harassment lawsuit to having their operatives throwing out military ballots in Florida while claiming that "Bush stole the election" a claim they could never substantiate but have convinced millions of its veracity.
And if you still think I do not have the facts correct, then check this out from the DNC. This is an ad by the DNC now running in Wisconsin.
There is your proof folks. If you don't realize that the left is gravely more dishonest than they are even accusing Bush of, you simply are not paying attention. They do this on issue after issue after issue. They have absolutely no integrity. They will willingly put the country at risk for the sake of their own ambitions of power. They need to be marginalized until they figure out how to be political leaders and value America at the same time.
The "Unbiased" Media
From Townhall and The Tocquevillian Magazine, comes this nifty little article by Michelle Malkin. Imagine if you will the Intelligence of Ann Coulter, without the bullshit or spite, and a whole lot better looking (IMHO). That's Michelle. Anyways, it seems the Old Grey Lady has been caught with her pants down and exposed for the hypocritical waste of paper and ink that they are. Yet again. Go. Read. Now.
And since I've brought up the Tocquevillian Magazine, there's an nifty piece in there as well that sums up the feeling of "flyover country". Definately worth a look-see.
And since I've brought up the Tocquevillian Magazine, there's an nifty piece in there as well that sums up the feeling of "flyover country". Definately worth a look-see.
I just can't understand where those silly Conservatives keep getting this idea about "Liberal media"
CNN had a hilarious story this weekend about a new "trend" in America: Americans moving to Canada, because America is just "too Conservative"! (an actual statement from the article). To illustrate this trend, CNN found a whopping 3 Liberals, yes that's right, 3 people who are leaving the US to live in the big government utopian fantasyland to the North. One of them is a puppeteer (yes, that's right, a puppeteer), and another is a guy who is still in college (America looks better once you start paying taxes and stuff). The article also quotes another guy as saying: "Canada has an opportunity to define itself as a leader. In some ways, it's now closer to American ideals than America is." (Apparently, gun confiscation and high taxes are American ideals -- does anyone actually think that the country will miss this dope?)
The best part of the article is the end, where it nonchalantly mentions an interesting fact: "But every year since 1977, more Canadians have emigrated to the United States than vice versa -- the 2001 figures were 5,894 Americans moving north, 30,203 Canadians moving south. ". That means that Canadians moving South outnumbered Americans moving North by a ratio of 5 to 1. CNN gleefully writes a story about three people moving out of America because it is "too Conservative". I wonder when they will get around to writing a story about some of the tens of thousands of people who leave Canada because it is "too Liberal".
Biased story? Nahhhh. Where would someone get that kind of silly idea?
CNN had a hilarious story this weekend about a new "trend" in America: Americans moving to Canada, because America is just "too Conservative"! (an actual statement from the article). To illustrate this trend, CNN found a whopping 3 Liberals, yes that's right, 3 people who are leaving the US to live in the big government utopian fantasyland to the North. One of them is a puppeteer (yes, that's right, a puppeteer), and another is a guy who is still in college (America looks better once you start paying taxes and stuff). The article also quotes another guy as saying: "Canada has an opportunity to define itself as a leader. In some ways, it's now closer to American ideals than America is." (Apparently, gun confiscation and high taxes are American ideals -- does anyone actually think that the country will miss this dope?)
The best part of the article is the end, where it nonchalantly mentions an interesting fact: "But every year since 1977, more Canadians have emigrated to the United States than vice versa -- the 2001 figures were 5,894 Americans moving north, 30,203 Canadians moving south. ". That means that Canadians moving South outnumbered Americans moving North by a ratio of 5 to 1. CNN gleefully writes a story about three people moving out of America because it is "too Conservative". I wonder when they will get around to writing a story about some of the tens of thousands of people who leave Canada because it is "too Liberal".
Biased story? Nahhhh. Where would someone get that kind of silly idea?
Sunday, July 20, 2003
It is amazing how over two weeks of madness coming from the Democratic Party and the leftist media can be summed up in Bill Kristol's latest. It has taken some time for the mainstream of the Democratic Party to fully represent their growing fringe element, but the conversion appears to be complete.
Bush Suckers the Democrats: "God knows the Bush administration is not beyond criticism for either its prewar planning or its execution of postwar reconstruction efforts. And it would be a valuable contribution to our politics if such criticism were mounted by the Democratic party--acting as an intelligent, loyal opposition. But it's a free country, and if the Democrats prefer instead to act as a pathologically disgruntled lunatic fringe, then it'll be their problem more than anyone else's. "
Bush Suckers the Democrats: "God knows the Bush administration is not beyond criticism for either its prewar planning or its execution of postwar reconstruction efforts. And it would be a valuable contribution to our politics if such criticism were mounted by the Democratic party--acting as an intelligent, loyal opposition. But it's a free country, and if the Democrats prefer instead to act as a pathologically disgruntled lunatic fringe, then it'll be their problem more than anyone else's. "
Some fun to lighten your Sunday
From RNS, we learn that the Democrats are acting like spoiled petulant children. Excuse me, Rep. Stark, but the rest of us have learned that calling someone a fruitcake and challenging them with "'Oh, you think you are big enough to make me, you little wimp? Come over here and make me. I dare you,'" isn't grown up behavior.
The left has had their way for far too long. Their temper tantrums and childish displays are proof of that. My disgust and contempt for the Democratic Party grows with each passing day.
Also from RNS comes the Top Five Gun Myths, now full of holes. Copy this info down, because I don't know how long it will be there. Copy it, print it, keep it handy. And then spread it around. More guns, less crime. More info, hopefully less GWF's.
For those of you who weren't in the middle of a blazing hot field, working your ass off and sweating water you couldn't afford to lose, I'm sure you watched Tony Blair's speech. If, like me, you couldn't, you can find the text of it here.
And last but not least, if you don't read National Review Online, at least take time to read Jay Nordlinger's Impromptus. You can get more good info from that man in thirty seconds that you can on some news pages all day long.
The left has had their way for far too long. Their temper tantrums and childish displays are proof of that. My disgust and contempt for the Democratic Party grows with each passing day.
Also from RNS comes the Top Five Gun Myths, now full of holes. Copy this info down, because I don't know how long it will be there. Copy it, print it, keep it handy. And then spread it around. More guns, less crime. More info, hopefully less GWF's.
For those of you who weren't in the middle of a blazing hot field, working your ass off and sweating water you couldn't afford to lose, I'm sure you watched Tony Blair's speech. If, like me, you couldn't, you can find the text of it here.
And last but not least, if you don't read National Review Online, at least take time to read Jay Nordlinger's Impromptus. You can get more good info from that man in thirty seconds that you can on some news pages all day long.
Saddam's Terrorist Ties
Gee, now that the Butcher of Bagdad is gone, it seems that certain terrorist groups don't have the funding they used to.
The Left loves to scream that there's no proof that Saddam supported terrorism. "There's no proof! Other than Salman Pak, there's no proof! I mean, other than Salman Pak, and the $25,000 he was giving to families of suicide bombers, there's no proof! I mean, other than....." (ect., ect., ad infinitum)
Does anyone else feel like they're in a bad spin-off of Monty Python's "Spanish Inqusition" skit?
The Left loves to scream that there's no proof that Saddam supported terrorism. "There's no proof! Other than Salman Pak, there's no proof! I mean, other than Salman Pak, and the $25,000 he was giving to families of suicide bombers, there's no proof! I mean, other than....." (ect., ect., ad infinitum)
Does anyone else feel like they're in a bad spin-off of Monty Python's "Spanish Inqusition" skit?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)