Saturday, December 31, 2005


I was reading Malkin's blog this morning and ran across a post about a liberal political cartoonist named Mike Luckovich. You see back in October Mike did a cartoon by using the names of the then 2000 Americans killed in Iraq to form the word WHY as an obvious anti-war image. Then comes Danielle Ansley (17) who after seeing the WHY cartoon daily, as her mother had cut it out of the paper and put it on the refrigerator, created a response. I have to give it to Luckovich who put the response on his own blog and that he didn't delete the comment on his blog that sums things up best on this: "Is this only sad to me, that ML asks a question ‘WHY’ and the 17 year old, Danielle, knows the obvious answer, FREEDOM. Of course, Danielle, is not blinded by bias."

Friday, December 30, 2005

How my commute could be 90 seconds

My work commute is 6.5 miles and takes on average about 15 minutes, which is extremely short in silicon valley. My current daily driver is capable of making this commute in much less time but the abundance of many less qualified vehicles (and drivers) make this unachievable. Being the performance junky and car buff that I am, I manage to do some spirited driving in my daily commute even if it's only the boyish game of seeing everyone several hundred feet back in my review mirror after only a few seconds of leaving a stop light. My daily driver will do 0-60 in a tad over 5 seconds and has a wind limited top speed just over 140 mph...but this is with a 4800 lbs pickup. There is a strange exaggerated feeling when you have this kind of performance in the unexpected and heavy form of a truck. That's why I can appreciate the eye popping performance numbers of the new Bugatti Veyron. At 4200 lbs these numbers are more like what you would expect from a car weighing 1000 lbs less with the same power. Bugatti has obviously figured out how to best translate scary power (to go and to stop) in a way not achieved in any other production car to date. If you're not a car buff all of this is probably uninteresting and the physical experience I imagine from reading these numbers will be lost on you.

  • Quad turbo 8-liter 16-cylinder 1001 hp, 922 ft/lbs power plant
  • 10 radiators (what?)
  • 7 speed transaxle, 4 wheel drive
  • 0-60 in 2.5 sec
  • 0-150 in 7.5 sec
  • 253 mph top speed (limited to 234 until you use a special key and lower the cars ground clearance from 4.9 to 2.6 in!!!!)
  • 250-0 in less than 10 sec
  • $1,200,000

Killer Chihuahuas?

Five Chihuahuas attack a policeman! Ok, this raises so many questions: Why does anyone own one, let alone five, of these rat-dogs? Was this a great example of restraint shown by a police officer? Or maybe he left his gun or baton in the car? Maybe he was unaware that an average man can kick or throw a Chihuahua a good 50 feet? Why hasn't a REAL dog in the neighborhood eaten these mice? And in case you didn't know, the Chihuahua is the one under the chair!

Will MSM & Democrats support this leak probe?

Now that there is an official probe into the leak of the NSA eavesdropping program , approved by Bush post 9/11, it will be interesting to see the reaction of the press and hard left Democrats. The press will probably not like how the investigation will treat those at the NYTimes who received the leaked information. The usual Democrat's (like the Three Stooges in the post below) will likely show their typical liberal hypocrisy and denounce this investigation as an effort by the White House to deflect the issue of whether the NSA program was illegal. But of course they supported the Plame leak probe with enthusiasm!

Update 1, check the NYTimes' own article on this probe....sure enough the hypocrisy begins with the Times saying "Privacy advocates said today that the leak investigation should be set aside, at least for now, in favor of an investigation of the warrantless eavesdropping itself." Of course the privacy advocates they're talking about are the leftist ACLU and Electronic Privacy Information Center both of which are worried more about protecting terrorists and promoting anti-Bush projects than they are about civil liberties.

Update 2, Brent Baker at NewsBusters has a post on a biased piece done by ABC on the issue. Just goes to show you the little things you can do (like the choice of an a supposed expert, a piece of text on the TV screen, or something left out) to bias a story.

Wednesday, December 28, 2005

Associated Press & CNN's anti-Americanism

Bias in reporting by the MSM is nothing new, but I think the AP actually manufactures stories into anti-American hit pieces. This week what appears to be gang violence on a Toronto street, busy with holiday shoppers, took the life of a 15 yr old girl and wounded 6 others. The AP story appears on the CNN website with the headline Canada blames U.S. for gun violence. The mayor of Toronto and the Canadian Prime Minister are quoted as blaming the U.S. for a surge in violence and the use of guns. The Mayor and Prime Minister have made such comments about the U.S. and guns, but I can't find it related to this 15 yr girls killing. They are comments made prior and in regard to a growing youth and gang violence problem in Canada. As you peruse the Canadian press you don't find that "Canada" blames the U.S., you find that a few politicians are making excuses for other root cause problems they have failed to deal with. Interesting coverage from the Canadian Free Press, The Globe and Mail, and the largest paper The Star. When you look at the Canadian news coverage, and reaction of Canadian citizens, you would never come up with the headline that CNN used or focus the story on blaming the U.S. for increased violence in Canada as the AP did...unless your purpose was to create an anti-American story.

Friday, December 23, 2005

Three Democrat Stooges

Ok, there's a lot more than three Democrat stooges, but three get the distinction for being especially stooge like in the last few days. This was all sourced from today's WSJ Opinion Journal blog by James Taranto where you'll find a blurb on all three are worth a visit.

Stooge 1: Ted Kennedy whose op-ed in yesterday's Boston Globe calls Mao Tse-tung's "little red book" the Communist Manifesto which was actually written by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Ted was trying to point to a supposed abuse of government reach by referring to the likely made up story about a college student checking out the aforementioned book from a library which got him a visit from homeland security agents..NOT!

Stooge 2: Tom Daschle had an op-ed in today's Washington Post where as Taranto put it "the defeated Senate Democratic leader, weighs in on today's Washington Post op-ed page with a piece in which he argues that he and his erstwhile Senate colleagues never meant to authorize President Bush to fight terrorism in the U.S" Taranto also links Ed Morrissey's blog who sums up Daschle's newly reached position thusly: "Democrats have to be the worst historical revisionists still received by polite society or have been truly clueless about the nature of the war on Islamofascist terror since its start. Daschle actually makes a case for both in his essay" and "Perhaps Daschle didn't notice, but the entire reason that Congress passed the war resolution was that the United States got attacked--inside the United States. It's as if that context never occurs to Daschle."

Stooge 3: Harry Reid apparently told a gathering that "we killed the Patriot Act." and then on Monday decided to clarify what he meant by saying the maybe he should have said was "we killed the conference report" and went on and on blaming his poor choice of words on his lack of education and not having had an English class. Tarranto pounces on this in the following way; This is the same Harry Reid who, a little over a year ago, called Justice Clarence Thomas "an embarrassment to the Supreme Court" because "I think that his opinions are poorly written." If Reid's literacy is as defective as he himself claims it is, doesn't this make him, by his own standard, an embarrassment to the Senate?

Further, if Reid never even had an English class, what qualifies him to evaluate Justice Thomas's writings? Or was he merely stereotyping Thomas as unintelligent because of his race, in the manner of ignorant men throughout history?

You've Got To Be Freaking Kidding Me!

Grinchy remark sends kids home in tears:

Who says there's no war on Christmas! Now they've taken the battle to 6 year olds.

"Theresa Farrisi stood in for Schaeffer’s regular music teacher one day last week. One of her assignments was to read Clement C. Moore’s famous poem, “A Visit from Saint Nicholas” to a first-grade class at Lickdale Elementary School.

“The poem has great literary value, but it goes against my conscience to teach something which I know to be false to children, who are impressionable,” said Farrisi, 43, of Myerstown. “It’s a story. I taught it as a story. There’s no real person called Santa Claus living at the North Pole.”

Farrisi doesn’t believe in Santa Claus, and she doesn’t think anyone else should, either. She made her feelings clear to the classroom full of 6- and 7-year-olds, some of whom went home crying."

Nice, let's have teachers tell our kids what they should believe in.

Thursday, December 22, 2005

Left Paranoia

The NSA story continues to have legs beyond any legal questions. The left is, of course, always convinced that a Republican administration has no noble effort when they use the FBI, CIA, NSA and military for anything. There is always a conspiracy! Bush really isn't trying to prevent the next 9/11, he is instead trying to find out what ordinary citizens (that have a tie to a known terrorist) are talking about. Ya, sure that makes sense! So, to try to convince those who don't fully understand what we must do to properly fight this war, the media likes to throw out "parallels" or "echoes"! Like this "phone-spying program has disturbing echoes of arguments once used by South AfricaƂ’s apartheid regime" piece. Ya, and Iraq parallels Vietnam, or the NSA spying echoes Hitler's Nazi Germany and so on. If you have actual evidence of wrong doing or why an approach to a problem is wrong present it on it's face value. Trying to attach some other unrelated negative event or person to your argument weakens, not strengthens, it.

