Friday, March 31, 2006
McKinney has in a 2nd, or 3rd, statement on this situation suddenly thrown in the race card! First of all, check these three images of her, is it obviously the same person? Would you recognized this person as the same if she was among thousands who shuffle by you each week? She's not a particularly famous House representative so she can't assume her fame should speak for itself. And watch the video that is on the story link above, any diversity in her staff/entourage? And is that Willie Brown's brother with her?
There is, of course, the usual duplicity that both sides of the isle participate in. When one of them does it they say, "I would not make a big deal of this," as Nancy Pelosi did. But of course imagine a flip in this scenario...say Bill Frist even slightly touches a black female officer in the same situation. WOW, the uproar, the calls for resignation and full prosecution would be deafening. The quotes from Pelosi and others would be "another example in the party of corruption and lawlessness".
I had to chuckle at the spokesman for House Speaker Dennis Hastert, a guy named Ron Bonjean, who said of Pelosi's comment "How many officers would have to be punched before it becomes a big deal?"
And.....House member Juanita Millender-McDonald, also a black women, "interviened" because she is on the House committee that oversees the Capitol Hill police! Oh, sure if this was involving a Republican, or a white man, I'm sure Juanita would be trying to butt her nose in!
But wait...there's more....and see the Update below!
And yet another look for golden glove McKinney on FoxNews. Geez, is this women a human chameleon? And, now McKinney is saying she's the victim! She's not just playing a race card, she's playing the entire deck. Plus, can you imagine a better way to both play the fake victim and at the same time guarantee alienation from every white (and probably most blacks) then to stand at a podium with Danny Glover and Harry Belafonte behind you! ARE YOU KIDDING ME? She's claiming not to have been inappropriately violent with two idiots progressives that cozy up to violent foreign leaders!
Please watch the video at the bottom of the page on this latest link of Belafonte and Glover. This is an embarrasing use of celebrity association and also a display of some of our black separatists.
Update 4/3: So now a warrant for McKinney arrest is in the works...this should get interesting. It will be interesting to see how the regular media darlings in D.C. will respond to either a possilbe arrest or her being prosecuted. The right thing would be to say that nobody is above the law and that striking an officer is not something to just be shrugged off. And of course lets let our process of justice run it's course...but McKinney isn't denying she smacked the officer, she instead is trying to hide under a made up racial cloak. Also it's interesting that this AP pieces says black clergy and lawmakers came to her defense on Monday. Other than Pelosi who last week said it was probably no big deal, and probably just wishes she kept her mouth shut, I see no law makers coming to her defense. I see only black reverands and bitter black entertainers showing support. In fact apparently the support is limitless as she can do no wrong since Rev. Reverend Darrell D. Elligan, president of Concerned Black Clergy, says "She has our support unconditionally". This does wonders for creating a color blind society...way to go McKinney!
And blogger Wizbang makes some good points and asks some great questions of McKinney.
And Michelle Malkin has a new skeleton in the McKinney closet....you know, if you draw attention to yourself you just might get more attention than you bargained for!
Wednesday, March 29, 2006
First they're wrong because I can speak from first hand experience that a system (business and tax environment) that promotes business starts and growth (that's small business not just mega corp stuff), and YES can make the business owner/starter (uh, that would be me) rich, but employ 50 doing so! It's a food chain and it works its way down. It goes like this. The business environment encourages large corps, mutual funds, etc. to be limited partners in a venture capital fund. The venture capitalist invests in my startup... I hire all sorts of people from highly experienced engineers with advanced degrees, to degree less office help, to college students as interns. If you keep that environment healthy, and I do a good job running the biz, I grow and give out more equity in the company, etc. If I do an IPO, or I am acquired, potentially more than just a handfull of us become millionaires. Even without that big exit event we pay good salaries and my employees are big consumers. They buy lots of goods and services which employs those in all levels of the economic scale as well as creates other business creation opportunities.
But lets keep it going.....one of my employees bought a house (and that's without the exit) and now he's hiring small contractors to put in a new fence, fix up a bathroom, and so on. If the environment has incentives my startup is replicated all over the country. The small, and industrious, contractor can grow his own business (and you need to give him proper incentives and not penalties too) based on his upwardly mobile client base.
The study also found that "emerging affluent" households with a net worth between $100,000 and $500,000, again excluding primary residences, is also growing. And, lest you think that all this good news is at the expense of putting more into poverty...you would be wrong.
According the US census bureau the percentage of the population below the poverty level is not growing and is around 12%. However this 12% doesn't consider after tax income nor does it include all the various forms of government assistance (of which there is a ton). When you include those, the number living at or below the poverty level is around 5.1% which is as low as it has been since 1960's. I think the movements in all income levels demonstrates trickle down economics working. Now, lets see how this is spun by the party not in power for they can't allow you to believe anything is good during a Republican reign.
Tuesday, March 28, 2006
Because the SF Board of Supervisors almost daily tries to turn this once world great city into a homogeneous liberal bastion of sexual deviance, we refer to them as the Board of Stupidvisors. Prior to the Battle Cry group showing up the Stupidvisors passed a resolution warning that this group could "negatively influence the politics of America's most tolerant and progressive city." As a SF Chronicle editorial points out this, and not the Christian teenagers, is the definition of intolerance! It's amazing to me how pervasive the "do as I say, not as I do" charade is among liberals. If you didn't already know it, SF is gay beyond recognition and the city leaders that community identifies with are more intolerant than those they claim scorn them!
