Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Once Again, the Mind of Sowell...

Media Nicer to Obama than Bush? No Shite Sherlock

Hey have you heard? What a shock!
Didi you happen to notice how suave that party was? Millions of people eating Kraft dinner and hot dogs, while the MSM and Washington elite chow down on a "three-course salmon and risotto dinner," with some pate and caviar thrown in there too, I'm sure. Not mention both red and white wine. What, no Dom Perignon?

Of Course! And Illegal immigration Isn't A Crime

More brilliant observations from the head of Homeland Security. Scary, man.
This from the same woman who doesn't think the laws apply to immigrants (and that word will be dropped soon, too) but rights of the American constitution does.

A Little Teleprompter Trouble

More presidential dependency. One day, he's gonna have to do it without the darn thing.

Nice Goin'

Who's ever responsible for this has got some explaining to do. The walls of communication are still standing, it seems.

Buildings evacuated.
Panic in the streets.

Along with this whole Mexican bird flu thing,...
the freak-out factor is at def-con 3 right now.

Obama "not happy."

Talk about fear-mongering, eh?

Zo has his take. True and funny.

Saturday, April 25, 2009

Begala Don't Know Jack About History

Once again, a prominent member of the mainstream media has re-written history to facilitate their own need to misinform the masses and put more contempt for George W. Bush into the minds of the already vengeful left.

CNN's Paul Begala apparently doesn't mind fueling even more of the left's hatred of the Bush administration with his inaccuracies.

But (from Mark Hemmingway at National Review): the truth is...

"What Begala said isn't true. Begala appears to be referencing Yukio Asano, a Japanese soldier convicted of war crimes. His case was popularized — in the context of waterboarding — by Ted Kennedy. See this Washington Post article from 2006:
"Asano was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor," Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) told his colleagues last Thursday during the debate on military commissions legislation. "We punished people with 15 years of hard labor when waterboarding was used against Americans in World War II," he said.

Not only was Asano not executed, but his 15-year sentence was for a host of crimes besides waterboarding. According to the U.C. Berkeley War Crimes center:
Docket Date: 53/ May 1 - 28, 1947, Yokohama, Japan
Charge: Violation of the Laws and Customs of War: 1. Did willfully and unlawfully mistreat and torture PWs. 2. Did unlawfully take and convert to his own use Red Cross packages and supplies intended for PWs.

Specifications: beating using hands, fists, club; kicking; water torture; burning using cigarettes; strapping on a stretcher head downward

So Asano beat people with clubs and burned them with cigarettes — and I think there's no real debate about whether that consitutes torture. But wait, there's more. Asano practiced a much more severe form of waterboarding, according to the Post:
Twenty-one years earlier, in 1947, the United States charged a Japanese officer, Yukio Asano, with war crimes for carrying out another form of waterboarding on a U.S. civilian. The subject was strapped on a stretcher that was tilted so that his feet were in the air and head near the floor, and small amounts of water were poured over his face, leaving him gasping for air until he agreed to talk.

In waterboarding as it is practiced by the U.S., cellophane or cloth is placed over the subject's mouth to keep water out of nose and mouth. Asano was pouring water directly into the mouths and noses of subjects which is considerably more harsh and dangerous.

I don't think that any of this settles the debate over whether waterboarding as it was practiced by the CIA is or is not torture, but Begala certainly doesn't know what he's talking about. And it's certainly not accurate to say that the U.S. punished war ciminals from other countries for the same enhanced interrogation techniques we committed in the wake of 9/11.
For his part, after a pregnant pause (perhaps Fleischer was waiting for Anderson Cooper to make another Nazi comparison), Fleischer responded strongly:
Well, again, Paul, I guess you already are the jury, the prosecutor, the judge, and a citizen all rolled into one. You have already pronounced judgment that it is a crime.
So, if it is a crime, my question goes back to. Which Democrat members of Congress who sat in on the briefings, were authorized, were told about it, while -- particularly at a time when the Democrats had the majority in the Senate, would you say need to be prosecuted, Paul?"

The MSM of course says nothing, which says they are either culpable in the re-writing of history or totally ignorant to it. I would wager on a bit of both.

Thursday, April 23, 2009

Bizzaro World-The Unfair, Untrue Caricaturization of Conservatives


By Jay Nordlinger

National Public Radio

In the last few days, I’ve been thinking a little about Dick Cheney’s image. This stems from a lunch a group of us had with him last week (and I wrote about it here). Cheney is an unusual person: very sensible, very measured, very trustworthy. No wonder he has been entrusted with so many sensitive government positions. He is a calm person, and he has a calming effect on others. He is the kind of man you want in public service — party or partisanship quite aside.

In the course of our lunch, he said that the recent Democratic victory was “part of the normal cycle of a competitive two-party system,” and “fundamentally healthy for the nation.” He also talked about how wondrous it was to swear in the first black president. And what is his widespread image? He is a kind of Dr. Evil to people, although, unlike the Austin Powers one, not a comical Dr. Evil. He is a right-wing menace, a scourge of civil liberties, a Torquemada. This is absolutely perverse. And what of President Bush’s image — at least one aspect of it? They say that he is less than bright: that he is stupid. And stupid is the last thing President Bush is. Call him willful, call him stubborn, call him petulant or cussed or difficult. Stupid, he is not.
Consider one more public figure: Sarah Palin.

I keep hearing and reading, in various quarters, that she is a “bimbo.” That is the word I hear about her, rather a lot: “bimbo.” This is a woman, of course, who has been married since her early 20s. She and her husband, Todd, have five children. Sarah is governor of her state; Todd works in the oil fields. From what anyone can tell, they delight in each other, and in their family. They seem almost an advertisement for monogamy: for the married life. And yet people say “bimbo.”

In a nation full of bimbos, Governor Palin is one of the few who aren’t.

It seems to me that the Left has won: utterly and decisively. What I mean is, the Saturday Night Live, Jon Stewart, Bill Maher mentality has prevailed. They decide what a person’s image is, and those images stick. They are the ones who say that Cheney’s a monster, W.’s stupid, and Palin’s a bimbo. And the country, apparently, follows. I have a friend who teaches at a prominent university, and she says that, when Palin’s name is mentioned, the people laugh. In the course of the 2008 presidential campaign, an extraordinarily accomplished woman — more accomplished than most of the rest of us will ever be — was turned into a laughingstock.

What are the shaping institutions of American life? The news media. Entertainment television. The movies. Popular music. The schools, K through grad school. In whose hands are those institutions? In what areas do conservatives predominate? Country music, NASCAR, some churches? (Talk radio too, I suppose — no wonder so many on the left want to shut it down.) I will be talking more about this in the coming weeks, months, and possibly years.

Sidney Blumenthal once wrote a book called “The Rise of the Counter-Establishment” (meaning conservative associations and institutions). The counter-establishment needs to be tended, and beefed up. A country that believes that Cheney’s a monster, W.’s stupid, and Palin’s a bimbo is a country with its head up its . . .

A report from the Associated Press began as follows: “Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said Sunday it is unlikely that ailing former Cuban leader Fidel Castro will ever appear in public again.” My question is, Will his political prisoners ever appear in public again? Or will they remain in their dungeons until they die?And do opinion-makers in free countries care?Jimmy Carter got himself known as a human-rights president, and he has created an image as a human-rights person all around. Very curious. He is certainly selective. Recently, he has been in China, praising that state to the skies. In his meetings with PRC rulers, he apparently said nothing about human rights — and this is a country, remember, with a gulag (called “laogai”). Untold numbers of people have disappeared into it.Listen to a little of this AP report:

“The main thing is for the new administration to work harmoniously with China . . . and overcome those differences which are inevitable and seek out the best ways to cooperate as partners,” Carter said on the sidelines of a conference commemorating the establishment of ties [between the U.S. and the PRC] on Jan. 1, 1979.Human rights issues have . . . been a consistent source of friction between the two sides, with the U.S. pushing China to improve its poor record, including its religious repression and silencing of political dissidents. But Carter, a recipient of the U.N. Human Rights Award and a fierce critic of [the] United States’ own human rights violations under the Bush administration, did not make any public comments on the issue on this trip.

