Raging Right Wing Republican

For those of us who are politically informed, and therefore Republican.

Tuesday, November 30, 2004

Canadian Moonbats Converge As Bush Arrives

Considering that the 'peaceful' Canadian protesters have been threatening Bush with violence, it's not surprising to see them show up again. Hot on the heels to Bush's visit to Canada, the half-bathed professional protesters have come out in revolutionary force to denounce Herr Bush's revolting presence on Canadian soil. Or at least that's what they want to believe. Early anti-Bush demos fizzle in Canada.
OTTAWA (AFP) - Hopes for early mass protests in the streets of Ottawa on the eve of Tuesday's visit by US President George W. Bush (news - web sites) fizzled out, as journalists outnumbered demonstrators.

A loose coalition of groups opposed to just about everything Bush supports had promised two demonstrations hours before Bush was due to jet into Ottawa Tuesday aboard Air Force One.

The first demonstration -- of Palestinians and sympathisers of the Palestinian cause opposed to Washington's support of Israel -- attracted less than 40 demonstrators.

According to a quick head count by journalists, the protest attracted 39 demonstrators, 42 journalists and television crew members and three police officers.
Nothing is more entertaining than watching idiots embarass themselves. My question is: Why is the media even covering this non-story? There's more reporters there than there are protesters!

Do these people even know what they're protesting, anyway? Do they know any of Bush's actual positions aside from the fact that he's an oil hungering warmongering tyrant? Judging from the various posters, I wouldn't bet on it.
A second, ostensibly larger, demonstration scheduled for the midst of the evening rush hour -- was called by a group calling itself Students Against Bush.

Nobody turned up. Further protests however were expected on Tuesday.

Efforts to contact protest organizers were unsuccessful, with the phone numbers listed by organizers remaining unanswered.

Unsurprisingly, Parrish, most likely having nothing to do (how different is that from the other protesters?) after being booted out of the Liberal party, is speaking as well. These guys are in opposition to everything Bush supports. Everthing. Tax cuts. The war on terrorism. Capitalism. Maybe somebody should let them in on the big secret that Bush supports breathing air.

Later in the day, the size of the protest significantly increased, of course, giving one brave soul the opportunity to venture into the fracas to take photos for the perusal of the morbidly curious. And then there's the throng of protesters swarming around Parliament Hill.

Not all Canadians were involved were nuts, though. Elsewhere in Ottawa, a smaller entourage of Canadians waving Canadian and American flags side by side welcomed Bush as he passed through.

The U.S. president also made a tongue-in-cheek reference to the supporters he saw among the protesters as his motorcade drove through Ottawa. "I'd like to thank the Canadian people who came out to wave, with all five fingers, for their hospitality," he said.

Annan, Clueless As Usual

Ah, this one was too much fun to skip over.
Annan 'surprised' at son's link to oil-for-food scandal

By Anne Penketh Diplomatic Editor

30 November 2004
Let us first take note that this is one of the very rare occurences of correct usage of sneer quotes by the mainstream media.
The United Nations has revealed that the son of the secretary general, Kofi Annan, worked for a company being investigated in the Iraqi oil-for-food scandal for four years longer than he first admitted.
...In other words, from the years 1999 to 2003, one might usefully add.
Mr Annan said last night he was "very disappointed and surprised" that his son Kojo had not told him the full story of his links to Cotecna in Geneva.
Ah, try to pull another one on us. So we're to believe that you're own son worked for four years in one of the biggest scams perpetrated under your own cosmically inept, bumbling bureaucracy and you didn't know? For some reason, I'm unconvinced.

Monday, November 29, 2004

Turfing Parrish

Quote of the Day

H. Jackson Brown, Jr.:
"Our character is what we do when we think no one is looking."

Friday, November 26, 2004

Trouble in the Uke'

Disputed vote pushes Ukraine towards strife.
KIEV — Ukraine moved one step closer to civil conflict yesterday when election authorities declared Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych the nation's next president after fraud-tainted elections that triggered four straight days of massive anti-government protests.

Four of the 15 members of the nation's Central Election Commission dissented from the decision. Appearing buoyant before a crowd of more than 200,000 supporters, opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko, who had declared himself the winner one day earlier, called for a general strike and said the decision freed the opposition "to put the nation on the street in an open struggle."

Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said in Washington that the United States did not consider the election legitimate. "We cannot accept this result as legitimate because it does not meet international standards and because there has not been an investigation of the numerous and credible reports of fraud and abuse," Mr. Powell said. The White House had urged Ukrainian authorities not to validate the election results.
The Ukranian Supreme Court recently declared that no winner for the election shall be declared until it has been given time to consider the appeal filed on behalf of Yushchenko.