Mark Leno, D-SF Assemblyman told some protesting the visiting Christians, that the teenage God loving group were "loud, they're obnoxious, they're disgusting and they should get out of San Francisco." He apparently later back peddled and said they were welcome in SF but that "under a cloak of love" their message would feed a "fearful world's appetite for hate."
So at first I thought this was just more of the ever apparent hypocrisy we see around liberal and leftists stances concerning free speech and free assembly. Examples come to mind like so many schools (high school, college, etc.) where the administrations have tried to stop such benign groups as student republicans from using school facilities while the gay student groups do so regularly. We can have classroom posters that tell gays they are safe, but we can't even have the Declaration of Independence on that same wall. Military recruiters are not welcome on campus. City offices and rooms available for public use are often made unavailable for what are clearly conservative minded groups.
But then I think there is more than just hypocrisy at work here. It's fear! So many real hard core closed minded liberals (and conservatives for that matter) know damn well they have a lot of sheep followers! The facade of their position is thin! Their sheep are not so rooted, or intellectually grounded, in the stance you put them in. They are so fearful that even a group of their ideological opposites, who they consider crack pots, might put doubt in the minds of their flock! Un-flocking believable! --hat tip to Glock26 for the article.
Monday, March 27, 2006
I use to be a red wine nut, drank quit a bit of it...opened a bottle nearly every day as it was a my after work drink of choice and Mrs. Tiny didn't partake so it was all mine. I subscribed to the Wine Spectator and closely followed their ratings along with Parker and others. And just about the time that a study came out that a glass or so of red wine a day (or was it just alcohol?) was actually beneficial I started to develop an obversion to the tannins, or histamine. Now one small glass of red occasionally is all I can do.
About the same time I became a red wine snob I took up cigars. The Wine Spectator publisher, vice-master Shanken, put a page in the Spectator about a new magazine he was starting (Cigar Aficionado, or CA) . He offered a free first copy and I was in! It was 1992 and that first issue showed up...I read that thing cover to cover several times in the first week...and of course I subscribed. I was fascinated by the art of the cigar, from tobacco leaf growing, drying (or more accurately cooking), selecting the tobacco used for the filler, binder and wrapper (yes 3 in a cigar), to the hand rolling of the differing shapes. I soon became the cigar guru among my friends and supplied many a gathering with the best you could buy. I had a neighbor who made regular trips to Europe and Hong Kong and he brought me back Cuban's every trip. In those days the cigar craze hadn't hit so customs wasn't looking for business men as cigar mules. And smoking fine contraband was also part of the allure.
In the mid 90's I was having 2 fatboys (ring gauge of 50 or bigger) a day. I had a humidor (not a girly sit on the desk variety, a floor standing cabinet) at home and a small one at work. At work I would have a midday Robusto (fat but short) and eventually I held court in what was the smoking area (now the cigar area) with anywhere from 2 to 6 of my coworkers. I was producing fellow aficionados! Unfortunately I haven't yet seen the study to suggest this was an ok, or good, habit. And Mrs. Tiny's dad didn't survive a fight with cancer that was more than likely caused by his own habit of not-so-secretly smoking those flavored pencil thin cigar wanna-bees. So, my regular habit became very infrequent and I moved my big humidor to work. Then in a recent office building move my humidor was broken into and roughly 500 cigars found a new home.
I was full stride into my cigar habit when CA mag enticed my entry into the finer distilled spirits! I soon became an aficionado of cognac and more aggressively single malt scotch. From the earthly ingredients to rich traditions of the worlds oldest distillers the process was complex and individual producing a wide variety of flavors. Still hooked today!
I was however a lost sole, my nightly oaky cab was gone, the after dinner stogey on my front porch a distant memory, I needed to fill the void. I don't know how it happened but Gin became the filler! I think it was an article I read in an airline magazine about the process and complex mix of botanicals in fine gin that got me interested. Good gin had similarities to wine and cigars, the involved process that some turned into an art form. The end product could be dramatically different by subtle tweaks that result in dramatic differences in the taste. It's odd to me that most people I know think straight gin (or single malt) tastes medicinal or chemical....ah, I'm quite happy for most to remain neophyte distillate drinkers and so the few small batch artisan gins haven't gone thru the roof like most single malts have.
Then there is my life long addiction which has been a constant, food! I think from my earliest memories of certain meals my mother made I loved food. My junior year in high school I started lifting weights and I became like a Roman gladiator! Well, except my sword was a dumbbell, and my feast was as many sandwiches as a 16oz can of tuna made. While some eat to live, I live to eat and so calorie burning allowed for mass calorie consumption. At some point I got into cooking and because all of my oral habits (get your mind out of the gutter) involved strong flavors so did my food. Anything spicy, strong heat, rich flavors, over the top powerful taste was what it was about. I mostly cook Italian but I like it all. Of course I also like anything with fat, butter, cream, cheese and beef and pork. I use to mail order a lot of prime grade beef but stopped as red meat got its bad reputation. But I still regularly look for that wonderful densely marbled goodness almost weekly (Costco is a great source) , grill it up and smother it with a nice mushroom gorgonzola sauce!