Instead Carter praised China for its remarkable transformation over the past three decades. “Not even Deng Xiaoping could have anticipated the glorious changes that have taken place in this wonderful country,” he said during his opening speech at the academic conference.
So, that’s Carter. If Chinese political prisoners are waiting on him, they will be waiting a long, long time. When people such as Carter urge free countries to “work harmoniously with China” and to “cooperate as partners” — what they mean is, “Shut up about human rights.” By the way, if the Philippines of Marcos, or the Chile of Pinochet, or the South Africa of the Boers had harvested organs — what would Carter and the Today show (to use a shorthand) have said?And did you catch the AP, above? “Carter, a recipient of the U.N. Human Rights Award and a fierce critic of [the] United States’ own human rights violations under the Bush administration . . .”! Not even an “alleged”!

In Gaza, Tony Blair wants a ceasefire, the French government wants a ceasefire, everyone and his brother wants a ceasefire — well, almost everyone and his brother. I am struck by the difference in aims here — aims cherished by two sides. On one side are Blair et al.; on the other are the Israelis, or at least most Israelis. (Where the government stands is not entirely clear, because the government has maintained some ambiguity, and wisely.)

For one side, a ceasefire is paramount — the cessation of the current violence is paramount. For the other, the destruction of Hamas — or at least the hobbling of it, so as to prevent violence in the future — is paramount. These two goals are not reconcilable: a ceasefire (which would spare Hamas) versus the end, or crippling, of Hamas.An elementary point, to be sure, but sometimes the elementary should be aired. As we learn in this report, “French teachers hurled shoes and other objects at police Monday to protest President Nicolas Sarkozy’s high school reforms, prompting police to respond with tear gas.” Hurling shoes, eh? Nice — just the sort of people you want teachin’ the young-uns. “British PM condemns prince’s racial slur,” said the headline (over this article).

The prince was Harry, and the slur was “Paki.” Let’s just say that slurs ain’t what they used to be. It is common (or used to be) in geopolitical talk to refer to the Pakistanis as “the Paks.” Vice President Cheney did this on television. What a difference a syllable makes, apparently: “Paks” versus “Pakis.” It reminds me of something that Rob Long once said (or was it Mark Steyn?). Suddenly, it became trendy in America to have a little Hitler mustache on the lower lip — below the lower lip. An inch or two above that: not so cool. What a difference an inch or two makes. I was amused by something the AP’s (notorious) Jennifer Loven wrote, in her article about Bush’s final press conference. She said, “The news conference, held in the White House’s press briefing room, comes as Bush has been granting a flurry of legacy-focused interviews, often with niche interviewers and news outlets as he seeks to shape the view of his presidency on his way out the door.”

So, my officemates and I are “niche interviewers,” and NR and NRO are “niche news outlets.” I’ll buy that. Reading that George Voinovich will retire from the Senate, I thought of a story Bill Buckley used to tell. Cardinal Segura, in Seville, was a severe type, who frowned on dancing and the like. After he died, a visitor asked a local, “How’s it going, now that the cardinal is gone?” Came the reply: “When Cardinal Segura left us, both he and we passed on to a better world.” I hope that Senator Voinovich enjoys his retirement.

Now available from National Review is Here, There & Everywhere: Collected Writings of Jay Nordlinger. It contains almost 100 pieces, on a great variety of topics. And it is just over 500 pages long. Mark Helprin, the novelist and analyst, says that reading these pieces is “like opening one present after another.” The book is $24.95, but is being offered through NRO for $21.95. If you’d like an inscription from the author, that’s free. To order the book, please go here.
So, that’s a book plug. And if you would like Impromptus fed by RSS — if you want an RSS feed for this column — go here. (It’s free, natch!)Care for a little music? To read my December “New York Chronicle,” in The New Criterion, go here. And to read January’s, go here. Performers discussed include Valery Gergiev, Richard Egarr, Alisa Weilerstein, Lorin Maazel, James Levine, Susan Graham, Daniel Barenboim, Piotr Anderszewski, and Chanticleer. For The New Criterion’s homepage, go here.Reader writes,

Jay, I’m driving home from playing golf around noon Saturday and I pull up to a traffic light. In front of me is a car with a bumper sticker: “One Nation, One People, Obama.” A chill ran down my spine. Can you guess why? Does that evoke something for you?
Yupperz. Another letter — this one from an Ivy League campus:
Mr. Nordlinger,I was talking to an undergraduate this evening who told me that he has an assignment for class to write an “op-ed piece” relating any World War II-related anniversary to modern times. Do you want to guess what he’s doing? He’s comparing the liberation of Auschwitz to the closing of Gitmo.

But of course. I’ll be surprised if they don’t put him on the faculty!Some columns ago, I had an item — a reader had sent it in — on a Mr. Dikshit, who was in trouble with the law. Another reader has written,
Jay,At least Anurag Dikshit can thank his lucky stars that his first name isn’t Prikshit, like the childhood buddy of an Indian friend of mine. That’s right, Prikshit Dikshit: one dude who won’t be emigrating to an English-speaking country anytime soon.

I have had a great many responses to a few recent columns: about Bush and Cheney; about Marilyn Horne; about Elliott Carter; and, above all, about the intrusion of partisan politics into nonpolitical spheres — “My Kingdom for a Safe Zone.” I hope to publish some of those responses in coming weeks. Then again, I still want to deal with mail concerning my Iraq journal of last October . . .And this would be a good time to issue one of my periodic apologies: I am dreadfully behind on my mail, and sorry for it.
In Sunday’s Philadelphia Inquirer, I had an op-ed piece on Bush — his basic decency and likability: here. I cited several incidents that I thought showed a characteristic Bush. I should have mentioned the shoe-throwing in Baghdad: his response to which was almost the definition of cool (in my opinion).

Ah, well: Can’t remember everything, I guess. But you can always write again!
I don’t believe I have ever quoted Hugh Hefner in this column, or anywhere else. Shall I end that way today? I ran across something amusing recently, and thought you might find it so too. Hefner, 42, meets Barbi Benton, 18. He asks her out. She says, “I’ve never gone out with anyone older than 24.” He says, “That’s okay, I haven’t either.”Oh, I can’t end with Hef — let’s end with a little language. Something language-related. Indeed, I think I’ve had this in Impromptus before. But the other day, I mentioned the word “stewardess” — as in, can’t say it, must say “flight attendant” instead. A man wrote, “My young daughter pointed out a while back that ‘stewardesses’ is the longest word she knows that can be typed entirely by the left hand. Do you know a longer one?” No, but that reminds me of my junior-high basketball coach, Ken Treaster: who pointed out that his last name was typed by the left hand alone.

On that non-Hefnerian note: See you.

Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Intolerent Perez Hilton Shows Us Why People Resent the Gay Agenda

If you happened to catch the Miss U.S.A. pageant, then you witnessed the most dumbest, irrelevant question anybody can ask a beauty show contestant. It had nothing to do with the spirit of the pageant and everything to do with advancing the gay agenda. What intolerant gays like Hilton don't get is that although they want you to think differently, they either really don't get that they are in the minority in their lifestyle and opinions-and I mean world-wide-or they're living in bizzaro world.

As you saw, Miss California, Carrie Prejean gave an honest, sincere answer to an incredibly irrelevant and obvious agenda-driven question by the queen of all nobodies." But, like all gay extremists, he didn't like the answer (that 95% of the planet agrees with) so he pouted and worse yet, threw an insulting and revealing tantrum on his video blog. If ya can't beat 'em, whine and bitch about it:

The worst answer in pageant history? Why? Because she doesn't agree with you? Because she has different morals and standards she lives by? Because she won't be indoctrinated by the intolerant gay agenda?

By the way, about his "She got booed. Never in the history of the pageant has anyone been booed," comment
Um, I don't know who...oops, I mean what he was smoking, but I heard more applause for her answer than boos. Come to think of it, were there even boos directed at her? If there were, it was no more than the three people that applauded Hilton's question.

Y'know, I'm not a gay-bashing bigot. I've known two homosexuals in my life. No, we weren't that close, but we were civil whenever we ended up hanging out with each other through mutual friends. One was for gay marriage (yes, it does go back farther than this decade) and (hold on to your socks) one wasn't. Imagine that, a homosexual against gay marriage. Perish the thought, huh? I have one bi-sexual female friend today. She knows of my thoughts on gay marriage. She doesn't like it, but she never blew up at me like this whiny little loser did to Prejean. Of course, she also said she hated conservatives when she first met me. Naturally, she couldn't tell me why. But regardless, she ultimately came to respect my views and me hers. We just differ in opinion and values, that's all.