Bush Refuses To Address Canadian Parliament

Are all of Canada's elected officials 12, or what? There's no law that demands you like or respect anyone, but what kind of a jackass would invite a person to speak just so you can yell at him and then act insulted when he says "No"? Dubya to avoid heckling.
WASHINGTON -- President George W. Bush will avoid a potentially hostile reception in Parliament and travel to Halifax next week after his first official trip to Ottawa, White House sources said yesterday. Bush's side trip to thank Canadians who helped out after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks will come after a working visit Tuesday with Prime Minister Paul Martin and a dinner reception with hundreds of prominent Canadians.

American officials involved in planning the trip were worried about a cranky audience on Parliament Hill, sources said.

"We didn't see the need and, frankly, we didn't want to be booed. There are other, better venues," said one U.S. official.

Last week, the White House brushed off the latest anti-American outburst of MP Carolyn Parrish, who appeared on a comedy show stomping on a Bush doll before Martin turfed her from the Liberal caucus.


Her antics didn't directly contribute to the decision to avoid Parliament, sources said.

But Bush wanted to avoid another embarrassing incident like the one in Australia last year, when he was shouted down by Green party senators while trying to address the parliament in the capital, Canberra.

And U.S. officials noted during planning discussions that Ronald Reagan was heckled by New Democrats opposed to his missile defence scheme during that president's 1987 state visit to Canada.

Bush will instead hold a joint news conference with Martin after lunching with him. He'll also offer a toast that night at a gala dinner held at the Museum of Civilization.

Autorantic Virtual Moonbat

This is a work of genius. Finally, the reasoning processes of lefty Mooreons has been reproduced. BEHOLD: The Autorantic Virtual Moonbat!

Go into the 'Options' to change it's temperment and personality.

Winning the War

Looks like Zarqawi is feeling the heat after Fallujah:
Islamic sources said that for the first time in more than a year the Tawhid and Jihad group led by Al Zarqawi appears to have lost control over many of its insurgents in the Sunni Triangle.

The sources said Iraqi and U.S. assaults on major insurgency strongholds in such cities as Baghdad, Fallujah, Mosul, Ramadi and Samara have resulted in heavy insurgency casualties and a break in the command and control structure.
Once again proof that the way to defeat the terrorists is to defeat the terrorists.
"How long will you continue to abandon the nation to the tyrants of the east and of the west, who are inflicting the worst suffering, cutting the throats of the holy warriors, the best children of the nation, and taking its riches?"
Is that irony?

Bin Laden "Amazed" At US Defiance

This is a great piece on the October 29th video threat. Apparently we were all so busy analyzing the political ramifications of it that we failed to notice what he was actually saying.

Turns out he's in disbelief that we are actually opposing him - that we didn't simply roll over and die:
''This is the message which I sought to communicate to you in word and deed, repeatedly, for years before September 11th,'' the fugitive al-Qaida leader said in a videotape aired around the world Oct. 29. ''But I am amazed at you. Even though we are in the fourth year after the events of September 11th . . . the reasons are still there for a repeat of what occurred.''

Eight years after issuing a written declaration of war against the United States, the theme of bin Laden's speech was disbelief that he had failed to make his point with the American people, even after the deaths of nearly 3,000 people on U.S. soil and a succession of bombings [and other terrorist acts.]
How about we provide him with more of such disbelief?


Brilliant. More people need to get together and work on art like this. Try zooming in and out...

It looks rather flat, but the detail in each area is impressive.

Corruption as a Way of Life

At the UN:
Even the much praised UN technical agencies, such as those dealing with refugees, are bastions of waste and corruption. No need here to discuss the disaster that is called UNRWA and what it has done to set back peace in the Middle East for nearly 55 years, all the while providing lucrative employment for generations of UN bureaucrats. The much-ballyhooed UN Development Programme (Note: Although the USA pays the lion's share, the UN uses British spellings) likewise is hugely expensive, over-staffed, painfully slow in delivering meaningful assistance, and rife with anti-Americanism. These programs [or, if you prefer, programmes] generate a blizzard of statistics showing that everything, everywhere is getting worse all the time, and desperately requiring more money for more UN programs and agencies.

The American taxpayer is getting ripped off in a big way by the UN. The "need" to play the UN's political games damages the US ability to act forcefully in its own interests. If the UN wants to stay in New York and frequent the bad restaurants and bars that have sprung up around UN HQS, that's fine -- but not with US tax money.

It's time for the US and other serious countries (e.g., Australia, Israel) to get out of the UN.
I'm certainly in favor of ejecting ourselves from the putrid swamp the UN has become, though I think that we should entertain the idea of staying, only to prevent the less desirable elements within the organization from solidifying their control. Either way, cutting back the amount of money we throw away by wasting it on the UN is definitely in order.

Thursday, November 25, 2004

Quote of the Day

Thomas Jefferson:
"The happiest moments of my life have been the few which I have past at home in the bosom of my family."

Happy Thanksgiving

I'll be spending time with relatives for most of the day. I just wish every store within a ten mile radius of my house didn't close up shop for the day. I've got my eye on seeing a few movies...

