Tiny's

The common link - Muslim

2007-06-02T12:28:00.001-07:00

Once again the common link in terrorist plot after terrorist plot are that Muslims are involved. Of course the press treads lightly on this...why?...as in the plot that was stopped with today's arrests the press (and maybe FBI, I'm not sure) mention that one of the 4 suspect is Muslim...what about the other 3?

If this plot had been planned by 4 practicing Catholics, where bibles, rosary beads, and other Catholic paraphernalia was found in their apartments would the press barely mention or ignore that fact? Not on your life.

And, if someone was abducting children from schoolyards, murdering them and left evidence that they were a practicing Muslim would the police investigate area Mosques and Muslims? You bet they would...and the public would support it. You don't include everyone in your search when the evidence says the bad guy was a bald white guy missing his left arm!

The Muslim's who do not aggressively denounce those among them who promote jihad, that don't pull out all stops to help stop and bring these bad seeds to justice, are ensuring that we persecute the entire Muslim faith.

But, sadly we live with a large part of the population wanting to believe that there is no common link between evil people...that in fact we don't have a global war on terror that is 100% rooted in the worst part of the Muslim religion.....hopefully those I care about won't be sacrificed because of the politically correct Kum Ba Yah attitude of ignorant among us.

The ACLU sues so your kids can be killed!

2007-06-02T08:57:00.000-07:00

It's becoming more frequent that the ACLU takes on the cause of those who are anti-American, whether citizens of this country or not. I have no sympathy for those who find themselves targeted by the CIA especially under the suspicion of being a terrorist or an Al Qaida operative.

For the ACLU to take a case such as this puts them squarely in my cross hairs as terrorist sympathizers. If there's enough evidence, whether circumstantial or not, for the CIA or any police agency to suspect you're a terrorist or associated with terrorists, I'm on the side of NOT presuming you innocent. My children, family and friends are too important...sorry I say shoot and ask questions later.

I guess the "American" part of the ACLU is meaningless at this point....and so the ACLU is now more than just a pathetic joke concerning "American Civil Liberties"....they're an enemy of America!

Just your average peacenik!

2007-04-24T15:20:00.000-07:00

Meet a Harry Reid supporter! He's just your average Islamic good guy! In this case, the dichotomy of carrying grenade launchers and automatic weapons at a rally against violence is lost on these brain washed infidel haters. I suspect Harry Reid thinks we just need to sit down with this fellow and be diplomatic for this guy to see the light.

I had to laugh this week at how Harry Reid is like Teflon with the press. His various on camera appearances post his "we lost" in Iraq statement are a joke. He never says anything substantive...in fact he has now adopted a version of the "fake but true" stance many took with the faked Bush National Guard documents. Harry says even if he's told by General Petraeus that things were improving he wouldn't believe it...so "true but fake". Any conservative who would provide so many idiotic displays of logic, lack of facts and school yard name calling would be SKEWERED by the media.

And God forbid the press ask Harry, and Nancy, and all the gang if Al-Qaida is in fact operating in Iraq, and effectively, wouldn't allowing them free rein there ultimately mean they get stronger and more dangerous world wide?

But they're smart...if you don't even go to briefings you can later claim ignorance if it bites you in the end.

SurrenderCrats

2007-04-21T08:22:00.000-07:00

Pic says it all......with the most pathetic terrorist sympathizer surrendering coward non-troop supporter being Reid!, but you gotta love Lieberman!

From Tiny's Cold Dead Hands

2007-04-17T15:57:00.000-07:00

I'll protect my right to bear arms to my death. The drumbeat has started and anyone could have predicted it...the 2nd Amendment is under fire. The old cliches are however true, its the person and not the gun...but these are lost on the kumbaya crowd. They think if you put the anti-jump barrier on the bridge the suicidal person won't actually attempt suicide...they think if we have far greater gun control, or ban gun ownership altogether, crime with guns will go down. They think bad guys and those wishing to die couldn't think of ANY other way to do their deed. It's simply the guns! In fact such measures just create more helpless citizens and victims.

The logic is flawed. First you cannot compare any other country to ours. America is completely unique in this regard and has been the worlds most free and prosperous country based on the founding principles and in part on the 2nd amendment. The original intent of the 2nd amendment might seem archaic to some, not me. Today's most powerful people on the left are borderline socialists and while most liberals think they are the party of freedoms, they are in fact the party that thinks you don't know how to handle your freedom so they need to take it back. I've heard there are from 200M to 1B guns, legal and otherwise, in circulation in the U.S. Even if you ban ownership and expect people to turn them in, what F'ing crackpot thinks 100% of law abiding citizens will turn all of theirs in. Or thinks even a single bad guy will turn theirs in?

My most recent gun was a H&K 45ACP...shot thousands of rounds at the range. The range I used was frequented by various local police officers...several told me that a burglar's biggest fear was entering a home when someone was home...worse that the someone would own a gun. Well I want bad buys to fear entering my home! I want an out of control or rogue government element to fear entering my home. Bad guys (in groups or not) don't like and fear good guys with guns!!!!! It's also 100% certain that if any of those who was face to face with the Virginia Tech shooter was packing there would be a chance far fewer people would be killed. But, if there isn't any normal law abiding trained folks packing heat.....well then it's 100% certain all those that could die will die.

And then there's the shameless politicking! With lifeless bodies still warm at Virginia Tech it was disgusting to see those trying to take an act of pure evil and use it to draw attention to political issues, including the illogical gun issue. People always want to be able to blame someone, well other than the perpetrator! There must be someone alive we can all direct our anger too...somebody must have screwed up right! And surely even more powerful is a long string of screw ups that really must be the reason that this evil person executed so many with apparently zero emotion. I'm sure there will be all kinds of mental health reforms requested...as if we can predict which person with depression or weird behavior might SNAP. So drug them all I guess? Or maybe lock them all up?

Wanna bet liberals will make moves to curtail individual rights and freedoms with this incident as the catalyst? Well, they already are!

I thought Obama was actually one of the better liberals in the POTUS race...but Obama jumped on the cheese ball bandwagon of politicizing this event...and he does it in rambling and inarticulate form...I couldn't even listen to this entire thing...this guy sucks.

Who doesn't want a colorblind America?

2007-04-12T13:34:00.000-07:00

First, lets be clear.. semi-shock jock Imus calling the Rutger's women's BBall team "nappy headed hos" was bad..both because of its racial bigotry but also because he picked on private citizens in a public way. I don't think he should loose his job over it though...of course the chicken-shit advertisers may force that issue as they run away before Jackson or Sharpton show up at their door.

But the real problem here is not Imus. He, apparently, makes stupid and derogatory comments all the time but in an equal opportunity way...so JUST LIKE many black comedians he's not promoted bigotry or stereotypes but using that it exists in his schtick!

The real problem is people like Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton......they run to the nearest camera ONLY when some apparent injustice, or even an insult, is flung in the direction of a black person(s). This rush to condemn the racial bigotry (as they define it) is immediate and without homework (Can you say Duke Lacrosse?) or without looking inward! And there it is....while I've heard Sharpton say just yesterday that he does condemn rap music that uses offensive words and messages I can find no evidence of what should be a wide spread, daily campaign against the hundreds of blacks involved in making and put out that pathetic material.

But I have posted on this many times before..the likes of Jackson and Sharpton DO NOT want you to be colorblind! Their power, their significance in the public eye, goes to zero should America become colorblind. I heard callers who called into talk radio on this topic mention how the bulk of the rap music sales are to young white men...I say so what. The material is the first problem....Whites and blacks involved in the creation, promotion and sale of this material should be targeted with even more aggression than Imus has seen...and especially by the black community. The black community is nearly silent on this....as long as people think it's ok for a black to use words like nigga, ho, bitch, pimp when referring to another person, but not for a white....well then you've got an idiotic double standard that allows the very people who claim to be victimized by this language enabling black-on-black racism and bigotry.

I just heard that Imus is out of a job...dumped by both MSNBC and CBS radio....those blacks who promote the language and culture that got Imus fired do far more damage. I also think Imus asked a good question in wondering if Al Sharpton would apologize to the Duke Lacrosse players who he castigated very publicly....not a chance...because too much of his power base wouldn't like it. Also disturbing is what appears to be an ambulance chasing move by Hillary who rushes to Rutgers to make a speech...pathetic.

Update: So, looks like Jarpton (my new term for Jackson and Sharpton) influenced the CEO of CBS Radio in Imus' firing....Gee, any bets on whether they also asked Les Moonves to also stop playing any music featuring nappy headed, ho, nigga, pimp, etc.? NO CHANCE....and has Jarpton met with the CEOs of the record labels who put out rap and hip-hop demanding the same thing? NO CHANCE

Update: I haven't seen the Rutger's team press conference but have read a few reactions to it and find it interesting these women feel so victimized. Can any of you name a single player? Could you pick them out in a crowd? Do they really think "man...maybe I am a ho?". Interesting comments from women to Paul over at Powerlineblog on this. And I bet that when these players go on Oprah that there will be a lot of focus on how damaging this was to these specific women. As if these words which were flung at their team in name, and not their personal names, is worse than any situation they have yet to encounter in the young lives...give me a break!

Pelosi should be prosecuted! But not if her friends (pictured here) have their way!

2007-04-06T07:34:00.000-07:00

It's interesting that at the same time there are new calls for the impeachment of President Bush, on by any reasoned inspection with no damning evidence, we see Nancy Pelosi very well may have committed a felony in visiting Syria. In today's WSJ, Robert Turner makes this very point (subscription only link)...some excerps:

The "Logan Act" makes it a felony and provides for a prison sentence of up to three years for any American, "without authority of the United States," to communicate with a foreign government in an effort to influence that government's behavior on any "disputes or controversies with the United States." Some background on this statute helps to understand why Ms. Pelosi may be in serious trouble.

********

Ms. Pelosi and her Congressional entourage spoke to President Assad on various issues, among other things saying, "We came in friendship, hope, and determined that the road to Damascus is a road to peace." She is certainly not the first member of Congress -- of either party -- to engage in this sort of behavior, but her position as a national leader, the wartime circumstances, the opposition to the trip from the White House, and the character of the regime she has chosen to approach make her behavior particularly inappropriate.

********

Ms. Pelosi's trip was not authorized, and Syria is one of the world's leading sponsors of international terrorism. It has almost certainly been involved in numerous attacks that have claimed the lives of American military personnel from Beirut to Baghdad.

********
The U.S. is in the midst of two wars authorized by Congress. For Ms. Pelosi to flaunt the Constitution in these circumstances is not only shortsighted; it may well be a felony, as the Logan Act has been part of our criminal law for more than two centuries. Perhaps it is time to enforce the law.

As sure as the sun will rise tomorrow the MSM will not create the hell on earth fire storm they would if this was a Republican subverting a Democrat president...ask any of your staunch liberal friends to defend Pelosi's actions and falsely acting on Israel's behalf! Then after they do you can tell them about all the terrorists leaders and Islamic Jihad members that liked Pelosi's shadow government foreign policy friendly talk as well....they're in good company.

Update: Iran's position on Pelosi might be proof of violating the Logan Act! Check it out on Littlegreenfootballs.

Pelosi talks, middle east problem solved!

2007-04-05T07:19:00.000-07:00

Pelosi is in the middle east.....using the liberal approach, we have been hearing about for 6-ish years, of dealing with terrorist supporting nation states...the approach? Simple, you talk to one side, then go to the other side and make up stuff about how the other side wants to make nice!

After visiting Israel and meeting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Pelosi then, I'm sure, using carbon friendly means made her way to Syria to meet President Bashar Assad. Syria is a supporter of Hamas and Islamic Jihad organizations which includes providing weapons to insurgents and terrorists in Iraq...and thus killing Americans! Thus, President Bush, the State Department, the U.S. Government, and even Olmert told Pelosi not to visit Syria...oh don't worry boys...I'm a women, I'm Nancy Pelosi and all these bad boys need is some talking to!

After the ill advised meeting Pelosi said she brought a message to Assad from Olmert saying that Israel was ready for peace talks. NOT TRUE....Olmert says differently! Where is the MSM on this?

From the Prime Minister Olmert's office:

She (Pelosi) said the meeting with the Syrian leader "enabled us to communicate a message from Prime Minister Olmert that Israel was ready to engage in peace talks as well."

According to officials in the Prime Minister's Office, however, this was not what transpired during her meeting with Olmert.

The officials said Olmert had told Pelosi that he thought her trip to Damascus was a mistake, and that when she asked - nevertheless - whether he had a message for Assad, Olmert said Syria should first stop supporting terrorism and "act like a normal country," and only then would Israel be willing to hold discussions.

UPDATE: Ok, the Washington Post has recognized this buffoonery! I wish it was better than Page A16, but at least someone is noticing....this is a very strong rebuke of Pelosi's foolishness on this trip...can you imagine the fire storm if a Republican Senator was doing things that, as Pelosi is doing, are tantamount to trying to setup and run a shadow government? As the WaPo says:

Two weeks ago Ms. Pelosi rammed legislation through the House of Representatives that would strip Mr. Bush of his authority as commander in chief to manage troop movements in Iraq. Now she is attempting to introduce a new Middle East policy that directly conflicts with that of the president. We have found much to criticize in Mr. Bush's military strategy and regional diplomacy. But Ms. Pelosi's attempt to establish a shadow presidency is not only counterproductive, it is foolish.

UK's The Independent supports terror & Iran

2007-04-03T07:35:00.000-07:00

When I saw the above headline on the Drudge Report I thought oh great...what mission went wrong now! But even before reading the story behind the link on the UK based The Independent I thought about the video of the British soldiers....the way those soldiers are acting like puppets they would have spilled the beans on camera about a botched mission.

So I read the story and first thing I note is somehow they want to link a Jan 11. mission to the capture of the British soldiers....no connection, no fact based connection provided!

Then I visited HotAir as I do every morning and Allahpundit does a great job of breaking down the fake story, read it all but in summary:

Pretend to break news that’s already been reported, assert a causal connection to another event without a single source to support it, then publish as fact. Good, hard-nosed, hard-left agenda journalganda.

This is plain and simple made up anti-US propaganda...the press hides behind anonymous sources and implications like there's no tomorrow....but what's really behind this? Do those who put out such things not know the Islamic extremists they embolden would gladly snatch their sycophant asses in a heartbeat and cut their heads off on video? Ah, but maybe they do...but they see George Bush and the U.S. as even more evil!

Just another concerned Global Warmer's home!

2007-03-30T08:16:00.000-07:00

Nice eh? Just pull your Boeing 707 right up to the home jet way....you won't even get wet when it rains in beautiful Florida as you go from the jet to the small home!

John Travolta is just the latest monster hypocrite celeb to join the concerned do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do crowd. I have to give Travolta credit though, he isn't over the top about telling all of us to do something radically different...he suggests we may not be able to change things and that inhabiting other planets or building protective domes is the way to go! If I had 5 jets I wouldn't be suggesting we all use less fuel either!

Just your average Democrat!

2007-03-28T16:46:00.000-07:00

Did you notice the guy/thing standing in the background when you saw video, or pics, like the one here of Valerie (I'm not sure if I was covert) Plame testifying, for no real purpose, in front of a Congressional committee?

That is apparently just an average Democrat! And as it turns out, what is probably your average Code Pink devotee! Not sure if it male or female are you? Well it's male, but he wishes he was a she...he's a professional protester living on Social Security disability...mental disability no doubt! This Adam's apple touting Code Pinker is getting some fame, but probably not the kind of fame you Democrats (who are less than a degree of separation away from this freak) want....pathetic how the reporter on this story calls him "she"....Puulease!

And just to prove that Adam's apples, 5 o'clock shadows, mental disabilities and smoking good looks are standard for Code Pink, check out this member!

Hatred on the left, fringe or the norm?

2007-03-26T10:29:00.000-07:00

It seems a week doesn't go by where left leaning vitriol and hatred displays itself. Those on the left will claim this to not be representative of the left, but instead call it fringe behavior. I don't think so.

First, the image here is from the anti-war, anti-American protest in Oregon a few days ago where an American soldier was burned in effigy. Of course they didn't have Sean Penn's face on it, that was added by http://www.imao.us/ who humorously notes one can support something while simultaneously burning it in effigy. So I support Sean Penn's right to be a childish hateful American hater while at the same time displaying this image!

Sean gets this honor for his speech this weekend in Oakland where his hatred was unabashed and supported by a Congresswomen who was present, along with an enthusiastic crowd. With numerous celebrities and elected US Government officials regularly participating in very caustic hatred for American operations and our Commander & Chief my claim that this is not fringe behavior on the left is more supported than man caused global warming.

If you don't think so, present influential people on the right, celebrities on the right, gatherings of hundreds on the right where similar hate is directed at the left...just show me a few as compared to the dozen, or so, in the links I provide for my case on the left!

This is the Democrats

2007-03-24T07:53:00.000-07:00

Today's Wall Street Journal had a piece on the pathetic politicking on Iraq by the Democrats. As my previous post points out, the Democrats are far from united and so you have to give Pelosi credit, albeit the pure political porcine bribery form of credit, for even pulling off a simple majority on her useless vote. The editors at the WSJ were more kind with the headline of 'A Triumph for Pelosi' The Democrats send their message on Iraq, but the kindness ended there. The opening paragraphs nailed beautifully:

Saturday, March 24, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT

That's how the Associated Press described yesterday's vote by the House to demand a U.S. retreat from Iraq, and in the perverse calculus of Capitol Hill we suppose it was. Speaker Nancy Pelosi has demonstrated she can pile on enough pork to bribe enough Democrats to cobble together a bare, partisan majority to "send a message" that has no chance of becoming law. Congratulations.

"Today is an historic day," Ms. Pelosi said on the House floor. "The new Congress will vote to end the war in Iraq." But of course the bill does nothing of the sort. If she truly wanted to end the war, the Speaker and her fellow Democrats could simply have used their power of the purse to refuse to fund it. But that would have meant taking some responsibility for what happens in Iraq, which is the last thing Democrats want to do. So they have passed a bill that funds the war while claiming it ends the war.

The bill's "benchmarks" and deadlines certainly have nothing to do with achieving victory in Iraq, or assisting General David Petraeus's campaign to secure Baghdad. They are all about the war inside the Democratic Caucus. On the one hand, they appease the antiwar left by pretending to declare the war illegal if certain goals aren't met by Iraqis or U.S. forces. But on the other, they allow "moderates" from swing districts to claim they are nonetheless "supporting the troops." Acts of Congress don't get much more cynical than that.

Keystone Democrats

2007-03-22T13:27:00.000-07:00

The image above of the breaking news teasers on www.drudgereport.com says it all! From Pelosi and Co's inability to articulate their slow bleed timetable for Iraq, or the appointments to various committee's of dear in the headlight old farts that make President Bush's public speaking skills seem scholarly, the Democrats are running around like bumbling Keystone cops.

Evil Shyster

2007-03-22T10:39:00.000-07:00

I was getting tired of seeing that hideous picture of Gore from my previous post so I was looking for something to post on when I felt a sick feeling. This morning before heading to work I saw teasers on TV for a press conference John Edwards was having. The teaser mentioned Edwards cancelled some campaign work to attend a doctors appointment with his wife. Because he scheduled a press conference the assumption was this was not good news about his wife's fight with cancer. Various TV and blog posts of course assumed if his wife's cancer was back that he would only be calling a press conference to announce putting is campaign on hold, or dropping out of the race altogether.

Then I heard he in fact used this as an opportunity to say "the campaign goes on"...my reaction was Oh MY GOD!.....First, this guy has less substance on the issues than Obama, but his actual qualifications to be President aside he's an ambulance chasing shyster lawyer who made millions and lives like it...then lectures us on class warfare and the have-nots..what is it with liberals and their hypocrisy?

Anyway, this is pure evil....to use your wife's battle with cancer as a vehicle for political gain..presumably from sympathy for the situation, is truly evil...un F'ing believable.

Now, will the MSM skewer this evil shyster for this as they should?

Al Gore believes NASA doesn't exist, and that's beyond dispute!

2007-03-21T14:33:00.000-07:00

Ok, follow me on this one. Today Al Gore testified in front of several committees in Congress on his belief that global warming is caused by man. Gore, in his testimony, still claims there is no debate, there's a consensus, it's beyond dispute....and he continued his fear mongering as if that makes his claims more true. Gore uses words and phrases like "crisis", "mans survival is threatened", "dire warnings", "planetary emergency", and so on.

Gore asked for immediately legislation to curb carbon emissions over some period. Of course unless you get China, India and the rest of the world that's plowing into the 21st century to also do something in lock step in wouldn't matter much....oh and nobody who claims we (manly man) are causing global warming has presented any evidence, science or theory that we can actually stop it. But never mind....buy some carbon credits from the companies that Al Gore owns part of! And never mind Al uses 15-20 times as much energy in his home than you...he's not going to change that...gee, he really believes in this emergency of global warming doesn't he!