So imagine my delight to see this news story about genetically engineered pigs whose bodies contain heart healthy omega-3 fatty acids! Oooooh yaaaaaa...bring on the bacon, the babyback ribs, sausage, the pork tenderloin! And, if the genetic engineering police don't F this up, soon I'll be searing omega-3 rib-eyes, filet-migs, tri tip, and.....oh, my mouth is watering! I can't wait for science to make healthy sitting in front of the tv, pounding beers and using tortilla chips to consume a few cups of what I call Karmen's hot lava dip (chili, hot salsa, a few pounds of cream cheese all made molten!). I never thought I would actually desire health food!
Friday, March 24, 2006
I don't subscribe to the notion that we need illegal cheap labor to sustain our economy and standard of living. There was a time when most fast food, unskilled construction and manual labor jobs were filled by high school and college students. Yes, farm workers have been primarily illegals for a very long time. However, just like the California public school system, this can only be fixed by going thru a painful demolition of the status quo followed by a painful (and expensive) rebuilding. The food industry has always had this inappropriately cheap and illegal labor so the creation and adoption of technology hasn't had a forcing function. The physical tasks done by most farm workers in the field can be automated with ease.
I admit I didn't do a lot of homework on this other than reading this article on the situation in Costa Mesa. Apparently what will happen is that if police have a suspected violent felon in their hands, they check that persons immigration status. Ooooh, so evil! So when the business owners say "fear among the immigrant community is keeping patrons away from businesses that cater to Hispanic customers", I say so what? If you're not an illegal there's nothing to fear. If businesses exist that actually base their survival on selling goods and services to illegals I don't care if they suffer. It's a ridiculous argument to say that to check the immigration status of people who end up with cuffs on is somehow bad, overreaching, inappropriate, or will hurt businesses that cater to them! If the police have a person in cuffs, I say check with the FBI, Homeland Security, the INS, the IRS, with other countries, and if it's a man see if he's a deadbeat dad. I also can't stand how these stories stay away from using the word "illegals" or "illegal immigrant" as if it's offensive to do so. Now, if only we would deport those found to be illegal.
Update (3/25): The protests over the pending immigration bill 4437 took place where you would expect. It's also not surprising that all the news stories are very illegal friendly with no reporter asking why shouldn't the U.S. enforce it's immigration laws? Why must the U.S. be the only country to not enforce laws at its border? If you come here ignoring the various laws that govern living and working here why should we not assume you will ignore other laws? Why is it ok to pick and choose the laws you obey? How many illegals pay taxes? How many illegals drive on a valid license or have insurance? How many illegals are arrested for crimes or are in our jails? How many of those in the protests have spent just one millisecond working to improve legal immigration from other countries to the US? How many who protested and are illegal have attempted to be here legally? If that failed why and what have they done to work toward improving that process? What does it teach about the rule of law, respect for our laws, respect for our system, when we just forgive the breaking of immigration laws? Notice also the fear mongering to suggest that people will just be rounded up by the way they look! Ya, sure just like we only do airport screening of middle eastern looking men.
update (3/26): I'm confused....the LA Times, whose city saw the biggest protest over 4437, uses the headline More Than 500,000 Rally in L.A. for Immigrants' Rights. And their link showing pictures of the protest have captions like "Marchers protest HR 4437, an anti-immigration bill that opponents say will criminalize millions of immigrants and anyone who helps them." Oh, so this bill actually goes after people who immigrated legally? We are going to criminalize legal immigration and go after people who have been here for years legally? Now I see what all the fuss is about...gee, silly me.
Thursday, March 23, 2006
I want a new car so I have cars on the brain right now!
Update (3/24): In case you have questions, like Mr. Sheen, or you're swayed by various experts the many conspiracy theory websites and books present, let me offer you some material or things to consider. First, East Carolina University has a great website that gives links to thoughtful reports and analysis. There is a ton of material....video and still images, not just single experts from here and there but entire teams giving input to various theories throughout these sites. Some time ago I found the ECU site and read a lot of the material on the sites they link. But a Popular Mechanics piece on the skepticism of what really happened is one of the better concise reports addressing this. It's called 9/11: Debunking The Myths and here's the PM Editors notes on the report:
FROM THE MOMENT the first airplane crashed into the World Trade Center on the morning of September 11, 2001, the world has asked one simple and compelling question: How could it happen?
Three and a half years later, not everyone is convinced we know the truth. Go to Google.com, type in the search phrase "World Trade Center conspiracy" and you'll get links to an estimated 628,000 Web sites. More than 3000 books on 9/11 have been published; many of them reject the official consensus that hijackers associated with Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda flew passenger planes into U.S. landmarks.
Healthy skepticism, it seems, has curdled into paranoia. Wild conspiracy tales are peddled daily on the Internet, talk radio and in other media. Blurry photos, quotes taken out of context and sketchy eyewitness accounts have inspired a slew of elaborate theories: The Pentagon was struck by a missile; the World Trade Center was razed by demolition-style bombs; Flight 93 was shot down by a mysterious white jet. As outlandish as these claims may sound, they are increasingly accepted abroad and among extremists here in the United States.
To investigate 16 of the most prevalent claims made by conspiracy theorists, POPULAR MECHANICS assembled a team of nine researchers and reporters who, together with PM editors, consulted more than 70 professionals in fields that form the core content of this magazine, including aviation, engineering and the military.