Enjoy the break, and go eat!


(Cartoon courtesy of Cox and Forkum.)

Enter the Stalinists

I've often joked about this, but leave it to California to come up with something ridiculous like this - a Californian school district banned one of it's teachers from teaching his students about various historical materials - like the Declaration of Independence. Why? Because they mentioned "God", of course. Clearly, the Founders were in violation of the document they wrote. Declaration of Independence banned at Californian school.
Williams asserts in the lawsuit that since May he has been required to submit all of his lesson plans and supplemental handouts to Vidmar for approval, and that the principal will not permit him to use any that contain references to God or Christianity.

Among the materials she has rejected, according to Williams, are excerpts from the Declaration of Independence, George Washington's journal, John Adams' diary, Samuel Adams' "The Rights of the Colonists" and William Penn's "The Frame of Government of Pennsylvania."

"He hands out a lot of material and perhaps 5 to 10 percent refers to God and Christianity because that's what the founders wrote," said Thompson, a lawyer for the Alliance Defense Fund, which advocates for religious freedom. "The principal seems to be systematically censoring material that refers to Christianity and it is pure discrimination."
Incidentally, this has occured around the same time as another incident involving those who are so up-in-arms over the supposed fundamentalist surge which Bush rode to victory that they are rewriting the history around Thanksgiving to purge out any mention of God. The teacher's reasoning:
"We teach about Thanksgiving from a purely historical perspective, not from a religious perspective," said Charles Ridgell, St. Mary's County Public Schools curriculum and instruction director.
And George Washington's view on the matter:
"It is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favor."
So who exactly is teaching history here?

The question isn't about whether or not God is taught in schools, or separation of church and state, but historical accuracy. This kind of historical revisionism does not only violate the purpose of teaching but also seldom tends to stay restricted to one area once unleashed.

Tuesday, November 23, 2004

Of Valor & Honor

Where do we get such men?
The first is a Marine from 3/5. His name is Corporal Yeager (Chuck Yeager’s grandson). As the Marines cleared and apartment building, they got to the top floor and the point man kicked in the door. As he did so, an enemy grenade and a burst of gunfire came out. The explosion and enemy fire took off the point man’s leg. He was then immediately shot in the arm as he lay in the doorway.
Corporal Yeager tossed a grenade in the room and ran into the doorway and into the enemy fire in order to pull his buddy back to cover. As he was dragging the wounded Marine to cover, his own grenade came back through the doorway. Without pausing, he reached down and threw the grenade back through the door while he heaved his buddy to safety. The grenade went off inside the room and Cpl Yeager threw another in. He immediately entered the room following the second explosion. He gunned down three enemy all within three feet of where he stood and then let fly a third grenade as he backed out of the room to complete the evacuation of the wounded Marine.

You have to understand that a grenade goes off within 5 seconds of having the pin pulled. Marines usually let them "cook off" for a second or two before tossing them in. Therefore, this entire episode took place in less than 30 seconds.
Read the rest here.

Winning Hearts & Minds, the French Way

Showing what jingoist imperial oppressors they really are, American troops brutally suppressed a crowd of protesters with gunfire. Well, not really. But I got that partly right.

French troops opened up unprovoked fire on a mob of protesters in the Ivory Coast. It's gruesome footage. Many are injured; some are killed. Here's the first half (98 MB), and the second half (101 MB) of a video capturing the slaughter. It all becomes indisputable by the end of the second video.

The French, of course, deny it, but the video clearly shows a soldier leisurely walk up to the crowd and start spraying it with bullets. There were no guns - and if there were, then the armed soldiers overreacted and killed ten times more protesters than needed, mostly women. Where's the outrage?

Those Ingrates!

From a soldier in Fallujah, as posted on NRO about those DAMNED INGRATES in Iraq:

I am also a professor at a military-related institution, and my little brother is an enlisted Marine (a sniper with 1-3) in Fallujah. This weekend he called for the first time since the battle began. He informed us that a large number of the residents of Fallujah, before fleeing the battle, left blankets and bedding for the Marines and Soldiers along with notes thanking the Americans for liberating their city from the terrorists, as well as invitations to the Marines and Soldiers to sleep in their houses. I've yet to see a report in the media of this. Imagine that.

Additionally, he said their spirits are high, but they would certainly appreciate any "care packages" that folks in the States would care to send their way (preferably consisting of non-perishable food items, candy, deodorant, eye-drops, q-tips, toothpaste, toothbrushes, lip balm, hand/feet warmers, black/dark undershirts, underwear & socks, and non-aerosol bug spray)

It would be great if you could pass this message along to anyone interested in helping out.
Why isn't this kind of stuff on the front page of the New York Times? We already know the terrorists hate us! But do we see such coverage about the outpouring of affection from the citizens of Fallujah?