You ever notice how someone will tell you over and over again something they claim is obvious, evident and clearly correct when it's not? You can be sure when someone likes to say the debate is over, it's surely not. If the debate was over, if it was "beyond dispute"...well, it would be pretty obvious and we wouldn't be debating it with you. Those who think there are no scientists of note that question man made global warming aren't looking very hard, just look at my GW related blog posts....and they like to point out that because Michael Crichton is challenging man made global warming that his celebrity author status gives him no credibility. Well you read his bio and tell me who is more a scientist, Gore or Crichton?

But while Gore and his supporters claim there is no debate and that there's a consensus... I find almost daily stories of scientists, groups of scientists and studies from respected scientific organizations that present evidence, findings and theories that if nothing else PROVE there is a debate, that it is NOT beyond dispute...well, unless for example, Gore is claiming NASA and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory doesn't exist!

The Great Global Warming Swindle

2007-03-13T09:28:00.000-07:00

See update below!

The BBC produced a documentary so titled. I don't think anybody would make the claim that the BBC is a tool of big oil or of conservatives, yet this movie does a great job debunking the claims and misrepresentation of facts made in Gore's award winning documentary...and all without dramatics and emotional pleas, but instead with SCIENCE.

CO2 levels, natural weather patterns, global climate cycles, ice cores, sun spots, solar activity, sea levels, storms, polar ice caps, permafrost, dissenting opinions being censored, oil & gas behind dissension, the money trail, you name it and the BBC documentary covers it. An amazing array of accomplished scientists participate and present science not presented in Gore's movie.

Also it's important to understand that the idea of a Global Warming crisis is about money and a political agenda and not about conservation and environmentalism. Climate science and those who practice climatology are made relevant and get funding if there is a looming crisis. In the end, if you're unwilling to listen to all evidence, all the theories, that are central tenets of Global Warming and man's role...well then you're intellectually dishonest, close minded and intolerant.

Many schools, churches and other venues offered free showings of Gore's movie....will those same venues now offer the BBC documentary as a counterpoint? Will it make its way into theaters or onto mainstream television channels? I think we all know the answer!

IF YOU BELIEVE the points made n Gore's movie, you must view the BBC piece so that your personal view can have integrity!

BBC Channel 4's official page for The Great Global Warming Swindle documentary is a great resource of information.

Apparently links to the full BBC movie are being taken down by those who don't like its content (intolerance)...so here are several.

On Google Video

LittleGreenFootballs

1Dawg

------------------------------------------------------------------

Update: From today's Wall Street Journal opinion blog Taranto had a reader point out an interview Gore gave last year where he basically makes it clear that he's ok exaggerating, if not lying, for the greater good when it comes to global warming...problem is that this is all about science and this completely goes against the foundation of good science.

------------------------------------------------------------------

'An Over-Representation of Factual Presentations'After our item yesterday on scientists critical of Al Gore's "global warming" alarmism, a reader called our attention to an interview with Gore that appeared last May in a publication called Grist:

Q: There's a lot of debate right now over the best way to communicate about global warming and get people motivated. Do you scare people or give them hope? What's the right mix?

Gore: I think the answer to that depends on where your audience's head is. In the United States of America, unfortunately we still live in a bubble of unreality. And the Category 5 denial is an enormous obstacle to any discussion of solutions. Nobody is interested in solutions if they don't think there's a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.

Global Warming causes COLD

2007-03-13T09:18:00.000-07:00

Two women who wanted to bring attention to Global Warming with a North Pole expedition had it cut short due to extreme cold (minus 100 at times) and frost bite! First the article calls where they were using sleds to travel the "Arctic Ocean"...uh, I think if a slide slides across it, it's an ice shelf, an ice cap, or some other label that denotes the cold stuff called ICE! But more importantly, the organizer of the expedition wants you to know this isn't ironic as the extreme cold is just another GW side effect:

"They were experiencing temperatures that weren't expected with global warming," Atwood said. "But one of the things we see with global warming is unpredictability."

NYTimes Global Warming slap, not hit, piece

2007-03-13T07:14:00.000-07:00

Yesterday on Drudge a teaser ran all day saying the NYTimes was doing a hit piece on Gore and his Global Warming alarm-ism. Well, the piece is in today's NYTimes and it's hardly what I would call a hit piece. It tempers each example, and person, who take issue with any salient aspect of Gore's movie, or the main concept of man's role, with the reappearing message that he largely got it right.

The piece does give mention, but not with the weight it deserves, to almost daily public pronouncements from scientists who cry foul. Consensus and the notion that there is no longer a debate are complete folly and will, I believe, irreparably damage the credibility of those who promote man's role in GW as indisputable fact and not a theory.

While the piece sites issues with the movies claims of increased deadly hurricanes and a catastrophic ocean level rise, the most damaging albeit underplayed point is made by nearly all who challenge man's role....and this point hasn't been countered in any substantial way to date. The evidence for a natural warming cycle that has repeated itself over the planets history is in abundance and most of it with no green house gases producing humans in existence.

“Nowhere does Mr. Gore tell his audience that all of the phenomena that he describes fall within the natural range of environmental change on our planet,” Robert M. Carter, a marine geologist at James Cook University in Australia, said in a September blog. “Nor does he present any evidence that climate during the 20th century departed discernibly from its historical pattern of constant change.”

In October, Dr. Easterbrook made similar points at the geological society meeting in Philadelphia. He hotly disputed Mr. Gore’s claim that “our civilization has never experienced any environmental shift remotely similar to this” threatened change.

Nonsense, Dr. Easterbrook told the crowded session. He flashed a slide that showed temperature trends for the past 15,000 years. It highlighted 10 large swings, including the medieval warm period. These shifts, he said, were up to “20 times greater than the warming in the past century.”

Getting personal, he mocked Mr. Gore’s assertion that scientists agreed on global warming except those industry had corrupted. “I’ve never been paid a nickel by an oil company,” Dr. Easterbrook told the group. “And I’m not a Republican.”

How did they get elected??????

2007-03-12T17:08:00.000-07:00

You just can't make this stuff up....a must see video I found while reading www.wizbangblog.com showing Nancy Pelosi and David "idiot liberals" Obey putting President Bush to intellectual shame! Well, hardly...watch it here

Gore officially a nut

2007-03-01T10:01:00.000-08:00

Liberals have complained ever since Fox News and conservative syndicated talk radio hosts started getting ratings that were significant. Somehow this was unfair or bad. Whether you believe Fox is more balanced than biased, doesn't matter...it clearly doesn't present stories with the same spin as the MSM..and since the MSM far and away has more viewers than Fox it's not even an example of balance....the airwaves still get far more liberal content than conservative.

So why then do they complain? Well, because they're intolerant and when the opposite view actually makes sense it DRIVES THEM INSANE. You have to love how liberals want to stifle debate and the opposing view and don't see their intolerance in doing so.

Today when I saw a quote from Al Gore with regard to the media and how reporting on global warming, and man's role in it, I had to laugh. It's hard to have missed that in the last several months the number of stories of scientists, academics and researchers who have said wait a minute, there is no consensus, data is being interpreted incorrectly, or data is being ignored so as to better fit a position, and most of all...there is no certainty that man causes this warming, it's merely a theory....and one easily challenged.

Gore obviously isn't happy that people challenge his baby, his mantra of the last several years claiming dire consequences, a global emergency, the sky is falling! Of course the challenges are very logical, non-emotional, reasoned and compelling...which makes people talking in absolutes on the other side (Gore's side) look like overacting simpletons.

So instead of Gore embracing the debate, instead of saying we should weigh all facts and evidence and be logical about things he does what ever liberal does when cornered by reality...he becomes illogical and emotional. Read Gore's comments for yourself...the use of the word "consensus" is a joke...just like how there was a "consensus" in the 70's about the coming new Ice Age! A consensus doesn't make something true, or even likely true as history shows. But how can one take someone for anything other than a nut when he actually calls a balanced view biased, and his desire for everyone to sing the same song right?

They have failed to report that it is the consensus and instead have chosen …balance as bias. Al Gore, 2007

If you're intellectually honest how can you excuse Gore's own "carbon footprint" with his homes and private jet travel. Carbon credits are a joke...you're either personally responsible for creating more pollution than the average person or not. If you pollute 20 times more than me you don't get a pass because you planted trees or supposedly offset your filth some other way.

Update: Taranto of the WSJ blogged on Gore's hypocrisy and disingenuous motives yesterday...also pointing out that the MSM bias in not skewering Gore as they would if he was a conservative.

Hollywood, America's most egregious Global Warming offender

2007-02-23T13:26:00.000-08:00

Yes that's right! You heard it at Tiny's first. I thought it was important that I break this story before the Oscar's this Sunday, when you will surely hear plenty of Hollywood luminaries lecture us on being "green", the catastrophe coming, and how GW denial is sinful.

You might think I'm calling Hollywood a major offender of GW based on how many of the Hollywood elite travel by private jet, or stay in power sucking hotel suites, or own one or more 5000 sq/ft+ power sucking homes, or who while owning a Prius also own several SUV's, luxury sedans or exotics....no, no, it's not because their personal green footprints are enormous...it's because the product they produce, entertainment, is not green friendly at all!

That's right...after all, the entertainment product they produce is a luxury...it in fact requires energy to consume. While food production, construction and transportation all probably have much bigger green footprints than entertainment, they are necessities. The type of entertainment Hollywood produces is not, and lets face it..the vast majority is also crap.

You see, when I was a kid I didn't use much electricity. I mostly played with balls, bats, MatchBox cars, GI Joes, and road my Schwinn Stingray for hours every day. Today my kids use more power in a day by themselves than my entire family did in a day when I was growing up...that's even with the inefficiency of appliances in the 70's and 80's. The number of American families that run one or more TV's for a good 4-6 hours every night, plus one or more cable boxes, plus the home theatre amplifier, etc....is surely close to 100M.

My personal footprint for just consuming Hollywood's product is huge. It's not unusual for me to be watching TV solo in our family room in front of a power sucking home theatre setup that has so many components it's on a dedicated 30 amp circuit. My wife will be watching a TV driven by a cable box in our bedroom, my son playing Xbox (and so running two devices) in his room and my daughter at our kitchen island drawing while watching Sponge Bob (again two devices because of the cable box). During this intellect sucking entertainment orgy my family engages in, I calculated the power usage to be equivalent to burning 45 - 100 watt light bulbs for 6 hours. This explains my PG&E bill each month....probably about the same as the average home mortgage payment in Ohio.

Of course something less indulgent is going on in most American homes each night, but the aggregate power usage is giant. Then don't forget the other major Hollywood product...movies..I don't go to the movies much anymore and instead do the on-demand and DVD thing...but the green footprint of a single 2 hour movie showing is big....all those people driving to the theatre is the biggest component.

This thin investment most, including Hollywood celebs, have in understanding both GW and energy is laughable. Most seem to think electricity is somehow green! Most electricity in this country doesn't come from wind, solar or hydro...it's oil and coal fired generators and a bit of nuclear. The later of which we should really be invested in.

So Hollywood....if you were serious about being green you would tell us all to turn off our TVs, stop listen to are large amp stereo systems, stop going to the movies....stay home and spend time talking to your family and maybe read more books....we would all be better off. Gore's movie will surely win an Oscar or two...not because it contains truth, but because Hollywood likes to show us that they care about the world...and makes them feel better about being hypocrits in their personal life. So remember when you see a star on Sunday pull up to the red carpet in a borrowed electric car, that he/she probably just flew in from Europe on a private jet and that the outlet that car was plugged into earlier in the day isn't green!

Illegal aliens bank of choice

2007-02-23T10:10:00.000-08:00

You may have heard that BofA has a program in the LA area where without a social security number you can get a credit card. Coming under fire for the program, and for good reason, the CEO (Kenneth Lewis) got a letter published in yesterdays WSJ in response.

First, it's funny that he tries to pretend its not about making money on illegals when this program is in the LA area only. Then he tries to claim this is just about helping customers (illegals) build a credit history. And he says "we have an obligation to serve all those in our country who are legally eligible to receive services. To do less would be discriminatory and unfair."....really, if they are in your BofA branch signing up for one of these accounts and they are here ILLEGALLY would that meet you standard for "legally eligible"?

Lewis then tries to hide behind the Patriot Act...which apparently weakly allows financial institutions to accept some foreign government forms of identification when opening an account. Well, that's just flat out wrong. Kenneth even makes the statement that the bank needs to "do our part to support the security of our nation's financial systems". Ya, like taking foreign IDs which have little or no integrity to the process in the countries who issue them as a way to establish financial operations in the US...good job Kenneth...ya, you're a real patriot and doing your part for national security and unity.

But best of all is when little Kenny employs the first law of the 2nd grade rules of universe...in describing the credit cards that probably all Al-Qaeda cells in the country use "They are offered at Bank of America and many other financial institutions as a way for customers to build their credit history."

Bank of America is no longer the bank of America in my eyes.

Big discovery, heat can affect a fever!

2007-02-22T17:34:00.000-08:00

I can barely contain myself...I want to scream at the lunacy spawned by global warming hysterics. A study, using data from one lowly children's hospital in Australia found that TWO more children under six years old were admitted with fever to that hospital for every 5 degrees of temperature rise. WHAT? Stop the presses.....and this is just from 2001 to 2002!

Could you imagine how many children under 6 would have shown up at a hospital 10,000 years ago, if there was one around then, when in a several year period certain locations on the planet had 30 degree average rises in temperature. Oh, damn that global warming.

You have to hand it to these idiots at the University of Sydney who I'm sure didn't take into account that it might just be how high the temperature in the Australian city where this hospital is which of course is exacerbated by any rise at all. For example, if they looked at a children's hospital where the hottest summer temperature was 75 degrees would that hospital ever see such a correlation when it went from 70 to 75? Hell no.

I know, lets put a children's hospital, or an elderly care center, dead smack in the middle of Death Valley....watch what happens when the summer temperature from one day to the next goes from 115 to 120!

And how about this statement "And now global warming is becoming more apparent, it is highly likely an increasing number of young children will be turning up at hospital departments with these kinds of common illnesses".

I can't even think or write anything useful after reading this idiotic story....we are doomed.

UPDATE: And yet more idiocy....children are worried and having a hard time going to sleep because of the pending doom due to global warming!!!!!! I don't doubt the survey...you know why these kids even know about the looming disaster caused by global warming? Because our K-8th grade teachers are MORONS. They believe this, they see GW and mans roll in it as a liberal/Democrat position and buy it all. They think its an undeniable fact...a fact...it's not even a theory. I experienced this first hand. When my 2nd grader was in first grade (at a private school I might add) his teacher told the class the GW horror story. My son was worried and echoed the lie, his teacher told as fact, to me. I was furious...I talked to the teacher....explained that first this is not a fact but a theory, that there is no consensus and gave her a boat load of links on the Internet to back up that up. I provided data from experts that show a logical and emotionless analysis of the same data used to convict man of causing GW, but instead convict natural cycles and phenomenon the planet goes through whether we are on this planet or not.

Homophibia is your right

2007-02-21T16:03:00.000-08:00

I regularly read syndicated columnist Leonard Pitts Jr. and also regularly disagree with what he writes. But, he makes interesting and smart arguments that I enjoy trying to rebut. This week Pitts' column makes the argument that Tim Hardaway's blunt declaration that he hates gays will expose the ugliness of homophobia thus setting about a reversal of its acceptance.

Pitts uses the example of Bull Conner who, as a Birmingham Alabama police commissioner in 1963, put attack dogs and high pressure fire hoses on peaceful and unarmed black civil rights marchers. These images surely gave people a sinking feeling in their stomach. I'm sure it did so because this was a physical attack on citizens by police, by fireman, by city workers sworn to protect and serve those citizens...a physical attack that could seriously harm, or even kill, those just exercising their right to assemble and speak their mind.

An ex-NBA player who was fodder for a radio host, a host that clearly baited him into making a "homophobic" statement, is hardly comparable to those sworn to protect and serve deciding to attack a large group of citizens not breaking the law. Hating someones lifestyle is not even on the same planet as the willingness to physically harm someone just because of the color of their skin.

Surely more disturbing to those who may read this is that I don't even think homophobia should go away. Is the argument that I should accept homosexuality as normal? Or just that it's mean to publicly declare my disdain for their lifestyle? As a conservative I don't get that protection from liberals! I suppose some would argue that, like a black, the gay person is born that way, so to even express hate for them is equivalent to racism.

Sorry I don't buy it! I personally don't hate gays, I hate their lifestyle. I hate that they constantly put their agenda, whose goal is to portray gay as "normal", in our faces constantly. I hate bath houses where men have orgies with strangers. I hate that there is apparently far too many gays having unprotected sex. I hate that gays want people to believe a child isn't better off with a mother and a father, as opposed to two fathers or mothers...and so on.

Racism is bad....racism to the point of hurting people is even worse....the idea that homophobia must be wiped out, is bad in my view. I see it as a slippery slope....after all, a pedophile was also born with his sickening desire so is my hatred of that group also misplaced? We either have freedom of thought, and speech, even when you're diametrically opposed to, or even sickened by, it or we are throwing out the bill of rights and we are no longer a republic.

This defines what I see as a fundamental difference between a conservative and a liberal. Aside from the usual differences (less government, personal responsibility, etc.) a conservative believes the whole is more important than the individual. That it's more important to be good than to feel good. That you should approach the big issues with logic and not emotion. That it's not true that if it doesn't harm others, it's OK. That sometimes what is right, isn't fair to everyone.

Does a gay person have hurt feelings if you tell them to their face you hate them? Surely they do, but you wouldn't want the right of a person to express that hate to be stifled would you? Are our freedoms only protected when you agree with ones ideology? And what hurt, or pain, did Hardaway cause anyway? I see political pundits spewing vitriol on conservatives all the time..I'm not hurt, or pained, or calling for liberalism to go the way of racism! Political correctness and accept everyone run amuck!

Immigrants, not Americans, must adapt

2007-02-15T14:23:00.000-08:00

I got an email from my dad today, one of those emails that was forwarded from an email fowarded many times....real or not, doesn't matter, I like what it says.

Email:

Think about this: If you don't want to forward this for fear of offending someone-----YOU'RE PART OF THE PROBLEM !!!!

Will we still be the Country of choice and still be America if we continue to make the changes forced on us by the people from other countries that came to live in America because it is the Country of Choice??????

Think about it! All we have to say is, when will they do something about MY RIGHTS? I celebrate Christmas...........but because it isn't celebrated by everyone.............we can no longer say Merry Christmas. Now it has to be Season's Greetings.

It's not Christmas vacation, it's Winter Break. Isn't it amazing how this winter break ALWAYS occurs over the Christmas holiday?

We've gone so far the other way, bent over backwards to not offend anyone, that I am now being offended. But it seems that no one has a problem with that. This says it all!

This is an editorial written by an American citizen, published in a Tampa, FL Newspaper. He did quite a job; didn't he? Read on, please!

IMMIGRANTS, NOT AMERICANS, MUST ADAPT
I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture Since the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Americans.

However...... the dust from the attacks had barely settled when the "politically correct! " crowd began complaining about the possibility that our patriotism was offending others. I am not against immigration, nor do I hold a grudge against anyone who is seeking a better life by coming to America. Our population is almost entirely made up of descendants of immigrants. However, there are a few things that those who have recently come to our country, and apparently some born here, need to understand. This idea of America being a multicultural community has served only to dilute our sovereignty and our national identity.

As Americans......we have our own culture, our own society, our own language and our own lifestyle. This culture has been developed over centuries of struggles, trials, and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom.

We speak ENGLISH, not Spanish, Portuguese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish t o become part of our society, learn the language!

"In God We Trust" is our national motto This is not some Christian, right wing, political slogan.. We adopted this motto because Christian men and women.......on Christian principles....... founded this nation..... and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools.

If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home.......because God is part of our culture.

If Stars and Stripes offend you, or you don't like Uncle Sam, then you should seriously consider a move to another part of this planet. We are happy with our culture and have no desire to change, and we really don't care how you did things where you came from.

This is OUR COUNTRY, our land, and our lifestyle. Our First Amendment gives every citizen the right to express his opinion and we will allow you every opportunity to do so! But once you are done complaining...... whining..... and griping....... about our flag.......our pledge..... our national motto.......or our way of life I highly encourage you to take advantage of one other Great American Freedom...... THE RIGHT TO LEAVE.

It is Time for America to Speak up

If you agree -- pass this along; if you don't agree -- delete it - You are in the WRONG Country!

Homohumorless

2007-02-06T15:50:00.000-08:00

Apparently the Mars candy company is gay, meaning they have no balls, as they caved into pressure from the bath house loving, light in the loafers gay rights groups ,The Human Rights Campaign and the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, over their funny Super Bowl commercial for Snickers.

Come on Mars, do you really think Snickers, M&M's and your other dime store candies are popular with the homofood folks? I don't think so...they prefer Jacques Torres, La Maison or those handmade truffles you can get at the shop on Polk Street.

Isn't the gay, homo, free-sex lifestyle crowd big on freedom of speech and expression? Do they want us heterosexual men and women to hide our disgust when we accidentally experience a homomoment? And when your DNA ends up so that you don't want to participate in the natural reproductive methods of your species do you also loose your sense of humor.