In the end, we were able to debunk each of these assertions with hard evidence and a healthy dose of common sense. We learned that a few theories are based on something as innocent as a reporting error on that chaotic day. Others are the byproducts of cynical imaginations that aim to inject suspicion and animosity into public debate. Only by confronting such poisonous claims with irrefutable facts can we understand what really happened on a day that is forever seared into world history.--THE EDITORS
Update (3/26): Hey all you conspriacy believers....see even your normal bash the right, bash Bush wielding MSM is in on the coverup! So worried is the government that Charlie Sheen's words will be viewed as credible that they controlled Drudge and the MSM! Man, it's wide spread! We better take up arms and storm D.C.! Oh wait...you don't own any guns do you?
Wait....maybe, just maybe the MSM wouldn't run this because it would be like covering rapper fitty cent's opinion of neoclassical economics! Well, Comedy Central would cover that!
Update (3/27): Conspiracy guys....how do you explain Zacarias Moussaoui? Today he testifies that he and "would-be shoe bomber Richard Reid were supposed to hijack a fifth airplane on Sept. 11, 2001, and fly it into the White House". I guess these two were paid so well, or brainwashed by government scientists, so that they don't spill the beans on the big conspiracy! It's interesting that nobody has drawn a line between any of the 9/11 hijackers and our government, our military, or anyone even close!
I assume the difference between these two words is all over blog land this morning. It is amazing, but not suprising, that the group ( Christian Peacemaker Teams ) the 3 rescued anti-war activists belong to, along with at least the family of one of the rescued, put out statements not using the word rescue and not thanking the British and American special forces who RESCUED them. Michelle Malking has several nicely worded responses to the Christian Peacemaker Teams idiotic press release, this one by her reader Matt L. who wrote to the CPT:
Congratulations on the safe return of your activists. I'm sorry they did not all make it home safely. I read your press release relating the "release" of the activists; please note that they were not released, they were rescued. The term release implies that their captors let them go. You know that is not true, they were rescued by a team of American and British soldiers who risked their lives to free people whom apparently have no gratitude for their actions. It is one thing to be against war and the actions of our military (I'm not justifying that position, just acknowledging your right to it), but another to deny when they SAVED YOUR ASS!!!! Are you so insecure in your position that you think even acknowledging your people were rescued, not "released" would undermine your whole message that the military serves no useful purpose? Actually, I think you are correct in your assumption, so I guess you should stick to your story lest any of your supporters start to use logic and reason to dissect your beliefs. Where would you be then? I guess you might have to begrudgingly join the rest of society who realizes that a strong military is the best defense of a free nation against tyrants and terrorists who are out to destroy us and our way of life. God bless you, and I hope you quit sending your hippies to WAR regions risking not only their lives but the lives of the soldiers who end up having to secure their "release" by RESCUING them.
Wednesday, March 22, 2006
While I don't have high regard for Bush on a lot of things I appreciate his effort in the war on terror and believe he went into Iraq for what he, the intelligence community, dozens of other nations, the UN, and all the senators who approved the action believed...that Saddam had WMD's and would use them. Powerline shows the media's unwillingness to let go of the "Bush lied" angle even when they have the scoop that should do just that. Instead, as John Hinderaker of Powerline points out, NBC creates a Bush administration negative headline for a story that contains once sentence that helps exonerate Bush on WMD's.
The headline reads Iraqi diplomat gave U.S. prewar WMD details Saddam’s foreign minister told CIA the truth, so why didn’t agency listen?
Then burried in the story is: Sabri said Iraq had stockpiled weapons and had "poison gas" left over from the first Gulf War. Both Sabri and the agency were wrong.
John writes: Obviously, if Saddam's Foreign Minister admitted that Iraq had large stockpiles of chemical weapons and leftover poison gas, that would have been seen as the final confirmation of what everyone in the intelligence community already believed. And Sabri's statement that Saddam "desperately wanted a [nuclear bomb]" but would need more than a few months to a year to build one--bizarrely presented as exculpatory by NBC--would hardly have been reassuring.
Hahahahahahaa....ok, I actually laughed much longer than the typed laugh takes to read when I saw the Drudge item called STUDY CLAIMS: Confident, resilient, self-reliant kids grow up to be liberals; Whiny children: conservatives.... My first reaction is great, as long as they grow up conservative I don't care what they are like as kids! Then I read the story...oh big surprise that this "study" (apparently things like statistics and environment aren't considered so the word "study is even to generous) was done by Berkeley profs and according to the article 95% of the 100-ish kids tracked grew up in Berkeley. I love how they describe those who became conservative as "rigid"! Of course personality traits of the non-conservatives sound nice!
Quoting the article: The whiny kids tended to grow up conservative, and turned into rigid young adults who hewed closely to traditional gender roles and were uncomfortable with ambiguity.
So if you believe marriage is between one man and one women, or you don't think we shouldn't have special treatment for gays in any aspect of society, or you wouldn't attend the SF gay pride festival...then you're rigid! And frankly being uncomfortable with ambiguity is a good thing....why should someone be ambiguous?
And: The confident kids turned out liberal and were still hanging loose, turning into bright, non-conforming adults with wide interests. The girls were still outgoing, but the young men tended to turn a little introspective.