Quote of the Day

Edmund Burke:
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

When He Wins, He Loses

Nothing Bush ever does is applauded; according to the Democrats, even when he's right, he's wrong. Jonah Goldberg over at NRO wrote an illustrative article on inconsistencies demonstrated by the Bush hating left's attacks spearheaded by Kerry:
John Kerry was right about at least one thing. He repeatedly said that if Bush were reelected we'd get "more of the same." What he meant, always vaguely, was war, tax cuts, and carping from France and Germany. On the war, Kerry was absolutely right. On tax cuts, I hope he was right. And on the Franco-German carping, I couldn't care less.

But Kerry left out another area where the status quo was to be extended by another Bush term: The president can do nothing right.

This has been a constant theme of the last four years. When Bush was allegedly acting unilaterally (Iraq), he was denounced for not being multilateral. When he was multilateral (North Korea), he was denounced for not being unilateral. When Europeans are excluded, that's bad (again, allegedly Iraq); when Europeans are allowed to take the lead (Iran), that's bad, too. When Bush "outsourced" the war in Afghanistan by using non-American troops, that was a monumental mistake, according to Kerry and others. When we didn't outsource the war in Iraq, that was a monumental mistake as well. And so on.

Caption Contest™

It's time for another caption contest.

"John Kerry."

I'll put the best up tomorrow.

Monday, November 22, 2004

Nuclear Tools

(Cartoon courtesy of Cox and Forkum.)

UN Human Rights Abuses in Congo Continues

The abuse going on the Congo has been going on for a long time. The environment is such that young girls, thirteen years old and starving in poverty, are forced to crawl under holes in fences at night, like animals, into the encampments of UN troops and prostitute themselves for something as little as half a loaf of bread. And of course, the troops masquerading as beneficiaries there have no problem forcing themselves on these helpless people for release. Following this, the typical victim is ostracized from her community and family and left to bear a child by herself, abandoned and only used as a tool to be exploited for the sexual gratification of the thugs under the UN banner. UN: 150 Sex Abuse Charges in Congo Peacekeeping.
The United Nations (news - web sites) is investigating about 150 allegations of sexual abuse by U.N. civilian staff and soldiers in the Congo, some of them recorded on videotape, a senior U.N. official said on Monday.

The accusations include pedophilia, rape and prostitution, said Jane Holl Lute, an assistant secretary-general in the peacekeeping department.
How sad that the institution which should be promoting human rights has perverted it's original purpose so terribly.
The revelations of peacekeeping abuses is usually kept quiet at the United Nations until reporters or individual countries disclose the news, as happened in Cambodia in the early 1990s and later in Somalia, Bosnia and Ethiopia. But in this case the world body released some details.
Yet another run of abuses in what is becoming an all too familiar pattern.

The Ba'aths Find a New Home

Want to guess where it is? Anti American Ba'athis Activities in France.
With the defeat of the Saddam Hussein regime on April 9, 2003, the Ba'th ruling party was outlawed and a committee for the de-Ba'thification of Iraq was established. However, the Ba'th's propaganda machine appears to have found a new abode in Paris, France, whence threats to the U.S. are issued regularly in three languages - English, French, and Spanish. Not surprisingly, the Ba'thist propagandists use the word "resistance" (in French, "la resistance") to underscore the association with the struggle against the Nazi occupation of France during WWII.
The Ba'athists pumped so much money into Chirac's pockets, along with using the BNP (Banque Nationale de Paris) as the only bank handling the UN's $64 billion share of the Oil-for-Blood program, that choosing Paris as their new headquarters was only natural.
"We are numerous everywhere in the world, and particularly in the French-speaking space, to wish not only the end of the Yankee's occupation in Iraq, but more the victory of the Ba'thist resistance, which claims itself of Saddam Hussein and which is organized in the Movement Resistance and Liberation [poor translation from the original in French, meaning the Resistance and Liberation Movement] of Iraq."

The newsletter extends the purpose of the "resistance" not only to defeat "the American-Zionist imperialism in Iraq," but to other fronts, "particularly in occupied Palestine and Europe, where the Yankee domination is shaken today." It goes on to affirm its agreement with Che Guevara that, "imperialism has a head, the United States, and that it should be cut off!"

The French-speaking space is identified as Belgium, France, Quebec, and French-speaking Switzerland. The space will be occupied by "a French-Speaking Coordination of the Iraq Committees."
Incidentally, the fighting in Iraq was compounded recently when a new surge of foreign terrorists entered the fray, from France. The only country where the former President, François Mitterrand, would use special anti-terrorist units to wiretap actresses instead of terrorists.

GOP Congress Holds the Line on Spending

To my amazement, the GOP congress actually acted like conservatives, and managed to limit the increase on non-discretionary spending to 1%.
The bill, consisting of more than 1,000 pages and weighing 14 pounds, codifies the stingiest budget for domestic departments since the late 1990s.
It's a good start. Of course, if you read this in the New York Times you'd have no idea how strong the line was toed in spending.