Update, some informed points on the NSA and the Patriot Act I found on Hewitt's blog by a former FBI profiler that support my view.

Wednesday, December 21, 2005

Colleges Aren't Asking & Aren't Telling

Here's something I find most interesting:

Many colleges (especially on the left coast) are prohibiting military recruiters from visiting their campii due the military ban on gays serving openly (don't get me started on that one) yet they gladly take money from Suadi royalty to expand programs that "study Islam and the Muslim world".

Georgetown University recently accepted $20 Million from Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal.

Now last time I checked the Saudi's were vehemently anti-gay (it's a crime punishable by beheading) and anti-women's rights (they're not allowed to drive, or to leave the country without a male "guardian's" permission).

But I guess that's okay with the leftists.

The evolution of man is a THEORY!

The U.S. District court ruling this week that said teaching intelligent design violated a constitutional ban on teaching religion in public schools is a joke. First, go and do some research on intelligent design theory (IDT) and tell me what religion it teaches? This ruling is so wrong not just from its religious connection being off base but on what it says about schools. The religion hating crowd (mostly liberals and funny that they aren't tolerant isn't it) is apparently afraid of people making up their own minds. It's also interesting that from religious fanatics to the more broad minded IDT supporters, they all would support teaching all three THEORIES on how man got on planet earth; creation, evolution and intelligent design. Those who wish only evolution to be taught wouldn't except presentation of other theories. Students are capable of understanding the application of deductive reasoning in order to absolutely prove any of these theories as fact is not possible with what we know today. The students can also understand that millions around the world will believe one of these theories to be true, that is their belief. To only present a young mind with a single theory, evolution, on the question of the origin of man is tantamount to brain washing.

RNC versus DNC, which looks good to you?

In hearing that Howard Dean put out an email letter to donkey supporters I had to check the DNC website. Wow, just go there and contrast it with the front page of the RNC website! The energy the DNC site spends on attacking others is amazing. Their site is full of "Bush lies", "Republicans are corrupt", and the like. No matter where you navigate around the DNC site you will find the overwhelming focus is on attacking people (being Bush and republicans) as opposed to offering up solutions to deal with issues. The comparison is telling. It's also interesting that the DNC has a People link, and page, on their home page. Under it are sections for African Americans, Asian, Pacific Islanders, Disability Community (doesn't this mean all dems?), Hispanics, GLBT community (I had to look this up, are you kidding me?), several others and oh yes...Women. Ok, now visit anyone of these and it's just more about how Bush, or some other GOP agent, is doing your particular group wrong. I like how in the African American (read BLACK) section are stories about how Bush or the administration has done poorly responding to Katrina. So the DNC is saying Kartina is a BLACK issue? And, what if you're a Women Transexual do you visit the GLBT page or the Women page? Both parties should treat all those who align with their philosophy, or even don't, the same. You Democrats must be so proud of your leadership's divisive, hateful, separatist, finger pointing and inability to except that Bush is your president.

Tuesday, December 20, 2005

Thank You for Wiretapping

The WSJ Review & Outlook opinion piece today called "Thank You for Wiretapping" nails it. Once again senators (even some Republicans) are playing fast and loose because of political ideology with the result being to impede presidential powers and to undermine our military and our security agencies during a time of perpetual war to thwart terrorism against us and our allies. Tell me how I'm wrong? Tell me how this isn't a case of it's Bush so it must be wrong, abusive or illegal? You can't have it both ways "Stop them, catch them, but don't watch them or listen to them".

Update 1, Hugh Hewitt has a post on Jay Rockefeller's letters to the Vice President on his concerns over the NSA program he was briefed on. Like Hugh, and some liberal Bloggers, I agree that it appears Rockefeller wanted to distance himself without any outright disapproval of the program. As Hugh put it "Rockefeller's "feeble" note, as one lefty put it, is a great symbol of the entire Democratic Party's approach to the war. These are not the people you want running it, or even close to the controls."

Update 2, we now see that Carter and Clinton approved searches and surveillance without court orders. Michelle Malkin also has a nice post on the "spying on Americans" uproar with links to other sources. It turns out it was just made public that as part of the ongoing law enforcement work just after the Oklahoma City bombing the U.S. government used a spy satellite to gather intelligence on a white separatist compound in Oklahoma. Where is the outrage on this? From Michelle's post "The Left believes the government should do whatever it takes to fight terrorists--­but only when the terrorists look like Timothy McVeigh. If you're on the MCI Friends and Family plan of Osama bin Laden and Abu Zubaydah, you're home free."

Update 3, the ACLU demands (whatever) records regarding the NSA's surveillance...ya right! They don't however demand any records for the spying that was done on the skin heads in Oklahoma! The ACLU looks out for your civil liberties as long as you think like them or are a Muslim!

Update 4, John at Powerline posts his email exchange with one of the reporters at the NYTimes who "scooped" the NSA story. John's exchange is typical of a well thought out fact and referenced based conservative position on an issue, and the reporters responses (which have stopped coming) reflect the typical liberal terse hollow response that ignores the last retort! As I have said previously, numerous bloggers spent several days (versus the NYTimes having a year+) researching the NSA story and the legality of what has happened. It's pretty easy to build the case that this was legal based on the constitution and on recent precedent set by the actions of other presidents as well as rulings by SCOTUS. In fact, it's so easy to build the case for this being legal one could only conclude to put out a story suggesting the contrary was done knowingly to mislead.

Update 5, Democrats thankfully cave in (6 month Patriot Act extension) probably only because they checked polling numbers and found that most American's think their idiotic sky-is-falling civil liberties stance on intelligence measures that help keep us safe is just plain wrong.

Monday, December 19, 2005

A masterful FU

I have to give my compliments to Arnold who pulled off a friendly and eloquent FU today. Government officials in Graz, his Austrian hometown had poor things to say about Arnold not granting clemency to the Tookster. Arnold was their beloved son, who they named a sports stadium after and who they gave a ring of honor, whose name they use to promote the city. In a friendly letter, written as if he was doing the mayor of his hometown a favor, Arnold told them to remove his name from the stadium and to stop using his name to promote the city. He also wrote "Since, however, the official Graz appears to no longer accept me as one of their own, this ring has lost its meaning and value to me. It is already in the mail," and noted city officials would receive follow up letters from his attorney.

Who should profit from our oil use?

And the hypocrisy continues as the Democrats threaten a filibuster on the defense spending bill that just passed in the house because it includes drilling for oil in ANWR. So the Republicans used the system to attach ANWR to defense spending so as to show opponents are soft on defense, good move! The Democrats are pissed off, once again being schooled by the Republicans. First, the arguments against drilling on ANWR's 1.5M acres are a joke. Modern drilling uses very little land and has very little effect on wildlife habitat especially considering how little space the facilities would take. But worse is the lefts complaint on our reliance on foreign oil. You have the possible minor disruption of caribou, polar bears, migratory birds and other wildlife over our dependence on middle east oil and Democrats choose the later? Explain that to me! They would rather us continue our dependence and force restrictions on SUV's. New Jersey's Sen. Frank Lautenberg said "This is a Christmas package designed for delivery to the oil industry, and we have got to fight as hard as we can to stop that delivery". SO would rather have the money go to the Saudi's, Iran, Kuwait, Libya, Iraq, United Arab Emirates, etc.? And if not, your concern over a few animals being disrupted in the boonies trumps your concern over 250M Americans? What the hell is wrong with US oil companies doing well? WHAT THE F!!!!! Ted Kennedy is all for wind power as long as you don't put the wind mill in his ocean view. Democrats think everything we do in the middle east is about oil and fail to embrace a head on approach to fix that. They would rather F*** the consumer, and business, instead of an animal. Putting ANWR on the bill is fair game, this is how the system works. We should have been drilling there 30 yrs ago. The Democrats take the PETA approach when it comes to our energy dependence and security...but they're patriots and support the troops! NOT

Political Amnesia or Hypocrisy?

Gee, have any of those rule-of-law Democrats who cried for heads to roll for the outing of not-so-secrete secret agent Valerie Plame asked for the same in the case of the NSA's program to eavesdrop on dozens of Al-Qaida linked targets leaked to the NYTimes? Of course not, and I even bet if you ask one of them they will argue that the Plame joke is as serious as the NSA program! Of course they want the President to explain the eavesdropping program and its legality. They however don't seem to care about an NSA leak or that a dozen times top members of both parties were briefed on the program. If anyone who was briefed those twelve times thought a law was broken wasn't it their duty to expose it? The democrats take positions and lob criticism purely based on political winds...there are so few in that party who are not overtly hypocritical or show a consistent core set of beliefs...good God!