Implying the conservative isn't bright and doesn't have wide interests. And not conforming (whatever the hell that nebulous statement means) is good! Hmmm..Adultery is non-conforming, burning houses under construction is non-conforming, throwing pigs blood on a women wearing a fur is non-conforming...is that what you mean jackass? I'm not suggesting those are activities that all liberals condone, but the implication here is that not conforming to anything considered to be normal or appropriate by the whole is somehow better...and that is total crap. Oh, and "still hanging loose" is code for not having a job and still sponging off their parents!
Well at least the study's author recognizes "liberal Berkeley is not representative of the whole country" but then goes on to say the "results hold".....what a joke of a professor at what is considered a fine university.
Update (3/23): This is a hoot....Michelle Malkin gives some commentary and links that shows that all the subjects of this study were children at the Harold E. Jones Child Study Center which is only open to children of U.C. Berkeley faculty and staff. So all the children were offspring of UC Berkeley faculty who were rated the most left-wing in the country: 91% of teachers there were classified as liberal. What is so funny is that some still turned out to be conservative!...There is hope afterall!....oh, and the "results hold".
Tuesday, March 21, 2006
A very good and terse piece by Dennis Prager called "Socialism Makes People Worse" came out today. While those who know me know I don't much care for the French, I seriously do hope for the strangle hold socialism has on them to be broken. As a government economic model socialism has plenty of examples to study that exemplify a long term disaster for what seems like short term gains for the masses. France is suffering from a huge problem with it's youth. The racial, ethnic and religious mix of the 20-ish yr old demographic is only unified by their 23 percent unemployment rate and their entitlement attitude. Prager writes:
These young people in France really believe that they should be able to be hired at their tender ages and that a company must not be allowed to fire them from their first day at work (except "for cause," which, as we are learning in America, is increasingly difficult to establish). In America, most of us would call the French young people's attitudes "spoiled."
Socialism teaches its citizens to expect everything, even if they contribute nothing. Socialism teaches its citizens that they have a plethora of rights and few corresponding obligations --except to be taxed.
The employment sectors in America that still cling to the socialistic notion of labor unions should take note of the situation in France. In the end the attitudes a socialist society creates is more selfish than a pure democratic capitalistic one as Prager points out. When you live your life not striving to be the best, when you make sure you don't work a minute earlier than 9 or later than 5, when outside those hours you relish in complaining about your job or the company that writes your paycheck, you're very likely not going to give a rats ass about anything or anybody other that yourself.
I had to laugh when I finally found a pic on the web of Ruth Marcus! A link on Drudge caught my attention, it says "What's behind everything that's wrong with the Bush administration: Manliness... ". I knew right away this was going to be yet another journalist who is afflicted with BOHD (Bush obsessive hatred disorder) and I was not disappointed. But, I was surprised by the bonus factor....the story isn't about facts, or details of something Bush did, it's about everything he does (which is assumed wrong) is because he is too manly! And that manliness is bad! Now, I could take the position this is a bit tongue and cheek but when I saw Ruth's picture it all became clear. She's jealous! I mean references to Brokeback, and going on and on about manliness characteristics of Bush (and Cheney) and that plays a role in bad decisions. I don't know jack about Ruth but I would say that's a women who really, really wants to be manly if I've ever seen one. Hey Ruth, fortunately for you America has a great tradition of manly men from the farmer, to the cop, to military men and in our leadership throughout our history. Cause if we weren't so damn manly we wouldn't be so free, we wouldn't be so educated, we wouldn't have the worlds best standard of living, we wouldn't be able to say any F'ing thing we want without fear of retribution. (you conspiracy theorists don't even start else I would be glad to meet you in person and show you some good old fashion manly ass kicken!). So Ruth, thank your lucky man jealous stars that we are a nation of manliness. Here's hoping that the next time you try to find the reason for why you disagree with someone's entire life it won't be a personality trait that is in fact good. All things in moderation mind you, but we need more ass kicking than we need hand holding and singing these days.
Monday, March 20, 2006
I know it's not universally accepted that the media has a very left leaning bias but I think there is something far more sinister than just effecting opinion when bias, or pure conjecture, is reported as truth or inevitability. I'm not going to suggest this is a conscious effort on the part of the media bosses, but I do blame them for allowing their personal biases to show up as rooting for failure in Iraq. It takes only a little homework to see that the number of Iraqi's (not foreigners who are terrorist insurgents) out of the 25 million who still employ violence, or who fight against a democratic Iraq, is very small. Yes, a very small number of people hell bent on violence can keep killings in a country the size of California a daily event. Yet the infrastructure of Iraq has vastly improved since Saddam's ouster. The economy, private enterprise, health care, education and equality has progressed tremendously. The terrorists and freedom haters who number maybe in the tens of thousands dominate the media coverage. You can hardly find a story on progress out of the thousands of stories each week. So what is sinister? What is dangerous in this negative bias on Iraq? Well, things have a way of becoming true if its pounded into us relentlessly. The media has been promoting the notion that Iraq is on the verge of civil war for months with a new flurry of stories today. Just exactly how long does something sit on the verge, or brink, or edge? And is there really the organized armed opposing factions ready to go at it in Iraq so as to fit the definition of a civil war? I think this is bias at its worst. Not only does it not serve the Iraqi people well it doesn't serve our people and our military well....Whose side are these media reptiles on anyway?