Further down, we find why the GOP is often known as the 'stupid party'.
Adding to the chaotic finale of the proceedings on the giant bill was a last-minute fracas over another provision, apparently slipped into the bill at the last minute by a House staff aide, that would allow agents designated by the chairman of the House or Senate Appropriations Committee to look at tax returns.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) described the provision as a "terrible, egregious abuse of power," and GOP senators joined in denouncing it.
This is right up there with the entire Delay mess.

The Democrats' best hope to retake Congress probably rests not in their own power but in hope that the GOP will grow too arrogant and be whisked out of power via public backlash just like the Democrats themselves were back in '94 for that same arrogance. But seriously, you'd think that the two idiot senators who slipped this in would have at least some grasp of the political nature of their constituents; most Americans hate the IRS and conservatives tend to distrust the government by default. Now here come these two to arbitrarily increase it's power in a way that would make many uncomfortable.

The fact that it's generating such a stir is good news, though, as it means that the situation will probably correct itself.


Another new development in the Oil for Food scandal has been unearthed, reported by (of all the networks) the BBC:
The United Nations knew that Iraqi president Saddam Hussein was stealing from the oil-for-food program - and, by extension, starving his own people - but did little to stop it, according to a special report by the BBC at the weekend.

After a six-month investigation, the BBC said it had evidence that Saddam took billions from the oil-for-food program, and that "these abuses were widely known about at the time". The BBC said there was evidence that Saddam demanded a kickback from companies that wanted to do business with Iraq under the oil-for-food program.

Australia sold wheat worth about $A1 billion to Iraq under the program but the Australian Wheat Board strongly denies wrongdoing. However, US congressman Chris Shays told the BBC that Saddam "didn't participate with you if he couldn't get kickbacks.

"He didn't buy commodities unless he got kickbacks so, if you agreed to participate, you agreed to do it on his terms. And we know what those terms were."

The Age reported last year that Australia sold wheat to Iraq at what appears to be an inflated price.
I suppose this is going to quiet the claims that the Oil for Food scandal was an isolated incident, something unplanned, unheard of, not known except to a minority, etc. And of course, the list of those with their hands caught deep in the oil barrel increases.
The wheat board says it never gave a cut of its contracts to Saddam. It was forced to pay a Jordanian trucking company to move its wheat around Iraq. That trucking company was selected by Saddam.

The BBC sent a reporter to Iraq and Jordan to track down people involved in the oil-for-food program, which has been described as the largest financial swindle in history. Virtually all said that Saddam took kickbacks from companies who sold goods to Iraq, and that the UN knew this. The businessmen - most of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity - said it was standard to pay commissions, that nobody complained, and that was the price of doing business with Iraq.

A Jordanian banker said it was an open secret that contracts were inflated so Saddam could take 10 per cent. "We knew it was there," he said. "(But) actually, it's not our business, you know. Banks are (only) interested in their money, and to make money."
Once again, the UN demonstrates its degeneration and corruption, showing that the original ideal it inspired to is only something to pay lipservice to while it engages in illicit bargains and unchecked appeasement. (It's not that surprising, considering that 2/3 of the place is composed of nations that are the direct opposite of what we'd call a liberal democracy.)
Many UN officials believe the US is trying to divert media attention towards the oil-for-food program as a way of punishing the UN for failing to back the war in Iraq.

Others believe the US is using the investigations as a way of distracting attention from the war. Mr Shay said: "Well, the UN is sure making it easy (to attack)."
Nah. No way.

Saturday, November 20, 2004

Bush Pardons Two Thanksgiving Turkeys

This is when I start to get mad at Bush for being a squishy faux-pas conservative.

Look, these bastards knew what they were getting into. Do a man's crime, do a man's time. Let 'em dangle.

The bleeding hearts will read this as some sort of a victory. I'm more concerned about these blackhearted fowls' next victims -- and there will be more victims, of course.

Can Bush "pardon" them, I wonder, once they're found raped and butchered in an auto junkyard? I think not.

Do you want it living in your neighborhood, Mr. President?

It's a white turkey, by the way. What kind of message does this send?

Yet Another Slim Majority

Apparently, 137,000 of the provisional and abstenee ballots have been counted in Ohio. So what's the breakdown?

Bush = 56%
Kerry = 43.5%

Bah! I say we go for a recount. I mean, seriously, how could Bush have won? Nobody I know voted for him...

UPDATE: Apparently the information reflected is based on Ohio counties which have certified their results as final. Indeed, based on current results, it seems that instead of going 56/43, the provisional ballots currently are breaking... *drum roll* 60/40 for the President. Again, I demand a recount!

Fallujah Isn't the Only Dangerous Place

Talk about irony.