Maybe Hilton, and other gay extremists like him can someday do the same.

Dennis Prager v.s. Perez Hilton

An interesting debate. I just want to know why I even should know who this Hilton is and why he has any influence on anybody? I'll just let you decide if the always excellent logic by Prager punks the emotional discharge (surprise!) by Hilton.

By the way, is it just a coincidence that two people named Hilton are celebrities for absolutely no reason?

Chavez and the Book

So President Obama met with his good buddy, Venezuelan dictator and all-round punk, Hugo Chavez. It's not surprising that Obama met with him, after all socialist minds think alike. But when they met, they were all smiles like they were old war buddies. But the most striking thing I noticed was the handshake. You must have noticed this. I guess the politically incorrect term would be the "bro handshake." You know what I mean. Teenagers and young adults do it all the time.

That in and of itself is not what perplexes me. It's that Obama seemed just a little bit too comfortable doing it. Like I said, it was like they've known each other for years. First he bows to the King of Saudi Arabia (something that no president of the United States has ever done) yeah, I know, what about Bush holding hands with him? Well for one thing (not that I liked it either) that was a custom of friendship and equality (I didn't agree with that either.) To bow to the leader of another nation may just seem like respect, but it's seen as Obama is the inferior one, a subordinate.

And now he's being chummy with a socialist dictator in acts that would make Sean Penn proud.
Speaking of which, didn't Penn's own good buddy, Mickey Rourke, say that not too long ago Penn was calling homosexuals the F-word in every other conversation? Now he supports gay rights and a guy that jails the homosexuals in his own country? Well, I guess he's consistent. Hypocritical, but consistent.

But even more outrageous is the gift from Chavez to Obama. The anointed one apparently (and to no surprise) accepted a book from Chavez that purports to describe just how "evil" and "imperialist" America (and Europe) has been to Venezuela over the centuries. That's right, the man who gave a bust of one of the greatest men of the 20th century back to leader of the country that gave it to him (the bust of Winston Churchill given to George W. Bush by Tony Blair) but accepts a book demeaning the country that he is the leader of. Some leader. I'm sure he'll enjoy it. Heck, Oprah may even put it in her book club.

By the way, why does Obama smile at dictators?

Witch Hunt!

It's on. President Obama, in yet another flip of his policies, has given the o.k. for U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder to start a witch hunt on, in the president's own words, "those who formulated the language" of the Bush administration's "interrogation memos."

Earlier in the week President Obama had stated that he wanted to "look forward and not backward" in his transition to president. Now, according to White House Press Secretary, Robert Gibbs (who makes Scott McClellan look like Tony Snow) the president is now "open to to prosecuting Bush administration officials who devised the legal authority for 'controversial' terror-suspect interrogations," that the White House says includes water-boarding.

Nevermind the fact that water-boarding is NOT torture (if it were, you would have to indict evey drill sargeant and commanding officer of every soldier at Guantanamo Bay-not to mention every soldier-that not only water-boarded terror suspects, but American soldiers themselves that went through the process themselves)

It does not leave any long-lasting physical after-affects, it does not cause pain (opponents of the tactic say it does leave pain-emotional or psychological pain, boo-freakin' hoo. So does my favourite sports team not winning the championship every year. Jeez, if you are a Detroit Lions fan and that were true, you'd be annually suicidal)

President Obama says that America has lost "our moral bearings" with use of the tactics. Hmm. I guess losing one's "moral bearings" includes getting results and saving lives.

This is just a plain ol' witch hunt, folks. Y'know, like what liberals have been decrying since the days of Joseph McCarthy? But now that the Messiah is president, all bets are off and hypocrisy reigns supreme.

But the difference between McCarthy and Obama is, at least McCarthy was front and center and led the charge himself. Yes, he ruined careers and lives of innocent people and I highly condemn that. However, and perhaps more importantly, he was right. There were KGB agents and communists in the State Department of the Truman administration. I know, "unsubstantiated claims," right? Really? Alger Hiss ring a bell? Obama wants Holder to get dirty for him. Yes, he is the Attorney General and he serves at the pleasure of the president, and obviously Obama isn't going to (nor does he have the time to) start the game himself, but he is placating to the far-left and his MoveOn.org/George Soros keepers.

This is the left's time. It's their chance at revenge for the "evil" George W. Bush and Dick Cheney "regime." It's also their chance to get revenge for the impeachment of Bill Clinton, which you know they've been chomping at the bit for 10 years now. However, since the dropping of the Clintons as their heroes, the MSM doesn't seem all that desperate to do anything for the "first black president." So, it's clearly Bush Derangement Syndrome run amok...still.

"The president had said earlier that he didn't want to see prosecutions of the CIA agents and interrogators who took part in water-boarding and other harsh interrogation tactics, so long as they acted within parameters spelled out by government superiors who held that such practices were legal at the time," said the article. But if that is true, who would Holder go after? I mean, if everyone involved was just following orders, who do you blame? Obviously, during any congressional investigation they're going to try and make it look that the orders came from the top, or at least one level from the top. That means they're ultimately going to try and prosecute Bush and/or Cheney. And you just know, that's what the Democrat-controlled Congress is salivating for, a chance at indicting the former president and vice-president on trumped-up charges of war crimes. Right now, congressional Democrats are losing sleep over this one, dreaming that they're going to be the one(s) that finally "got" Bush.

But, to the president's credit (and assuming he's sincere and won't flip on this too) he said that he "didn't want to see prosecutions of the CIA agents and interrogators who took part in water boarding and other harsh interrogation tactics, so long as they acted within parameters spelled out by government superiors who held that such practices were legal at the time."

And those "practices" were legal, because water-boarding as we know it today, is not torture. I'm sure by the end of the year, it will be defined as such and be done away with (and with it any chances of extracting information from suspected terrorists that would be vital to fighting the war on terror, or whatever they're calling it now. Actually, what are they calling it now?

By the way, do you realize this is the first time in the history of the presidency that a sitting administration has gone after the previous one for "crimes" of any description? Not even Nixon faced this kind of hatred. Maybe Ford did for pardoning him, but certainly not Nixon.
I think it may behoove the president to take a page from Ford's book and not try to be so divisive. Yeah, yeah; he claims to have nothing to do with it, saying that will "be more of a decision for the attorney general within the parameters of various laws and I don't want to prejudge that." In other words, he has judged it and wants retribution on behalf of his MoveOn masters. it's just that he doesn't want to get his own hands dirty (which will later be the libs excuse-that he, personally, didn't have anything to do with it)

You think this wasn't planned by Obama and his people before this report was released? You think he didn't get some information about it leaked to him? Please. If this isn't some diabolical plan to enshrine his legacy as a hero of the radical left, then what is it? Is it just the president laying down the law? Really? He wasn't (and continues to be) not too concerned about the rule of law when he was taking campaign contributions from Willian Ayres. Yes, him again. What did Gibbs say? That Obama "does not believe that people are above the rule of law?" Prove it. Start by charging some of your White House staff with tax evasion, for starters.

Now that there's a potential for a Republican "scandal," he's all over it. How do I know it was planned all along? Because he didn't have to make these findings public. He could have left it alone and moved on. Apparently he wants divisiveness in the country. If he doesn't think that's what will happen, or even the slight possibility of it, then he isn't as intelligent as everyone tells us he is and he has no business being leader of the free world. But, as I said, he does know what will happen. Or at least he thinks he does, because after all I've said here today, the simple fact is the Supreme Court will not allow this to go forward. As try as they might, this will be a near impossible case for Holder to prosecute because, quite simply there is no case.

It's just I'd wish they would stop all this the president "may" or "might" or "would" as if he hasn't contemplated any of this and doesn't have a horse in this race.

McCain to Face Worthy Opposition in 2010 GOP Primary

Arizona Senator and former Republican Presidential candidate, John McCain will face a serious and seriously-backed GOP opponent in the 2010 Arizona Senate race. His likely opponent is the founder of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, Chris Simcox.

Not only did McCain blow his chance at becoming president by being too "gentlemanly," he now may lose his Senate seat, come 2010 due to his long-standing stance on immigration and being, as some of his former supporters on the right have said, "a rino (Republican in name only) in sheep's clothing."

I can't say I feel bad for the "maverick." He blew it by not fighting back and lettingnthe MSM dance all over his face.