Good God homos....get a faggot grip....oh no...do I need to go to counseling now?

99.999999% of us knuckle dragging straight guys would react just like the guys in this commercial.....and yet the reaction of those who really DO NOT believe in the freedoms we enjoy is as unhinged as they come. Check out this site where they think Mars actually meant for this ad to be anti-gay and to promote violence against them!!!!! Their evidence is the Mars family being Republican, the ad itself and the Mars website where you could vote on the best ending to the commercial, the best ending that allowed the two men to feel like men again after their lips met.

Meet the Democrats holy man!

2007-02-02T17:22:00.000-08:00

This is amazing...I read on littlegreenfootballs that an Iman who has shown support for Hizballah, Hamas, the Ayatollah Khomeini, and Yasser Arafat did the convocation for the Democratic National Committee’s winter meeting.

Present at the meeting was a whose-who of Democrats including all those who are expected to make a run for POTUS in 2008. During the convocation opening the meeting the Iman said:

So guide us to the right path. The path of the people you bless, not the path of the people you doom. Help us God to liberate and fill this earth with justice and peace and love and equality. And help us to stop the war and violence, and oppression and occupation.

Apparently none of the Democrats present has an issue with being one of the doomed!

Funny how Democrats can't stand religion, well especially Christians, Catholics and Jews so I guess it should come as no surprise when they finally embrace some religion its Muslim and with a Muslim of questionable reputation.

Global Warming smart guys predict WaterWorld!

2007-02-02T09:28:00.000-08:00

The UN board who released their latest opinion on global warming is very impressive. It consists of scientists (or people with some other label) from 113 governments....does that mean they're in the employ of those governments? And just for fun can anybody give me a list of even say 20 countries with a scientific community that contributes to science in significant ways in the last 10 years? And, can you find any significant university with a degree in climatology?

The same science community that misses weather predictions within the same year by a million miles can seemingly predict that we are in fact doomed by the end of century. Funny though, how in the same sentence suggesting our impending doom there's acknowledgment of a similar thing happening 125,000 years ago.

"And when that happened 125,000 years ago, seas rose between 13 and 20 feet. That is looking like a real possibility for the 22nd Century, the report said, though some scientists fear much of it could happen before the end of the century. "

So, it happened before without fossil fuel burning? Without man-made CO2 being pumped into the atmosphere?

And, if this could happen by the end of the century...within 100 years...where's the proof, the computer model, that shows this could be reversed, stopped or just made less catastrophic even if we could shut off man's entire pollutive output this instant?

Who would have guessed all the bad Costner movies are really a sort of predictive weather vane!

UN should do my local weather

2007-02-01T14:54:00.000-08:00

Breitbart.com put out a story today with the headline Global temperature set to rise 1.8-4.0 C by 2100: UN panel...so Breitbart thinks this is pretty certain as they said "set to rise". It gets watered down some in the story where they say "The earth's surface temperature will probably rise", and say it's according to a "best estimate".

Have you ever asked yourself why your local weather man/gal doesn't use words like "best estimate" or "probably"? Even though they don't use qualifiers on their forecast we know it's just that, a forecast, and we expect it to only be sort of close to right. Monday this week the local television meteorologist I watch in the morning said I would see close to 65 degrees and partly cloudy sky's today (Thursday)...nope...more like 52 and complete cloud cover. His temperature was off by 20% and just 4 days out.

Meteorologists can't predict weather to single digit precision in a small area but yet we are willing to believe some UN meteorologist and scientists have a model with infinite more precision over hundreds of years? Why? The nature of black holes is universally recognized as a THEORY. That the earth's dinosaurs became extinct due to a prolonged winter caused by a meteor strike is an universally recognized THEORY. But man causing our recent (according to Al Gore since 1940) global warming of about 1 degree C is a CERTAINTY?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Maybe the UN should start doing our local weather as they have apparently found the holy grail of temperature forecast models unavailable to our average weatherman! Come on people, apply some logic and reason to what's being reported. What is the motivation of those who report theories on both sides? I'm all for alternative energy, lowering fossil fuel dependence and so on. But ask why your pals in D.C. don't want to develop more nuclear energy or harness wind energy off their pretty summer home shores.

Also, I'm reading some material on how the planet has seen warming cycles every 1500 years, and that CO2 levels are at a historic low over the Earth's history, and that the warming each 1500 years shows no correlation to CO2 levels which have been much higher than we have at present. I will post on this later.

F*** YOU William Arkin

2007-01-31T17:26:00.000-08:00

Today I read the most un-American illogical asswipe bile I've ever seen in a main stream publication. William Arkin posted an opinion piece on the Washington Post website and I believe it was also printed in the LA Times that has my blood boiling. I can barely contain myself.

The best response to this crap is by Uncle Jimbo at BlackFive, a great milblog you should visit frequently.

You just need to read this stuff...If I try to explain it I'll be typing expletives every other word.

I'll leave with the very first comment little-dick Arkin's post on the Wapo site:

Too much estrogen in your diet Mr. Arkin? Called a pussy too often as a little boy? Little girls tormented you and made you play house? Did you land on your head one to many times as a toddler? The only explanation for such unadulterated crap is Penis envy because he does not have one, and cranialintrarectum from falling on his head.

Proof Global Warming is a NATURAL CYCLE

2007-01-31T10:28:00.000-08:00

It's now a daily event.....a media story on global warming being man made! But we might as well not even try as the latest yet-to-be-released study will say the effects of man's influence on warming will last 1000 years. Wow, the sky is really falling!

And even without the release of the study some findings (I love how a study like this contains findings instead of theories...as if everything in it is a certainty) are presented in a biased form. For example one "finding" is that "the last half-century was probably the hottest in at least the past 1,300 years". Of course this is to suggest man's contribution in the last 50 yrs, easily our dirtiest period on earth has caused warming. But why 1,300 years? The supposed "experts" decided to include a 1,300 year window for some reason. It's not that we have accurate temperature measurements for that period...we only have it for about 100 years, so why? Well, it's easy to guess...if you include more time the warming we see in the last 50 yrs looks like NOTHING.

We have had several ice ages on earth...most of which saw nothing you would call a "man" or man made gases or pollution of any kind. The last ice age ended about 10,000 years ago where very thick ice extended from the north pole down into the middle of our country...AND GUESS WHAT...it warmed up...what caused that? If this study looked at our minuscule rise in average global temperature over the last 50 years as compared to the last 10,000 years it wouldn't make a case for MAN's influence...so they don't!

Most all studies are like this....include and detail only those points to fulfill your original theory. But you see, we have evidence of multiple ice ages that nobody disputes and each time we warmed considerably. That's proof of multiple natural global warming cycles.....the evidence left by the ice is solid, the evidence greenhouse gases are causing warming is not..it's far more theoretical...so tell my why you know a few degrees of warming isn't just part of the continued natural cycle of the warming from the last ice age? I feel like I need to say this every time...this isn't an argument for unchecked polution...it's an argument to stop taking everything your fed at face value!

The Clay Pigeon

2007-01-31T09:28:00.000-08:00

Glock26 pointed me to a great article published in print in GQ (very metrosexual of you Mr. Glock) about Oklahoma Republican Senator Tom Coburn.

I love this guy....a lone wolf even in his own party.....he's been unaffected by Washington and fights to change the business as usual in D.C. where Democrats and Republicans alike sneak pork into every vote the Congress makes on spending money.

The GQ article is long, but worth the read....near the end you'll learn about the strategy calls "the Clay Pigeon" where he invokes an obscure rule forcing colleagues to debate each item in an amendment. He used this when the Senate was looking at approving $92B of emergency funding for designed to provide assistance to crisis victims (9/11, Katrina, etc.)..ok that's fair enough...but the schmucks in D.C. stuck another $14B of additional projects as pork on this thing. Coburn found the 19 most offensive strips of bacon and filed a nineteen part amendment each designed to remove one earmark. Using the obscure rule to force each of his nineteen parts to be debated on the floor he hoped to expose the idiotic thievery each represented.

Interestingly, most of these earmarks where sponsored by a Republican and yet their inclusion in the emergency funding was approved (by only 1 vote so a victory of sorts) by prominent Democrats like Hillary Clinton and Ted Kennedy.

If you think Hillary is somehow different, not part of the Washington bullshit, a beacon of hope for sanity and doing the right thing....you gotta read at least this section of this article and ask yourself why would she vote for you and your great-great-great grandchildren going into more debt for the pork attached to emergency crisis victim funding!

Obama sees in Black & White

2007-01-31T06:40:00.000-08:00

Personally I think Barack Obama isn't qualified to be president based on his combined business and political experience. I'm not looking to compare him to any other president, but against my view that they should have substantial experience with large and complex organizations in both private business and in government. I think that's why we often see candidates emerge who have been successful in business along with having been a governor.

I'm also not so sure the majority of the country would vote for a black, or a women, for president....I would vote for either as long as I believe them to be qualified and that I like most of their positions on the issues.

With Obama the central issue will surely be his inexperience and his race...or maybe his racial attitudes. An interesting background piece on Obama came out yesterday on Examiner.com

While each of our personal experiences form our impression of others a true leader needs to rise above the bias and color awareness most of us, including me, have. Yes, I expect my president to be better than me, to be more moral, to be more wise, to be more inclusive, to not prejudge, to be confident, to be strong.

In Obama's first memoir, “Dreams from My Father,” published only a little over 10 years ago he clearly was still wrestling with his blackness and how others saw and treated him, and how he saw and thought about those not like him. I don't blame or fault him for these feelings....it's human and based on his life experiences. But, my president must be better than that. My president must truly be color blind....at least not show this limited and bias view just 10+ short years ago. One could argue this was 10-15 years ago, he has grown....sorry, I'm still judged professionally by what I did 15-20 years ago...it's absolutely relevant.

When I think of myself I don't think of myself as a white...I just think of myself as a man.....it seems to me Obama first thought of his identity is that he is a black man.....and I suspect his first thought upon seeing me is that I am a white man...until he no longer sees in black and white he isn't presidential material.

-----------------------------

Then there's Joe Biden who also sees things as black and white....and apparently he thinks Obama as a black man is anomalous for a black man. Joe's says “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy,” he said. “I mean, that’s a storybook, man.” Of course, it could be given Joe's lack of articulation, brightness and good looks that he's impressed with anybody that trumps him in these areas.

Why you shouldn't send your kids to Berkeley

2007-01-30T16:52:00.000-08:00

In the SF Bay Area those on both sides of the political spectrum often refer to Berkeley, the city, as the People's Republic of Berkeley. This label is earned not just by the city's politicians but by the fine academic university that also sits within the city. While it's not hard to show the liberal bias from Kindergarten to University graduate programs all throughout this country, the greater Bay Area won the liberal academic lottery with UC Berkeley, UC Santa Cruz and the University of San Francisco.

Colombian artist Francisco Botero was inspired by Seymour Hersch's version of what happened at Abu Ghraib by the hands of Americans. Mind you, facts and credible witnesses to this version of the torture by Americans aren't required. It doesn't really matter what actually happened. Much of the world was happy to hold all of America, not just the soldiers involved, at fault for what was portrayed in the actual photographs. What was in those photographs amounted to grievous crimes against humanity according to many...give me a break.

UC Berkeley was happy to display Botero's Abu Ghraib series of paintings and drawings about which he told the SF Chronicle "The whole world and myself were very shocked that the Americans were torturing prisoners in the same prison as the tyrant they came to remove," he said. "The United States presents itself as a defender of human rights and of course as an artist I was very shocked with this and angry". He says it's not anti-American, I don't agree...but it's art and I'm fine with any university or museum displaying it.....AS LONG AS...they would also display artwork showing Muslim extremists and members of Al Qaeda blowing up children on a bus with a bomb belt, or beheading a journalist, or using women and children as human bombs, and so on....of course they wouldn't show this art exhibition.

Is there even an artist willing to draw such terrible images? Likely not....it's not fashionable...or maybe most famous or talented artists have more respect for their craft. I think art should inspire, it should evoke emotion, including sadness. But in my opinion that is more appropriately done not through obvious political messages. It's easy to draw the obvious...to show a man being humiliated by showing in detail the act of his humiliation. It's much harder to paint just a man....and in his face you read a humiliation that must have fallen upon him...that's true artistry.

Our schools, first and foremost, should teach young minds how to think, how to reason, to analyze and be critical of what they encounter, to come to a truth or align with a theory on their own. Sadly, they are too often given theories as fact and are told what to think.

Gelato consumption enhances suicide risk

2007-01-25T15:46:00.000-08:00

Most of the public suffers from reading a book by its cover. If you read that a researcher, a scientist, a medical doctor or academic has done a study and made a conclusion you will assume, like most, that's it's credible and logical.

It's simply not the case...nearly all research is funded on the premise of bias. A theory is put forward in order for those who approve the research to give a nod...or in order to get a grant. Those who give the nod, or write the checks, are addicts and their drug these days is anything Global Warming.

Take for example Global warming possibly linked to an enhanced risk of suicide! While this link is only to the abstract of this study you don't need to purchase the full study to see the absence of the link it claims. The Department of Psychology, University of Cagliari, Italy and the Genneruxi Medical Center also in Cagliari, Italy "sets out to explore the impact of global warming on suicide mortality, using data from Italy." Of course that there is global warming, and not just cyclic weather patterns, is put forward as a certainty. This pseudo linkage is a silly attempt to blame anything bad and terrible to global warming.

We shouldn't question these academics, after all they looked at suicide and temperature data, for Italy, and the "relation between them was investigated using the Gaussian low-pass filter, linear correlation analysis and rank analysis." Oh, very impressive. I'm no statistician, but I was a math major and I was an electrical design engineer early in my career. Gaussian low-pass filters are common in signal processing but not in statistical analysis....I couldn't even find a reference where Gaussian filters, which smooth not so smooth data, are used for statistics.

As for the other methods...sure those are fine....but a statistical correlation of data from two systems doesn't make them linked in reality...it just says there data behaves similarly, when one goes up the other does as well. It could be that Italy sees more summertime suicides because the weather is conducive to people venturing out of doors thus leaving those who are depressed alone more than in the cold of winter. Lot's of things happen in summertime that don't happen in winter, so would you conclude that Gelato consumption also enhances the risk of suicide? You might as well say everything that increases in the summertime is caused by global warming, or by anything else on the list of increasing summertime things! What a joke!

Also interesting....that on Drudge today there's news of a coming U.N. climate report that will "shock the world"....this at the same time that weather news around the globe has winter in full swing just where it should be....with record lows, record snow fall, and so on.

Meet the new Christ

2007-01-23T14:06:00.000-08:00

Just when you thought the PR machine around Tom Cruise had thought better of his shortness being overly exposed as part of Scientology we hear he's Scientology's Jesus!

Of course the Scientologist think Tom is the "chosen one" and will spread the word of the evil Xenu and how we all must rid ourselves of thetans. And of course in the future Cruise will be worshiped like Jesus....ya duh, that's all obvious.....I'm just wondering if he has a new movie coming out!

Cruise be with you, and also with you!

Whites not allowed

2007-01-23T06:58:00.000-08:00

It's a bit like a boy wanting to join the Girl Scout's! I don't understand why the newly elected Representative from Tennessee, Democrat Stephen I. Cohen who is white, even considered for a moment that he might join the Congressional Black Caucus. But no matter, a white is not welcome to do so. And is there a Congressional White Caucus? Why not?

I received an email a few weeks ago from a friend that was one of those emails people are urged to pass around. This one was about the hypocrisy of many, so called, minorities who have a hypocritical view of what is appropriate for them versus, so called, whites!

I don't believe true racist attitudes are dominate in America...sure there are stereotypes that people hold, but if we call that racism then some of those who claim to be its constant victim need to rethink things.

Why is ok for there to be a United Negro College Fund and not a United Caucasian College Fund? Or how about the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, would you be ok with the National Association for the Advancement of Caucasian People? Is ok for me to call blacks "negro" and "colored"?

Why is ok for there to a Black History Month, Black Entertainment Television (BET) or Gay Pride Day? Can we have a White History Month, WET and White Pride Day?

There are all kinds of black, African-American, Hispanic, Asian and other race labeled organizations in every community. But, if there was a Caucasian or white versions of these organizations with the same goals...that is to be advocates for, to advance the standing of, those Caucasians and whites....it would be racist. Apparently only whites are racist.

Fact Nazi - The Global Warming non-debate

2007-01-21T07:23:00.000-08:00

Instead of an honest Global Warming debate what we are seeing lately is the equivalent of the Seinfeld show soup Nazi "No Soup For You". Unfortunately most of the general public swallows whole what the media, politicians and entertainers fling at them. Well, let's qualify that....that is if they already agree with the idea being flung. After all, if for whatever reason, you want something to be true why bother considering information that contradicts your "convenient truth".

I can give you many examples of how those on the left suffer from this affliction far more than those on the right. You can find them easily enough if you're willing to be intellectually honest, but I'll stick to global warming for now. People unwilling to do any reading, any research beyond a movie or the last newspaper they read, assume those of us who challenge man's participation in warming don't care about the environment or just want to protect big oil. You know, Bush was in oil, his buddies are in oil, so we are all blindly against anything that might be bad for big oil!

It's funny, the left likes to portray the right as being intolerant...uh, HELLO, anybody paying attention here? This week we saw the unhinged attitude towards debate, and facts, displayed by an intolerant on air personality on the Weather Channel, a Dr. Heidi Cullen. You see Heidi thinks the American Meteorological Society should pull their certification from weatherman "who expresses skepticism that human activity is creating a climate catastrophe". Note that Heidi's show, The Climate Code, on the Weather Channel is all about global warming. Some good reading on Heidi's intolerant "no facts for you" story, links to official Weather Channel response, and debate are here!

Apparently Al Gore also runs from debate and from considering all the facts. Al's version of "no facts for you" is the omission of facts, as well as exaggeration bordering on fabrication, in his one sided movie. I've read many reviews of Al's movie, and also heard the "moving" reaction to its message from family and friends. Why is it they, you, anybody assumes the movies content is factual? Why is it an indisputable fact and not a theory that human, versus natures, created green house gases have caused warming in the last several decades?

Read the link above...it's not a very long piece...it's just one example of a very reasoned and tolerant skepitism in this debate. If you're not willing to research and refute credible information that conflicts with your position, well then, what kind of position do you have? So instead, those who can't deal with ALL the facts put there blinders on and compare people like me to Holocaust Deniers! Other than Bush-disdainia or big oil=Republican connection I don't see why man's role in global warming is a political issue. But it seems that those on the left are lining up with the side that doesn't want to consider all facts, or have honest debate, or embrace free speech that conflicts with their ideology.

Can Democrat women get away with murder?

2007-01-12T06:14:00.000-08:00

Could you imagine the media firestorm if President Bush had initiated an organized work stoppage for himself and a large number of his staff in order to watch a college football game? Or how about if he somehow used the fact that a female Democrat was single and childless as part of an argument that she had less in the game in discussing military matters? Or replace Bush for any Republican in this hypothetical and how would the media react? However, if it's Nancy Pelosi or Barbara Boxer you essentially get a pass from the media.

Pelosi and her fellow "we're not business as usual" Democrats decided the business of the people was less important than a college football game and let themselves off work. I'm sure millions of fireman, policeman, postal workers, auto workers, you, me and every other American would have liked their boss to say "hey, what are you doing here? Hit the nearest bar and watch the BCS championship game on me!". Then there's Pelosi's funny new calendar math. She and her party made a big deal of what they were going to do in the first 100 hours of the new congress, but apparently she's only counting "legislative hours" whatever that means.

Worse was Boxer's pathetic exchange with Secretary of State Rice over the Iraq war during an appearance before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Boxer indirectly, but with clear meaning, made the point to Rice that she couldn't understand the price of war being single and childless. There is a 100% certainty that the media and members of the Democratic Party would be in an uproar demanding apologies and resignation if a Republican lawmaker had done this.

And yet, the MSM is relatively silent. Google searches on both of these stories (at the time of my post) shows little coverage and no outrage...the hypocrisy of the media, and of Democrats, to not demand high standards of Democrats is laughable in the wake of the rhetoric in this last election.

Why Jefferson owned a Quran

2007-01-09T10:52:00.000-08:00

When I heard newly elected Congressman Keith Ellison was to be sworn in while putting his hand on a Quran, and not a Bible, I wasn't too bothered.

Frankly I don't think this ceremony should involve any religious text...they should probably just raise their right hand and pledge their allegiance to our country and constitution. But today I learned, via an excellent piece by Ted Sampley, that Ellison didn't use his personal copy of the Quran, he used a copy that was owned by Thomas Jefferson which the Library of Congress loaned him for the occasion.

Obviously this was done to try and lessen the eye brow raising caused by Ellison using the book mostly frequently carried and quoted by terrorists the world over. Ellison commented saying he chose to use Jefferson's Quran because it showed that "a visionary like Jefferson" believed that wisdom could be gleaned from many sources.