Sunday, March 19, 2006
So, with the weekend nearly over the press has done their best to make the global collection of moonbat gatherings to sound like a significant movement against our involvement in Iraq. Of course the real story is what a joke these protests are and that the vast majority of participants are in fact wacko moonbats, gray haired hippies trying to relive the 60's, and young people who undoubtedly don't hold a job and belong to the Jessica Simpson chapter of Mensa...the later demonstrated by the young barret wearing women who doesn't actually know that her peace sign is missing a line and so it's a Mercedes hood ornament! Probably the largest protest in the US was in anti-American San Francisco where the collection of sexual deviants, communists (literally), socialists (literally) are so representative of America as a whole! I love the comments from some of those present at the various protests...they can't understand why there isn't more participation. This illustrates either a problem with intellect or one of being informed. There isn't broad support for a cut and run from Iraq, or for socialism, or for communism, or that capitalism is bad, or (among people who still have functioning brain cells) that Bush is the worlds worst terrorist. And one might ask how many of the 25M Iraqi citizen's protested this weekend?
Update 1: Oh, so since the protest action is weak the media will call it quiet disapproval and that the polls show this. I guess that would be true if polls actually where independent and unbiased with respect to how questions were phrased.
Update 2: Puulleazzzze!..The Associated press tries it's best to give the "tens of thousands of protesters around the globe" some importance. But it's amazing to me that they quote protest organizers who are, in most cases, truly fringe thinkers and so for the press to give the impression that their position has significant support is dishonest. I think the country, and world, would be shocked if they saw bio's on the average protester in the SF or Portland gatherings....the collection of social outcasts, deviants, time travelers, and those who support anything other than democracy would shock most. It's also telling that in this story they get a comment from Cindy Sheehan's boyfriend Hugo Chavez. That's a sure fire way to give your story credibility! Too funny!
Update 3: And then there is "Act Against Torture" who protested today by blocking commute traffic in SF. That's the first sign that they are in fact ignorant for when you F up the commute for us working stiffs on a Monday you pretty much guarantee contempt for your casuse. The second sign of derangement is that this group thinks the US is the worlds biggest regime of torture. Another example is a protestor in Neveda...you know the rough rugid west...where a local women Kristen Shelton of Reno made a protest sign in Arabic in part (she said) to fight the stereotype of Arabs as only being terrorists. She said the sign said "George Bush White House equals wicked evildoer." So instead of offering cogent argument or factual examples that would allow us to decide if someone's is an "evildoer" let's just skip right to the label!
Update 4: Michelle Malkin went to the protest DC where she talked to Mother Sheehan. She asked Cindy (check her site later for video) about the controversy of her not yet putting a headstone on her son's grave....Gee, will the TV movie with Susan Sarandon cover this, or money she's making off her antics, or that she likes people like Chavez, or that she drops F-bombs at these protests, etc. And I thought this pic, that I belive Michelle took, gives us a similar perspective on the protester profile!
And another example of an apparently confused unemployed unshaven youth whose parents are wondering why the college tuitition they provided hasn't given their son the ability to do some basic research (given his vast understanding of Islam and of Ernesto "Che" Guevara). Taken at the SF protest.
Saturday, March 18, 2006
I find it interesting that the "global" protests that so indelibly "mark" the 3rd anniversary of Iraqi Freedom have less turn out (and less protests overall) than the Muslim cartoon protests! The media is giving these protests inflated coverage trying their best to imply there is overwhelming global sentiment unfavorable to the US. However, the actual number of protestors who turned out in the countries where the protests have already happened tells a different story. Even in countries with very large Muslim populations the turnout the American hating leaders could muster were pathetic.
Country /Population / Protestors
Pakistan / 162,400,000 / 200
Turkey /70,000,000 / 3,000
UK / 60,000,000 / 15,000
Sweden / 9,000,000 / 1,000
Australia / 20,000,000 / 500
Japan / 128,000,000 / 2,000
Population total of 449,400,000 with 21,700 protesting or 0.0048%
Ok, this is only the first protests in time zones where Saturday came first, but let's not pretend this is anything more than it is. It's also worth remembering the irrational messages these protestors believe in. Bush is the worlds worst terrorist! Death to Americans! And so on... If you want to make a case for reasoned constructive criticism of either our role in Iraq or US imperialism present it!
And at the same time France had, at a minimum, more than 2 times the number of global Iraq war protestors protesting a new labor law. In just two cities alone the total was between 50,000 and 60,000 and they expect nearly 1 million across France will protest this weekend. So lets put the Iraq war protests in perspective!
Thursday, March 16, 2006
Before I get to my conspiracy theory....are you kidding me? A sitting SCOTUS justice gives a speech a month ago in South Africa in which she gives relevance to foreign law and court decisions to interpretation of the American Constitution? WHAT? What political correctness is to political views this is to our constitution and governing law! I read Ginsburg's speech on the SCOTUS website and have to agree with John at Powerline, where I found this story, who says of Ginsburg's unbelievable speech: "I've tried to be measured in this critique of Ginsburg's speech, but the truth is that it is more reprehensible than I have suggested. You really have to read it to appreciate how far removed it is from American laws and traditions, and how demagogic it is in both tone and substance. " This is so bizarre to me, that a justice of the SCOTUS could take this position, that I will assume that the looney left will come up with the theory this is a Carl Rove plot! You know, some Manchurian Candidate sort of operation to get Ginsburg impeached by programming her to run off the reservation! It's also obvious that this is yet another example of MSM bias. This is the first I have heard of this and you know that most outlets would monitor SCOTUS justice activities and website posting daily! This was posted on Feb 7 and since the politically correct left leaning internationalist US media would agree with Ginsburg they think this departure from American law and tradition isn't news!