Update: Let's see what happens when a few folks are killed or maimed with stolen high tech plastic explosives...I bet the general public will be happy to give up a few so called civil liberties then!

Saturday, December 17, 2005

To secure, or not to secure?

If things continue to improve in Iraq and we draw down troop levels as Iraqi's take over their security the Dems will suffer dramatically in the mid term elections next year. The divide on making our country secure between the left and right has become as polarizing as say abortion or the death penalty. So while the House passed tougher immigration legislation the Dems then block extension of the Patriot Act. The Dems get all fired up when maybe the Quran is flushed, or terror suspects are made uncomfortable, and so it will be interesting to see who denounces Bush's ordering eavesdropping of a few dozen people of interest shortly after 9/11 without a court order. You would think the result of poor intelligence (Iraq) would improve support for our ability to gather intelligence (Patriot Act and yes secret eavesdropping). Music concerts I attended 25 years ago had clothing searches for bottles, and such, prior to entry. Fast forward to today and civil libertarians are suddenly up in arms (NFL entry searches) when the old alcohol search is labeled as anti-terrorism security. It's sad that a tragedy like a suicide bombing at a large ACLU gathering probably wouldn't convince the civil rights all costs crowd that their stance on homeland security in general is wrong.

Democrats vs. America Part II

Just when you think they can't get any more pathetic they find a way to top themselves.

"House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said yesterday that Democrats should not seek a unified position on an exit strategy in Iraq, calling the war a matter of individual conscience and saying differing positions within the caucus are a source of strength for the party."

So your party shouldn't seek a unified position about winning a war? I wonder why not. Why wouldn't you want the brave US troops fighting that war to know that you back them 100%?

Oh wait, I get it! It's so that no matter which way the war goes you can continue to criticize without having to offer any freaking ideas about how it could go better. Other then just pulling a surrender that would make the French proud of us.

The MSM & the Democrats vs. America

One day after the historic vote in Iraq, a vote where Iraqi insurgents were actually safeguarding the polls, what is the main focus of the MSM?

This of course: Bush Approved Eavesdropping, Official Says .

Oooh, scary! The facist Bush is once again destroying our so called civil rights, right?

Wrong! The NSA is an evesdropping agency, that's its primary mission. They are authorized to monitor US citizens when they are outside the US. So what's the big problem? Well, the President decided (he issued an executive order and informed the Senate Intelligence Committee-including the democrats who sit on that committee, and he went through all the proper channels after making this decision) that it would be alright to monitor phone calls between suspected terrorists when they are in the country and they are calling somewhere outside the country. Egads!

Not only is it not illegal or improper for the NSA to do this, this program has been very effective in the past. In fact, in November of 2003 John Ashcroft gave a speech to the 2003 National Lawyers Convention and talked about this very program!

Here's part of what he said:

"Here's an example of how we use the act. Some of you are familiar with the case of Iman Ferris, a naturalized United States citizen who worked as a truck driver out of Columbus, Ohio. Using information sharing allowed under the PATRIOT Act, law enforcement pieced together Ferris' activities -- how Ferris met senior al Qaeda operatives in a training camp in Afghanistan; how he was asked to procure equipment that might cause train derailments and sever suspension systems of bridges; how he traveled to New York to scout a potential terrorist target. Now, Ferris pleaded guilty on May 1, 2003, and on October 28, he was

sentenced under the PATRIOT Act's tough sentences. He'll serve 20 years in prison for providing material support to al Qaeda and the conspiracy for the terrorist organization, providing them with information about possible U.S. targets for attack.The Ferris case illustrates what the PATRIOT Act does. One thing the PATRIOT Act does not do is to allow the investigation of individuals "solely on the basis of activities protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States." We know that it does not do that. And even if the law did not prohibit it, the Justice Department has neither the time nor the inclination to delve into the reading habits or other First Amendment activities of our citizens. "

There were other plots in England and Ireland that were exposed by this very program. A program that affected perhaps 500 people a year. The administration asked the New York Times not to publish this story so the NYT sat on this story for more than a year. So, why come out with the story now?

To take a great victory from President Bush, there's simply no other reason.

So the question is how does exposing this program make America safer? It doesn't. But it gives the Democrats another avenue of attack on the administration.

Don't you find it curious that the Democrats only care about leaks if they have absolutely nothing to do with national security? I guess the Democrats feel so safe here in the US that they need to spend their time attacking the institutions that make them safe.


Friday, December 16, 2005

2005 is the hottest year ever?

Yes, according to U.K. scientists 2005 was the warmest year since the 1860's when temperature records started being kept. Of course the studies authors say this is more evidence of human-induced global warming. Really? Let me get this straight, first you're saying 2005 was 0.65 C above the average from 1961 to 1990 which represents the baseline. And you say your calculations on that have an error of 0.1 C. And your baseline time window is only 0.00000058% of the earth's approximate 5 billion year history, but you're claiming only a 15% error rate? Ya, right! This is a joke. This is simply a miniscule sampling of surface temperature with nothing to connect human produced gas emissions to that temperature. Scientists and meteorologist have already come out saying that our unusual global hurricane season is part of a normal cycle. Whose to say that we aren't in a normal temperature cycle given the base line is only 29 years for christ sake! Even when global warming studies do talk about human produced gas and particulate emissions they almost never compare those to naturally occurring carbon particulate and various gas emissions from say volcanoes (annually the volcanoes beat out man each year).

Thursday, December 15, 2005

Minority Report: abuse or free market?

Today, a report by the California Reinvestment Coalition (CRC) was released and the conclusion the local media drew was reflected in the headline "Minorities pay more for home loans". Of course the CRC is happy with that headline since their mission is advocating for increased access to credit on behalf of California's low income communities. Wouldn't it be important, for the analysis of home loan data, to compare loan costs and rates for consumers with the same income level, job history, credit report score all against race?

Of course it would. That would in fact be the only way to say "minorities pay more for home loans" Otherwise you better say "minorities who as compared to a white counterpart make less, have less job history and have poorer credit scores pay more for home loans"! This study is so flawed its a total joke. For all we know even if they took into account the variables I mentioned it might be that yet another variable is the key, like education. In the end this is a free market, you don't need to take a loan from any particular bank or institution. You can shop for the best deal, but you have to be smart enough to do so. If you're not smart enough to open up a simple bank account so that you don't have to pay a fee to one of those strip mall check cashing stores then whose fault is that? In case you like to do your homework, the CRC's study is 50 pages and I scanned it. They do admit they don't have the ESSENTIAL credit score as part of the study but they, of course, blame it on the industry. The only mention of credit score is this two sentence disclaimer on the very last page.

"HMDA data is limited in that certain elements of conventional underwriting such as credit scores, loan to value ratios, and debt to income ratios are not available. While CRC and other community groups continue to call for HMDA reporting requirements to be strengthened, the industry continues to fight adamantly against any and all expansions of HMDA."

Groups like the CRC are why the HMDA (Home Mortgage Disclosure Act) exists. It requires lenders to report certain data but the key piece of data is race. Any guesses how many lenders asked for race on their loan applications prior to the passing of the HMDA? Oh, I'm sure before the HMDA the loan officer was secretely tagging applications for higher rates and fees based purely on the applicant being a minority! This is the same failed logic employed by affirmitive action propenents. They believe most business owners and hiring managers will not hire the best candidate if that candidate is of a certain race. You would only think that's a systemic problem if you have never been a business owner or hiring manager, or you work in a government or union job where there is no reason to hire the best.

Dems will surely put a negative spin on Iraqi vote

While even the New York Times can't deny the amazing voter turn out (they say it might be 11m of the 15.5m eligible) in today's Iraqi election I'm sure we will hear negative spin from Dean, Peloci, Kerry, Murtha, etc. After all, they have spent so much energy still harping on the issue of why we went into Iraq in the first place they can't now embrace the positive benefits of a democracy smack dab in the middle of Muslim hell! The next few days should be interesting!

Wednesday, December 14, 2005

A more qualified opinion

We all have opinions on Iraq and what the "plan" should be but most of us are just arm chair quarterbacking our way through it. Very few who have visited Iraq, especially of late, come back and support a cut in run or a time based pull out. They usually adopt pretty much the plan on the White House website which bases the reduction of troops on the ability of Iraqi's to maintain order and control. I even discount "former" military generals (on down) as war is not a mathematical equation that always comes out the same given the same inputs. The most informed opinion on this comes from those executing the mission, as is the case with Marine Major Ben Connable whose opinion column appears in today's WaPo.