Sunday, April 19, 2009

US to Boycott United Nations Racism Meeting

Good for the president. This is the kind of thing I think we all can support him on (assuming this story is legit. It is from the Associated Press) While he defends Israel, Ahmedinewhackjob will be attending. Guess who's going to dominate the hate-filled, anti-Semitic discussions?

Why Am I Not Surprised?

President Obama reportedly sat through a 50-minute long anti-American speech (some would say diatribe-as this report from FOX does and I agree) condemning America, without defending her once. Does the fact that he was silent on the matter (not answering questions about it) means he was just being statesman-like, or does it mean he agrees with it?

I think you know how I feel about that. Since he told reporters and officials in Turkey that America "has been arrogant in the past," I'm inclined to think he does. Either that or when he was asked what he thought about the speech from Nicaraguan President, Daniel Ortega and answered "It was 50 minutes long. That's what I thought," he was covertly saying Ortega was a wind-bag. I'd like to think that was true, but I just don't.

Friday, April 17, 2009

Bush Interrogation Memos Released

So a federal court has released President Bush's interrogation memos in accordance with a lawsuit brought about by the ACLU.

First off, there is nothing new in this report, to the chagrin of the left-wing media. They gutted this story as much as it could be. And probably even more frustrating is the fact that President Obama will not pursue prosecution of anyone in the CIA or the Bush administration (as the far-left's heads collectively explode) Obama may have learned a little class and respect of the office from Bush afterall.

But, let me make this very clear: I don't care how Islamofascists were treated by their jailers at Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib, or elsewhere...I DON'T CARE!
Do you squeamish little libs (and anybody else for that matter) have any idea how our boys would be treated by them if they were to be captured in the theater of battle? I'll tell you how, they'd be decapitated with a rusty knife on video with four or five religious zealots in ski masks standing behind them, mocking them before they are killed in the most barbaric way possible. I can only imagine what would happen to our women in uniform.

Aww, so the poor animals (and that's exactly what they are) were treated bad. Who cares? In a society where innocent unborn children are murdered in the womb on a daily basis by the thousands, you want me to care about what happens to animals that rape, torture and murder not only our boys and girls, but innocent women and children, even their own? And these pictures that were released by some turncoat, were over a two day period. It was not over an extended period of time, like a week or a month as some have suggested. That's not to say it didn't happen more, but like I said, WHO CARES?

Oh, I know, "We're better than that. We're supposed to be the leaders and purveyors of decency in the world. We should lead by example." Blah. Blah. Blah.
Hey, war is Hell. As long as we're the last ones standing in the end, so be it.

Say what you will.

HuffPo's Bob Cesca is..Just..Out of It

This guy really is a tool. Oh wait, I take that back. Tools are useful.
In his column at the Huffington Post today, Bob Cesca, in all his delusions of grandeur seems to think that the "Tea Partiers" (aka people fed up with government over-spending that will put their children's children into hock) are a bunch of "right-wing extremists." I certainly can't blame him for thinking that way. I mean, did you see all those families of "extremists?" Did you happen to catch a glimpse of all those seven-year-old to 60-year-old "extremists?"

Hey Bob, what about gay rights activists, are they right-wing extremists? How about the blacks that *GULP* didn't vote for Obama, are they right-wing extremists? Is anybody that doesn't follow your re-written history and lefty propaganda a right-wing extremist?
Or are they just ordinary Americans standing up for what they believe in?

In a classic case of the pot calling the kettle black, Mr. Cesca is proudly denouncing the very same hypocritical stances that only five months ago were calling for the impeachment of President Bush because of any number of Republican doctrines or ideals. The war in Iraq, the Patriot Act and so on. I would mention immigration, but where do you think all the Democrats future constituents will come from? (after they ply them with liquor and false promises)

For starters, he says "One of the very bizarre accusations overheard at the tea bag protests (always with the hate, these lefties, especially against their fellow countrymen in stead of the real enemy) Wednesday was that President Obama was somehow a 'fascist." Well, when you attempt to allow your radical friends to go unnoticed with the help of your MSM enablers, and you yourself are kicking reporters off of airplanes because they dare ask a question you don't like, well that may be a little fascistic. As for the accusations of the term, I don't think Obama is a fascist (at least not a full-blown one-not yet, anyways) but he is certainly a Socialist, despite his efforts to "clarify" his remarks to reporters about it. In fact, he wanted to make that point so much, he had to call them back and reiterate his positions, just to be clear. Once again, needing a do-over to get his point across.

And just for the record, Mr Cesca, you can be both a fascist and a communist. It's not ideologically impossible. You have heard of Joseph Stalin, have you not? I mean, he is one of your heroes, isn't he? As for your swipe at the hosts of Fox and Friends, have you heard some of the tripe and fallacies spewing out of the mouths of not only your Vice-President, but your people like Kieth Olberloon, Rachael Madcow and the like? And if you want to compare brainless TV hosts, yeah, how about those bunch of hens on The View? Do you really think Joy Behar is a rocket scientist?

He also says, "I'm expecting too much logic and message coherence from people who spent all of Wednesday protesting against socialism and wealth redistribution while gathered in publicly funded -- dare I say "socialized" -- parks and town squares."

This is called a "swerve," folks. Cesca obviously can't justify or adhere to American citizens exorcising their right of freedom of speech and lawful assembly. But, just because a liberal government seizes the taxpayers hard-earned money to fund their pet projects, it doesn't mean the taxpayers wanted it. I'll bet that if you asked the people for their permission beforehand (and isn't that the way it's supposed to be?) over half would have said, "No, I don't want my tax dollars going to something I will not or may not use."

"I'm not convinced that tea baggers like Michelle Malkin understand that fascism is, in fact, a form of right wing extremism."
Of course you don't. You see, you have to actually know what fascism is yourself before you cut anybody else up about using the term. By the way, nice job of publicy using an oral sex reference in a opinion piece. That's class and professionalism for you.

Fascism: def. "A political theory advocating an authoritarian hierarchical government."
Does the term, "I won" mean anything to you? Does the fact that the president is trying to shut down a prominent private citizen like Rush Limbaugh have any bearing on your (limited) thought process? Do you even consider his statement about "manufacturing cars that are relatively cheap and environmentally-friendly" and "...one that everybody can afford" Does the term Volkswagen ring a bell? How about a chicken in every pot? Does that sound familiar? Hey, how about that ol' "share the wealth" thing? Damn those personal home recorders, huh?

Cesca also joyously labeled Michelle Malkin, Limbaugh and Glenn Beck as "the usual band of apoplectic brainiacs ."
I guess caring enough about the American public to dare to warn them about a possible economic fate is "apoplectic." There's a reason FOX News kills your MSNBC and CNN doppelgangers every single day, in every single segment according to the ratings, Mr. Cesca. Maybe I'll slowly explain to you how the ratings work sometime, so you and your buddies can at least have half a clue.

And, predictably, the gang who can't seem to decipher basic high school level social studies concepts, kneejerked into one of their paranoid tantrums -- insisting that the report was entirely about them.
Almost right away, the far-right blogs and FOX News Channel were set ablaze with reports that the Obama administration was targeting conservatives with a massive surveillance operation. But here's the thing: the DHS report wasn't about conservatives. The word "conservatives" doesn't appear anywhere in the report.

Of course not. The Obama administration would never have the kohonies to be that honest. But what do you and your liberal friends call conservatives every chance you get (including in this very article?) That's right, good for you. They're called "right-wing extremists". Every time you lefties open your collective mouths on any sort of position you disagree on with conservatives (which is to say everything) the inaccurate insults fly. They're not just wrong, mind you; or even bad, they're "evil right-wing extremists." Every time you libs hurl some undeserved and ultimately ludicris insult at the right, you try to make readers think it's a brand new type of bloodsport, and then, of course, the victim card is rolled out for all to see.

Onward. "Now, when this story first broke, I was at a bit of loss as to how to accurately interpret the right's wildly conspiratorial, victimized reaction. Either Malkin and Beck were just as confused and incoherent as always, and, in their loud noises anti-government rage, they were inadvertently coupling themselves with right wing extremists," Cesca said.

I won't even touch the "conspiratorial" comment, but as for the "loud noises anti-government rage" crap; I do believe that's all you lefties have been advocating and shouting about for the last eight years. No matter what Bush did to appease you, you turned on him like a hungry pitbull every single chance you got, heck you guys even made up a slew of charges. Remember "Rather Gate?" "Or they not-so-subtly admitted that there isn't much difference between a garden variety conservative, a garden variety wingnut and a garden variety right wing extremist -- that they're all basically militant racists who are plotting to blow up federal buildings. I don't know."

