Saturday, December 31, 2005

Q: Why? A: FREEDOM


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 WHAT...you 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.

Nice.

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 deterrent.....no 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.

Nice.

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 Germany...as 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

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"