But, if Sampley is correct, Ellison while factually correct that Jefferson owned this text to glean wisdom, I suspect he didn't understand Jefferson's motivation for doing so. After declaring our independence from the British we lost the protection of their navy for our trade routes in the Mediterranean. Sampley says American ships were attacked and their Christian crews enslaved by Muslim pirates operating under the control of the "Dey of Algiers"--an Islamist warlord ruling Algeria.

Others in our fledgling government wanted to pay tribute (ransom to free our people and to clear our way) but Jefferson knew there was no negotiating with those who followed the writings in the Quran. He and John Adams had previously met with an ambassador of the Dey of Algiers and asked him why Muslims held so much hostility towards America, a nation with which they had no previous contacts. Sampley then tells us that at a meeting with the American Congress the two future Presidents revealed that this Muslim leader answered this question with

Islam was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Quran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman (Muslim) who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise.

Jefferson knew that military force was required to solve the problem in the Mediterranean and did just that when he became president. Read Sampley's entire piece...it's worth it. Jefferson's Quran, and the words of the Dey of Algiers ambassador, are likely what led him to the conclusion this was an ideology rooted in hatred and barbarism. Religious devotion so misguided Jefferson knew only war would stifle it. Jefferson owned a Quran to glean wisdom on how to defeat our enemy.

Glock 26 pointed me to a WSJ's OpinionJournal post titled Why They Fight . In it, Peter Wehner, gives an excellent historical overview of Islam and in particular the Shia and Sunni factions. The extremists within these two groups are the bulk of the Islamic problem we must face. It's interesting that in the hundreds of years since Jefferson faced followers of the Quran not much has changed. Wehner reaches the same conclusion as Jefferson, as would any reasonable person in looking at the history. I believe as Wehner does that We will either defeat them, or they will come after us with the unsheathed sword.

Rewarding Law Breakers - illegal aliens

2007-01-06T07:56:00.000-08:00

I wouldn't have believed it if someone had told me. It couldn't be true that Bush and our government would create a way (is it a law or not?) that an illegal alien who, thru some mechanism, becomes legal would be able to count their time as an illegal towards Social Security benefits. WHAT?

Wait it gets better...and we reached this so called "agreement" with Mexico. WHAT?

I can't explain this complete and total lunacy. Has everyone lost their mind. I see no logical reason, no argument even using fairness as a guide that would bring one to such an idea.

We should be eliminating, and not creating, ways by which those who break the law actually get some benefit for doing so. Sometime in 2006 I heard another lame brain idea related to converting illegals to legal status. You would pay a fine, and would have to pay back taxes....but if you were here illegally for 5 years you would only have to pay back taxes for 2 of them!

Can you imagine if a citizen was given the option of only paying taxes against 2 years out of any 5 year period? Or if you could just say I realize you weren't aware of it, but I was working for 10 years where I didn't make FICA contributions but now I want credit as if I did? This makes total sense....TO LAW BREAKERS!

Our laws are to protect those who follow them and punish those who don't. This is ass-backwards.

Starting with the Left Foot

2007-01-02T14:36:00.000-08:00

As the Democrats step into the power position in the new Congress we are about to see what they're made of. An incoming comment from Pelosi was "Democrats are prepared to govern and ready to lead". We shall see, and hope!

I'm not suggesting that a Republican majority has previously, or would have this time, had a better set of initial priorities but terrorism, and our security, are de-emphasized with the Democrats.

As I understand it top priorities in the first 100 hours include ethics rules changes, raising the minimum wage, allowing more stem cell research and cutting interest rates on student loans.

Wow...nicely done Nancy and friends...lets take those one at a time:

Ethics: Sure, fine..but how first not allowing an ethically challenge John Conyers to assume the chairmanship of the House Judiciary Committee.

Minimum Wage: Oh, great idea...the never ending attempt by liberals to redistribute wealth and encourage those who don't strive to make something better of themselves. Minimum wage jobs shouldn't support a family. These are the jobs that should be done by high school teenagers and college students.

Stem Cells: That's on the top of every concerned American's list...way to go!

Student Loans: Ya, great....heaven forbid we create an environment where Universities lower tuition and aren't lining their pockets on ever increasing endowments....let's instead have all of us in the top 3%, who pay 97% of the IRS revenues, pay for everyone to go to college. These student loan holders need a break...it's a big issue for this country! :) .I suspect this is on the list because the first wave of those with serious student loans balances are coming of age (40-ish). If you're sitting on a student loan you should pay it off and at a market interest rate...you knew what you were doing when you got that loan. You could have always looked for a school with a lower tuition. How anybody would include this in a short list of important first-do issues is beyond me!

The media and liberal talking heads in this country have done a fantastic job keeping the disaster of Iraq in the headlines. The public has become numb to the actual reality of Islamic extremists the world over. The over exposure of our efforts in Iraq have somehow erased the threat of terrorism from the consciousness of Liberals and plenty of Conservatives. God help us!

It's also interesting that the Democrats say on day two they will look at rules changes requiring that new spending or tax cuts be paid for.....so apparently they believe that every single government program is sacred, appropriate and efficiently run....the dollars spent must be the same no matter what? They apparently still don't get that the IRS gets more revenue when both personal, and corporate, tax rules and rates promote the movement (spending) of money.

The Democrats are making a priority of frivolous and bank breaking agenda items that are popular with those who are more socialist than American. Look at John Edward's statement of this week that it's more important to invest in universal health care and lifting people out of poverty than to reduce the budget deficit.

Many liberals rightfully pointed out the deficit increases under Republican leadership, but now that the elections are done with they put that leftist foot forward on a path to bankrupt this country...of course if we drop the ball on our security it won't matter.

ACLU hates America

2006-12-26T16:38:00.000-08:00

Who supports the ACLU anymore? Who exactly still donates to this America hating organization. Please try to find one sane, good or anything that puts America first they do or have done in years!

There have been endless examples of how the ACLU will file a lawsuit on behalf of gays, any liberal organization, anybody not white...and sadly, if you just took that exact same situation that got the ACLU to come a running for these groups and instead have it involve a heterosexual, a conservative group or a white person and suddenly they're nowhere to be found.

This is one of the most biased political groups in this country...their agenda has always been very transparent..and yet they somehow they have enough funds to continue with their overtly hypocritical legal terrorism (I like that label). I suspect it's because most who send a check to the ACLU just assume they do mostly good and mostly take the side the giver would take. I suspect those who donate just don't do their homework.

Since the issue of illegal immigration isn't just a conservative issue, I'm sure many who have supported the ACLU would not like their attempt at challenging an ordinance recently passed in a suburb of Dallas that makes it illegal to rent housing to an illegal alien. Also "The City Council also approved resolutions making English the city's official language and allowing authorities to become part of a federal program so they can enforce immigration laws. "

If you know anything about the ACLU you will know the "English only" crowd (which I belong to) also gets the ACLU all up in arms.

The ACLU pathetically claims this is about landlords not having to enforce the laws..and that the federal government should do this...what a joke...the local and state police should do it...but just as an employer MUST verify the legal right of an employee to work via a Federal I-9 form, so should landlords and probably a lot of other service providers. This is all about the ACLU's un-American stance where the individual (citizen or not) is number one. In their view the good of the whole be damned, the right of each and every individual no matter who they are or what they're doing trumps the greater good of the overall population....well except if your conservative...then they have no interest.

Merry Christmas

2006-12-23T15:52:00.000-08:00

This was my failed attempt at a humorous Christmas card...based on the Seinfeld TV show character Frank Castanza's (George's dad) rebellious alternative to Christmas, Hanukkah and everything in between. The holiday slogan is "A Festivus for the rest of us". It was presented in a single episode in 1997. Based, apparently, on one of the shows writers actual experience with his father's irreverent attitude around Christmas time it includes traditions that I wanted to make part of my family traditions.

These include: A simple undecorated pole instead of a tree...I added the lights as to not totally break from traditional trimmings all in one swoop! There is also the "Airing of Grievances" in which each person tells everyone else all the ways they've disappointed him/her over the past year. After the Festivus dinner "Feats of Strength" are performed. And my favorite, Festivus is not declared over until the head of the household is wrestled to the floor and pinned.

Alas, my wife vetoed the drawing as our Christmas card....my original artwork down the tubes!

So, regardless how or what you celebrate during Christmas here's wishing you and your family a Merry Christmas...because that's what we are celebrating at my house!

God bless...Tiny

NYTimes' Global Warming Xmas

2006-12-23T08:10:00.000-08:00

The New York Times is the most credible news source with that portion of the public that blindly accepts anything the MSM delivers. But it's one of the most inaccurate, and biased, news sources if you do just a smidgen of homework on any given story. Unfortunately, a large portion the MSM news swallowing public never bothers to scratch the surface on anything they get from the MSM. For those trying to make news, or worse make facts out of theory, this is a green field environment.

We have unseasonably warm weather in the North East this month. The NYTimes uses a story about a warmer December resulting in fewer coat sales to coin the phrase "global warming Christmas". Interestingly, the story doesn't quote a single person in the retail, or garment, industry as using the words "global warming" but Michael Barbaro, the NYT writer, implies that's what all the industry sources are talking about. Barbaro also gives you some weather facts, lets break some of them down.

Barbaro says in Midtown Manhattan on Thursday it reached 45 degrees. Tiny points out that the 30 year average for this date is 46 degrees...oh my!

Barbaro says the average high since this Dec 1. is 47 degrees, compared to 32 degrees for that same period in 2005. Tiny wonders if he's claiming global warming wasn't in affect in the NY area in 2005, this is GW year 1?...wow it's happening at an alarming pace! Tiny also finds the average high in NYC for December using 30 yrs of data is 42.5.

Barbaro says this year the average high this month was 52, whereas it was 38 degrees since 2001. Tiny points out that Barbaro chooses only data since 2001 instead of the 30 years of recorded data used by the major weather organizations which show the avg. high in NYC of 42.5 degrees....Barbaro chooses only a period to help his case.

Barbaro adds the commentary that this remarkable weather data is "making this December the warmest since 2001". Tiny wonders if now the NYTimes admiring public will think GW has only made its presence known to us in the last 5 years?

Weather is hugely complex. Even if we had hundreds of years of data (temperature, barometric pressure, humidity, rainfall, etc.) for a grid covering the globe just one mile apart and at every 1000 feet of altitude above the earths surface...even then we wouldn't likely know if cycles are natural or man made. But one thing is clear....it's 100% unscientific, and misleading, to just use data for a few years and make any implication.

There are people who apparently just WANT to believe man is to blame for any warming patterns we see. But even they know their position is weak as they're unwilling to present all the facts as they show GW being influenced by man is but a theory....and not one universally believed.

I scratched the surface by visiting http://www.noaa.gov/ , http://www.weather.gov/, http://www.weather.com/, http://www.weatherbase.com/. My position that we DO NOT know whether normal weather fluctuations, or something else, has anything to do with today's weather comes from reading Chaos by Gleick which explores chaos theory and Weather Cycles by Burroughs, who uses logic and mathematics to put forward the theory that observed temperature effects can be due to natural variability, solar activity, and the Earth's orbital parameters.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend

2006-12-22T16:12:00.000-08:00

Al Queda's number 2, Ayman al Zawahri, had a message for the Democrats that was released today....very interesting that Al Queda is acknowledging their desire, and indeed their claim to influence American elections and our political landscape.

In the message Zawahri said:

The first is that you aren't the ones who won the midterm elections, nor are the Republicans the ones who lost. Rather, the Mujahideen -- the Muslim Ummah's vanguard in Afghanistan and Iraq -- are the ones who won, and the American forces and their Crusader allies are the ones who lost

And he told the Democrats to negotiate with him and Osama bin Laden, not others in the Islamic world...and of course added:

And if you don't refrain from the foolish American policy of backing Israel, occupying the lands of Islam and stealing the treasures of the Muslims, then await the same fate

Let's get Baker right on this...I'm sure he would suggest we break bread with Osama and Ayman!

Miss Piggy vs. Comb-over Boy

2006-12-21T15:53:00.000-08:00

I must say, I'm thoroughly enjoying the war of words that Rosie O'Donnell and "the Donald" are engaged in...it's clearly better than any show either have or will be a part of. Rosie started it by asking about Donald's moral authority being questionable as he decided not to fire the current Miss USA for partying. Rosie doesn't get that her questioning Donald's morality over his several marriages and alleged affairs would be more appropriate if he fired the young women who currently holds the Miss USA title...how is he acting like a moral judge when he gives her another chance?

Anyway Rosie added stuff about Donald supposedly filing bankruptcy several times, having a bad come over, blah, blah.....the the funny part...Donald fires back "she's out of control", "she's ugly", "not very bright", failed shows, magazines, nobody likes her, etc...and he said it wasn't true that his father left him a fortune or that he ever has filed for bankruptcy...oh, and he is suing her and he looks forward to enjoying suing her....hahaha...great stuff.

When Donald shot a over the bow that Rosie should watch out as he can send a friend over and steal away Rosie's girlfriend...her return shot was something like she's not worried about a guy with a come-over getting her girl. Ya, well I hate to tell you Rosie, but Donald's comb-over is looking a lot better than your mug the press is using these day...case in point the one I used from AOL's TMZ site! When I look at that pic I find my self doing that yuh-yuh-yuh thing that Schemp from the Three Stooges always did!

Then I found a link to Rosie's blog...she puts a bunch of history of Donald's supposed financial problems on her blog straight from wikipedia! Too funny...Rosie probably thinks she's untouchable for defamation, or damages, because after all she's just echoed information she found on an official encyclopedia that is factual! WOOOPS...sorry Rosie, wikipedia is an open source information site that may be accurate but can also be as reliable as a recipe you find on someones MySpace page!

I don't know if Donald ever filed for bankruptcy, but if he didn't and Rosie was relying on wikipedia she's in for a rude awakening! Check out wikipedia's tag line "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit."

Thank God for scripts!

2006-12-21T07:30:00.000-08:00

I wasn't aware that Chris Matthews, and his show Hardball, participated in movie promotions, but Robert DeNiro and Matt Damon showed up on the dimwitted show the other day. I think both of these guys are decent actors, but now I know they should only bother opening their mouths when a camera is running if they've had a look at a script. Just a short piece of the transcript below shows their inability to string together coherent sentences. And I also find Damon's attempt at suggesting some measure of fairness when we are at war "in name" laughable.

I wonder what his definition of "fairness" is. Like private jet fairness? Like only top floor suite fairness? Like no reservations needed fairness? While I enjoy my share of ivory tower spoils I think Mr. Damon has no F'ing clue of which he speaks. It's easy to sit in front of millions of admiring fans and speak of sacrifice and fairness because after all he can tell you the title of a book he read. I know I sound bitter....because I am...little shits like this get fame and fortune and then believe they have become enlightened and that the rest of us need the gift of hearing about it! Because you can get access to politicians, or you visit other countries, or read a book or two, doesn't make your opinions public worthy. Yes I blog and put out my opinions and who the hell am I? But if you're in a position where, if you talk (or write), millions will listen to it you have a responsibility. You're free, of course, in this great country to ignore such responsibilities, but it sucks that so many do. In the case of celebrities, most should shut their pile holes unless there is a script.

From the Hardball transcript:

Damon: What bothers me the most about the state we're in right now is I don't feel that there's a shared consciousness and a shared sense of sacrifice, and we have these young men and women who are fighting a war in name and our president tells us to go shopping. And I think that more can be asked of us and we need to be participating more for--I think that makes for a more robust democracy. . . .

Question: Hi, my name is Meghan Wright, I'm from Richmond, Va., and I was just--this question is both for Mr. DeNiro and Mr. Damon. I was just wondering, would either of you go to war right now? Not right now, I guess, but--would you go to war if you were asked?

DeNiro: Well that's such a complex question. . . .

Matthews: If you were drafted?

DeNiro: Well, I don't know, that's another thing about the draft and so on, if it ever would come up again. I mean, I was for going to Iraq originally and then I saw, I realized that when you--we went in and we didn't know how to like deal with it once we were there. We just thought they'd all cheer us and we'd be out and then they'd want democracy. We're dealing with--we were just talking about before--the thousands of years old cultures that have all their in-fighting, whatever. I mean, we can't come in unless we have a real plan or strategy and I never thought that.

Damon: There is this great book that just came out about that called "Imperial Life in the Emerald City." That's definitely a book worth reading, just about that. We kind of blundered in there with the best intentions, but nevertheless without a plan. So, but in terms of your question, I agree with Bob that it's a complex question. It would depend on certain situations. I mean, I don't think that it's fair, as I said before that it seems that we have a fighting class in our country that's comprised of people who have to go for either financial reasons or you know, I don't think that that is fair. And if you're going to send people to war, if we all get together and decide we need to go to war, then that needs to be shared by everybody, you know. And if the president has daughters who are of age, then maybe they should go to.

WHAT?

2006-12-19T15:18:00.000-08:00

Americans Line Up for Swift Co. Jobs

Quick, somebody tell these good Americans...these citizens of the good ol' U.S. of A. that they are confused and in the wrong line....Americans aren't suppose to want the jobs that illegals gladly take! Round em all up and deport them I say..not just those who steal the identity of our citizens! And yes I occasionaly read Tammy Bruce!

Barry, innocent again!

2006-12-19T14:33:00.000-08:00

I had a good chuckle when I noticed the headline "Barry Arrested, Claims He Was Targeted". Every Marion Barry intersection with the law is a big mistake or purposeful wrongdoing on the part of law enforcement...ya right. Let's do a little self survey...how many you who happen to read this post have ever been cuffed (by law enforcement!), been booked and prosecuted? I suspect we might not even have one visitor answer yes....yet check out the other Marion Barry stories from D.C. NBC affiliate (nbc4.com) website on Barry just since October of 2005!

I also found it interesting he claimed he was pulled over because the police were using racial profiling....ah, well the District of Columbia turns out to have 58% of its population respond to the 2004 U.S. census as black....seems it would be hard to pull over a non-black person randomly. What a clown!

Xmas Porn at Tiny's

2006-12-19T08:27:00.000-08:00

A word of advice...don't leave your outside Christmas decorations on all night else you might draw attention of late night pranksters! While I don't care for the lighted articulated head reindeer my kids insist that these be put out every year, last night they were humorously violated!

This morning as I looked out the window at 5am....still very dark and the lights all a glow....but something was amiss! I could see movement in the tangled mess that use to be two reindeer, one with it's head moving up and down (the one on top), one moving its head sideways....until I went out the front door I didn't realize that the two virginal reindeer had been placed in I guess what you would call reindeer-doggy style position...oh my!

Dem Indifference

2006-12-19T06:58:00.000-08:00

Careful what you vote for! Pelosi's first week after the election was the inspiration for that phrase...but the newly more powerful Democrats continue to show their brilliance and what a stellar choice a vote for them was!

The hair straightened genius known as Charlie Rangel continues his love of politics over country with this brilliant statement to the question "So now that the Democrats have won control of Congress, what should they do about the war in Iraq?", Rangel answers:

"I never understand that question," answered Charlie Rangel, the incoming chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. "You have a President that's in deep sh--. He got us into the war, and all the reasons he gave have been proven invalid, and the whole electorate was so pissed off that they got rid of anyone they could have, and then they ask, 'What is the Democrats' solution?' "

Taranto of the WSJ does a nice job describing douche bag Rangel's reply:

The sentiment Rangel expresses here is an unpatriotic one--unpatriotic not
in the sense of being anti-American but in the sense that, as Elie Wiesel has
said, the opposite of love is indifference.

Metal-Rap worth a listen....Open Season ya-all!

2006-12-19T06:42:00.001-08:00

Gotta love it.....found this on littlegreenfootballs.com and while the lyrics contain profanity, for this subject it's appropriate....as images of the Twin Towers fall, or as Muslim children are dressed for Jihad...the band "Stuck Mojo" says in the chorus:

My forefathers fought and died for this here

I'm stronger than your war of fear

Are we clear?

If you step in my hood

It's understood

It's open season

Danny Partridge-Bonaduce

2006-12-19T06:08:00.000-08:00

I always thought Danny Bonaduce, as an adult, was sort of a clown but in retrospect I think he's an actor who has been fighting type casting as a Partridge Family kid every since the 1970's.

How do you get a ton of new fans in a matter of a day or two? Be lucky enough to have a bozo 9/11 conspiracy idiot with a camcorder put your reaction to their lunatic ideas on YouTube! I don't believe this was staged and I liked Danny's reaction to the clown who interrupted his lunch.

Then John Gibson of Fox got him on the phone (sourced from hotair.com) and we see how bitter, militant and hypocritical the left fringes are when they give Danny, and even his young daughter, death threats for speaking in opposition to the hooey they believe in.................I'm now a fan of Danny Partridge-Bonaduce!

Making a racist point!

2006-11-21T09:10:00.000-08:00

Ah...Occasionally you read a story where someone goes out of there way to expose the blatant flaw in the thinking or actions of others. It's a wonderful thing to see...and hopefully when someone does point out the king has no clothes people actually take note of their own flawed alignment with the naked king!