Chilean Moonbats: We're Sorry, Death to America

That's right: They feel sorry for the terrorists in Fallujah; but the US is the Great Satan.

Friday, November 19, 2004

Quote of the Day

Ronald Reagan:
The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks nothing is worth a war is worse. The man who has nothing which he cares about more than his personal safety is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.

Rice & The Second Amendment

I'm starting to like this woman more each day:
In a pleasantly meandering conversation over lunch in San Francisco last summer, Condoleezza Rice, then still provost of Stanford but already unofficially what she now is officially, George W. Bush's senior foreign policy adviser, was asked her thoughts about gun control. "I am," she answered crisply, "a Second Amendment absolutist." Growing up in Birmingham, Ala., in the early 1960s, when racial tensions rose, there were, she said, occasions when the black community had to exercise its right to bear arms in self-defense, becoming, if you will, a well-regulated militia.
What a nut case! After all, we can always trust those authorities, ja?

And more over here:
During the bombings of the summer of 1963, her father and other neighborhood men guarded the streets at night to keep white vigilantes at bay. Rice said her staunch defense of gun rights comes from those days. She has argued that if the guns her father and neighbors carried had been registered, they could have been confiscated by the authorities, leaving the black community defenseless.
She makes a compelling argument; better than most I have heard. In fact, I'll have to take note of it.

This throws a bit of cold water on the notion that we can always rest easy if we allow gun registration; the idea that it could be abused is scoffed at. But the reality is that in this country as recent as 50 years ago, those in power demonstrated corruption, which was widespread, and had they been given more power, we'd have been helpless. What would her community have done if they were disarmed? Should we be risking it?


David Limbaugh has a great article on how the liberal chattering classes have gone unhinged post-election.
Since the election, liberals have ratcheted up their seething rhetoric, acting as though President Bush, by merely reshuffling his cabinet, has committed a new rash of felonies. They are portraying him as a Machiavellian dictator exerting total control over his docile advisors, from whom he has extracted every ounce of independence en route to an unprecedented Stalinization of American presidential power. This is the same man they depicted but a few short weeks ago as a sock-puppet figurehead fronting for the de facto president, Dick Cheney, and the neocon cabal.

We're Such Hatemongers

This is only a shock if you've been living in a cave all these years. Seems that England's black soccer players are learning what the Jews have already known for years - Europe has far more racists and bigots than we ever could.

Annan Threat

Sudan factions pledge to end war: 'Strongest warning' urged.
The move to conclude a two-year peace process for the south of the African nation came after U.N. chief Kofi Annan called on the council to issue its "strongest warning" to forces fighting in Sudan to sign a peace deal before the end of the year.

In addition to finding an end to the civil war in Sudan's south, the council is meeting in Nairobi to end a humanitarian crisis in the western region of Darfur.

Nearly two million people have died, largely through war-induced hunger and disease, in a conflict between Sudan's Arab north and its Christian and traditionalist south.

The Darfur crisis began in February 2003, when non-Arab rebel groups took up arms to fight for more power and resources. The government responded by backing Arab militias, who have driven millions of villagers from their homes.

The United Nations has called Darfur one of the world's worst humanitarian disasters, and Washington has labeled it genocide.
(Via Cox and Forkum.)

Kerry Blames Bin Laden For Loss

Kerry, once again refusing to accept the obvious:
John Kerry (search) believes he lost to President Bush because of the video from Usama bin Laden (search) that surfaced just days before the Nov. 2 presidential election.

The Massachusetts senator told FOX News' senior correspondent Geraldo Rivera that he believes he lost because the tape may have scared the American electorate.
While it could make for a compelling argument and no doubt had an affect on the election, his pleas might be more convincing if it weren't for the poll numbers prior to the tape's release reflecting the same margin of victory as the actual voting.

Is the Democratic leadership ever going to 'get it'? Instead of analyzing why they lost, and perhaps realizing that it could have been because of how they ran the campaign, or what they could have done better, they are wrapping themselves up further elitism and lashing out at the voters. Yes, now anybody who lives in a red state is a bigoted bucktoothed redneck. That's going to bring in the votes - call the voters idiots!

As long as such hysteria continues, it will wreck the party further. Of course, that's not necessarily a bad thing. But every party needs a serious opposition to keep them on their toes.

Kofi Faces Vote of No Confidence

Kofi has been up to his neck in trouble from the Oil for Food scandal, but ironically this isn't what is because this. UN workers to condemn chief.
NEW YORK - United Nations employees were reportedly preparing last night to issue a historic vote of no confidence in scandal-plagued chief Kofi Annan.

The UN staff union, in what officials said was the first vote of its kind in the UN’s history, was set to approve a resolution withdrawing its support for the embattled Secretary-General and UN management.

Mr Annan has been in the line of fire over a high-profile series of scandals including a UN aid program that investigators said allowed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein to embezzle billions of dollars.