Semper Fidelis

Iran's Terrorist Nuclear President

Probably the most dreaded terrorist act would be the detonation of a nuclear device in a populated city. Some suggest this is difficult because; there really is no such thing as a suitcase size nuke, very technical skills are required to prepare and detonate a nuke, the nukes out of the old U.S.S.R are old and crusty and unlikely to work, and so on. But with North Korea and Iran having nuclear programs to build a device and add their ability to deliver it conventionally (i.e. by rocket or missile) and we should be very concerned. Now, the terrorist President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (shown here in a 1979 photo where he participated in the American embassy hostage taking) is stepping up the crazy talk. His latest is to Holocaust is a myth. I can't figure out if this guy is taunting Israel, Germany, the U.S. into a fight or he is just looney.

Tuesday, December 13, 2005

Europeans Outraged at Schwarzenegger

The Associated Press shows it's liberal pacifist bias as they essentially create a non-story. They connect a celebrity politician (Arnold) and a hot ethical topic (Tookie Executie) and then find some leftists wacko's in Europe (although nobody that matters) to show their total ignorance in suggesting Arnold is to blame. Note all the anti-death penalty sentiment in the article that isn't directed at Arnold by the source, but it's inclusion implies the connection. Dishonest bogus sensationalistic crap journalism at it's best.

Bias or poor fact checking?

I was reading Michelle Malkin's blog today and found out the headlines I've been seeing everywhere quoting Dubya as saying "30,000 civilians killed in Iraq" is in fact being universally incorrectly described. The actual question put to Bush to which he gave this answer included Iraq military, police, insurgents, translators and yes civilians. Here's the exact dialog found on the White House website :

Q Since the inception of the Iraqi war, I'd like to know the approximate total of Iraqis who have been killed. And by Iraqis I include civilians, military, police, insurgents, translators.

THE PRESIDENT: How many Iraqi citizens have died in this war? I would say 30,000, more or less, have died as a result of the initial incursion and the ongoing violence against Iraqis. We've lost about 2,140 of our own troops in Iraq.

Now look at a Google search of how the MSM describes the 30,000

Monday, December 12, 2005

Beware parents of would be law students

If you have a high school child who's bent (even with what I hope was your considerable effort to dissuade) on going to law school, it would be prudent to look up which law schools were part of the recent Rumsfeld vs. FAIR debacle. If you've not been paying attention this was the case recently heard by SCOTUS where law schools would not like to have military recruiters on compass. Of course the government correctly made a big thing called government funding tied to free (and equal) access by said recruiters. And thus the case before SCOTUS. FAIR claims that the military's "don't ask, don't tell" gay stance is why they don't want to give recruiters access. But frankly I find this hard to believe. Are the 36 law schools that support FAIR riddled with gay staff and students? Is the gay lobby really this powerful that they have 36 very large universities doing their bidding? (well, maybe yes on that one) I think this is fueled by the university elite who are overwhelmingly anti-war and anti-military irregardless of the circumstance. I have not heard this put forward by others, but it would interesting to see or hear about some of the meetings that go on inside of FAIR.

So, if I were you I would give one last try at talking your child out of becoming a shyster...if that fails make sure the law school they choose isn't part of the group supporting FAIR. That group seems to be clueless about finding a good litigator or a good legal strategy!

FAIR = Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights
SCOTUS = Supreme Court of the United States

Tookie, Tookie, Electrocutey!

Let me add my 2 cents to Splash2's post below. The electric chair isn't in the picture but Tookie is to be put to death by lethal injection. While I'm thrilled that Arnold did the right thing (albeit after the crazy leftist 9th Circuit U.S.CA said it wouldn't intervene) in not granting clemency this is sad day. Not because Tookie will meet his maker. But because it's taken 26 years to carry out a death sentence, and that it will be done by a so called "humane" method of lethal injection. The anti-death penalty crowd says the death penalty is not a duh! The way we implement it it's like putting your 30 year son in a time out for hitting his sister when he was 5. Justice for these animals needs to be swift and scary. It's time we had a 1 year window of appeal from the date and time of conviction in death penalty cases. And the electric chair should be put back in action.

Frankly I don't care if the inmates in the prison system have riots after midnight tonight...let em hurt each other. It will however be sad if the poor sections of cities like LA see black instigated violence. It will not help the case of those who claim the poor black community isn't to blame for their lot in life if a subset of that group commits violent acts in protest of the death sentence of a murderer of 4 innocent people.

Only in Hollywood

It strikes me funny the way Hollywood leftists can continually hold such contradictory ideas in their miniscule minds without ever acknowledging the obvious contradictions.

Case in point; Tookie Williams. Here's a guy who founded the Crips and ended up in prison for killing four people by shooting them point blank with a double barreled shotgun. By all accounts he's still involved with the Crips and directs gang activity over the phone and he consorts with other Crips members in jail. Sounds like a great candidate for execution, right?

Of course not! See, he found God and he now rights "anti-gang" children's books. How sweet. So now he has the likes of Susan Sarandon, Tim Robbins, Mike Farrell, former Crip Snoop Doggy Dogg, Danny Glover, Anjelica Huston, Jamie Foxx, and Bonnie Raitt on his side asking for an audience with the Governor to beg for clemency.

So if you're a murderer and you find God and you then channel that newfound spirituality into changing the hearts and minds of chidren then that's a good and proper thing to do.

But if you're the President and you find God you're just another right-wing fanatic who is only worhty of loathing and disrespect.


Friday, December 09, 2005

White Flag Crowd

You gotta love the Democrat leadership (Dean and Peloci) and their anti-military, anti-anti-terrorism, anti-middle-east-democracy stance. And as one blogger I read pointed out this is not the work of fringe Democrats..this is the F'ing leadership! Of course they deny this is a white flag stance which is obsurd given what they say and do. And here is some of the latest reality:

Dean loving Code Pink

GOP video with Dean's we can't win, Peloci withdrawal now, Kerry's claim our guys in Iraq are terrorizing women and children

Daily Standard White Flag Boys

Washington Post's take on strong antiwar comments

Wednesday, December 07, 2005

Rumy on the media's Iraq bias

Nice speech by Rumsfeld on Monday at the School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University. The theme of the speech is the focus the media puts on the death toll, the latest car bombing or suicide bombing of citizens, and not the big picture. He was very diplomatic giving the editors and reporters the benefit of the doubt, but I don't. I think their bias is not innocent or unconscious. The media knows if it's been looking at events through a soda straw, as Rumy put it, and therefore paint an intentionally inaccurate view of the forest!

"You couldn't tell the full story of Iwo Jima simply by listing the nearly 26,000 American casualties over about 40 days; or explain the importance of Grant's push to Virginia just by noting the savagery of the battles. So too, in Iraq, it is appropriate to note not only how many Americans have been killed"

While it's great the WSJ printed this, I would love to see Rumsfeld hit the big network news and opinion shows and do so with the chief editors for those networks. I would like to see Rumsfeld ask why they run stories about the victories of thousands of terrorists versus nearly zero stories about the victories for the 25M citizens of Iraq. It would be hard to defend! America is at war, and maybe that has not been accepted by the crowd (Dean, Kerry, Murtha, and their ilk, the MSM) that appears to literally want us to fail in Iraq. The war is real. Our safety today, not to mention the way of life for our children and beyond, is at stake. Could you imagine the U.S. MSM acting this way during WWII? The comparison is appropriate.

Tuesday, December 06, 2005

Tuesday Speed Blogging

I sure like how Chief Justice Roberts is dealing with the ability of military recruiters to recruit on college/law school campus (else don't take federal aide).

Howard Dean, a traitor to our country but hopefully not Democrats (please back this mad man, it will be your demise!)

You gotta love that anti-war activists are going to hound Hillary! Will she now pull a Kerry-esque flip-flop?

And speaking of Kerry....he's still playing the same game he played when he showed his lack of stripes during his Vietnam protest days....LOSER!

Oh, and this is rich...the supposed secrete prisons in Europe, where prisoner torture is alleged, have caused such an uproar that Washington reported to have moved prisoners to North Africa. All this ahead of Condi's visit to if she was going to stumble on the secrete prisons that the Bush hating press hasn't been able to find. I love this kind of HIGH QUALITY story where anonymous sources are quoted and "media reports have revealed"..boy these guys sure set the bar high don't they!

Friday, December 02, 2005

Terrorist Negotiations

Christian peace activist: "Excuse me Mr. Swords of Righteousness Brigade guy, ah see I'm a peace activist, I try to find and expose bad things the U.S. and it's allies do here in Iraq. I'm on your side, so ah, we are good right?"