So I was all smiles when read that Boston University College Republicans created the "Caucasian Achievement and Recognition Scholarship" to point out the hypocrisy that "If you give out a white scholarship, it's racist, and if you give out a Hispanic scholarship, it is OK".

Similar to my previous post, the notion that equality comes from treating some as different or special is so fundamentally flawed as a philosophy that it boggles the mind!....don't bother hitting read the rest...there is no more!

Homopandering

2006-11-19T08:09:00.000-08:00

On Saturday there was an international leadership conference meeting for a particular group with attendance a modest 200. Normally a group of 200 isn't all that impressive except in this case the 200 are all public officials....ok, so that means they work at some level of government (city, county, state or federal) and so could influence things to some degree. Then add that they got chief Dem moonbat Howard Dean to talk to them....and he showed them some support in what he said.

This group, the International Gay & Lesbian Leadership Conference, was I'm sure thrilled to hear Dean say the Democratic Party needs to look beyond its dated goal of getting gays and minorities a place at the table and instead work toward getting them on the ballot. Really? Why? Ignoring the "minority" part, lets just look at the gay part. Are people with gender independent sexual orientation or preferences outside of whatever definition of normal man-women relations are a group that requires representation by one of their own? We already have a constitution and laws that give equal footing to every human....so unless you're inhuman please shut your "I'm special and need special treatment" pie-hole.

I have no idea if Dean is truly just pandering to the crowd before him or if he believes that only someone that engages in a lifestyle that on it's own cannot propagate a species can represent such a group. If that was the case, and you have any intellectual honesty, you must therefore provide member representation for all groups (however you define them) of a similar size within our population. Why should gays only have such status?

It's truly baffling to me that liberals who believe in quotas, affirmative action and calling out any group based on a physical or mental characteristic don't see the conflict with the notion of a society that is blind of color, religion and every other differentiation one can imagine.

What we should do is find those who truly love our country, it's founding principles and laws, to enter public service. We should encourage those to serve only under that distinction. By definition their love of what it means to be American, if true, will guide them to represent all of our citizens equally.

You cannot have it both ways! If you say at least 12% of our federal legislators need to be black because 12% of our population is black, you must therefore believe blacks are different from those who are not. I thought such difference was racist? The idea of picking and choosing things that distinguish various groups creates a divide and continues to highlight the very difference many claim they want to no longer to be the issue.

Liberal Hypocrisy

2006-11-18T08:43:00.000-08:00

A look at Liberalpocrisy I've been busy so have not posted in a while....but what fun it has been since the elections to watch the bumbling and blatent (but not to them) liberalposcrisy!

The first example of liberalpocrisy was Elton John's suggesting that all religion be banned....I always love examples of intolerance by those who claim to be the victim of intolerance. And of course this obsurdly intollerant notion is downplayed by the press. The Yahoo/Reuters headline of "Elton John wants 'hateful' relgion banned" leads one to believe Elton was targeting only religions that are to him "hateful"....no, he actually suggested banning all of them.

Then it was Nancy "oops, I backed the wrong guy" Pelosi who after some meetings following the embarrasing (for her) vote proclaimed "as we say in church, let there be peace on Earth and let it begin with us. Let the healing begin". I actually laughed when I heard the audio....it sounded forced and unnatural when she said "as we say in church"...what church would that be Nancy? Do you go frequently? Does your God guide your ideals? Oh my.....of course when you look at most press on this you will NOTE that "as we say in church" is conveniently missing...when the fact is, if a Republican had used those words that would be the story!

On this same vein, this next example goes back to the start of Tennessee's Harold Ford Jr's campaign. Ford, a black 36 yr old bachelor (I don't know why that's relavant! :)) frequently, or more accurately nearly always, mentions God, the Lord, church and actually sounds a bit like a preacher. But the hypocrisy in this example isn't Ford's, it's the MSM and other Dems who apparently think his connection to God and his constant declaration of it is just fine....while it's apparently scary and freaky when a conservative invokes the same!

Another good chuckle came from John Edward's apparent do as I say, not as I do as he sent a staffer after a new PlayStation3 at the local Wal-Mart...which is fine..well except that Edwards who is worth tens of millions really relates to the poor and thinks Wal-Mart is bad for the poor...huh? But the laughs came from Wal-Mart putting out a press release nicely skewering Edward's liberalpocrisy! Of course Edwards claims the "young kid" (does he like young boys?) made an error born of ignorance. John at Powerline correctly says "Edwards recited the very silly liberal critique of Wal-Mart as a threat to low-income people. His aide, however, when charged with buying the Senator a PS3, quite reasonably went to Wal-Mart because he knew he would get the best price there. Which is, of course, why Wal-Mart is one of the greatest boons to people of modest means in recent history. Edwards should learn from his aide, not criticize him.".

Return of the Kerry Magic!

2006-10-31T13:39:00.000-08:00

I had to steal Dean Barnett's post title over on HughHewitt.com on Kerry's amazingly timed gaffe in a speech Kerry was giving to college students.

Apparently the surrounding context of Kerry's unfortunate sentence "you know education, if you make the most of it, study hard and do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart....you can do well...if you don't you get stuck in Iraq" doesn't make his current claim that this was a botched joke about Bush believable at all....not that it would have been anyway.
Amazing the cajones this guy has to not apologies and just like he did in his failed Presidential run he once again thru out that he served and denounces criticism from those who did not. This is so typical of those on the elitist side of the cultural divide in this country....they think if you served in the military, or have Parkinsons, or had a spouse die in the Twin Towers that you are beyond reproach and your motives cannot be questioned.

Kerry was only an honored military man and patriot prior to the day he made those unfounded claims to a Senate committee in 1971 of atrocities committed by fellow soldiers in Vietnam.

If for no other reason than to see Kerry get castigated by the Dems for loosing their shot at a majority in this election I hope we keep control....too funny!

Update1: Victor Davis Hanson over at NRO has a post with more on Kerryism...like how much a joke it was for Kerry to be lecturing students on doing well in the first place, Hanson wrote: How could John Kerry, born into privilege, and then marrying and divorcing and marrying out of and back into greater inherited wealth, lecture anyone at a city college about the ingredients for success in America? If he were to give personal advice about making it, it would have to be to marry rich women. Nothing he has accomplished as a senator or candidate reveals either much natural intelligence or singular education. Today, Democrats must be wondering why they have embraced an overrated empty suit, and ostracized a real talent like Joe Lieberman.

Update2: Black5, who I read regularly and is probably the most widely read military blog calls Kerry an Asshat! boohahahahahahahaha

Udpate3: Victor Davis Hanson nails the continuing Kerry saga.....here's the entire new post:

A man who remembers everything and learns nothing. One of the things I love about America is the spontaneous brilliance and humor that undermine all pretension. No better example was that wonderful banner from our brave and ingenious soldiers in Iraq, blaring:

"HALP US JON CARRY-WE R STUCK [backwards k] HEAR N IRAK."

20 million Americans must have seen it all over the Internet, and nothing sums up the nothingness of Kerryism better than those smiling soldiers. After seeing that, no wonder he's offering deer-in-the headlights apologies. This is a man who remembers everything and learns nothing.Then there was the finger-in-the wind initial Democratic response: their supposedly slight ill breeze suddenly became a Katrina hurricane, and, Presto!, they were all over the airwaves demanding from poor Kerry the apologies that just a few hours ago they thought were not necessary. As for Kerry — how quick the 24-hour metamorphosis from smugness to defiance to purported contriteness! At his earlier blame-the-wing-nuts-and-Rush-Limbaugh press conference, he thought he was a strutting, strong-jawed Napoleonic general leading his troops to rout the evil Bush-Cheney Prussians, and then, alone, suddenly turned around — and Mein Gott in Himmel!! — his Old Guard was heading for the hills.

CNN - Actively working against an Iraq victory

2006-10-24T15:15:00.000-07:00

The choice of CNN to air a snuff film of an American soldier in Iraq is beyond reprehensible, it's treasonous and sickening. I suppose American Flag hating Ted Turner is thrilled that CNN, while out of his influence, is actively promoting against an American victory in Iraq by showing terrorist insurgent propaganda.

If you haven't seen this video of CNN's Blizter trying to defend their action you just must watch (on HotAir) Duncan Hunter do a great job shredding Blizter's words and CNN's very bad decision.

Hugh Hewitt denounced this situation best with this:

We are in a war but elite media and much of the Democratic Party is indifferent to victory in that war, and genuinely incapable of regulating themselves and their behavior so as to maximize the chance of victory. Now a leading network is airing a snuff film from the terrorists, which follows a year in which newspapers have compromised both our electronic surveillance of terrorists communicating with their operatives in the US, and our tracing of terrorist money flows, stories which in both instances undeniably assisted terrorists in eluding capture.
.

Racist Democrat Hypocrisy?

2006-10-18T09:14:00.000-07:00

Today some, not all, of the MSM is covering a story about how Democrat House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer has apologized for saying to a mostly black audience that Republican Senate candidate, and currently the Lt. Gov. of Maryland, Michael Steele. Steele, who is black, was described by Steny (even his name sounds like a racist) as having "a career of slavishly supporting the Republican Party."

Oh my! There will be a ton of story's condemning Steny for this. Remember how Republican Senator George Allen got skewered in the press for calling a cameraman who was following him around for his opponent "macaca"!........ok, let's do a google search on "slavishly Steny Hoyer"...hmm...at the time of my posting only 103 hits and none on the first page having anything to do with Steny being a racist?

Ok, lets try googling "macaca George Allen"...yikes...416,000 hits of outrage!

Look, I seriously doubt either of these Lilly white politician morons is truly a racist....stupid at times, yes...but the point is the obvious and laughable hypocrisy of how such blunders are treated by the Democrats and the press when the offender is one of their own. YES, I'm calling the press the same as the Dems since surveys have shown 80% or more proclaim to be liberals and vote Democrat....but they only report facts!

Going Mad

2006-10-17T11:03:00.000-07:00

Has everyone gone mad? I just get the insanity, the illogical thinking going on all around us. Some examples, you decide!

Any bets on whether tax cheat Wesley Snipes gets more jail time than terrorist loving treasonous lawyer Lynne Stewart.....and guess who paid for her defense? Another America-hating leftist, George Soros. And note that a Muslim who did get a sentence of 24 years, Ahmed Abdel Sattar, was a paralegal for Stewart! But I'm sure Stewart loves America!

Free speech as long as long as it's Google approved speech!

Just show me one democrat caught in any level of scandal who takes personal responsibility for it? Not Harry Reid!

I love how Democrats knew not to trust the foreign and domestic pre-Iraq war WMD intelligence, but now believe fully in the National Intelligence Estimate. Check out how well those unbias intelligence folks do in an intelligence test! But don't worry, I'm sure an analysis of the middle east doesn't require one to know the difference between Sunnis and Shiites.

An issue of separating a father from son? Or an orphaned boy from his homeland? Or is it that some just can't handle the idea of a white adopting a black under any circumstance?

Academia and their attempt at gayification of your children and ignore the right to your beliefs. And a completely sane reaction that I support 100%.

More examples of the "Difference"

2006-10-12T13:55:00.000-07:00

Democrat: We need to try and keep Foley in the news and continue to link gays with Republicans! Republican: We need to be aggressive about sanctions on North Korea.

Democrat: The administration has let the trade deficit get to record highs and is killing the economy. Republican: Wow, can you believe what the YouTube guys got? And what about the record Dow? Ya, and did you hear the budget deficit is at a 4 year low?

Republican: Man Harry Reid did alright on that land deal. Democrat: Huh, what are you talking about? Note: just try to find this story covered like it would be if it was a ranking Republican who did this!

Democrat: Cindy says she's a finalist for the Nobel Peace Prize. Republican: Didn't they give the Nobel Peace Prize to that terrorist Arafat?

And for a correct and humorous FAQ on the Dems strategy of late was posted by Dean on www.hughhewitt.com check it out.

The Difference

2006-10-11T15:19:00.000-07:00

This cartoon says it all. Of course the nutroots say that Bush (or Rove) has arranged for the looney short guy in North Korea to creat some kind (since it's still unclear if this was a nuke) of explosion and draw attention away from Foley-gay-t.

Anything...ANYTHING but what really matters....most things are doing quite well...the real issues that need serious non-stop attention are the war on terror, crazy dictators and securing our borders.

Just in: Will the media make much of a land deal that Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid may have not reported correctly? Afterall, doesn't this speak to the ethics of the entire Democratic party?

The difference between the left and right

2006-10-04T14:51:00.000-07:00

The other night I caught Dennis Miller talking about how after 9/11 he swung nearly full tilt to conservatism. This was mostly a war on terrorism move for him, but he also said that he has noted over many years of doing his political standup that liberals in the audience were far less tolerant to humor directed at them compared to conservatives...he said this was "universal".

Well, in this heated political climate where both sides seem to think they're in a death match it's interesting to compare how far either will go. The Foley mess is apparently being played for political gain, and with little regard for reality, by Democrat Patty Wettering. Dean Barnetts post is on the money but he misses the point that since we can be sure a Republican wasn't sitting on the Foley timebomb the Democrat(s) who did, and then let it out in timely fashion for the best political gain, put children at risk just as any Republican who was aware of the IM's did.

You can be sure we will see more generalizations by Democrats about "party of corruption" along with any other distraction that takes focus off the issue or their candidates position on them.

Another example is the Democrats dirty tricks, and law breaking, trying to win against Michael Steele in Maryland. Steele is the most feared kind of opponent for the Democrats who believe their base includes the majority of blacks. The Democrats show what there made of in their efforts to take down Steele. I guess Steele has taken the high road, up to this point, and not engaged in even denouncing the opponents...but he has written a letter that is just brilliant where he takes the gloves off...and in a very classy way. This is the kind of person we want running as Republicans.

The last straw for Steele he makes clear in his letter:

While speaking with two mothers whose sons had died in Iraq, I noticed the ever present Democrat operative filming our conversation. A conversation with parents who have lost a loved one in combat is private in nature and has no place in partisan politics, and certainly not in the smear campaign you have waged against me even before I entered the race for United States Senate. The filming of this conversation demonstrates a callous disregard for families who have lost a loved one and is an indefensible invasion of privacy.

Compare the actions and methods of people like Steele to the Democrats, especially in hotly contested races....and ask yourself which side more closely aligns with your values, your idea of what integrity means.

Calling all Pages!

2006-10-03T17:56:00.000-07:00

I have a great idea to help make sure we a) get the electorate focused on the issues that face our nation and how candidates will deal with them and b) get rid of all Washington deviants that work in the House and Senate.

I would very quickly mobilize as non-partisan an investigative board as is possible and charge them with contacting the last 5 yrs (or maybe even more) worth of Congressional pages looking for any inappropriate contact or communication with Senate and House members, or their staff, from both parties.

Since Foley's transgression was leaked without due diligence, judge or juror we just do the same for anything the current and former pages offer up...ya baby!

Update: click Read the rest... to see the latest on the Folye mess!

When this page program investigation was announced you could even profile whose pages you focus on by watching who freaks out. And apparently prior to the Foley email/IM scandal it was well known in D.C. (at least to insiders) that Foley was gay. So use the inside information the insiders have on the rest of the deviants and focus more closely on their pages as well.

This would be the only way to turn this fiasco into an across the board cleansing the morally devoid members and applying a look at behavior of the entire D.C. power structure puts both parties on equal notice and scrutiny.

Such a radical and bold approach is of course a pipe dream, but it would make for an entertaining political news cycle and also rid our capital of some defective grey matter.

Update: Taranto has a great post on this Foley business, see the 2nd item starting with 'Open Secrets'. From his post, an editorial in the WSJ asked:

What next was Mr. Hastert supposed to do with an elected Congressman? Assume that Mr. Foley was a potential sexual predator and bar him from having any private communication with pages? Refer him to the Ethics Committee? In retrospect, barring contact with pages would have been wise.

But in today's politically correct culture, it's easy to understand how senior
Republicans might well have decided they had no grounds to doubt Mr. Foley merely because he was gay and a little too friendly in emails. Some of those liberals now shouting the loudest for Mr. Hastert's head are the same voices who tell us that the larger society must be tolerant of private lifestyle choices, and certainly must never leap to conclusions about gay men and young boys. Are these Democratic critics of Mr. Hastert saying that they now have more sympathy for the Boy Scouts' decision to ban gay scoutmasters? Where's Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi on that one? . . .

Yes, Mr. Hastert and his staff should have done more to quarantine Mr. Foley from male pages after the first email came to light. But if that's the standard, we should all admit we are returning to a rule of conduct that our cultural elite long ago abandoned as intolerant.

Taranto later in his post examins Foley's attorney Roth statement about Foley being molested himself as a boy, Taranto writes:

We're not sure whether to credit the molested-by-a-priest story, which sounds like an excuse. (In fact, even if it explains Foley's interest in boys, it in no way exonerates him for acting on those impulses.) But for the sake of argument, let's suppose it is true. What are we to make of it? Roth seems to be implying that Foley's interest in boys is the result of the trauma of having been molested when he was a boy. If so, does this mean that some homosexuals are made rather than born? Or are we to believe that Foley was born gay and would be having "normal" relationships with adult men had he not encountered the pulpitarian pervert?

What all this suggests to us is that human sexuality is vastly more complicated than either traditional morality or liberal dogma will allow.

It would be interesting to pose some of these questions to the liberals!

Does AA now treat Pedophilia?

2006-10-03T10:08:00.000-07:00

I was surprised to hear each news spot about Mark Foley's resignation from the House included that he has checked himself into a rehabilitation clinic for alcoholism. While to some it may sound harsh labeling someone thinking about sex with a 16 year olds as pedophilia it fits the definition. I think it's pathetic that Foley is trying to deflect his fascination with male children by suggesting the cause is a drinking problem. I wasn't aware anyone had linked pedophilia or homosexuality with alcohol abuse!

While Foley should be shot (metaphorically of course) as should anybody who knew and didn't do the appropriate and timely thing. It's not clear yet what anybody knew, when they knew it and if they didn't do the right thing. But knowing the facts doesn't stop the media and Democrats from asking for other resignations! It's really laughable and amazing someone would, with a straight face, ask for other resignations at this point.

But you see, those who immediately act aghast over this incident know their moronic political base. They now believe their important political base are the "fake but true" leftist who need no proof that the entire Republican membership is morally and ethically bankrupt....they just know it to be so...they want it to be so...they promote that it is so!

Take today's Washington Times editorial staff's Op/Ed asking for Speaker Hastert's resignation...because they know he knew enough long ago to out Foley. Note the opening sentence of this piece: "a disgrace for every Republican member of Congress". The bias and guilt by association, the implied group hypocrisy is laid out front and center.

The party that does a wonderful acting job of being shocked and then calls for heads to roll with fanfare and a pompous attitude does so exposing their own hypocrisy. In today's Investors Business Daily the editorial staff makes the case for Dems trying to capitalize on a good sex scandal in two faced fashion. Apparently heads needn't role when the zippers are coming down on Democrat!

Update: And the castigating (word of the day) is coming from both sides of the isle and the blogsphere.....but BE VERY AFRAID, if the electorate loses site of the real issues and those running for office not emobroiled in scandal, well as Hugh Hewitt puts his fear: These elections could put Nancy Pelosi in the Speaker's chair --third in line for the presidency--along with John Murtha as Majority Leader, John Conyers at the head of Judiciary and Charles Rangell (and William "The Freezer" Jefferson) at the top of Ways and Means. Given the stakes for this country's safety and security not to mention its economy, I think the center-right would be well served by a lot less posturing and a lot more digging from its new media members.

Brown Nosing

2006-10-02T09:25:00.000-07:00

Bob Woodward's schnoz is looking brown these days. After his last two books were not perceived by the liberal elite as being critical enough on Bush, Bob wants to get back in favor with his leftist brethren. And they seem all to eager to forgive. If your willing to do a Bush hit piece, no matter how thin, you can get booked on every TV program including, probably, MTV's Cribs.

While the TV tease spots and media headlines label Bob's latest book (State of Denial) with such things as "Bush bomb shell", it appears this is merely a "Potpourri-of-Beltway-Gossip-Posing-as-a-Book". Which is how Mario Loyola at the NRO put it. See Mario's post on how Bob misleads to make the case that Bush misleads!

And then of course there is the timing of Woodward's anti-Bush, anti-Iraq, anti-anyone still working in the Bush administration book. And apparently Bob didn't do very well with wimpy old Matt Lauer and wouldn't come out and directly say Bush lied or misled? What? And he admits that the book was timed to influence the November elections? If this description of Woodward's visit to the NBC puff piece morning show is accurate the media should be hammering Woodward in every appearance he makes going forward...Not likely!

Woodward is not an impressive thinker...his bias and timing are clear. It's about loyalty to the bias denying liberal media and about making a buck. There's no reason to believe Woodward wouldn't be complicit with the publishers of his book to maximize their return and also to influence an election. And the same can be said for the release of another book, a biography of Colin Powell. It's interesting how nearly every book covering an administration insider where the message is the insider was right, and the boss was wrong...was fired by the boss before making those claims. That's of course not condemning in itself..just interesting.