But staffers said the trigger for the no-confidence measure was an announcement this week that Mr Annan had pardoned the UN’s top oversight official, who was facing allegations of favouritism and sexual harassment.
C'mon, twenty billion dollars stolen by a genocidal dictator, no big deal. But sexual harassment, now that's important.

Like everything else the UN does, this mostly symbolic. At least it's coming to a head now. Hopefully this could mean a possible awakening to the UN's troubles from within. But don't bet on it.

Thursday, November 18, 2004

Stamping Out Relations

Liberal PM cast aside for unacceptable behavior.
"After speaking with the caucus executive earlier this afternoon, I am announcing my decision, effective immediately, to dismiss Carolyn Parrish from the government caucus," he said.

Mr. Martin, who did not take any questions, said that he had phoned Ms. Parrish to tell her personally.

"I told her that, while I have defended her right to express her views frankly, I cannot, as leader of our party and the government caucus, tolerate behaviour that demeans and disrespects others," he said. "It is unacceptable. There are better, more civil and more effective ways to make your case than those she has chosen."

The move by Mr. Martin removes an embarrassing figure from his party, reducing the chance that George W. Bush will be heckled from the government benches if the U.S. President addresses Parliament when he comes to Ottawa at the end of the month.

It also reduces the already-tenuous position of the minority Liberals. The governing party now has 134 of the 308 seats in the House of Commons. The various opposition parties hold 172 seats and there are now two independents.

Ms. Parrish has refused to tone down her criticisms of Mr. Bush, who she has denounced as a "war-like" leader. But her most serious crime seems to have been rejecting the authority of her party's leader, saying Wednesday that Mr. Martin could "go to hell" if he didn't like her behaviour.

Her attitude received international attention when a photo of her stomping on a Bush doll, filmed as part of a This Hour has 22 Minutes episode, ran on the hugely popular Drudge Report.

Mr. Parrish has long been a thorn in the side of Liberals who want to rebuild ties with the United States. She called the countries contributing to U.S. efforts in Iraq a "coalition of the idiots" and was dismayed at the re-election of Mr. Bush.
Good riddance, I say. This will most likely play well for the actual party, having dismissed this kook. But I wonder if this is reflective of any body of opinion within Canada, considering the animosity directed towards Bush from Europe and other parts of the world. We say we want to improve relations, but are we really doing everything we can?

Concerted Effort

(Cartoon courtesy of Cox and Forkum.)

Quote of the Day

"If a President lies to the American people, then he should resign." - Bill Clinton

The story everybody hears...

...And the story nobody ever does. A marine from the 11th MEU writes home:
This is one story of many that people normally don't hear, and one that everyone does.

This is one most don't hear:
A young Marine and his cover man cautiously enter a room just recently filled with insurgents armed with Ak-47's and RPG's. There are three dead, another wailing in pain. The insurgent can be heard saying, "Mister, mister! Diktoor, diktoor(doctor)!" He is badly wounded, lying in a pool of his own blood. The Marine and his cover man slowly walk toward the injured man, scanning to make sure no enemies come from behind. In a split second, the pressure in the room greatly exceeds that of the outside, and the concussion seems to be felt before the blast is heard. Marines outside rush to the room, and look in horror as the dust gradually settles. The result is a room filled with the barely recognizable remains of the deceased, caused by an insurgent setting off several pounds of explosives.

The Marines' remains are gathered by teary eyed comrades, brothers in arms, and shipped home in a box. The families can only mourn over a casket and a picture of their loved one, a life cut short by someone who hid behind a white flag.

But no one hears these stories, except those who have lived to carry remains of a friend, and the families who loved the dead. No one hears this, so no one cares.

This is the story everyone hears:

A young Marine and his fire team cautiously enter a room just recently filled with insurgents armed with AK-47's and RPG's. There are three dead, another wailing in pain. The insugent can be heard saying, "Mister, mister! Diktoor, diktoor(doctor)!" He is badly wounded. Suddenly, he pulls from under his bloody clothes a grenade, without the pin. The explosion rocks the room, killing one Marine, wounding the others. The young Marine catches shrapnel in the face.

The next day, same Marine, same type of situation, a different story. The young Marine and his cover man enter a room with two wounded insurgents. One lies on the floor in puddle of blood, another against the wall. A reporter and his camera survey the wreckage inside, and in the background can be heard the voice of a Marine, "He's moving, he's moving!"

The pop of a rifle is heard, and the insurgent against the wall is now dead. Minutes, hours later, the scene is aired on national television, and the Marine is being held for commiting a war crime. Unlawful killing.

And now, another Marine has the possibility of being burned at the stake for protecting the life of his brethren. His family now wrings their hands in grief, tears streaming down their face. Brother, should I have been in your boots, i too would have done the same.