And you want to talk about victimization? Are you kidding me? I don't think there's enough room here on blogger to list even a third of how lefties use any event or position to rally the troops under the flag of "victimhood." Everybody from John Edwards (cheating on his cancer-stricken wife, then claiming "victim!") to Hillary Clinton and Barney Frank blaming the non-existent "vast right-wing conspiracy" or Republican "attack machine" for their malfeasance. Please.

Embellish much? Or is it just more lefty projection, I don't know which. By the way, what's with you libs and your dependency on Timothy McViegh as, apparently, your only Is that the only "right wing extremist" that you can up with that was actually guilty of domestic terror? It was over 14 years ago and he's still the only example you can use? Hmm, I notice you didn't mention William Ayres. Then again, since you guys tune out every time his name is brought up, I guess you probably don't even know who he is. The fact that you compared him to patriotic citizens who actually do love their country is irrisponsible, unprofessional and disgusting!

And this one's a doozie:
There's one thing we know for sure, however: they're definitely freaked out about the government's post-9/11 intelligence apparatus -- the very same bureaucracy they actively and vocally cheerled throughout the Bush years. Malkin, in particular, was one of the most outspoken and cheerleadery endorsements of allowing unchecked executive power via the vice president's office, the NSA, the CIA and the military, while encouraging these agencies to use any means necessary to smoke out the evildoers. This included illegal wiretapping, rendition, suspension of habeas rights and every awful provision found within the USA PATRIOT Act.

I don't know where to start on this balderdash. First off, there's nothing to be freaked out about since, as news reports say, "there's nothing new in this report" and "Obama will not seek criminal charges against anyone in the former administration over this "finding." Not that there was any danger of it anyway, because it was A) not "domestic spying" as you and your MSM cronies like to call it, because they're not "spying" on Americans, they're keeping tabs on calls to/from the Middle East that may have terrorist connections. And B) this old liberal claim that this was "illegal wire-tapping" was voted on and o.k'd by the Senate. Much like the power to go to war, the U.S. Senate gave President Bush the legal authority to do so, Mr. Sour Grapes. So you libs can stop that B.S. anytime now.

Rendition was implemented by Bill Clinton by the way. Another reason you should crack a history book or two. You mention suspension of "Habeas Rights." Is this the same "Habeas Rights" that your new president gave to non-U.S. citizens, that are enemy combatants caught in the field of battle trying to kill Americans? The same enemy combatants that will now, because of these rights, be tried in American courts of law? Seriously dude, get a grip!

And of course, the famous liberal race-card tactic:

That could be the clincher, though. The far-right outrage might have something to do with skin color.
In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center's Intelligence Project
reported that as many as 60 white-right-wing terrorist attacks were thwarted by law enforcement in the ten year span following the Oklahoma City bombing which, by the way, was also perpetrated by an American right wing extremist with boy-next-door white skin.

There's that McVeigh reference again. Wow, this guy is on a roll.

See? Nevermind the fact that the left always (14 years and counting) brings up Timothy McVeigh as their one lone "white-skinned terrorist" They also try to claim that he was a Christian, but real Christians (and real Muslims for that matter) don't blow up innocent women and children. So, nice try. You can cease that bologna anytime, too.

Then Cesca tries to quote a left-wing blogger, that this guy himself got from U.S. News and World Report (a notorius left-wing publication-Surprise!) that he thinks proves his point:

"The plots, all foiled by law enforcement, reportedly included violent plans by antigovernment militia groups, racist skinhead organizations, and Ku Klux Klan members to use various types of chemical bombs and other weapons."

Where in that paragraph does it mention "right-wing?" How does Cesca know what hate and terrorist group constitutes "right-wing?" How does the U.S. News and World Report know for that matter?

Oh yeah, did you notice how Cesca labeled web sites that expose The Fifth Column in American universities, terrorist fronts that pose as Islamic diversity sites as "wingnutty websites?" He calls them "an ongoing feargasm intended to incite more wars and cultural intolerance."
Or maybe they're for what we on the right call a reality check. Fear-mongering, hate towards Muslims. Yep. 'Cause it was a boyscout troop that flew planes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Oops. There goes another "right-wing extremist" mentioning 9/11 again. I know how you lefties would like to forget about that so you can concentrate on how evil conservatives are and how they want to destroy America. You see, when a terrorist attack happens again, it will be you lefties and haters of all liberty that will blame the Republicans for "forcing them to hate us," while the rest of the country says in unison, "The Democrats caused this due to their filibustering and softness on terror." It keeps getting repeated, because it's true. And you know it. You just disguise it as "hate" and "intolerance" to shield the Democrats' incompetence as a governing body.

And Cesca goes on about how Glenn Beck, Malkin and Limbaugh are all to blame for every ill in our society. Well, pretty much.

I could go on for hours exposing this guy's lunacy and total disregard of history and his own party's hypocrisy and double standard, but I'm tired and I still have to finish another post on another blog.

Did I mention this guy is a useless tool?


Hezbollah Feels Enabled

This is just what we need right now. Did you expect terrorist organizations to stop their evil deeds just when they feel they have carte blanche since President Obama insisted on meeting with any foreign leader with no preconditions?

In the rush to be loved, the left, as usual, will be responsible for millions of more deaths world-wide. All in the name of "hope and change."

Apparently Only Right-Wingers Are "Extremists"

Not Code Pink, not Jeremiah Wright, not Louis Farrakhan and the Black Panthers, not William Ayers, not even radical professors at liberal universities teaching kids bogus history and why they should hate their own country, but "groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration," are the ones to watch out for.

Although Homeland Security Secretary, Janet Napolitano defended the report issued by the DHS, she said "the definition of right-wing extremism that was included in a footnote should be changed." The report also insulted veterans by saying, "some military veterans could be susceptible to extremist recruiters or commit lone acts of violence."

How about gay rights activists that rushed churches after their disappointment of Proposition 8? What about people that want to take away other's Second Amendment rights, because those people "cling to religion and guns?" Or how about pro-death advocates that want to force doctors and nurses to perform abortions, despite their personal "feelings" on the matter. And we all know how the left is on "feelings."

Democrat Congresswoman Assails Tea Parties

Of course. And with it the inaccurate, but continually repeated line of "95% of Americans will receive tax cuts." Again, the total "95% of Americans" don't pay taxes, due to unemployment, disabilities, or just general tax loopholes.

Calling the estimated 250, 000 Americans who are standing up for their beliefs, morals and principles across the country "despicable" and "shameful" is in itself disgusting. Assuming that these people actually got their singles crossed or have been given false information (like the aforementioned 95% of Americans will get a tax cut) how can a politician call these people "disgusting" when they are standing up for not only their first amendment rights, but also their right to dissent.

I noticed none of these Democrat Obama shills were too worried about groups like Code Pink interrupting Republican speeches or hearings. Only when conservatives and/or Reublicans excorcise their right of free speech, it's unAmerican or unpatriotic. After all, it's "patriotic to pay more taxes," remember? That, and anytime a conservative speaks (when not being shouted down) it's okay to deride them, because it's only "right-wing hate speech." It's not conviction, it's not patriotic dissent-no, it's plain ol' Republican hate speech. It's also "common knowledge" that "everybody knows."

And what's with this sudden awareness/anger of FOX News being the ring-leader in all this? I don't recall anybody being all that concerned about MSNBC leading the charge to get Obama elected. I didn't see anybody throwing a fit when CBS's Harry Smith was proudly leading the chants of "Obama!" on the day of the election on the Early Show. But now that there's a conservative movement to which a quarter of a million people (and that's just the ones that went public) exorcise their rights as Americans, the left wants to shut them down with lame excuses and "phony outrage."

Shocking, huh?


So once again, it's a battle of the wills, not to mention rhetoric. This time (and at least the MSM is acknowledging it publicly this time) Republicans have a vast amount of public support on their side. Although just when the Republicans seem to have momentum on their side, some governor has to go and do this.

"Perry suggested Texans might at some point get so fed up they would want to secede from the union, though he said he sees no reason why Texas should do that."

What a buffoon. Why would he even contemplate saying anything remotely as foolish as that? Did the Alamo or the Civil War teach this man nothing? Or perhaps he attended a liberal public school where they don't actually teach real history.