First, why anybody pays attention to either of these pseudo enlightened media whores is beyond me! But if we have to hear, and see, these two can we at least see them fight it out in the Octagon! I mean, I use to watch the UFC fights frequently when it was one of the few things on HDTV, but its become boring....however I would tune in if these two got in the ring! Come on, Clooney is a decent looking (ya, I can say that about a man) guy who can memorize and read lines and make you think their his own words..an actor...big deal...his opinion on anything other than the movie he's in is no more interesting than the ticket taker at the local theatre...so I don't need to see it on tv or read it anywhere. As for Huffington, she's worse...her current vocation is hobnobbing with Hollywood elite and running a political blog, which has no credibility as a source of enlightened views since her political experts are Hollywood and entertainment veterans. Just read the bio's on her front page of the regular contributors. My opinion is no more valid than theirs, but I don't have major news outlets quoting me either. These people are as disconnected as the blowhards in DC!
Could you imagine what the MSM would do with a story where a prominent Senator was the head of a Republican campaign committee and whose staffer illegally acquired a credit history report on a Democrat opposing one of their candidates? It would be a page 1, TV story one, all out media blitzkrieg! Probably every story would have a Democrat quoting some version of this being just another example of the Republican culture of corruption! If you don't think the vast majority of the Media has a liberal bias then explain to me why this exact story, just replace Republican with Democrat, is either ignored or buried? And why the prominent Senator (Schumer) who head's the Democrat campaign committee, and who the law breaking staffer works for, isn't even mentioned in the WaPo's buried story?
Let's use some liberal logic...if Dubya knew that, in fact, there was no WMD's in Iraq and given all his information on Iraq was second hand, then Chucky Schumer MUST have known (and ordered) his own staffer was breaking the law hoping to find some dirt on the opposition. Gee, the degrees of separation are far less for big mouth Schumer aren't they?
Tuesday, March 14, 2006
First, I had no clue Isaac Hayes was a Scientologist....but since I love every story that finds it's way into the press about the nut-job-Jonestown like cult I was thrilled to find one while reading Taranto's WSJ blog. Isaac has been the voice of the ladies' man/school cook on South Park for nearly 8 years. During that time he participated in material that poked fun at pretty much every religion, belief, political party, celebrity and race under the sun. Suddenly when they do a very funny show on Scientology which included the regular practice of skewering a celeb....in this case Scientologist extraordinaire Tom "shoes with lifts" Cruise....Mr. use-to-be cool guy Hayes decides the show is intolerant and bigoted! What a joke! The co-creator of South Park put it best saying "never heard a peep out of Isaac in any way until we did Scientology. He wants a different standard for religions other than his own, and to me, that is where intolerance and bigotry begin."
Once again the truth hurts doesn't it Mr. Hayes and your Scientologist freak friends!
Update (3/17): Say it ain't so Viacom! Hard for me to believe Sumner Redstone would kowtow to Tom Cruise threatening to not promote MI3 if the Scientology episode of South Park was re-run! It was suppose to run Wed and it didn't. Never fear, I suspect the creators of South Park are the wrong guys to F with. They put out a signed statement to Daily Variety that said: "So, Scientology, you may have won THIS battle, but the million-year war for earth has just begun! Temporarily anozinizing our episode will NOT stop us from keeping Thetans forever trapped in your pitiful man-bodies. Curses and drat! You have obstructed us for now, but your feeble bid to save humanity will fail! Hail Xenu!!!" TOO FUNNY! To understand who Xenu is, see my post from November 2005 called Scientology, a wack job cult religion!
Did you have one of those friends when you were a kid who would flinch severely when you faked like you were going to punch him? I wasn't a school yard bully, in fact I was small hence the nickname Tiny. But, I remember a few big mouth childhood chums that would pop off with the mouth but curled up like a sow bug if ever things moved beyond a verbal joust! Well all the big mouth Democrats feel like one of those childhood big talking flinchers right now. Russ "pretty boy" Feingold's effort to censure Bush over "domestic spying" was a political stunt called by Bill Frist who proposed to put the resolution to an immediate vote (just as was done with Murtha's Iraqi pull-out resolution). Democrats dropped their heads, spastically threw up an arm as if to block a blow to the head and blocked the immediate vote. Oh sure, the investigation isn't done yet so a vote is premature they will say! Then so was tossing out a resolution to censure you dumb ass!
And for comic relief check out Texas Senator John Cornyn's website showing the results of Feingold's censure resolution to date....and note his appropriate characterization of the so called domestic spying. Hey Democrats, if you're not ready to put your hands up and take a blow shut your pie hole!
Friday, March 10, 2006
Interesting piece in the WeeklyStandard today about how in Clinton's last year as President his administration approved of the UAE purchasing 80 of the most advanced F-16 model known as the Block 60. The avionics and weapons electronics are more advanced than our own F-16 variant and yet the UAE has 80 of these bad boys! Nobody complained then and nobody has made it an issue recently in the wake of the ports contraversy. I'm not suggesting the UAE having such an advanced air force is a bad thing..frankly, as the story points out, capitalism and immigration from neighboring messed up countries by those seeking something better is encouraging. After all, once you taste some of the fruits of capitalism, along with the absence of frequent gun fire outside your house ,you're more likely to align with those who also appreciate these things. Nice planes indeed!