I find it fascinating how many fired, asked to resign, or pushed out ex-administration employees now claim they had always been on the other side of every situation we can now decide on more clearly that their in the review mirror.

All this Bush bashing will be constant up to the November 6th elections....plus you will likely see the Foley email mess get labeled as either a cover up or as evidence that the entire Republican party are deviants. Anything but the issues! God forbid a candidate would have to defend, or even articulate, their positions on the issues.

Nation of Islam for Congress

2006-09-30T08:31:00.000-07:00

With what appears to be a bogus smear campaign against Senator Allen for use of the off limits to everyone but blacks "n" word, Democrat operatives are nonetheless finding an all too willing press to be complicit in this dirty politics that are about anything but the issues.

It's likely Republican hacks will also play the same game...I'm not a political analyst so I don't know if history shows that you must play back with dirty tricks or if sticking to the high road is a winning strategy....but it's clear this election season is going to be pathetic.

When you Google search on Allen and the "n-word" you find lots of mainstream and national media outlets covering the story without questioning its validity. Now for comparison see how much national press is covering Keith Ellison's connection to the Nation of Islam and anti-Semitism as demonstrated by his associations, words from his mouth and writings.

Is Ellison's questionable ideology from 30 years ago and on hearsay and little evidence? Ah, no....check the link above! While Ellison admits the association with Farrakhan's organization the information any of you can find suggests his version of things is a lie. The media, and Democrat party seems to be willing to give any of their members a pass on what they would crucify those on the right for.

But decide for yourself. Ellison, by the evidence, had offensive attitudes and questionable judgment as a 30 yr old husband and father...not as a teenager as in the case of Allen's claimed racial transgression. Can a 30 yr who gives speeches and writes to promote a racist and divisive ideology transform to someone who should be in Congress just 10 years later?

I'm not saying Ellison is now a racist. I am saying the evidence says he definitively was. He very well could have made a transformation around 30 yrs of age...but I believe by that time in your life the big issues and your core beliefs are well entrenched...if they're not, then your judgement is highly questionable and your too easily influenced by others.

The hypocrisy on the left, and in the media, is as strong as ever....do as I say not as I do, is once again the unspoken credo.

Fake Senator Allen Photo?

2006-09-26T09:12:00.001-07:00

You be the judge! With the recent revelation promoted by Allen's Democrat challenger, and the Democrat bedfellow Media, that Allen is a slave loving racist makes this photo most certainly a fake! Allen wouldn't be caught dead so close to fellow senators of color!

What a joke....for those of you who were in your teens or twenties in the 1970's as was Senator Allen and myself you have to laugh at the idea of anyone having never used the n-word. First, Allen denies the claims made by, I believe, two people. Second in the 70's I drank illegally, I smoked a joint or two, I used the n-word and every other racial epithet in existence with my friends. I would venture to say if you were in that age group in the 70's and never used a racial epithet at all we should question your normality.

So, can a non-black use the n-word ever, in any context, where they're not being racist? I find it extremely hypocritical that anybody in this day and age thinks the n-word has some special status. If anything the black community, the entertainment community in particular, having used the word incessantly and affectionately have made the word no longer verboten . The arrogance of blacks who think it's ok and appropriate for them but not for non-blacks is divisive.
My extended family is Italian (northern, Sicilian and from Palermo) and yet I have never heard anyone call each other a "wop". Do people with Irish descent call each other a "mick", Germans a "kraut", and so on?

Forgetting the stupidity of the racial slur issue, if Allen is found to actually have done things to indicate he really hated blacks well then that might be an issue. But more likely he, like me, used racial slurs in spirited youth and chemical induced fun...tacky and tasteless but victimless nonetheless.

Will the Democrats strategy that is emerging this political season work. They apparently aren't comfortable going up against anybody on issues and ideas. Instead the focus is Bush or personal attacks. I have to laugh at the anti-Arnold ads running in California. The ad is to get you to vote for anyone other than Arnold and you are to do this because you see over and over Arnold on video standing with the Bush's saying "elect George W. Bush". They sprinkle in the Iraq war and gas prices too. So do anything to attach the other guy/gal to Bush....or try to find, or invent, a skeleton in the closet.

Allen's opponents have also created an issue claiming that his grandmother is in fact a Jew and that Allen has been hiding this fact....amazing! Can you imagine if these tactics were used by Republicans...it would be a media feeding frenzy and the charges of a morally bankrupt political party would be the talking point by Democrat leadership.

Not that Republicans don't also partake in this BS...but it's much more prevalent in the Democrat playbook. It's also apparent that the Democrats know they get the DUMBASS vote. How do I know this? How else can you explain the idiotic stuff with Senator Allen? A dumbass will in fact think having the used the n-word sometime in your life is a reason to vote for the other guy. A dumbass will believe Allen was trying to hide Jewish heritage. But the most critical evidence that the Democrats know their voting base is from the gutter and includes a large amount of illegal aliens or voter fraud is that they oppose simply asking voters to show a photo ID before voting. They think it will intimidate people and scare them from the polls! I guess that's why those people don't get loans, use checks to purchase things, get a job (you must show ID to have an I-9 form properly done, etc....all because presenting a photo ID is intimidating. See what I mean...they're going for the people who think presenting a photo ID is scary...those are great voters!

Update: Taranto of the WSJ weighs in comments on the press bias in the reporting on the 'Swiftboating' of Senator Allen saying "That the press reported the Swift Boat story largely as a smear campaign against Kerry whereas it is treating the Allen charges as legitimate and serious suggests a strong partisan bias at work. "

Revisionist Excuses

2006-09-25T16:23:00.000-07:00

I find it embarrassing that former President Bill Clinton was so easily rattled by even a mild hardball question. When Fox News (a Republican propaganda media machine controlled by Bush according to liberals) reporter Chris Wallace asked the question "Why didn't you do more to put Bin Laden and al Qaeda out of business when you were President?" Clinton lost presidential composer.

He went into a nearly spitting and finger pointing rant about this question was a "conservative hit job" and that he did more than anybody else to get Bin Laden. He basically just made stuff up...which he is so adept at doing without scrutiny by most of the press.

Can you imagine if Bush had this kind of demeanor with a reporter who asked a mildly tough (and I'll explain why it's only a mildly tough question later) question and then proceeded to say things like "all the Democrats said this" or "all of the military told me that"....within minutes all media outlets would be doing Google and Lexisnexis searches. You would have to do a lot of searching because when you hear it you're saying to yourself...really, that happened?...hmm...lets get confirmation. So, of course, you can't find a partisan chorus of Republicans that complained that Clinton was obsessed with getting Bin Laden...will the main stream media point out this complete fabrication and parallel universe that Clinton apparently lives in? Of course not.

This was as undignified and as poor an interaction as I could imagine from an ex or sitting President as you can imagine. If you hadn't already seen it, see it on Hotair's video blog...the video and his fabrication are laid out plane as day.

Clinton had 8 years of mostly slobbering smitten press questions (with the exception of the Monica issue) during his time in office...and more constant love since leaving office....One little question and he has no class, no skill to deflect it! He could have simply said "you know, I wish I did more, I wish we had got him...but we didn't...it's not an easy thing and I'm sure the current administration would like to have gotten him by now as well"....then if the interviewer keeps pressing they look unreasonable...asked and answered. That's why this was a mild hardball and could have been easily handled.

And apparently Clinton, like many nutroots, blame Bush for his 8 months leading up to 9/11 and in no way Clinton for his 8 years prior to Bush. I guess Clinton was fighting terror in a big way without us knowing, handed Bush terrorism under control on a platter and Bush messed it up in his first 8 months. Clinton was just on the verge of killing off terrorism as we now know it when he had to leave office....it was Bush who blew it.

Clinton can't handle even an occasional tough question....Bush handles questions tougher than this everyday from the entire press core.....Clinton only has to only handle it from FoxNews (the Bush media outlet).

Update: Before someone sends me examples of GOP complaints about Clinton's cruise missile assault on an Al Qaeda camp in Afghanistan....keep in mind they were complaining he timed that attack to deflect the impeachment vote that was to happen the next day...it was a question of was he wagging the dog.

Update 2: From Dick Morris who was close to Clinton during the time he could have nailed Bin Laden and could have taken the 1993 attack on the WTC more seriously.

Terrorists Rights

2006-09-25T14:07:00.000-07:00

I always find it interesting when people will accept a position on a topic as absolutely correct when the topic has no absolutes (it's a matter of opinion) or obtaining such proof requires data that isn't available. When dealing with the human mind and its response to stimulus there is no absolutes and one only achieves a high probability of predicting response with a very very high sample size. You can't just apply straight statistics to human reaction. Every aspect of a persons history, life experience, personality and recent personal relations and events will effect their perceptions at any given time and so predictability is dubious.

So, what the hell am I rambling about? Senator McCain has come out very strongly on identifying by legislation specific interrogation techniques for detainees (terrorist suspects) that are off limits and in fact would constitute a crime. McCain is a war hero in my book...his many years as a prisoner of war in Viet Nam give him that label...no doubt. But I believe his experience actually clouds his judgment on this subject of war time interrogations and that he should recuse himself from playing a role in this legislation. Just as a civil judge who had sued a home remodel contractor should recuse themselves from overseeing such a suits in their courtroom.

McCain's experience alone doesn't make him a definitive source of what interrogation techniques work....or even what's moral, or the "high ground". While I believe physical mutilation or any technique that could result in death should be off limits I wouldn't automatically conclude either happening is evidence of a crime. Plenty of techniques that should be employed to make sure no Jihad loving American hating freak has a shot at my wife, kids, family and friends might in fact cause someone with say a heart condition to die. And if a detainee chooses to physically fight our guards or interrogators well they make suffer permanent physical injury......to F'ing bad.

McCain and others say that taking the "high ground" on this issue will in fact save American military lives when they are faced with being a prisoner of war? I yelled at the radio in my truck when I heard that for the first time....are you kidding me! I know of no enemy of the U.S., whether a sovereign state or a stateless terrorist group like Al-Qaeda, that in my wildest dreams would consider the Geneva Conventions, article 3 of the same, or that the U.S. took a humanitarian approach to prisoner interrogations when they're standing there deciding what to do to their American captive! In fact, I'm sure that they laugh at our public debate on this topic and in spite of the uproar in parts of the middle east over Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo those who put themselves in a position to be captured are none to scared of interrogators.

The proposed legislation handcuffs interrogators and will in many cases make them useless as the fear of prosecution or law suits has them playing catch with a nerf football with their prisoners.

I agree with Paul over at Powerline who called McCain (among others) the "terrorist rights wing of the Republican party".

I suspect some of the support for this "high ground" comes from the post 9/11 trend mostly on the part of Liberals to embrace Internationalsim. The idea that we brought on the hatred, that we turned normal life loving peoples into those willing to die to kill us...that actually love the idea of killing us...killing innocent civilians...not military or govt targets but a bus full of school children for example. I suppose those willing to believe such an absurd thing explain how people with a trainload of evidence to the contrary are willing to believe that our government (and our President) could be a part of a conspiracy responsible for 9/11.

For some reason these people ignore the terrorists acts by Islamic/Muslim based groups all over the world to people who can't even be said to be complicit with the U.S., and then there is also the Muslim on Muslim terrorism and murder in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. And lastly the fact that cartoons or repeating a 13th century quote that are critical of Muhammad result in violence and the threat of violence and death. Yes, all this anger and willingness to cut off someone's head can clearly be found rooted in something America has done!

Thankfully those of you who think this way are apathetic. If you believe there was even the slightest chance Bush was behind 9/11 or that his actions since have actually caused the creation of thousands of new terrorists you should be advocating physical force to oust Bush and take over the government! I would be doing everything I could to confirm my suspicions and then act on it if it was me.

If you agree with Chavez you're a traitor

2006-09-22T11:29:00.000-07:00

Chavez's address to the UN called the US (not just Bush) an enemy of the world and was as Peggy Noonan, more eloquently than I puts it, a call to arms against us.

The leftists and blind Bush haters among us only hear the anti-Bush message in what Chavez says....those of us who don't hate Bush (or love him) heard what the world heard. If what Chavez and Ack-my-lunch-what-a-wack-job said when they had their time at the UN podium didn't get you pissed off as an American...well then, you're not a patriotic American. Worse if you agreed with him (as many leftist in our country do) you're a traitor!

If you're a Chavez aligned traitor you're a spineless one unless you advocate using force to overthrow the US government....you could also choose to leave our country...but that would make you a spineless traitor as well....I prefer you do the later.

Both of these pukes rambled on....but this portion of Chavez's speech had a clear meaning to anyone being honest:

The "pretensions" of "the American empire" threaten "the survival" of mankind. The world must "halt this threat." The American president talks "as if he owned the world" and leads a "world dictatorship" that must not be allowed to "be consolidated." Bush will spend "the rest of [his] days as a nightmare." The U.S. government is "imperialist, fascist, assassin, genocidal," a "hypocritical" empire that only pretends to mourn the deaths of innocents. But not only the Mideast will rise. "People of the South," "oppressed" by America, must "strengthen ourselves, our will to do battle."

Liar Liar

2006-09-21T09:49:00.000-07:00

Get your rainbow badges!

2006-09-19T16:31:00.000-07:00

If you work for a major U.S. company you better check the Corporate Equality Index on the gay activists Human Rights Campaign Foundation website. You see, a fair number of companies have put in place policies that, for example, prohibit discrimination and/or call for respect of gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender people.

Well now....so let me get this straight (pun intended)...previously these companies, given they're big, had policies about ones general attitude towards others (coworkers and customers) at the workplace...but "others" previously apparently excluded gays (and previously mentioned sexual deviants). They weren't excluded because these policies said they were excluded....but because, you see, there are people with certain attributes that everyone knows we don't apply normal human rules to unless they're specifically called out!

So, with no influence from activist groups (ya right) these companies in the above mentioned fruitcake...ah, I mean corporate equality index...have called out those you would normally not give equal treatment to.

One big problem.....you see these new policies don't mention the other people all of us know we don't really need to treat equally (like, liberals, people who sleep with dogs, people with piercings you're forced to look at when talking to them, people with poor hygiene, terrorists, pedophiles, etc.) so how do we know who the gays (and others I don't want to mention) are among us so that we treat them special? I mean since they are called out in the policies unlike people with blue eyes, or people who are happily married, or people who are Catholic...well these people called out specifically in the policies..we really need to treat these folks special...cause, well...they really are special aren't they?

I say give them what they want....make themm wear visible identification that they are special, and then we will all know who we need to treat special!

Union Financial Transparency Outrage?

2006-09-19T10:17:00.000-07:00

A fascinating piece in today's WSJ summarizes some interesting facts about the spending habits of America's labor unions. New requirements have resulted in more financial transparency for these unions and what has been disclosed should cause outrage in the membership of these unions. However, I suspect very few working stiff union types get the WSJ and I don't have much faith that the MSM will make noise over what this new disclosures of union spending shows.

Union workers, I would guess, assume that their union and it's representatives spend the vast majority of their time and money on worker salary negotiation, worker benefits management, worker retirement management, worker education programs, and a bunch of other things focused on the worker. But, it turns out the majority of union funds go to political action aligned with the cultural left.....almost none of it can be shown to be in direct support of the union worker. In fact, union bosses seem to have a passion for giving to those whose focus is raising taxes....a proven method of curbing economic growth and thus hurting labor.

The new disclosures show how thousands of union officers and employees devote between 50% and 90% of their time on political activities and lobbying. And of course you find unjustly high salaries, dubious spending and purchasing by the union at non-union retailers....at least union management knows where you get a bargain!

Read the entire piece by clicking "Read the rest..."

Fun Union Facts -- September 19, 2006; Page A20

AFL-CIO President John Sweeney boasted recently that the union consortium intended to pour millions of dollars into this year's Congressional elections -- hardly a shocker. What is news is that this year, for the first time, rank-and-file union members are getting a look at precisely how much of their mandatory dues money is going to fund Mr. Sweeney's political causes, and plenty of other interesting details as well.

This month marks the deadline for the last of the nation's unions to file newly expanded disclosure reports, known as LM-2 forms. LM-2s have been around a long time, though until Labor Secretary Elaine Chao issued a rule requiring an expanded form in 2004, unions got away with providing the skimpiest details. This proved useful to union bosses who wanted to mask their political spending, or in some cases their corruption.

They are now being dragged into the sunshine. Whereas unions used to lump millions of dollars of disbursements into such vague categories as "sundry expenses," the new regime requires them to provide a detailed breakdown of who or what received union money: issue advocacy groups, political consultants, polling outfits, even hotels at which their members stayed.

Hard-working union members deserve to know, for example, that of the AFL-CIO's $82 million in discretionary disbursements from July 2004 to June 2005, only 36% went to representing members in labor negotiations -- which is what unions were created to do. A whopping $49 million, or 60% of its budget, instead went to political activities and lobbying, while another $2.4 million went to contributions, gifts and grants. The National Education Association was even more skewed toward politics, spending only 33% of its $143 million discretionary budget on improving its members' lots.

By our calculations based on the filings, the AFL-CIO spent at least $2.7 million alone on T-shirts, flyers, telephone calls, Web site hosting, and other support for 2004 Presidential candidate John Kerry. Groups that received AFL-CIO money included Citizens for Tax Justice, an organization devoted to higher tax rates; the Economic Policy Institute, a think-tank that campaigns against Social Security privatization and tax cuts; and the Alliance for Justice, a ferocious opponent of President Bush's Supreme Court nominees.

Dues-paying workers of the world might want to ask: Why is Mr. Sweeney spending more of their money trying to raise taxes, or fighting for the cultural left, than he is on collective bargaining?

The IRS may also want to inspect these forms. That's because, prior to the new LM-2 disclosure rules, at least a dozen large unions had told the tax agency that they spent nothing on politics. The National Education Association's 2004 tax return, for instance, left blank the line for "direct or indirect political expenditures." Yet according to its LM-2, the NEA spent $25 million on such activities from September 2004 to August 2005. Eliot Spitzer could sure have fun with that one -- if he didn't have the NEA's endorsement.

The forms also offer a glimpse at union chief salaries. At least three union heads took home more than a million dollars in compensation in their last fiscal year -- though two were admittedly the heads of the NFL and NBA players unions. The third-fattest union cat was Martin Maddaloni, the chief of the Plumbers and Pipefitters, who took home $1.3 million last year. The Plumbers' "director of training" -- a fellow named George Bliss -- somehow managed to make $456,644 in 2005. Now we know why plumbers are so expensive: They have to make enough to pay the dues that keep their union reps in Armani.

The LM-2 forms show that some 1,015 paid union officers and employees devoted more than 90% of their time to political activities. Combined, these folks took home compensation worth nearly $53 million. Some 1,755 union personnel spent at least 50% of their time on political activities and lobbying.

As for financial management, let's just say some of these union chiefs are having fun in their jobs. United Auto Workers Local 14 reported it spent $67,000 at an amusement park. The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers spent $124,000 at a hotel resort. And the Plumbers forked over $225,000 on Nascar advertising.

A couple of other fun facts: Of the 100 highest paid union executives, 93% are men. We hope some class-action lawyer isn't looking to sue for gender discrimination. And, believe it or not, unions report that they spent $624,000 at largely non-unionized big box retailers across the country, including Target, Wal-Mart, Sam's Club, Costco and K-Mart. They apparently know a low price when they see one.

When Secretary Chao proposed the new rules, unions were furious and came close to getting them blocked on Capitol Hill, and in court. Mr. Sweeney, the AFL-CIO chief, was quoted as saying the rule "will cost union members an estimated billion dollars a year," and that the average union would have to spend $1.2 million. The actual cost of AFL-CIO compliance turned out to be $54,000, so Mr. Sweeney was only off by 96%.

Unions should have the right to spend whatever they want on politics, and we've defended that right against McCain-Feingold and other campaign-finance limits. At the same time, however, union members who don't like the way their coerced dues are spent have the right under the Supreme Court's Beck decision to ask for the political and grant portion of that money back. May these illuminating LM-2 disclosures be spread far and wide.

Sticks and Stones; Muslims need to clean house

2006-09-16T07:27:00.000-07:00

The Muslim, or Islamic, or Arab world.....Whichever you want to label it...has some house cleaning to do. Why? Well, firstly because they have Bin Laden and various junior Bin Ladens around the world trying to recruit western looking Jihadists, and they encourage their new and old Jihadists to kill my kids, your kids, your wife, your husband, your way of life. The theory, and this is just a theory, is that most of the Muslim world loves their life and family more than the idea of killing yours..again this is just a theory. If this is true then they have some renouncing, some cleansing, some house cleaning to do.

But, I suspect, there will be no such movement within the Muslim world and the reaction to Pope Benedict XVI speaking of a dialogue between a Byzantine Emperor and a Persian. The Emperor conveyed that Muhammad's spreading faith through violence is something unreasonable. The Pope, in his speech in Germany this week, merely quoted a conversation between two men that took place in the year 1391. The entire speech wasn't focused on this criticism of Muhammad, but to the Muslim world it might as well have been.