In any event, the "Tea Parties" are making waves.

Thursday, April 16, 2009

White House Hides Jesus

In his first interview as president and repeated on his recent trip abroad, President Obama praised Islam and once again took a shot at former president, George W. Bush.
"I came to Turkey because I am deeply committed to rebuilding a relationship between the United States and the people of the Muslim world, one that is grounded in mutual interest and mutual respect."

Now, while in Georgetown, he made it a point to cover up the "monogram “IHS”--symbolizing the name of Jesus Christ—because it was inscribed on a pediment on the stage where President Obama spoke at the university on Tuesday," reported the CNSNews website.

This is just the first in "equality," "diversity," or better yet, compliance with being "respectful" to the religion of Islam. Of course it's respectful to Muslims to cover the founder of Christianity.
Gee, I wonder what would have happened if Obama requested any mosque to cover up or move any references to Mohammad?
Perhaps this? or this? Or even this? Oh, they're all the same result, aren't they?

This is just the beginning of the president's placating to the minority. Well actually his first interview as president was the beginning, but now I'm just going in circles.

I mean if the dude is willing to bow to the king of Saudi Arabia, what else will he do to tell the world, "Punk me!"

Careful Barry.
Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels. Mark 8:38

More Demands from the Illegals

MSM Lies About Tea Party Protests

Not that I'm surprised. This is what they do. The mainstream media (aka the Democrat Press) will not allow anything that shows (even the possible) Democrat hypocrisy-that includes the projection onto Republicans that they have mastered and that would expoe their "victimization" trump card. You know what I mean. Whenever a Republican is victimized, the Democrats, along with their media enablers, will attack the victim for their "phony outrage" and "callousness."

Well, this time, they're attacking Republican and conservative Americans as a whole by lying about the numbers of people involved at these protests, the number of people that have showed up to them and attempting to minimize the whole effort.

For instance, there are reports coming out of the Carolinas that say only 400 people showed up, when in reality there were closer to 2000. In Texas, reports say only "a handful of supporters" turned up near both Dallas and Houston, when in reality it was closer to 12, 000 to those that were actually there. Not only that, the MSM in all their righteousness think they can set the standard of conversation or worse, opinion.

One reporter from CNN, Susan Roesgen, stated, because she didn't get the usual liberal-induced, Obama-loving, sheepish, uninformed answer that she was looking for from a "tea party" crowd (who actually had to shout to her to "let him answer" when she tried to lead the conversation in another direction because the interviewee seemed to be more adept at history than her) that the situation wasn't "family-friendly" and that she couldn't hear herself. Funny, they don't seem to mind all noise when it's an Obama rally or speech. After not getting the answer she wanted because the crowd wouldn't bite on her "you're wrong and we're right" garbage, she "had to" conveniently send it back to the studio.

Anderson Cooper, not even trying to hide his bias, said after guest, David Gerger mentioned incredibly and inaccurately, the crowds "were searching for their voice," "It's hard to talk when you're tea-bagging." That's right, Mr. Take-Me-Serious-Because-I'm-a-Real-Journalist made a crude reference to a oral sexual act. Was he calling tens of thousands of Americans perverted sexual deviants? Or was it just a plain ol' off-the-cuff, crude joke? I'm betting on the latter, however is that a way for a "serious journalist" to act on national television?

Even CNN's Howard Kurtz commented on the Situation Room, "Much of the media seems to have chosen sides for 'tea day." That's the understatement of understatements. I'm surprised Kurtz gave even that away. Wolf Blitzer said, "many groups were small but the anger was large." And with that, he lied about the size of these rallies and at the same time regurgitated the "angry conservative" line. These media libs don't miss a beat when it comes to lying about, and attempting to discredit actual conservative/Republican accomplishments. And even if they do, it's more along the lines of, "But it doesn't really matter in the big picture" or "too little, too late" that type of thing.

But back to the main point. This story, from the Vancouver Sun up in British Columbia seemed to revel in their assumption that the crowds weren't there:

"Participants had hoped to rally hundreds of thousands of people to begin a grassroots movement that would force Obama to change government policy. But the turn-out was far from what was hoped for, with most rallies looking decidedly on the small side, especially compared to the 2006 immigrants rights rallies or the 2004 pro-choice march on Washington, both of which attracted millions."

The reference to the "immigrants rights rallies," is of course a media-created (lie) number inflated story with no mention that these were illegal immigrants. It was, in and of itself is a fraud because the story was debunked by right-wing news outlets (FOX News was not alone) and bloggers as media "number-jacking." Also, I never, not once, heard anybody involved in this movement (which you will never here the left call it) say they expected any certain amount of people to show up. Granted, they said they would like to get people involved "all across the country" but no concrete estimate of exactly how many was ever uttered on the air or in print.

When it comes to the opus that is the MSM, the beat goes on.

FYI: MSNBC has it's own poll on how should Obama be graded as president. Low and behold, 45% of pollsters gave him an "F," while 28% gave him an "A." A total of 27% gave him either a "B," a "C," or a "D."
This is from MSNBC's own website, no less.

Poor Barry.

Wednesday, April 15, 2009


Can anybody tell me they didn't see this coming?

They don't have anything to hide, so they kick out U.N. "weapons" inspectors. Sound familiar?
Do ya think this has anything to do with President Obama being soft with these guys? Me too.
He didn't really chastse Lil' Kim too much now did he? Niether did Hillary Clinton. After teh fact denouncements don't cut it.

Pirates Threaten U.S. Sailors

The pirates are start surging. There's going to be some BOOM BOOMS in the seas, me thinks.

Obama Maintains Bush's "Eavesdropping" Program

Funny, but I thought this was called "spying on Americans" by Bush's detractors when W. was in office. Strangely, I think they'll warm to it now, even though, from the beginning, the government could only listen to calls that could have a potential terror link, and even then they could only listen for 10 minutes at a time if there was no indication of any terror-related conversations. They weren't listening in illegally to all American-Muslims, and they certainly listening to the average Susie Homemaker or Larry Lunchpail talk about recipes and football.

It's funny how getting a look at those security reports could change a pacifists mind.

President Vows to Revamp Tax System

I don't how to feel about this.
In some aspects, I agree with the president, in what he says. He makes sense. But as usual, he was vague and I know to guard against what this man says and what he and his party really want to accomplish by using the recession to implement, whether you like the term or not, socialistic programs.

The tax system has to be overhauled, that's a given. But at what price? Will, like Secretary of State Clinton indicated about her plans for health care during the Democratic Presidential primaries, President Obama bankrupt the Treasury like most of the critics of the president's economic policies, myself included have railed against?

Or, like he says, will he rebuild the system upon the same "rock " that America's forefathers forged? One that has done America fine for the last 250 years, but he pretty much called a swamp (o.k, he used the word, "sand") the question is, on what financial and sociological foundation will that "rock" be re-built? Will it be in the mold of Jefferson and Adams, or of Chavez and Castro?

Tea Parties Gather Nation-Wide

Other than the slightly slanted coverage of my CNN source, how much will the MSM cover?

Monday, April 13, 2009

Happy Easter!

His Love
God sent His Son to take the punishment
For all the thoughtless, sinful things we do;
Jesus gave his life because He loves us;
His love is boundless, sweet, forever true.
On Easter morn He showed He is our Savior;
His resurrection proves He is our Lord.
That is why we tell you, "Happy Easter!"
He secured our heavenly reward!
By Joanna Fuchs

Captain Freed, Pirates killed

Head shots all...the...way.
However, "Other pirates vow to retaliate after daring high-seas rescue by Navy SEALs."

People are gonna die in the high seas this summer.

Saturday, April 11, 2009

Pirates Take Another One

Yo-ho-ho and a bottle of rum. Something has to do be done with these guys. I mean besides useless negotiations, that will do nothing to suppress the empowerment that these pirates are generating. Or should I say being given.

Zo Rules!

Pay particular attention to the Obama/Hitler parallels.

What? You say he can't say those things? What are you, a racist?
Other than one compliment on my presentation (and probably three too many disclaimers) I'm probably going to be labeled a Nazi for pointing this out again. Pretty ironic seeing that Zo and my parallels are eluding to not Obama being a Nazi, but that he comes pretty damn close (if not dead-on) to Hitler's execution of his doctrine.