Found on WSJ's Taranto's daily blog is the story that Natalie Portman the Harvard graduate and world renown terrorism expert and Senator.....oh wait I mean actress who doesn't know shit about terrorism and played a senator of mythical planet Naboo in Star Wars Episode II....spoke to a “Terrorism and Counterterrorism” lecture at New York’s Columbia University! Ms. Portmans' learned views on the topic included: "censorship is bad", “I don’t think it’s right to take down the Twin Towers” and “My immediate reaction is that torture is wrong.” Is it just me or is the ivy league looking more and more like a collection of junior colleges that must flank the famed Deliverance Chattooga River in Georgia?
Spock's head would have exploded if he was confronted with the ACLU's current lethal injection death penalty lawsuit. Could the ACLU attorney's really be this illogical? This stupid? So let's see if I've got this straight...lethal injection is cruel because it is SUSPECTED that the injectee may experience pain or discomfort. So, a judge orders the prison to make sure that a doctor give a pre-lethal injection non lethal injection of something that will ensure the injectee will feel no pain, no suffering of any type. But the ACLU says we have a right to witness whether or not the lethal injection does in fact cause pain and suffering without the non lethal injection removing that very possibility? WHAT? Is this the most ill conceived stupid F'ing thing you ever heard? This is a legal argument? Boy, you card carrying ACLU members really must be proud of how your money is spent and the great legal minds you have assembled to fight the fight!
Tuesday, March 07, 2006
No doubt you've already heard about the victory for common sense in the form of the SCOTUS decision on FAIR vs. Rumsfeld. The unanimous decision is a harsh rebuke to the enlightened law school smucks who fear the brainwashing of their students isn't resolute enough to withstand a choice on campus they don't align with. From the Dean of one of the FAIR law schools, Dean Dan Polsby of George Mason Law School, commented to Powerline "This is really a stinging rebuke, not only to FAIR but to an entire industry that has become complacent and self-indulgent. Many law professors really do believe, with the late Justice Brennan, that their own strongly-held policy preferences are all encoded somehow in the Constitution. This is a timely reminder that it just isn't so." And was the position of FAIR truly based on these university's issue with "don't ask, don't tell"? Really? Of all the things you could pick on the military about the issue of being openly gay in the military is paramount to university's with law schools?
The gay lobby must be have been at work here...ah, no matter I think Bill Muchison at Town Hall sums it up nicely: "The legal factories demanding the right to protect students from exposure to the idea of a career in military justice thumb their noses at Main Street America. The Supreme Court had to settle this thing? Why couldn't common sense, tinged with some latent affection for our country, have done the job? Because at too many institutions of higher wisdom, you prospect for weeks without striking a vein of common sense. Left wing ideology, though -- plenty of that. "
You might recall 6 months back, or so, DNC chieftain Howard Dean said the Democrats will have a detailed plan, or message, only a short time before the November 2006 elections. This inability to provide details on how you fix all the things they say the other side has screwed up was continued with the Democrat response to Bush's SOTU speech at the beginning of February. Funny eyebrow man Virginia governor Tim Kaine gave the Democrat response which mostly was just a list of problems he blamed Bush and the GOP for followed by "there's a better way". I'm happy to report the Demoidiots had meetings, focus groups and lots of research and have modified the ever evolving motto to "America Can Do Better", after a brief period where it was "Together, America Can Do Better"! I guess togetherness was something they just couldn't stomach. A new WaPo story suggests to me that details and clarity are very unlikely for the Dems! The head's of this uninspired approach, Reid and Peloci, recently appeared before the Democratic Governors Association where some governors questioned this lack of a message and detail. Apparently Reid and Peloci said they're studying it, trying to narrow the list of key items, etc. Reid and Peloci then gave their differing short list! Oregon Gov. Ted Kulongoski said later: "One of the other governors said 'What do you think?' and I said 'You know what I think? I don't think we have a message.' "
Don't expect the strategy of the last several years to change....at least if Schumer (N.Y.) and Emanuel (Ill.) , who head the Senate and House campaign efforts, have their way! The WaPo says they "believe the November election will turn mainly on how voters view Republicans." So apparently they believe it's enough to just say the other guys is doing it wrong, offering up how it would be done right isn't necessary. There's leadership for ya!
Thursday, March 02, 2006
Here they are! The ten elected pacifist obstructionists who believe security, intelligence and police work in a country with the most porous borders in the world doesn't require a balance with liberty. The new Patriot Act was passed overwhelmingly with a vote of 89-10. Let's just hope there are no more attacks like 9/11, and especially in the states these shit for brains represent!
Akaka (D-HI), Bingaman (D-NM), Byrd (D-WV), Feingold (D-WI) , Harkin (D-IA), Jeffords (I-VT), Leahy (D-VT), Levin (D-MI), Murray (D-WA), Wyden (D-OR)
Wednesday, March 01, 2006
Gotsta be a bit uncomfortable in the Clinton household these days! Bill tried to show support for Dubai, who paid his rock star fees for a speech in 2002, then in the next breath says he supports his wife's stance that port security is too important to place in the hands of foreign governments. Dude, you're no longer Slick Willie!...you're loosing your touch...you use to be so crafty, but on this your duplicity smells like that Lewinski tainted stogie!
Upate: And Willie is working this deal pretty hard!