Islamic terrorist guy: "Silence you infidel scum, we tell the world you shall die unless all prisoners in U.S. and Iraqi detention centers are released. Now shut up while I sharpen my sword....Akbar, charge the camcorder battery"

Murtha vs. Lieberman

Democrat John Murtha makes comments about the pulling out of Iraq immediately (thus losing the war) and how our military is "broken" and "living hand-to-mouth" and what happens? Media frenzy! He's in every major newspaper and a headliner on all the major TV news shows.

Democrat Joseph Lieberman writes a great op-ed piece for the Wall Street Journal backing the Bush Administration including this statement:

"I have just returned from my fourth trip to Iraq in the past 17 months and can report real progress there. More work needs to be done, of course, but the Iraqi people are in reach of a watershed transformation from the primitive, killing tyranny of Saddam to modern, self-governing, self-securing nationhood—unless the great American military that has given them and us this unexpected opportunity is prematurely withdrawn.”

What happens? Media silence. According to the Media Research Center both the ABC and CBS evening news failed to “utter a syllable” about Lieberman’s Iraq assessment while NBC simply ran a brief Lieberman clip. This after all three networks made the news of Murtha’s call for withdrawal a leading story only some two weeks ago.

As for the print media, here’s a run down:

• The Washington Post did not acknowledge Lieberman’s comments in its Nov. 29 and Nov. 30 editions. This despite running a front-page story on Nov. 30 headlined, “U.S. Debate on Pullout Resonates As Troops Engage Sunnis in Talks.”

• The New York Times had no space for Lieberman, either. They did find room, however, to run a Nov. 30 story headlined, “Senator Clinton Calls for Withdrawal from Iraq to Begin in 2006.” This “call” took place in a letter Clinton wrote to constituents.

• The Boston Globe carried a 479-word Associated Press story on Nov. 28 that perverted Lieberman’s comments, focusing on the potential of a “significant” withdrawal in ’06 rather than the progress in Iraq that Lieberman hoped to report.

What MSM bias?

Thursday, December 01, 2005

World AIDS Day? Spare me.....

Just listening to the news and the lead item at the top of the hour was a story about "World AIDS Day". What the heck is that? Why does that get so much press? What about "World Cancer Day"? World Diabetes Day"? "World MS Day"? Etc...

Some guy is quoted as saying something along the lines of "It's very important that we get the message out that AIDS/HIV is still a big problem and there is still no cure for it".... Oh really? The message out? Are you kidding me? Who doesn't know that the following activities are risky: Unprotected anal sex between homosexuals? Unprotected sex with a prostitute? Sharing needles among drug addicts? Everybody knows by participating in any of these activities, the possibility of contracting AIDS and ulitimately dieing from HIV is extremely high! Here is the cure for AIDS.... STOP HAVING UNPROTECTED SEX AND SHARING NEEDLES!!!

The amount of money that is funneled to companies and universities for research to find a cure for AIDS makes me sick! The amount of people in the United States who die from AIDS/HIV is way down the list but the amount of money that is allocated is disproportionate. Curious about some statistics?

US deaths in 2002 by disease:
Total = 2,400,000
  • Cardiovascular disease - 937,000
  • Cancer - 553,000
  • Respiratory Failure - 122,000
  • Diabetes - 69,000
  • Influenza & Pneumonia - 65,000
  • Alzheimers - 50,000
  • Motor Vehicle Accidents - 43,000
  • Kidney Failure - 36,000
  • Blood Disease - 31,000
  • Firearms - 29,000
  • AIDS/HIV - 16,000
This isn't to say that I don't have sympathy for the people who die from AIDS but as far as I'm concerned, it is the MOST preventable disease out of all of those listed.

Tiny's Death Penalty Clemency Plan

With the hopefully impending execution of Stanley "Tookie" Williams in 2 weeks I felt it necessary to show I have some compassion. So I have come up with my plan that would allow clemency for a death row inmate. It's very simple, the inmate, in order to receive a second chance at life must meet the following four (all four) requirements and their sentence will be commuted to life in prison without parole.
  1. The cost of the police work, prosecution/trial and incarceration (every single cost associated with their prison stay) to date must be paid in full to those who incurred these costs.
  2. A monthly fee for the continued incarceration costs for the life of the inmate must be paid to the state.
  3. All murder victims of the inmate must be brought back to life to get their second chance at life.
  4. All income the victims would have made since they were murdered multiplied times 10 needs to be paid immediately to each victim upon accomplishing #3.

This is the only fair plan as it attempts to compensate most who suffer from these murderers. It's interesting that these bleeding heart psycho liberals who march, protest, sit-in, etc. each and every pending execution spend no time at all on the victims! Any bets on how much time, or help, Jessie Jackson, Bianca Jagger, Jamie Foxx, Snoop Dogg, Mike Farrell, these two sick freaks in Marin, and the NAACP have spent with Tookie's victims? These are all Tookie supporters! If Tookie was truly a changed man he should say "That while I hope for clemency, my execution should serve as a message to our youth that can choose the right or wrong path. I have committed great sins including the creation of a still active street gang....I should pay for these mistakes and if that is by the termination of my life then I hope God will have mercy on me".

Update: Heard a caller to a talk radio show make an interesting comment...the caller was willing to bet that Buff & Cindy (the sicks freaks in Marin linked above) would be happy to escort their 13 year old grandaughter to get an abortion without telling her parents. How would they defend this duplicity?

This guy could have been President?

I'm sure many who saw the NBC Today Show interview with John Kerry this morning didn't catch how Kerry stumbled. One thing he does better than Bush is that when he is tripped up and not responding very well he doesn't sound like it as much as Bush does....but, he surely did a poor job responding to the question that his plan for Iraq sounds pretty much like Bush's (it's a about a minute into the video, and yes you must sit thru an advert!). After Matt Lauer apparently was too much for Kerry to handle, they then did a spot with Katie (are you getting my good side) Couric doing a response on Bush's Iraq strategy with Mary Matalin (on the same video page as the Kerry spot) who did a great job.

Thursday Speed Blogging

Lieberman, a Democrat I could vote for! He's likely not popular with the left right now.

Hillary is trying to have it both ways, and her support in the party might also be in jeopardy!

WHAT? There's an explanation for our flurry of hurricanes that doesn't finger global warming!

The pot calling the kettle black! From my own anonymous source who said "You gotta love MSM pukes who don't even see the obvious hypocritical blunders they make!"

And yet another example of hypocrisy, but this time it's anti-war, anti-American "pacifists"

Wednesday, November 30, 2005

Islam The Religion of Peace

Here's a great website to go and check out. It has a list of Islamic terrorist attacks carried out over the past 12 months.

And for those of you who would say "Of course there are so many attacks it's all because we're in Iraq. So it's all about Iraq."

Here's their answer:
"Yep, It's All About Iraq and...
India and the Sudan and Algeria and Afghanistan and New York and Pakistan and Israel and Russia and Chechnya and the Philippines and Indonesia and Nigeria and Thailand and Spain and Egypt and Bangladesh and Saudi Arabia and Ingushetia and Dagestan and Britain and Turkey and Kabardino-Balkaria and Morocco and Yemen and Lebanon and France and Uzbekistan and Gaza and Tunisia and Kosovo and Bosnia and Mauritania and Kenya and Eritrea and Syria and Somalia and California and Kuwait and Virginia and Ethiopia and Iran and Jordan and United Arab Emirates and Louisiana and Texas and Tanzania and Sri Lanka and Pennsylvania and Belgium and Denmark and East Timor and Qatar and Maryland and the Netherlands and Scotland and...

...and pretty much wherever Muslims believe their religion tells them to:

"Fight and slay the Unbelievers wherever ye find them. Seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war."
Qur'an, Sura 9:5

Is There Anything We Can't Blame Bush For?

Apparently not. Earlier this week four individuals were taken hostage by the heretofore unknown terrorist group “The Swords of Righteousness Brigade”, all four belonged to a anti-war group called the "Christian Peacemaker Teams", a group that blames American foreign policy for 9/11, who served as human shields earlier in the war and who ran an "Adopt-a-Detainee" program for terrorist suspects held at Gitmo, and this group places the blame at the feet of President Bush.

Here's a little snipet from their official statement:

"We are angry because what has happened to our teammates is the result of the actions of the U.S. and U.K. governments due to the illegal attack on Iraq and the continuing occupation and oppression of its people. Christian Peacemaker Teams (CPT) has worked for the rights of Iraqi prisoners who have been illegally detained and abused by the U.S. government. We were the first people to publicly denounce the torture of Iraqi people at the hands of U.S. forces, long before the western media admitted what was happening at Abu Ghraib. We are some of the few internationals left in Iraq who are telling the truth about what is happening to the Iraqi people We hope that we can continue to do this work and we pray for the speedy release of our beloved teammates."