Andrew Klavan on the Culture

It's just that simple. Mention a Democrats faults and or lies...SHUT UP!
Talk about the inexperience and radical associations of a Democrat president...SHUT UP!
Point out the bias of the mainstream media...SHUT UP!
Bring up anything that that could conceivably embarrass or expose a Democrat or a left-wing media member...SHUT UP!


Bush Settles in Texas

Former president, and now private citizen, George W. Bush has quietly, yet contently started his life after the presidency with his wife, Laura in near Dallas, Texas.

He apparently didn't talk too much about his time in Washington until later in the evening at the dinner party held by neighbors.
But, when he did, he told of an interesting story concerning an incident when he went to Romania in 2002.

"Not until late in the dinner party did the former president speak in any depth about his two terms in the White House. He told one of his favorite stories, about a trip to Bucharest, Romania, in 2002. More than 200,000 people had come to hear him speak in a town square, he said. The sky turned dark. A cold rain fell. The Romanian president introduced him and -- look at that! A huge rainbow emerged on the horizon, and the Romanians burst into applause.
"Magical," Bush said. "

Hmm. Maybe it was W. that was "The One," all along.
You notice how he waited until he was no longer president to relate this story. As usual, trying to be classy and not garner any extra attention to himself that was un-needed. Not like a certain man in the White House today.

Remember "We are the ones you've been waiting for?" Yeah, he doesn' t think he's the be all and end all. It's not like he's treated like a rock star or the Messiah, or anything.

To prove that, he told a crowd last month while on a speaking engagement in Calgary, Alberta; that he wouldn't take the low road as Presidents Obama and Jimmy Carter have done.
"Bush rarely talks about his successor and he vows to support him. At his luncheon speech in Calgary, the former president said: 'I'm not going to spend my time criticizing [Obama]. There are plenty of critics in the arena. He deserves my silence."

And his advice on making important decisions?
"You make your decisions based on principles, he said. And you never worry about popularity or polls."

Like I said, classy.

Friday, April 10, 2009

Being Good Friday...

I'd thought I should post something that is "holy," yet stays in contrast with this blog theme, so I'll link you to NewsBusters for a story about the past and *present* liberal objectives to Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ.

You know, since then, has Hollywood made any Christian-themed movie? The Nativity Story, released in 2006, was an independent film, I believe. It would have to be, wouldn't it?

NYT At It Again

Leave it to the Traitor Times to yet again give more empowerment to the enemy.
The old girl sure ain't what she used to be.

I'm too tired and deflated by these guys today to even comment.

What We Missed in Europe

First Verse of the Bible...Kinda Cool

This is actually pretty neat. Moreover, it's my duty as a Christian (how good a one is arguable) to spread the word, isn't it?

Like a commenter said, "...the beginning was really great, I think they kinda took the seven thing a bit too far though."

Exactly. They may have been reaching with some the ways they came up with the logistical seven.

And This is Just Creepy

This is just going to add to the "Obama is the Antichrist" pile and I'll undoubtedly be labeled as a FEAR MONGER, but this is just too creepy (although not unexpected) and entertaining enough (I thought of posting it on another blog) to warrant it.

*As I was typing this, I had to go and edit the HTML and I saw the video again. When I heard the backward speech of President Obama again, it sent a shiver up my neck.
Of course, not to be confused with a "loving" tingle up the leg.

And just for more f-u-n:

Look, you can say and comment what you want, this is just eerie. I've heard this stuff before from different people like Bill Clinton, when he was talking about how "we can all get along," blah blah blah, apparently while a buxom reporter was in the front row and in reverse speech, he said something like (I'm paraphrasing) "Nice cans!"

And don't you lefties out there accuse me of "Oh, there he goes, calling Obama the Antichrist!"
I mean, like he said at the end of the video, you guys did this to Bush like, six times a day.
So relax.
But, uh, have you seen this? Or this? Or any of these 892, 000 pages?
Yeah. I'll admit (and I hope he's embellishing on these "visions") the "IS Obama guy" is a little out there.


More on reverse speech...
Yeah, I know you could have done that yourself.

Thursday, April 09, 2009

Obama Salutes the Troops

He spoke to them like they deserved and made it o.k. to like the soldiers again. The wrong man to speak to them, but a fine job, none the less; although he did turn it into an obvious sound bite for his agenda, instead of just congratulating and complimenting those in uniform.

And he also promised to take care of them.

Kudos to the president for the first and I hope he's serious about the second.

The veterans also appreciated his surprise visit.

Obama to Push Immigration Bill

I don't know what any president is supposed to do about immigration. There are what, like 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S.? Reagan gave amnesty, Clinton did bubkis, and Bush was busy screaming at Syria about their borders (not that he shouldn't have) when the damn was leaking in his own back yard. So, whaddya do?
But if he does something stupid, I'll still be on him.

The President is starting his approach.

Pirates Strike Again

Palin Backs Missle Defense

Governor Sarah Palin stresses the need for a "missile defense network."

Well, with the rockets North Korea has been launching lately, I don't think they're quite in the game yet, but they will be; just the fact that they're publicly showing their wares is disconcerting.
It's Iran, mostly, that I worry about. But isn't this, with the obvious crusades by these rouge nations to not only acquire these weapons, but to use them as Ahmadinejad already said he would-and recommended that others do the same, just common sense to protect the nation in the nuclear age?

The scary thing is, these guys will get these weapons and they will develop rockets that can reach the continental United States, unless something is done if and when diplomacy fails.

Palin Likes Murkowski for 2010

Alaskan Governor, Sarah Palin is reported to have decided not to run for the U.S. Senate, as she wishes to focus on her governing duties and prepare for the 2010 elections. She has chosen to endorse Sen. Lisa Murkowski.

A good move. Why fix what ain't broke? She has a good record and good approval numbers. Right now she has options galore. She can run for Governor again and assuming she wins, she can then parlay that into more stuffing for her presidential resume. Then again, she had more executive experience than Obama, Biden and McCain combined and that didn't help her as it should have.

H/T to Adrienne at Sarah Palin 2012
(Good job of keeping an eye on that ADN)

Tuesday, April 07, 2009

The 1980 Republican National Convention

I can't believe I didn't find this before. Watch the elegance, the demeanor, the seriousness, the truth. Man, we need a man like this again. Unfornately, us conservatives know that's like expecting another Lincoln. Unlike liberals, we don't compare every single new guy with our heroes from day one. We don't because there's only one every 20 or so years. I'm still waiting.

More From Zo

Yes, I know who he is now. And did I mention he should have been at CPAC? He was.
Gotta love this guy. All hail Zo.

If he keeps making these videos, I'll keep posting them.

North Korea Breaks U.N. Resolution and Launches Disputed Rocket

Was there any doubt?

An interesting comment left behind by administrator, Amy Proctor, on her Bottom Line Up Front site:

"North Korea routinely kidnaps South Koreans, Japanese, has a terrible sex industry, its people are starving and childing dying in the streets from malnutrition. This is not an exaggeration. No one wants to address these issues because who wants to go through what George W. Bush went through the last 8 years? No one wants to man up and facilitate world peace because its easier to talk about it than actually do it."

That's it in a nutshell.

Yet Another Obama Gaffe Ignored by the MSM

President Bush made yet another idiotic gaffe yesterday when he said that in a country that speaks German, he couldn't come up with the Austrian phrase for "wheeling and dealing."

Oh wait. It wasn't Bush, it was President Obama. Silly me.
In case you missed it:

At a news conference afterward, Obama said his debut on the international stage had convinced him that “political interaction in Europe is not that different from the United States Senate,” where he served before entering the White House.
“There’s a lot of -- I don’t know what the term is in Austrian -- wheeling and dealing, and people are pursuing their interests, and everybody has their own particular issues and their own particular politics,” he said in response to an Austrian reporter’s question.

It was a natural mistake right? I mean President Obama couldn't possibly be that stupid, right? Everybody knows that they speak German in Austria (also Slovene, Croatian and Hungarian) We all know there's only one man that could have possibly made that kind of goof.
It would seem so, because the MSM isn't telling anyone about this.
Gee, what a shock.

Yeah, yeah. I know there's a lot more to this story. Actually Obama was there trying to scrounge up support for (formally) the War on Terror. He was there to fix the rift happening in NATO. Credit given where credit is due. But where is Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews on this one. Ignoring it? Naturally.