The inflammatory (literally) reaction to the Pope's speech is interesting since it merely comes from quoting someone who was just critical of Muhammad 600 years ago. The Pope was speaking to the need for genuine dialogue among cultures and religion...a plea for peaceful coexistence. But the Muslim leaders who are stirring the fire among their followers are of course not telling their sheep of the context of the "supposed" slam against Islam.

Just read the reactions from various countries and their Muslim talking heads....then look at the Pope's speech. The best reaction, one that shows the backward logic and that criticism of the Muslim world is properly placed was from Pakistan's Foreign Ministry who said "Anyone who describes Islam as a religion as intolerant encourages violence." WHAT?

Apparently the entire Muslim world is like one of those guys who suddenly looses it on our congested American roads and succumbs to road range and gets violent...the entire Muslim world! Can a group who is so brain washed, so prone to violence from simply being critical of their prophet peacefully coexist with us? I'm beginning to wonder!

Upate (9/18): Islamic reaction to the Pope's message that violence shouldn't be part of the worlds religions trying to co-exist was predictable. They of course say the Pope was instead saying that Mohammed and Islam are about violence...and so to make their case they prove the fake Pope message correct by threatening death and violence. So, how many Catholics will threaten to kill, or actually kill, because Muslim's all over the world burned the Pope in effigy? Ah, I would guess ZERO. Now imagine even one demonstration where Mohammed is burned in effigy.

Update (9/19): The Muslim Cleric who organized the Danish Embassy cartoon protest calling to 'Behead Those Who Insult Islam' weighs in and is demanding the Pope be executed....you gotta love those peace loving Muslims!

Stupid Human Tricks of the Week...so far!

2006-09-15T09:26:00.000-07:00

Well, there seems to be plenty of stupidity to go around this week. Here's a few of my favorite stupid human tricks that made there way into the news this week:

Judge Rules You Can't Ask Voters To Prove Their Identity! And I love Wizbang's idea on how to point out just how stupid this is!

Liberal Lesbian Tells Mindless America Who Watches TV Midday That "radical" Christians in America are just as much of a threat as the followers of radical Islam who piloted hijacked jetliners into New York's Twin Towers!!!! No other commentary needed!

Stupid #1: Harvard invites former President of Iran to speak at the Kennedy School of Government. Stupid #2: Audience sits silently as Khatami justifies the death penalty for gays. That same audience would jeer loudly if Bush spoke about say military tribunals for terrorists caught on foreign soil!

Minnesota Democrats give primary win to less than honest Muslim and Nation Of Islam follower. His claims he didn't know the NOI was anti-Semitic are laughable.

Stupid #1: That the UN still gets funds from the U.S. and that anybody thinks they do ANY good at all. Stupid #2: That Kofi Annan would have any reason to visit Castro.

Stupid #1: That anybody, U.S. citizens, the EU, or anybody else thinks that terrorists and insurgents are covered by the Geneva Conventions. Those who are not fighting under the flag of any country or wearing the uniform of any country's military and are, therefore, not shielded by the Geneva Convention! Stupid #2: That Colin Powell, McCain and others feel if we don't feel these scum by the GConventions that it will make it worse for our solders! WHAT? Oh, so instead of the Islamic fascists torturing a solder before cutting his head off, they'll just go straight to the decapitation IF ONLY the U.S. give their kind Geneva Conventions rights! The time for worrying about those in countries who populace supports evil acts towards Americans think has long past. Now is the time for us to crush and instill fear in those that will supposedly just as easily be a peace loving Muslim or be a bomb-belt wearing terrorist.....not worry about whether they think we are being moral hypocrites.

How not to be taken seriously

2006-09-13T08:45:00.000-07:00

Have an important cause, issue or crisis? Want the attention from international government officials? Have an opportunity to address the UN Security Council and make your case for help from the international community?

So here's your plan, first get Nobel Laureates to join your organization and help...shows that smart thoughtful people who you assume do their homework believe in your cause....their accomplishments give credibility to their position on your cause. Second get an actor who has played a TV doctor, a demon killer, a con man and a secret agent in the movies. This will......(sound of a record being stopped by hand with that terrible scratching noise of the stylus dragging across multiple groves in the vinyl)....WHAT?

Look, celebrity endorsement of products, your clothing line, your hair products...in fact I suspect they really know their hair products, is great. But when you have George Clooney speak to the UN (let alone the Security Council) about an issue in a country he visited for days or weeks...an issue he's not a known expert on, an issue involving political turmoil, dictatorial leaders, tribal relations, genocide, etc.....you loose every intelligent person questioning the legitimacy of your issue. Everything they say can be correct and heartfelt...but generally we don't want to hear such things from self important pseudo intellectuals who think because the celebrity adoring public and paparazzi fawn over them that they suddenly have enlightened knowledge on nearly any topic.

Darfur is messed up and I'm sure has been inappropriately ignored by those who claim to care for the human condition around the world...but in my opinion there's no better way to turn powerful people away from your issue than to have a celebrity like George Clooney lecture them on it.

Left is, as Left does

2006-09-12T11:37:00.000-07:00

A new CNN pole says basically there is no change in those who blame Bush (and/or Clinton) for the 9/11 attacks since 2004...but CNN chooses the Bush bashing headline "More Americans blame Bush for 9/11". In fact the poll shows the number of people who blame Bush, a little to a great deal, for the 9/11 attacks only differs by 2% from those who also blame Clinton.

But a 1-2% change in this stupid poll doesn't make a story...what should make a story is that an attack in the planning for many years, and that Islamic fascists were carrying out terrorists acts for a good decade prior to 9/11/01...and yet some think it's all Bush's fault that roughly 6 months into office this attack happens?

How stupid are these people? Their dislike of a Republican who also believes in God (oh my) is so great that all logic, reason and a grasp of the facts escapes them. As PowerlineBlog points out, the left (no longer just the angry left) blames everything on Bush that couldn't even possibly be his fault....amazing.

I'm not in love with Bush.....but on the left there is a deranged hatred that hurts us as a whole.

Duplicity in this derangement is those media outlets that attempt to make news instead of "report, you decide". The enlightened intellectuals in the media no longer think you're capable of deciding what anything means (GWOT, Global Warming, civil rights, etc.)...so at CNN they will just tell you what it means. The Riehl World View said this about the CNN pole:

"if you take into account the polls margin of error (3%) and the fact that they used a partial sample in 2001 (MOE 4.5%) and, for some reason, have no results for Clinton in 2002 ... the fact is, there is no significant difference between the numbers for Bush and Clinton, except for right after 9/11, when Clinton stood at 45% to 40% for Bush.
Now, look at the top three categories, which would mean any blame at all. Clinton polls 62%, Bush 64% in a poll with a 3.5% margin of error = no significant difference."

The Arab Problem

2006-09-12T09:05:00.000-07:00

As we slip past the 5th anniversary of our generations Pearl Harbor I wonder if it's appropriate to feel that our efforts to thwart another terrorist attack on our soil is working? After all dates and symbolism seem to be important to the Islamic scum who desire our demise. Would they not have done great harm to our sense of safety to even mount a small attack on any anniversary up to this point? If you believe they are fearful that the symbolism of another attack on a 9/11 anniversary would re-awaken the sleeping giant with a vengeance not seen before, think again. There not that smart, nor do they understand our kind of patriotism.

I'm not suggesting we are employing all the best tactics in fighting this war...some are in fact laughable. And to not TARGET MUSLIMs in police work and intelligence work of this fight is stupid and dangerous.

What is worrisome is the attitude in the overall Arab world where one would assume that all are not extremist and some not even Muslim. A great blog on Iraq and the Arab world, by two brothers who should know since they're blogging out of Baghdad is Iraq The Model. One of the brothers, Mohammed Fadhil, has a piece to this point called Blaming the Victim in today's WSJ. Fadhil points out the Arab medias focus on our response to 9/11 as opposed to the act itself. To ignore the provocation is dishonest but also speaks to the attitude that America deserved this. Fadhil also shares my belief as he answers the question on whether the West can appease these ruler and clerics by our changing our strategy:

I don't think so. Those dictators and extremists always seek to keep a state of low-level confrontation and to keep the possibility for war open because their dominance over their people depends on their ability to create enemies and convince their people that those enemies are whom hatred and anger must be directed at.

A poll just published on Jihad TV's (Al Jazeera) website further illustrates the Arab attitude. I found this on www.littlegreenfootballs.com but you can see the original page of the terrorist medias poll on a Google translation page. My pal, Glock26, points out one positive in the poll...that the majority don't want to visit our great country!

1) Is the world safer after September 11? Yes - 4.2 % No - 95.8 %
2) Do you support Osama bin Laden? Yes - 49.9 % No - 50.1 %
3) Do you think that the war on Iraq is a war on Islam? Yes - 79.8 % No - 20.2 %
4) Do you think that there is a link between the war on terrorism and the war on Iraq? Yes - 23.4 % No - 76.6%
5) Do you wish to travel to the United States? Yes - 27.6 % No - 72.4 %

A disconnect that's hard to explain

2006-09-11T15:31:00.000-07:00

I have often alluded to the hypocrisy one can observe in the words and actions of Democrats on the key issues as compared to Republicans in the post 9/11 era. I'm not suggesting that the right is perfect, just that the left seems to have en masse abandoned key principles and values they once (although still claim) to hold dear.

This hypocrisy is so obvious that it's perpetration is confusing...They don't even try to disguise it and so I theorized, some time ago, that it must literally be a mental disorder. How else can one explain intelligent people yelling 2+2=5? And so I called it Bushdisdainia!

On this 5th anniversary of attacks on our way of life by Islamic fascists I feel the same way I felt on that morning...I was pissed, I was patriotic, tears were easy to come thinking about those who lost their lives. But one thing I have never felt..not even in the slightest...is that in any way we brought this on ourselves. I believe most conservatives feel the same. Sadly many (maybe even most) liberals feel differently...it really is shocking to me that liberals feel that these Islamic extremists could be quelled by anything other than our destruction. Some have compared Hitler to some of the Islamic anti-semitic leaders....but would Hitler give up his desire to rid the planet of inferior Jews from simply having some sort of appeasement talks?

DJ Drummond over at Wizbang has an excellent (albeit long) essay on this disconnect I encourage you to read. A small sample that hit home for me:

But the modern Liberal has abandoned most of what Liberalism used to mean. Where the old Liberal wanted all people to be treated as equals, the modern Progressive (to use the word they stole from Teddy Roosevelt to pretend to respectable intention) demands preferential treatment and advantages for a select minority. Where the old Liberal fought against Racism and Sexism, the modern Progressive is happy to take up those very causes, in order to advance their agenda. Even where the Conservative outrage about CBS's "The Reagans" is matched in the media with Liberal anger about "The Path to 9/11", methods differ sharply, as Democrats have even threatened to attack ABC's very broadcast license if they do not get what they demand. The Progressive Method is Hypocrisy in action, and eschews the Constitution by design.

Never Forget

2006-09-11T08:27:00.000-07:00

Our turn for Fake But True

2006-09-07T09:56:00.000-07:00

Apparently various Clinton administration alum have their knickers in a bunch over an ABC two part mini-series called The Path to 9/11. I find it interesting that they say ABC (and parent Disney) acknowledge the show is fiction and contradicts the 9-11 commission report but I cannot find any such acknowledgement.

It's also interesting that specific complaints from people such as Sandy (that's not a document in pants) Berger and Madeleine (I've never been wrong in my life) Albright are based not on their viewing of the series, but of someone else's account of certain scenes.....ah, ok....while they may in fact have a bone to pick they don't really know for sure. Of course you know darn well that anything that makes 9/11 look like anybody other than GW Bush's fault will be contested aggressively. I'm surprised these Clinton-ites aren't just saying 9/11 was a conspiracy and executed by the government under Carl Rove's direction. Oh wait...the planning and placement of all those building demolition charges and miles of wire had to be done before GWB was even elected..OH MY GOD....this proves that those crazy Bush cronies stole the election....they had to ensure they would be in office on 9/11!

The truth is only interesting to the left (of which the media is a major part of) when it supports their position. The stunning apathy on the left and in the main stream media that in fact the Valerie Plame leaker was an opponent of Bush policies named Richard Armitage. The calls from the left, and the MSM, for Bush to step down, impeachment for this and for Iraq, for someone to go to jail, that Rove, Cheney, etc. were evil and played with our security (as if Plame was a real operative), that this was just more proof of the evil right wing.....OOOPS......so are they calling for Armitage's balls?

I think the past behavior of those who are (and are yet to) yelling about this ABC series will in fact tell us that the events laid out in the drama may in fact be right on the money...at least thinking that puts a smile on my face.

Update: Hugh Hewitt has seen the ABC piece (unlike the complainers) and he says it's very critical of the Bush administration as well....but you don't see Bush or the GOP complaining do you? Clinton, who hasn't seen it, is saying he just wants it to be accurate...ok, any guesses on whether it will illustrate the 3 chances he had to take out Osama and didn't? A concise op/ed on Clinton's blown chances by Investors Business Daily.

Update: The new Dem power brokers, exemplified by the DailyKos, is employing an all out assault to censor or kill the ABC docu-drama.....the left is so mortified that it's base is so fragile that they can't survive any portrayal of their past leaders looking weak..truly amazing!

Update: UN-F'ing believable...the Democrats are the most chicken-sh*t bunch of hypocrites the world has known....they supposedly care about civil liberties...yet a docudrama that might paint any of them in a bad light must be pulled off the air? Can you imagine if Republican leadership was trying to pull this same stunt...the Dems would be making comparisons to book burnings, censorship and not trusting the public to make up their own minds whether ENTERTAINMENT was anything close to the truth. The Dems are cowards in facing scrutiny let alone in fighting the war on terror.

Update: You could have guessed this was going to happen....ABC is going to make changes to the content? If Clinton really did make a call to them I would love to hear it..... "Mr. Former President, but did Sandy really stop the CIA from doing it?" Clinton: "it depends on what your definition of IT is".

And as the WSJ's Tarranto put it "one wishes the Clinton people had been as aggressive in defending the nation from bin Laden as they now are in defending their own reputations." See his blog today, the story "Democrats Embrace Pre-Emption" midway down.

Sure, it's totally believable that Clinton wasn't distracted by the Lewinsky affair...that was just business as usual for Slick Willy!

Update: Excellent essay by Dean Barnett at TownHall on why the "Clintonistas" are all up in arms over this mini-series..and his final thoughts here:

But 9/11 changed everyone else's world view. It became apparent to most of America that we had to kill the would-be criminals before they actually became criminals. To most Americans, this was disquieting but a common sense necessity.

But the left never escaped its previousmind sett. Liberals remain exactly where they were 10 years ago; desirous of a policy that waits for a terrorist act and then lets law enforcement mop up the aftermath.

The fact that people are talking about the Democrats' attitude towards terrorism is horrifically damaging to the Democratic Party. There is, however, a way out for the Democrats. Truly, it would be best for the country and their party if they could arrive at a clearly articulated policy about what they would like to do, rather than simply loudly express primal emotions about how much they detest their domestic political opposition.

Alas, that's all they have. And this controversy brings their intellectually bankrupt status into the open.

The Muslim slippery slope!

2006-09-06T09:52:00.000-07:00

Yesterday on the Wall Street Journal opinion blog was an item where the Muslim beauty, and the 2005 Miss London, Hammasa Kohistani postulates that "even" a moderate Muslim can slip right into becoming terrorists because of the attitude others have towards them in today's Islamic Jihad rich environment. WHAT??????

You mean that Muslims are so fragile, so inherently prone to unspeakable evil that some dirty looks, or a few anti-Muslim signs, or being singled out in an airport screening line will push, say an accountant, into a bomb belt wearing suicide west hater? You know instead of playing in that cricket match, I'll strap on some C-4 and get on a bus!

Oh, my....so we better listen to Kohistani and not profile Muslims. Never mind that the most unifying link to nearly all terrorists acts around the world in the last 10 years is that those involved are Muslim extremists.....if we just act nice, don't stare...don't do that....they will just sit on the fence with normal loving person on one side and terrorist on the other.....it's so easy for them to become terrorists...so don't push them!

Exact text from James Tarranto of the WSJ opinion blog:

Moderate Terrorists
"The first Muslim to be crowned Miss England has warned that stereotyping members of her community is leading some towards extremism," reports London's Daily Mail:

Hammasa Kohistani made history last year when she was chosen to represent
England in the Miss World pageant. . . .

She said: "The attitude towards Muslims has got worse over the year.
Also the Muslims' attitude to British people has got worse.

"Even moderate Muslims are turning to terrorism to prove themselves.
They think they might as well support it because they are stereotyped anyway. It
will take a long time for communities to start mixing in
more. . . ."

So let's see if we follow this argument. According to Kohistani, Muslims are so thin-skinned and so violent that they respond to prejudice with terrorism.

Um, isn't that an invidious stereotype?

How many degrees between you and a modern day Hitler?

2006-09-05T13:22:00.000-07:00

Yesterday my brother-in-law was telling me about how over the weekend he heard a women use the phrase "six steps of separation". Turns out she had a few glasses of wine at that point and so we were joking maybe she was mixing AA's twelve steps with the phrase she was trying to use "six degrees of separation".

I didn't really know the story behind this phrase other than it had to do with linking someone within those six degrees to actor Kevin Bacon....so I looked into it. Well Six Degrees of Separation was a stage play in 1990, then a film in 1993 (Bacon was in neither) but both are based on the premise that everyone in the world is connected to everyone else in the world by a chain of no more than 6 acquaintances. Supposedly the phrase got linked to Kevin Bacon by a trivia game created by 3 college students who also got booked on the John Stewart Show. The game was to link any actor to Kevin Bacon within six acquaintances in films, TV shows or plays that actor had been in. The producer who booked the three students supposedly called the trivia game Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon.

I think, in fact, it is interesting how many people you can connect to when you get to 3 or 4 degrees of separation. The number of people in your pool at that point is in the thousands or tens of thousands. However, with no separation (you have had direct contact) or just one degree...well that limits you in a big way.

For example how many of you have no separation between you and Hugo Chavez? Or only one degree of separation between you and our modern day Hitler Iran's Ahmedinejad? While this story isn't really about Cindy Sheehan, it's about these other two, that's how connected Cindy is to each of these.

Cindy visiting and kissing Chavez is well known...and the recent closeness of Chavez to Ahmedinejad has also been in the MSM....but what I doubt will make it's way into the MSM is that Hezbollah is apparently developing a following (thru marketing) in Chavez's country. A must view is the video blog on this very topic over at HotAir, where you should make regular visits to see the daily video blogs.

It's very scary that these two anti-American leaders are cavorting in any way. Together they could cause economic havoc messing with their oil production and price, let alone working together to build an Islamic extremist terrorist mentality in South America....this kind of thing will not be stopped by playing nice with meaningless UN resolutions..

Update: Part 2 of HotAir VBlog on Hezbollah in Latin America

Exclusive: Tom Cruise signs with Scientology Studios

2006-08-24T09:34:00.000-07:00

Tiny's has learned that the mysterious, and not believable, $100M hedge fund that will bank roll Tom's movies now that Sumner Redstone booted his ass from Paramount is the recently formed Scientology Studios! That's right, the one headed by the much maligned eccentric studio head Xenu. More on this exclusive story as details come in!

Of course I'm basking in Tom's newest travails (note the word choice) much as I did during the bizarre baby birth episode (Tiny's: Cannibal or PR genius?), or the South Park fun (Tiny's: Cool Cat Scientologist).

So with the recent news that apparently intelligent, lucid and non-believer in 60M year old aliens Sumner Redstone decided to not renew Tom's contract with Paramount my crack staff went to work. Tom's wacky partner (this Wagner women) immediately started spouting off it didn't happen this way, they were going to split with Paramount anyway, blah, blah, blah. Apparently Mrs. Wagner (or is it Ms.?) didn't get the Scientology memo about using any psychological drugs!

It's also interesting how all the Hollywood friendly press is writing how this will backfire, how Redstone stepped on his Paramount studio chiefs, and so on. Hey Hollywood most everyone has a boss including your precious study chiefs. I for one hope Redstone did this primarily because it was the right thing to do given Tom's bizarre and very public beliefs. To a movie studio marquee actors are the product, if you product has a virus what do you do? Continue to sell it even if people will buy, or do you change the product? But it would be refreshing if Redstone actually put values ahead of money. On the other hand it could very well be that Tom and his freaky lady friend wanted to much to renew and Redstone figured since they won't renew with them might as well shoot em on their way out the door...hey, that's business!

Tom, even with being short and an idiot, will land on his feet...but I'll enjoy the negative press surrounding him and Scientology until he does!

Update: Tom raises less than $3M as the supposed $100m hedge fund still hasn't materialized....any bets on if his new investor is a Scientologist?

Global Warming believers cover your eyes!