So it seems to me that the terrorists should love the CPT people and yet it appears they don't. Hmmm...go figure.

Tuesday, November 29, 2005

California public schools need change

My local paper (a silicon valley neighborhood rag) has a new education column written by a teacher and principle with 32 years experience. I'm sure most think that makes him an expert and worth listening to. Not me as his maiden column confirmed he's part of the problem with our public schools. The column was titled Report cards are overrated as an indicator of progress. You can guess the rest....Unbelievable...I wrote a response letter which the paper printed this week, it's title Indicator of progress falls back on schools.

Al-Jazeera, can we either blow it up or put them under surveillance?

Most reports in Iraq just hang out in the big cities waiting to report on the latest insurgent or terrorist bombing. There are very few venturing outside of a few cities to see what's going on around the country. There is apparently nothing good happening in Iraq. But worse than the regular MSM is Al-Jazeera who serves these vile criminals. It's amazing how quickly following an incident that Al-Jazeera will air the propaganda from the perpetrators. It's also ironic that the most recent kidnap victims are peace activists. As Glock26 commented "maybe they'll be able to hug their way of it".

I assume that the only reason not to bomb Al-Jazeera's operations into the nether world is to put their offices and people under surveillance! Another thing that ticks me off... the MSM (and of course the AP piece I link above) feels compelled to put total U.S. military deaths in each new story of this type...why? What's the point other than to editorialize within a news story. And for Christ sake why don't they also give the total number of innocent fellow Muslims the terrorists and insurgents kill in each of these incidents? Why? Isn't that also a very telling statistic? But of course they won't because that doesn't serve their agenda and bias.

They can't stand good news

The MSM editors are not happy. They are surely grumpy that there is any good news that can in any way be linked to the Bush Administration. While they did their best to lie about the post Thanksgiving holiday shopping results when another good financial story follows so closely it's hard for them to continue the negativity. But don't worry, few are making this good Consumer Confidence news a top story and many will manage to add negativity in moronic fashion. Take CNN for example. They report the good new home sales news, but then add "Most real estate economists have said that those readings all suggest the housing market has peaked", really which experts? Are they the experts who have been saying this for the last 2-3 years? Or "There were some signs of cooling in new home prices in the report." but then they site that in the West and Northeast (which probably is about half the total market) are up 40%, the South (in spite of hurricanes) was up 1.9%, and only the Midwest had a drop of 9.5%. Then CNN uses the famous "some" when they say "Some question whether the latest report isn't either an anomaly or even an example of sampling error." These are the same "some" who just can't stand that there is good news, they desperately want news under a Republican administration to be bad to the point of disbelief...good god, America hater's just leave the country would you!

Monday, November 28, 2005

Biased, politicizing naysayers on Iraq in the minority!

On Taranto's WSJ Opinion Journal blog today the first post is about some polling that finds the general public still bullish on the ability to succeed in Iraq. It's interesting that a poll by the Pew Research Center found that a majority of the public (of course the largest group represented in the poll) and those who carry out the Iraqi mission (the military) believe efforts to establish a stable democracy will succeed. The lopsided opposite view comes from groups (what Pew calls opinion leaders) that are known to be liberal and anti-Bush (so anti-America-succeeds at anything while under Dubya's watch).

Democrat's New Iraq Plan or Bandwagon?

Have you noticed all the Democrat politicians or liberal pundits who are talking about training Iraqi security forces to take over so that we can reduce US military in Iraq? I know this was what the Bush administration was talking about long ago. Suddenly though the MSM covers this revelation by liberals as if they have a new plan for Iraq. The QandO Blog has a nice summary of the strategy our President had as far back as August 2003. It's funny, I immediately thought of the Fedex commercial set in a business meeting, the boss says "we have to cut costs people, ideas?"....a dork says they could sign up for Fedex online shipping, blah, blah....silence, then the boss says the same thing but making hand gestures and all the sheep in the room compliment the idea. Too funny, check out the new but stolen great idea ad!

Lonely Cindy

Apparently Cindy Sheehan has a book? And clearly the book singing this weekend was a big hit!

Update: Oh, my mistake.....Cindy and her book are very popular!

Holiday Retail Sales - who wants you to feel bad, feel good?

Clearly the MSM doesn't want you to feel good about the economy. Many economic indicators show we have a strong economy. Sure, there are always price fluctuations (oil, gas, homes, etc.) but employment, the big economic indicators and the markets are in great shape. The MSM likes to do stories that would make you believe otherwise. You will see stories about the house price bubble, or big companies with multi-thousand person layoffs, and so on. They don't give the perspective of the overall economic picture...they like to focus on just a small dent in an otherwise cherry classic automobile! The post Thanksgiving holiday shopping picture is no exception. Most of the stories below take what are in fact positive results (22% increase for the weekend total retail take according to the National Retail Federation, NRF) and spin it to sound ok or even bad. Amazing because most even quote the NRF figure with words like "dramatic" to describe the increase over last year. So why are the headlines or commentary always framed in a negative way?

Negative Spin

ABC calls it a modest start

CBS quotes economist who says a lot of hype but luke warm

NBC says spending modest, AP says the same thing

Positive Spin

Reuters (go figure) says Robust!

Mixed, admit the postive but temper it!

USA Today, some crazy, some keep it simple

NPR audio clip "so far, no drop in Holiday Shopping

Wednesday, November 23, 2005

Rapid Fire Blogging

misleading headline "Vatican gay document prompts criticism", after all when 2 gay groups criticize you it's not as if it's real criticism, it's more like a badge of honor!

How you define "More than a dozen"? Gee, is that 13, 14, oh maybe as many as 15!...what a joke and what a non-story that some idiots are at the roadside near Bush's ranch again!

Bush ranch update: and now they're arrested. Funny that Vietnam era loon Daniel Ellsberg boasts that this is his 70th arrest in various protests since Vietnam. He surely believes in every case his side was bolstered by his sign holding, sitting and arrest. It doesn't take a genius to know that these protesters have an adverse affect on the side of the argument they sit on. Most don't identify with people who do this, most think they're fringe hippy wannabees. Most wonder why they don't do something more concrete for their cause (run for office, get signatures for a ballet initiative, etc.) instead just mugging for a photo opp.

And yet another Liberal gets schooled by a Conservative!

The presidential pardoning of a Turkey each year is idiotic...we should change this tradition to the president goes on a turkey hunt using a high end 12 gauge over-under shotgun that would then be auctioned off for charity after the pres bagged his bird. Some would have us eat tofu!

The anti-business climate continues in Santa Cruz where a group is trying to make the minimum wage for any worker within the city limits $9.25 an hour. By comparison the kid at the Baskin Robbin's ice cream parlor is San Jose would make the state minimum of $6.75. So in S.Cruz a kid scooping ice cream could make just under $20k a year. This is of course not a good move since you pay too much for zero skilled jobs making them attractive for grown ups! The jobs that high school kids can do well shouldn't be attractive for people who should be trying to move upstream!

It's about time and can we do this at all our borders!

Tom Cruise not only knows the history of psychiatry but apparently is also an expert in obstetrics!

Cool Xmas gift #2 & #3

While I'm not a "gamer" I did recently buy a large HDTV and like most who have done so I crave more high def content. Both MSFT's new Xbox 360 and Sony's PS3 will bring to HDTV what are already pretty amazing graphics and animation. The Xbox 360 is out now, in the $400 range if you can find one that isn't bundled with games. And I say buy one! I also say buy the PS3 when is available here which is likely March 2006, it's only money! I say give the Xbox 360 to your kid or friend when you get the PS3, the reason...I want the Sony to blow away the Xbox in the market. Turns out this is likely since, unbeknownst to me and likely you, Sony has one the war so far with 90 million PlayStations sold since its introduction versus 25 million for the Xbox. But the real reason I want Sony to win is I want to see HD DVD's on the market sooner and not later. Its Betamax vs. VHS all over again! Sony developed an HD DVD standard called Blu-ray and they put a Blu-ray player in the PS3. The first stand alone Sony Blu-ray DVD players are said to retail for $1k or more so given the PS3 will be about $350 your getting a HD DVD player for free. I predict Sony, whose scars from loosing the Betamax battle still linger, lower the PS2 price to the $100 range so as to keep some buyers from buying the Xbox 360 now. They have already said they will sell the PS3 at a loss just for the purpose of getting millions of Blu-ray players in the market so that movie studios are compelled to produce HD content in that format. I hope they win, not because I love Sony, but because they can drive high def DVD content into the market faster than the rival standard called HD-DVD.