Well, He Tried

I'll give him credit for that much. But as always, no matter who's in charge, those sheepish Europeans would have none of it. Remember folks, contrary to popular (and misguided) belief, President Bush at least had the ears of the allies after 9/11, not to mention their (albeit brief) accord with the former president. Obama, as it turns out, doesn't seem to have that type of influence. Funny, seeing how he's the The One and all.

Another Assination Plot Against the President

Another foiled assassination plot on the life of President Obama was reported Tuesday. Turkish police arrested a man, who claim are there are at least two other conspirators.

The Jerusalem Post reports in its lead,
"The Secret Service in Washington said Monday night that Turkish National Police arrested the man last Friday in Istanbul. Secret Service spokesman Ed Donovan said the president was never in any immediate danger, as Obama arrived in Turkey on Sunday, two days after the man's arrest.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this is the third plot to be broken up. If you remember, there were the three cowardly white supremacists back in August of last year, although the charges against them were dropped (!?)

Then there were two more supremacists back in October that wanted to do the President in while wearing white tuxedos.

I'm afraid this won't be the last.

FOX News Cans Columnist for Reviewing Pirated Movie

Is it fodder for FOX News haters or Rupert Murdoch's transparency?

Probably a little of both. Although I can't see how this is Murdoch's fault. I'm sure the folks at MoveOn.org will find a way to tho. It was an illegal act, nonetheless; even if it was "after the fact."

See. I post about the indiscretions of FOX. Too bad it's not about some Rupert Murdoch sex scandal or something, eh libs?

Obama Wants Control of Banks

Plain and simple. Why else would he refuse $340 million of TARP payback money. Well, it's kind of like a landlord who wants the undesirable out of his building. You just simply refuse his rent money. You want to keep control of who you rent to. The same thing here, President Obama wants to maintain control of the banks, so, he refuses any attempt at payback. WSJ's Stuart Varney also seems to think so. It was the first thing that entered my head when I heard about it.

So what's his excuse? Power, baby. Pure, unadulterated power.

But...I Thought Everyone Loved "The One"

Apparently not. He is supposed to be the Great One (even bigger than Wayne Gretzky) the bringing together of all religions, creeds, and color. He's the man that we're all supposed to love and blindly follow.

I guess not. Now, this really isn't all that big of a deal, considering. The numbers between all of these presidents within the parameters of this comparison are not all together that different. It's just that all the Libs and their MSM cohorts tried to make everyone believe (when I say everyone, I'm of course talking about the naive sheep that thought he was the answer to their prayers-like he even said himself, in certain terms) that he was indeed the second coming.

Is it a surprise then, when his numbers turn out to be not that astronomical from inaguration to less than his first 100 days? Well, they are if you live in Obamaland.

Stolen Cessna Lands in Missouri

A cessna stolen out of Thunder Bay, Ontario and escorted by two F-16 fighter jets shortly after it crossed the Canada-U.S. border landed on a Missouri highway Monday. The pilot, Yavuz Berke, a 31-year-old naturalized Canadian citizen, born in Turkey, then tried to escape authorities on foot, but was quickly apprehended.

The story here.

I was listening to Hugh Hewitt when this story broke and thought for sure there was going to be a shootdown, especially when Berke ignored repeated attempts by the F-16 pilots to establish communications.
The Canadian press also has the story.

I thought for sure we had another Frank Corder situation on our hands, although I knew there was no way in Hell this guy going was to get even remotely that far.

Saturday, April 04, 2009

Why the Left Hates Palin

Leave it to the left to hate anybody without even knowing who they are or what they stand for. As long as their liberal friends and MSM seers says "hate," they say "how much?"
You know how every liberal that hasn't read any of Ann Coulter's books say she's evil. How about those who have never listened to Rush Limbaugh say that they can't stand him. The same with Bill O'Reilly.

"Why They Hate Sarah Palin So Much"
via Ace of Spades

Another take (off of a link from Ace) is from House of Eratosthenes. This one is a great opinion piece.
And finally, some power to the truth from Ann Coulter.
So, Bush was secretive, manipulitive and a shredder of the Constitution? Check out how the Annointed One is making sure everyone know "he won." From kicking reporters off of airplanes that dare question him, to now "keeping score" with any Democrat that doesn't fall wholeheartedly inline with his socialistic policies and ideas.

Isn't this guy the epitome of "change?"
Well he did "change" one thing, he sure has the MSM in his back pocket and has actually conned people into not questioning anything he does through the threat of "executive privilege."

If only W. had it this good.

Charges Dropped Against Stevens

Via Squarespace.com

The Department of Justice dropped its case against former Republican Alaska senator Ted Stevens, who was convicted in a corruption case during the presidential election. The Justice Dept. dismissed the guilty verdict vindicating Stevens based on FBI and prosecutorial misconduct aimed at Stevens. The judge in the case called the prosecuting lawyers’ behavior “outrageous” and held them in contempt of court.

Friday, April 03, 2009

Palin Speaks Out on Stimulus Refusal

“Shovel ready or digging a hole?”
By Gov. Sarah Palin
March 27, 2009

Some question my decision to accept job-ready stimulus funds, while leaving on the table for discussion other funds that grow government. Washington dollars are tempting, but we must consider whether they create sustainability, help develop our resources, reduce dependency on Washington, and all without mortgaging our kids’ futures.Under federal law, I must certify that every stimulus dollar will create new jobs and stimulate the economy. I take that charge seriously.

Accordingly, I’ve requested $514.4 million for capital projects that legitimately create new private sector jobs. Shovel-ready projects are certifiable because they put people to work and grow Alaska’s private-sector economy.Unfortunately, a disproportionate percentage of the federal package available to Alaska would increase government operations. It’s a stretch to certify that more spending on more bureaucracy actually grows an economy.

When stimulus money runs out in two years, who will pay for the expanded government programs, when Alaska currently has a budget shortfall of over a billion dollars? My administration will not willingly and knowingly dig a hole for Alaskans to fill under this enormous, debt-ridden, Washington spending plan. That's why public discussion on budget increases must happen through open, transparent legislative hearings so everyone is aware of the cost.I am deeply committed to quality public education, so I appreciate questions concerning my $20 million dollar request for certifiable funds. Regarding other available funds, I have sought public discussion on school district spending plans.

Alaska’s children are my priority, as proven by my unprecedented increases to K-12 funding, including intensive needs programs, which we currently fund at historic levels. I moved the education discussion to the legislative arena because the public, lawmakers, and our schools must consider what will happen in 24 months. The districts should present spending plans that don’t dig huge fiscal holes when temporary federal funds disappear. Will they wisely and prudently fund training for existing positions, or just create new positions, leaving Alaskans to foot the increased bills? When one-time funding ends, will they lay-off all those new teachers?

Are Alaskans willing to shoulder the expanding programs in the education bucket, including questionable priorities, like proposed increases to the National Endowment for the Arts? Alaskans must have confidence the additional funds will produce actual results for our children and not simply increase bureaucracy. Remember, these dollars aren’t “replacement dollars,” they are “additional dollars,” and obviously increase budgets. I’m approaching federal funds and mandates with caution, but won’t stand in the way of organizations or communities applying to the feds for funding their own expansions.Some, enticed with as much Washington money as possible, assume this is free money. It is not. America is $11 trillion in debt. They also may fail to consider the level of federal intrusion.

For example, Alaska’s communities would have to adopt building energy codes that compliment the most recent International Codes. These standards should be locally determined, not federally mandated. And, if we take additional unemployment compensation funds, Alaska would have to extend eligibility guidelines. This federal involvement locks us into government dependency for longer periods.
Alaskans must read the fine print on these federal mandates, because certain allocations also require state-matching funds.When Alaska was granted statehood, it was with the expectation that our independent, innovative spirit and rich resources would largely sustain us, rather than depending on federal government. Creating more dependence on Washington steers us away from Alaska’s magnificent potential and destiny, and that, to me, is a problem.My job is to help Alaskans count the cost for the long term, not sell our birthright for short-term gain.

Alaskans must acknowledge that if we dig a fiscal hole, it will be filled by our families and businesses. Reliance on Washington is not our only option. We could exercise fiscal responsibility and prudent planning, develop our resources, energize Alaskans, and revitalize our spirit. We are up to the challenge. This is the best lesson we can teach our children.

A very appreciative H/T to Adrienne at Sarah Palin 2012
  • /* Profile ----------------------------------------------- */ #profile-container { margin:0 0 1.5em; border-bottom:1px dotted #444; padding-bottom:1.5em; } .profile-datablock {