2006-08-21T17:33:00.000-07:00

If you believe in GW then you'll probably dismiss this story, or say it just supports your position. So here it is, you be the judge! A newly released study of 247 of the 350 glaciers on Disko island off Greenland's coast found 173 of those glaciers have been shrinking for the past century "suggesting that the ice melt is not a recent phenomenon caused by global warming".

What I found interesting is that the researches say they studied 95% of the area covered by glaciers on Disko. So wouldn't that mean they should have studied 95% of the 350 glaciers or 315 instead of only 247? If 247 glaciers are on 95% of Disko island that means the remaining 103 glaciers are on just 5% of Disko they didn't cover?

Ok, this aside....it would be interesting to know if 173 glaciers on this island have been shrinking for over 100 years what's up with the other 74 in the study holding steady? Guess what, the article says that they also identified that there were more "galloping glaciers" than had been previously estimated....75 of them!

This is getting interesting....173 glaciers are shrinking for 100 years at around 8 meters a year...but the study also found 75 glaciers caled galloping glaciers that have growth spurts of several years (lets say 2) at a rate of 50 meters day..while most of the time growing at 20 meters a year. So 173 glaciers shrunk over 100 years by 800 meters each. But 75 galloping glaciers each grew as much as 36500 meters in the 2 years of galloping growth, and another 1960 meters for the 98 years of normal 20m/yr growth for a whopping 38460 meters of growth!!!!!!

I realize I'm averaging things here, and that all glaciers are not of the same size...but it sure would be interesting to see if the tremendous growth of the 75 growing glaciers balanced, or surpased, the lost ice of the slowly shrinking ones!

Update: It's always interesting to find a study, or a scientist, that refers to something as a certainty that is in fact as of yet unproven theory. Here's an example of your findings not fitting your theory so you claim what you found is caused by the theory. So apparently now global warming is also to blaim for more ice! And note the last quoted sentence of the researcher and how he/she refers to global warming as if it's a certainty.

Living in the victim-hood

2006-08-21T16:22:00.000-07:00

Juan Williams is a smart guy. It's interesting when I see a smart person I don't notice their race. Think about a public figure that inspires you....is your immediate thought of their race, or is it the thing that you admire in them? I don't see Juan as black, just a smart guy. Juan has, in a sense, taken the baton from Bill Cosby in saying what's wrong with black America. Juan's new book ENOUGH: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America -- and What We Can Do About It echoes much of what Bill Cosby has been saying for years and taking heat from those who are a major part of the problem. Juan also has a piece in today's WaPo on this culture of failure for blacks.

It's really all very simple....black leaders (figures in popular culture, politicians, educators, etc.) could have the biggest and most efficient change to the future for black youths...and yet they seem against it. They largely promote a victim and entitlement message to the black community.

The best training ground for self reliance and responsibility is of course the home, but given the epidemic of broken black families the black leaders can have the biggest effect on the youth. In my childhood I can remember various influences (parents, popular culture, school, my pier group) that lead me to understand my future was up to me. It was a given that you needed to be creative, you needed to work for things, you needed to do things with integrity. I did a lemonade stand on occasion, had a kid's version of a garage sell (the early version of eBay), rebuilt and painted and then sold bicycles, moved up to a paper route, pitted apricots at a local ranch, worked pool maintenance at the local swim club, worked as a stock boy during college and so on. I never assumed that the end goal was to live on some form of assistance. I also never assumed the end goal was to work for someone else. While my father, and most fathers around me, worked for large companies and would retire on company pensions the environment they created for me had a spirit entrepreneurism.

It's clear that spirit is missing from the poor black communities, but worse is that you could argue it has been replaced with the notion of a Cliff Notes shortcut to "making it" is through crime. The messages that permeate black popular culture embrace crime, drugs, disrespect for women, being smart is acting white, big business is bad, the police are evil, everyone else is prejudice, blah, blah.

I have posted on the idea that black leaders get their power from their communities believing they're victims and that their race (and it's baggage) entitle them to something, or everything. If most black fathers stayed married to their children's mothers, if most blacks believed in doing well in school, if most blacks believed in the American dream of working hard and anything is possible, if most black entertainment was smart, civil and uplifting, if most black sports stars were model citizens....in that world what would the message from the likes of Jessie Jackson, Luis Farrakhan, Julian Bond, Cynthia McKinney and Kanye West be? Are these figures influential in the black community preaching a message that will inspire a black child to do well in school, that they can accomplish anything but that it's up to them?

Academia and journalists in the black community also share blame for sending the wrong message and for taking a stance against those with the right message. Case in point is Peniel E. Joseph, a teacher of African Studies at Stony Brook University, who rebukes the message of Juan's book. Joseph's final message is that William's thinks the civil rights movement had a beginning, middle and an end but that the truth is we are in an "unfinished saga of racial struggle". That's exactly the problem! People like Joseph believe if your black and poor, if your black and a hoodlum, if your black and at the bottom rungs of a job it's because of racism and nothing to do with you.

Hat tip to www.powerlineblog.com where I found both WaPo pieces linked above.

Out of order, I'll show you out of order

2006-08-17T10:02:00.000-07:00

Here we go! A federal Judge has ruled in favor of an ACLU suit filed on behalf of some journalists, scholars and lawyers who say the NSA surveillance program is unconstitutional (a breaking story from Wizbang). It's nice that these leftists think the possibility of minor infringement of free speech and privacy trumps the lives of what could have been 3,000 or more saved by the break up of the UK airline bombing terrorist plot.

How F'd up are people who think this way? I suspect if the plot in the UK had happened, and 3,000 were killed, and that the authorities came out and said that if they had been allowed to have unfettered realtime monitoring of communications, financial transactions and location surveillance the plot would have been stopped...these same people would still want protection from such access to the extreme. The bar this side of the argument wants for this access is so high (and time consuming) as to require law enforcement to already have enough evidence such that they would no longer need the surveillance.

Let's hope higher courts have a better understanding that this is not a simple issue of regular police work, this is a war.

Update: Well what do you know....our lovely judge is a Jimmy Carter appointee and a known liberal whose politics play a role in her actions on the bench.

Update: WHHHAT? Even the Wapo agrees this was A Judicial Misfire

BUT, the NYTimes would be ok to sacrifice you, your wife, your new baby and say a few thousand of your neighbors to protect the "honey pick up some milk on the way home" phone call. The enemy is among us!

Update: Pretty strong words from the well reasoned Hugh Hewitt, and I agree: "Any vote for any Democrat is a vote against victory and a vote for vulnerability."

The logo fits!

2006-08-16T16:13:00.000-07:00

Jimmy Carter demonstrates (like many others) why a jackass is a perfect logo of the Democratic Party.

That Carter believes Israel is the bad guy in the conflict with Hezbollah, and uses his stature as an ex-US President to express that belief along with what I consider anti-American ballyhoo...well, a jackass is a perfect visual!

Liberal Anti-terrorism feels good

2006-08-11T09:23:00.000-07:00

So it has begun. Liberals are foaming that Dubya's lumping together all the terrorists using the label "Islamic fascists". This is type of talk could "inflame anti-Muslim tensions" and this label is "unhelpful under the circumstances".

Puulease! Hey Democrats...this kind of politically correct peacenik attitude will get us killed. The DailyKos (Kos himself helped Lamont win over Lieberman in the CT primary) and most of the sites regular followers have an issue with you calling these wack jobs anything other than just terrorists I guess.

At the police department in DailyKosville all of their wanted posters just describe each suspect as the "terrorist". No physical description for fear of associated an innocent with the guilty. If the ideology of the bad guy is known, it's not disclosed for fear that this would be "unhelpful" or "inflame" bad feelings.

Lot's of FEELING stuff going on in the world run by liberals! If we just change our foreign policy, if we just remove Bush from office these poor confused YOUNG MUSLIM ISLAMIC FASCIST MEN, oops..I mean terrorist. will have their years of brainwashing hatred of westeners vanish....oh, why didn't conservatives think of that. We just need to make these young men with no common physical appearance or common ideology who are terrorists feel good and they will be good.

Update: Read Glock26's comment...great stuff! Plus the WSJ editorial board (whom liberals call a Whitehouse puppets) sums up my sentiments with 'Mass Murder' Foiled A terror plot is exposed by the policies many American liberals oppose. Similar to the point Glock26 makes, the WSJ points out that in the wake of news of the thwarted terror plot:

"Ted Kennedy chimed in that "it is clear that our misguided policies are making America more hated in the world and making the war on terrorism harder to win." Mr. Kennedy somehow overlooked that the foiled plan was nearly identical to the "Bojinka" plot led by Ramzi Yousef and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to blow up airliners over the Pacific Ocean in 1995. Did the Clinton Administration's "misguided policies" invite that plot? And if the Iraq war is a diversion and provocation, just what policies would Senators Reid and Kennedy have us "focus" on?"

Update: 40 more arrested in Italy now....their connection to those in the UK is unclear at the moment but I love how it is reported where the 40 were arrested: "Islamic gathering places". Also from todays' SF Chronicle...I love it.

MSM love affair with evil

2006-08-10T09:39:00.000-07:00

It's too bad we didn't stick some plastic explosive in Mike Wallace's 88 yr old keister and triggered it as he had his love fest interview with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Wallace's comments on Ahmadinejad:

"He's actually, in a strange way, he's a rather attractive man, very smart, savvy, self-assured, good looking in a strange way," Wallace said. "He's very, very short but he's comfortable in his own skin."
John over at Powerlineblog sums it up nicely

What is this, a Tiger Beat interview? Just once, I wish MSM reporters would adopt the same adversarial attitude toward foreign leaders who are deadly enemies of the United States that they take toward members of the Bush administration.

And yes, as John says, maybe Wallace does draw out and expose the evil of this man, but so far what's come out suggests that's unlikely.

Anybody else for profiling at Airport Security?

2006-08-10T08:46:00.000-07:00

With 20+ UK born men, supposedly of Pakistani descent, in custody after their efforts to kill what could have been as many or more than on 9/11 were thwarted maybe more card carrying ACLU types might consider profiling for airport security a good tactic? NOT LIKELY! Because God forbid that we embarrass or inconvenience a nice Arab looking person, instead we do it to 80 yr old white women.

And, hmmmm....guess what else we are sure to find those involved in this UK incident have in common with nearly every other terrorist caught, or known to commit a terrorist act in the last 10-20 years? MUSLIM ISLAMIC EXTREMISTS!

But hey, you liberal Americans just keep listening to people like Michael Moore and vote for people like Lamont and I'm sure we will have nothing to worry about.....ya, because they know that this is only happening because Bush and Co. have made MUSLIM ISLAMIC EXTREMISTS hate us and want to kill us. If we just make France, Iran, North Korea, Syria, Lebanon and every other country just like us everything will be fine. Sure, that will work...normally these people who listen to Islamic preachers about jihad and killing westerners would just ignore such ideas, but we have given them reason to suddenly become killers....we can reverse that with an approach that gets them to like us. Whenever we would like to employ some foreign policy just run it by diplomats from countries like those and if they like it, well then it must be right. Because if those folks don't like it, it must be wrong....we need to start thinking internationally and not nationally. Hold hands, and sing songs...ya, that's it!

Michelle Malkin has a nice timeline on the terrorist plot broken up by Scotland Yard....check out the various links and video at the end.

Update: of course the moonbat leftists are already calling this failed terror plot being made public today all planned by Bush & Co.....it's scary how many people really should be on some kind of meds!

Update: Nothing like confirming your blog readers are stupid F'ing morons with a survey that confirms it...these people are nearly as dangerous as the Islamic Fascists! And the dailykos himself helped Lamont beat Lieberman and even appeared in Lamont TV ads.

You're either with us or with the terrorists

2006-08-02T16:42:00.000-07:00

I'm not a great fan of Dubya with the exception of his unwaivering stance on fighting those who want simply to erase us from the planet. Just after 9/11 he said something like you're either with us or you're with the terrorists. It's the same with Israel, you're either on the side of Israel's right to exist, their right to protect its citizens, their right not to have those sworn to kill each and everyone one of them sitting just down the road with weapons...You're either for those things or you're on the side of terrorism, Islamic extremism and Iran. It's truly is that simple.

Israel is not being imperialistic and didn't start this fight. But because media types and liberals (interesting how those two are nearly always ideologically aligned) are completely ignoring or unwilling to accept that Hezbollah:

believes all Israelis should be exterminated
targets innocents (women and children)
started this current conflict by KILLING some Israeli soldiers (not just kidnapping 2) and firing rockets into Israel
is simply an extension of Iran

Because of this they frame Israel as the bad guy in this conflict. They throw out idiotic notions of proportional response. Talk of negotiation and cease fire. What has history shown us with respect to negotiation with Israel and their enemies? Just as a pedophile is born with, and cannot change, their sick desire Hezbollah will not accept the existence of Israel. Just as we would not negotiate with al-Qaeda they should not with Hezbollah.

Those of you who think Israel is being a bully are therefore sympathetic to Hezbollah and must therefore be anti-semites. How else can one explain your disdain for Israel trying to protect its citizens and your complete ignorance of the facts. Israel isn't targeting Lebanese civilians, Hezbollah is putting Lebanese between them and the IDF.

Apparently anti-semites are so blinded by their ideology they can't even recognize when they're supporting evil since good God fearing people when never do that. Oh, I forget those in the media, or are liberal, are not God fearing! :) Case in point, the Huffington post website apparently thinks this video make Israel look bad. While I wish the Israeli spokeswoman would have laid into this bimbo CNN anchor this video shows the common lack of understanding of terrorism, war and Islamic extremism by the media and peace-monger liberals.

No honest look at Israel's military history and actions in this current conflict would label Israel as warmongers. Yet apparently the media, and most liberals, take the position equivalent to the police officer continually asking a sniper to stop picking off people in the streets from the top of building while he continues to do so, and you have him in your sights. Wrong, you put one in his head. Item 4 above is also key given that today Ahmadinejad said "Although the main solution is for the elimination of the Zionist regime, at this stage an immediate cease-fire must be implemented". Too funny....oh sure, drop your weapons and come out, I won't shoot...wink, wink.

Finally, if you're still not on the side of Israel do you still think Jews control the media? Just one more thought....if the drunken anti-semitic rant of one man is so relevant and revealing then so is one self proclaimed American Muslim shooting 6 at the Seattle Jewish Federation.

They don't want to know

2006-08-01T10:20:00.000-07:00

It's apparent that the MSM and many around the world don't what to know the truth about what's going on in Lebanon. The press, and the public, swallow whole what the Islamic terrorists serve them. The bias in the media is clear.....why wouldn't the MSM be taking a closer look at Qana as evidence mounts that things may not be as they first appeared? The area bombed by the IDF in Qana was shown on video to be a site from which rockets were fired into Israel. Israel and others have shown evidence that the house didn't collapse until some 8 hours after the IDF bombing. The Red Cross is reporting the number of dead from that house at half that reported by the Iran/Hezbollah controlled Lebanese officials (see story linked below). Photographs on the Internet showing plain clothed men on truck mounted rocket launchers within residential homes in Lebanon show the tactic to draw fire and make women and children unwilling martyrs.

Note the Lebanese Red Cross volunteer quoted in this story who says "The priority is for the wounded, then we return, as much as we can, to take out the martyrs''. Wouldn't you normally call the women and children pulled from that house as victims?

Then there's this Lebanese terrorist mouthpiece who mentions his regret that the "Qana massacre did not horrify the conscience and did not bring about a UN decision for a ceasefire".

You don't have to look to hard for this look and sound like it was a staged event many hours after the IDF had bombed that area and make Israel look bad, to shock the world and garner support for Hezbollah and maybe coax the inept UN into trying to broker a ceasefire.

I'm not saying it's a certainty that Hezbollah staged the Qana deaths but to ignore its possibility is to shut your eyes to something you wish not to see.

Update (8/2): Nice video blog by M. Malkin that also asks about Qana, check it out. And the MSM still ignores the possibility Qana was staged. As usual you're too stupid (in their mind) to form the right opinion so they will make it for you....just try to find a journalist who will present the entire spectrum, with backup and sources, on ANY story and let you decide what it means.

Cracker says "tar baby"....oh my!

2006-07-31T09:24:00.000-07:00

This weekend a "cracker" used the phrase "tar baby" to describe the issues with the big dig (and why did anybody outside of Boston or MA need to pay for that?). Of course anybody with even a few brain cells knows the use of this phrase referred to the big dig being a sticky mess (basically the original definition). But apparently some black leaders think Gov. Romney was calling the big dig fiasco an especially dark skinned black person!

Hey black leaders...get over your F'ing self! We are all not fixated on a hatred for black people and so use terms "supposedly" used by some in a derogatory way towards black people but use them instead for bad situations or inanimate objects!!!! It's not all about YOU! You obviously hate yourself, being black and black people since you're constantly bringing negative attention to a race problem in situations where it doesn't exist. I suppose if Bush was heard telling someone at a dinner that he loves having a few Oreo's at night with a glass of milk that these same people would say his statement was racist and not about eating cookies!

Romney felt compelled to make an apology after these mysterious leaders, who lead all bitter-my-lot-in-life-is-some-crackers-fault blacks, cried "racist"....now I have less respect for Romney. He should have just said give me a break....the term means a sticky mess...end of story!

Do your homework

2006-07-29T14:44:00.000-07:00

There's a lot going on in the world. The most important thing going on is a human cancer called Islam. You can take the position that I'm be unfair painting all those who follow Islam as a cancer...but you would be wrong. I know because I have done my homework. From around the world I've read probably 100 blogs and articles and dozens of interviews from news outlets across the spectrum. The key to forming a meaningful and absolute position is having enough information from many sources pro and con. On my calling Islam a cancer I base this on countless first hand accounts from those effected by and living among this cancer in the many countries that have seen the cancer in action in the last decade.

This cancer has many names...Islamic extremist, Islamic fundamentalist, Al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Lashkar-e-Toiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed, and so on. But the common thread with these groups spread across the globe is Islam and a evil interpretations of Sharia (Islamic Law) and of the Qur'an (believed to be the word of God as revealed to the Prophet Muhammad). This is our enemy and he is loves the idea of his own death and yours more than we love our life. That is not a mentality that one negotiates or co-exists with. It is one that must be exterminated at all costs.....if you don't understand that you HAVE NOT done your homework...research, study and stop single sourcing your opinions and unless you're a died in the wool pacifist you'll agree with me.

Back to my main message of "do your homework". Everyday I see a person on tv, or hear them on the radio, or chat with them at the work coffee machine, or at a family dinner, or on the sidewalk in front of my house....and they have not done their homework. Not just on the issue of Islamic terrorism, but on every issue that would make the top 20 of today. Everyday I'm subjected to dozens, or hundreds, of people who have formed strict unbending positions on a topic without understanding the topic at a grade school level. How do I know this? Because I ask questions of my unscholarly victims and it rarely takes more than a few questions challenging their position before the charade of their understanding the topic is apparent. I'm not saying these people are stupid, merely lazy.

What's almost as scary as the global Islamic cancer is the number of people who see one tv news story, or read one story in their local paper, or hear from a single friend a passionate oration, and they have their solid position. They're sure this is the correct position and they will even talk about it with passion and as if it's as certain as 2+2=4. Could they be right, or better put could their position hold up to scrutiny and research...sure it could...but it would be lucky if their one source of knowledge on the topic turned out to the best one. But see, that's not my point...that you must have the RIGHT position...my point is don't be so sure, so foaming at the mouth, so righteous when you do not have the facts at hand. If you've not done a good job at trying to understand the positions of those at the poles of a topic as well as seeking a source that has the appearance of independence, well then your staunch position is dishonest.

So before you believe in your position on Iraq, Israel, Iran, North Korea, Global Warming, Nuclear power, Gay marriage, trickle down economics, public schools, affirmative action, illegal immigration, military interrogation methods, and countless other topics....before you set your position in stone...do your homework!

He would get my vote!

2006-07-27T17:58:00.000-07:00

If only there were a lot more congressional candidates like Vernon Robinson. Glock26 shot me a link to the best campaign tv ad I've seen and it's Vernon's! check out Vernon's latest Ad here. If he was in my area of California, instead of North Carolina, he would get my vote....of course living in Silicon Valley is the twilight zone so sadly his common sense would be his undoing in this area!

Partisanship in your face

2006-07-27T08:57:00.000-07:00

First....I'm back!

It's just amazing that the Dems haven't done something about Dean....the picture of a section from this morning's www.drudgereport.com says it all...just amazing. And to illustrate the level of Dean's partisanship and hypocrisy Powerline asks why Dean calls the Iraqi prime minister an "anti-Semite" yesterday when he failed to condemn Hezbollah in a speech but not John Dingell, John Conyers, Nick Rahall, Pete Stark, and Neal Abercrombie who all voted against the House resolution condemning Hezbollah's attack against Israel. Powerline then goes on to point out that unbeknownst to me the embarrassment of Georgia (Cynthia McKinney) also has some issues with Jews but her lack of delicacy goes without criticism from the left.