Tuesday, November 22, 2005

Cool Xmas gift #1

How about a 1Gb MP3 player so small the ear bud connector is longer than the player itself. Well here it is, the mobiBLU DAH-1500i available at Walmart for $129. It's less than 1" in each dimension and weighs 0.63 ounces....oh it has an AM/FM tuner as well!!!!

It's good to be the king

Oracle chief Larry Ellison settled a law suit brought against him because of a $900M gain (that's gain!) he realized just shortly before ORCL went down considerably in 2001. Without admitting any wrong doing he agreed to pay $100M to a charity (of his choice). Pretty nice since I would think a charitable donation is deductible even if a law suit (not a government order) required you to make the donation. Then today it was decided he also needed to pay the legal fees involved in the suit, so an additional $22M. In case you were worried about how poor Larry would come up with the $122M, don't fret he has 5 yrs and various places to draw from (that we know about).

  1. Direct shares of ORCL held 1,300,00,000 shares...that's billion! At today's price that's $16B
  2. Cash from sales of ORCL stock for just 2004, $1.1B
  3. Extremely large Bay Area home (that looks something like the Royal Palace in Tokyo) with lakes and traditional Japanese wood boats), approx. $50M
  4. Various large and small business jets, fighter jets, misc. planes $300M
  5. Various sail and motor yachts, and frequent participant in trying to own the worlds largest private yacht (or really ship)....approx. $500M

You get the idea...this is like a parking ticket!

The word on the "Arab street"

From Mark Steyn of the U.K.'s Daily Telegraph today....I especially like:

Happily for Mr Zarqawi, no matter how desperate the head-hackers get, the Western defeatists can always top them. A Democrat Congressman, Jack Murtha, has called for immediate US withdrawal from Iraq. He's a Vietnam veteran, so naturally the media are insisting that his views warrant special deference, military experience in a war America lost being the only military experience the Democrats and the press value these days. Hence, the demand for the President to come up with an "exit strategy".

In war, there are usually only two exit strategies: victory or defeat. The latter's easier. Just say, whoa, we're the world's pre-eminent power but we can't handle an unprecedently low level of casualties, so if you don't mind we'd just as soon get off at the next stop.

Demonstrating the will to lose as clearly as America did in Vietnam wasn't such a smart move, but since the media can't seem to get beyond this ancient jungle war it may be worth underlining the principal difference: Osama is not Ho Chi Minh, and al-Qa'eda are not the Viet Cong. If you exit, they'll follow. And Americans will die - in foreign embassies, barracks, warships, as they did through the Nineties, and eventually on the streets of US cities, too.

Saudi's and a chicken shit US bureaucrat

From gotta watch the entire video!


The Democrats put yet another military, national security and global policy expert out there who "called for" (is that like demanding or suggesting? :)) troop reduction in Iraq. Maybe they think he's an appropriate new torch bearer for not finishing the job in Iraq (and not finishing the job on a time table...that's always a nice touch) because of Obama's first name Barrack (def: A building or group of buildings used to house military personnel.).

Do your homework!

I have, for the most part, never just believe something I hear or read. Sure, if the source is known to me then the face value of the information in question is considerable. Unfortunately I believe most people are easily impressed by credentials, and position, and so no further back up is required. This free pass extends to the media as well. Most will see something on tv, read it in a paper or a book, and truth is assumed. I believe it is critical we teach our children to question, inquire, probe and challenge things. There is a logical approach to determining the validity of something and it is called deduction. Deduction can be defined as reasoning from the general to specific and "induction" as reasoning from the specific to the general. To present an argument using induction is often easier.

For example, your doctor tells you the dark spot on your skin is nothing to worry about. The conclusion here is that the dark spot is in fact not a problem. Is that reasonable? NO, it's not! While this example might seem like it moves from general to specific it is in fact induction and flawed. In induction the premises of a conclusion (or argument) if true make the truth of the conclusion probable. In this case the premise is the person that said the spot is not a problem is a doctor so it is probable his opinion is correct. But, since this dark spot could be a serious health issue (the conclusion matters) deduction should be applied. In deduction the truth of the premises are thought to guarantee the conclusion. Applying deduction you would want to know things like: Is your doctor an oncologist or dermatologist? Has the spot changed color over time? Has the spot grown or changed shape over time? At this point I would still call this case inductive, but what would flip it to deductive, all on it's own, would be lab results from a biopsy of the spot.

So, why do most people just take the word of their doctor, auto mechanic, building contractor, or a politician? Of course the ramifications of being wrong must be considered and when the stakes aren't high induction is perfectly suited. However, the stakes are not always obvious when the topic is political and the source is a politician.

Let's look at another example. The Democrats come up with their own Small Business Index and this month they use it to say that the small business outlook is the worst it has been in 8 yrs. Many will read this and assume it is so. The result could be hundreds or thousands who read it decide to not buy that franchise they were considering, or not to start their dream to open a restaurant. Others may think this is systemic to the entire economy so they will pass on that new car or tv purchase. It could, in fact, have a tremendous effect by paralyzing individuals whose participation in the economy is in fact what makes it bad or good. So if we do a little homework, we can try to achieve a deductive conclusion on the state of the small business outlook. My attempt at that started with a good blogger source on the topic The Entrepreneurial Mind. But, you should do your own homework until induction supports a conclusion, or better yet deduction makes it a guarantee. As an aside...why does a political party need their own business index? Purely to slant the conclusion since its out of their field of expertise!

Saturday, November 19, 2005

Democrats loose at patriotism and politics

Democrats in the House have been playing a loosing battle. I truly question the patriotism of those that would at every opportunity feed the press fabricated POLITICAL propaganda that attempts to invalidate, undermine, and lesson public resolve on finishing the job in Iraq. Not to mention implying severe character issues with our comander and cheif. The Democrats tomfoolery puts our military at greater risk and affects individual soldiers will. No evidence has ever been presented to support the claim that Bush, or his administration, lied or inflating pre-war intelligence. In fact 3 separate bipartisan reviews concluded that the intelligence was just faulty. In fact one review found some of the intelligence the White House held back promoted the case for war. So, not only is all this lying by Democrats at a time of war unpatriotic it is POLITICALLY MOTIVATED.

Then moron John Murtha opens his stupid mouth to suggest we cut and run from Iraq...even with some set time frame or the "as soon as possible" phrase this is idiotic. Please one of you brain damaged liberals explain to me the logic behind Bush wanting to keep troops there any longer than necessary!

The stupid suggestion by Murtha was pounced on by the GOP leadership who forced an immediate vote in the House on the idea. The big mouth Democrats were made to put up or shut up and they largely shut up with a vote of 403 to 3. Three Democrats, Jose Serrano of New York, Robert Wexler of Florida and Cynthia McKinney of Georgia, voted for withdrawal. Was this political? Of course it leftist fools just got schooled!

Note the AP story called the vote "hastily arranged by the GOP", no bias there....guess the AP doesn't think an immediate pull-out of Iraq would be hasty!!!!

Friday, November 18, 2005

Media uses senile source for attack on Bush

I started my first professional job one year after Stansfield Turner retired as the Director of the CIA in 1981. He apparently likes to be called Admiral Turner...well, while I think Turner had an impressive career, much of it in the military, however when you leave the Navy in 1977 it's probably a good idea to stop using the moniker in 2005! So here comes ITV, the largest commercial television network in the UK. They need (because they hadn't done one in several hours) to run an anti-Bush piece. So they're happy to enlist the 82 year old Admiral that retired from a position to have a clue about what a president thinks 24 years ago. ITV of course doesn't question that, they believe this is a solidly researched piece, which says:

The former spymaster claims President Bush is not telling the truth when he says that torture is not a method used by the US. Speaking of Bush's claims that the US does not use torture, Admiral Turner, who ran the CIA from 1977 to 1981, said: "I do not believe him".

On Dick Cheney he said "I'm embarrassed the United States has a vice president for torture. "He condones torture, what else is he?".

Gee, so I guess having run the CIA 24 years ago gives you the ability to read minds (a common skill among the no-facts liberals) since the suggestion is that this is in fact true based on our geriatric Admiral's belief? Ya, nice vetting of this story! Grandpa also apparently is up to speed on the other leak of the day of supposed "black sites"...I suppose the Admiral knew back in the 1970's that someday we would need these in Afghanistan and Pakistan so he setup them up. How else would he know and speak about these unless it's true?

Ok, I don't know if sailer boy is senile (and sorry to my dad for all the old guy jokes) but I'm pretty sure that since Turner has been no friend of the Bush Whitehouse he has no inside track. And if there is someone still alive in the CIA he knows and they're leaking evidence of Bush and Cheney condoning anything that is really considered torture of prisoners that communication would be a crime. So should some prosecutor have a talk with the Admiral?

Hypocrite squared!

The word hypocrite just isn't strong enough to describe liberals these days. So I think level of hypocrisy obtained when the standard hypocrite label is multiplied by itself is an appropriate description of the moonbats among us. There are so many examples, daily, of the hypocrite^2 and most have a similar root cause. Liberals can't stand freedom of speech when that speech is in direct opposition to their superior enlightened position, and especially when that speech is heard by millions. It's amazing that both ends of the liberal spectrum, from spike inserting tree huggers to your Prius driver, partake in the hypocrite^2 free speech ridiculousness. The various from-another-planet political waste of time that went on in my neighboring San Francisco recently has presented a nice example. Bill O'Reilly should be fired for his exercising free speech! Funny how liberals can (without evidence...oh wait, well I have no evidence but I just know if we had the real Bush NGuard memos it would be true) can make outlandish claims about Bush and his administration with vitriol and profanity and there is no outrage. You can ask for an apology when it might be over the top, but a topical talk/tv hosts job is in fact to use their speech to ask tough questions, to offer up their and differing opinions, to enable a good (and for ratings) and interesting debate. Just as long as everyone likes vanilla!

Iraq is the new abortion issue!

I have never understood why the subject of abortion is so polarizing. If you all think that ones position on abortion is so pivotal to ones entire being then I have a suggestion for you. Ask every family member, friend, co-worker, boss, etc. their position on it and immediately eject those whose stand is opposite yours from you life! After all isn't it the central barometer on a persons entire belief system? The point is that something goes non-linear in people when the abortion subject comes up. All reason, consideration of intelligent argument, even civility go out the window.

The same phenomenon is surely happening with the subject of Iraq. And like abortion frankly most with extreme views on both sides are hypocrites, wrong and damaging our country all for their stubborn ideology. Today's WSJ piece Why We Went to War makes my point with the larger view of both why going was still correct ("To believe that an untouched Saddam five years hence wouldn't have been back in the WMD game is fatuous beyond description.") and why we must finish the job ('The theory that democracies don't attack other democracies is as strong as such notions get, and what the world most needs now is a new, large Islamic democracy. A democracy, however "imperfect," is less likely than an authoritarian state to detonate a nuclear device in someone else's territory.")

Those who now call for a timeline for withdrawal, or more idiotic an immediate pull-out, are clearly suffering from this affliction. The worst part is they are playing partisan politics with our national security and our military who are in harms way. This is in my opinion tantamount to treasonous behavior.

Thursday, November 17, 2005


That's the exact title of this article in the New York Post today written by John McCain...if you don't have a subscription here you go:

IRAQ is today in the throes of another critical moment in its post-Saddam history. There is both great hope and great difficulty, with a new constitution and an ongoing insurgency, with parliamentary elections in a month and violence plaguing many areas.

At home, the American people wish to see us succeed in helping bring freedom and democracy to the Iraqi people, but express increased uncertainty among the way forward. Now is the last time we should send a message that withdrawing troops is more important than achieving success.

Unfortunately, the Senate considered two amendments this week — one of which was approved with 79 votes — that did just that. In the version that passed, 2006 is designated as "a period of significant transition to full sovereignty . . . thereby creating the conditions for the phased redeployment of United States forces from Iraq."

These words are likely to be examined closely in Iraq, by both friends and enemies. They suggest that the Senate has its priorities upside down, and I voted to reject them. Anyone reading the amendment gets the sense that the Senate's foremost objective is the draw-down of American troops. What it should have said is that America's first goal in Iraq is not to withdraw troops, but to win the war. All other policy decisions we make should support, and be subordinate to, the successful completion of our mission.

If that means we can draw down our troop levels and win in Iraq in 2006, that would be a wonderful outcome. But if success requires an increase in American troop levels in 2006, then we must increase our numbers there.

Morality, national security and the honor our fallen deserve all compel us to see our mission in Iraq through to victory.

But the amendment suggests a different priority. It signals that withdrawal, not victory, is foremost in Congress' mind, and suggests that we are more interested in exit than victory. A date is not an exit strategy. To suggest that it is only encourages our enemies, by indicating that the end to American intervention is near. It alienates our friends, who fear an insurgent victory, and tempts undecideds to join the anti-government ranks.

And it suggests to the American people that, no matter what, 2006 is the date for withdrawal. As much as I hope 2006 is the landmark year that the amendment's supporters envision, should it not be so, messages like these will have unrealistically raised expectations once again. That can only cost domestic support for America's role in this conflict, a war we must win.

The sponsors may disagree with my interpretation of their words, saying that 2006 is merely a target, that their legislation is not binding and that it included caveats. But look at the initial response to the Senate's words: a front page Washington Post story titled "Senate Presses for Concrete Steps Toward Drawdown of Troops in Iraq."

Think about this for a moment. Imagine Iraqis, working for the new government, considering whether to join the police force, or debating whether or not to take up arms. What will they think when they read that the Senate is pressing for steps toward draw-down?

Are they more or less likely to side with a government whose No. 1 partner hints at leaving? The Senate has responded to the millions who braved bombs and threats to vote, who put their faith and trust in America and their government, by suggesting that our No. 1 priority is to bring our people home.

We have told insurgents that their violence does grind us down, that their horrific acts might be successful. But these are precisely the wrong messages. Our exit strategy in Iraq is not the withdrawal of our troops, it is victory.

Americans may not have been of one mind when it came to the decision to topple Saddam Hussein. But, though some disagreed, I believe that nearly all now wish us to prevail. Because the stakes there are so high — higher even than those in Vietnam — our friends and our enemies need to hear one message: America is committed to success, and we will win this war.

Sen. McCain (R, Az.) is one of only 19 U.S. senators — including just 13 Republicans — to have voted against a Senate resolution Tuesday pushing for an eventual draw-down of U.S. troops from Iraq.

Wednesday, November 16, 2005

What's That You Say?

What's That You Say?
Here's the headline from an article that appeared in yesterday's Chicago Tribune:

Alleged bomber cites war for role in attacks

Excuse me, Iraq is now in transition in Jordan? How did that work out?
Well the real crux of the story is that the four suicide bombers wanted revenge for their family members who were killed in the battle of Fallujah.

So in this we see how twisted, evil, and mostly illogical our enemy is. These idiots want revenge against the US for it's role in Iraq so they travel to Jordan to blow up a bunch of innocent wedding attendee's who just happen to Palestinian Muslims. Nice. They also killed four Palestinian Authority officials, notably Bashir Nafeh, head of military intelligence on the West Bank.

So who takes the credit for this bombing? None other than Abu Musab al-Zarqawi the head of al-Qaeda in Iraq, who is himself, a Jordanian. Who sites as one of the reasons for his terrorist actions the treatment of Palestinians in Isreal.

Well now it all makes perfect sense to me.

Monday, November 14, 2005

In God We Trust

In 1967 when I was in first grade we said the pledge of allegiance before we sat in our desks for the first time each morning. That same act was being played out at thousands of schools, government offices and business around the country every morning. At some point that ritual lost favor and that’s unfortunate. We all may not believe in a God, and for those that do not the same God, but God is not just a part of our country's founding history. It is a core foundation of our founding. The notion that we are united by a creator, by something more noble than us, a God. This is fundamental to the spirit and the principles our founding fathers signed their names to in 1776. The Declaration of Independence isn’t a long document and so each word has more power. At the start of the document our founding fathers make the point that their “equal station” exists by the “Laws of Nature and of Nature's God” and that “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” This declaration was really the “kiss off” letter to the King of Great Britain and yet the importance of God and the inference that no man is God was clear.

A few quotes from some of our Founding Fathers:

“The right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of Man to alienate this gift, and voluntarily become a slave.” John Adams, Rights of the Colonists, 1772

“I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth-that God governs in the affairs of men.” Benjamin Franklin, To Colleagues at the Constitutional Convention

“And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep for ever.” Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, Query 18, 1781

“But where says some is the King of America? I'll tell you Friend, he reigns above, and doth not make havoc of mankind like the Royal Brute of Britain...let it be brought forth placed on the divine law, the word of God; let a crown be placed thereon, by which the world may know, that so far as we approve of monarchy, that in America THE LAW IS KING.” Thomas Paine, Common Sense, 1776

So, fast forward to today…and we have this misguided God-hater Michael Newdow who led the effort to ban reciting the pledge of allegiance in public schools at it again. This time it’s the words “In God We Trust” on our currency. Where would it end? The cleansing of the reference to a God, to a creator, would be an acid wash over the very spirit that makes us great and attracts those that come to partake in that greatness.