For those of you who don't know, we Marines, Band of Brothers, Jarheads, Leathernecks, etc., do not fight because we think it is right, or think
it is wrong. We are here for the man to our left, and the man to our right. We choose to give our lives so that the man or woman next to us can go home and see their husbands, wives, children, friends and families.

For those of you who sit on your couches in front of your television, and choose to condemn this man's actions, I have but one thing to say to you. Get out of your recliner, lace up my boots, pick up a rifle, leave your family behind and join me. See what I've seen, walk where I have walked. To those of you who support us, my sincerest gratitude. You keep us alive.

I am a Marine currently doing his second tour in Iraq. These are my opinions and mine alone. They do not represent those of the Marine Corps or of the US military, or any other.
(Via Powerline.)

Phony Muslims Drenching Islam in Blood

The terrorists we see today aren't truly Islamic; they are only so in name. (Sort of like Arlen Specter, only meaner, somehow.) The horrific acts committed hail back to a revival of the ancient pre-Islam paganism which it so opposed. Nothing Islamic about human sacrifice.
You don't need to understand Arabic to get the message of those videotaped beheadings, with their rituals and liturgy. The sermon precedes the sacrifice. Then the human calf, shivering with terror, has his throat slit by the "priest." We might be watching a ceremony from 4,000 years ago.

The attack on 9/11 was not a political act. It was a religious act. But it wasn't Islamic. The Koran forbids the murder of innocents (as well as the taking of hostages and the abuse of prisoners). The 9/11 attacks were cult behavior from the dawn of civilization, employing modern tools.

We must cut through the layers of intellectual nonsense piled up by academics and pundits to get at the essence of this new — and very old — reality. When the terrorists we face invoke the names of "Allah" or "Mohammed," they are blaspheming and corrupting a great faith. The prophet was appalled by the religious practices of the early desert peoples. Those who murder in his name today have rejected his message even as they claim to revere it.

The terrorists we face aren't super-Muslims. They're Islam's worst enemies. They don't seek to turn back the calendar to the 10th century. They're reaching back to the sordid epochs when gods drank human blood.

Wednesday, November 17, 2004

A Kiss for Good Luck

You just know this is going to drive the 'Bush/Condi love affairr!11' conspiracy theorists off the wall.

Linda Ronstadt Speaks, Babies Cry

I should've known that the loony left's Hitler comparisons weren't going anywhere. Linda Ronstadt: "A new bunch of Hitlers."
“People don’t realize that by voting Republican, they voted against themselves,” she says. Of Iraq in particular, she adds, “I worry that some people are entertained by the idea of this war. They don’t know anything about the Iraqis, but they’re angry and frustrated in their own lives. It’s like Germany, before Hitler took over. The economy was bad and people felt kicked around. They looked for a scapegoat. Now we’ve got a new bunch of Hitlers.”
The dumbest of the dumb speaks! Yes, we wanted to go into Iraq because it made for good entertainment. Get enough film and we can start making our own Star Wars. Bush, of course, would be Emperor Palpatine.

Gee, now that I've got her opinion, I'm sold. I was woefully within the iron clutches of the tyrant Bush Hitler until this lass, like an angel casting her divine light, illuminated the truth from the darkness.

Alex Jones Searches for Brain, Finds None

Some of the kooks are getting tired of comparing Bush to Hitler. No, now they are fully diving into the realm of fantasy. Bush = Emperor Palpatine!

Problem: Pregnancy, Solution: Baseball Bat

Cops: Teens ended pregnancy with a baseball bat.
It was an unwanted pregnancy, police said.

And for several weeks, her 16-year-old boyfriend struck her in the belly with a baseball bat in an effort to terminate her pregnancy, police said.
This guy should be wearing an orange jumpsuit and share a prison cell with a guy named 'Bruce'.
"Both of the teenagers' parents were unaware of the pregnancy, he said, but knew about the miscarriage and fetus burial. The teens' parents told police that a hospital informed them that the burial of the fetus was allowed."

Oil for Murder?

Oil for food money went to Palestinian bomber's families.
Investigators working for Illinois Republican Rep. Henry Hyde, chairman of the panel, are expected to say they have traced funds from former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's kickback scheme through a Jordanian bank and into the hands of families of bombers who attacked Israeli citizens.
Powerline has more.

Tuesday, November 16, 2004

Iraqi Death Outrage

By now you've no doubt heard about the Iraqi who was shot while unarmed. This story has been making the rounds and I feel that while it was wrong if the man was innocent or unarmed, we do not have enough information at this time. Furthermore, not being a soldier on the front, I can't speak for the people who have to live with the fighting out there and what the conditions there were. It's not Abu Ghraib - it's a battlefield, and typically any sudden movements, accidental or purposeful will get you killed. And if somebody is faking dead, that does not mean they have surrendered, and not having surrendered makes them a legitimate target.

Let's not forget that the terrorists typically pretend to surrender and open fire when the soldiers have come out of their hiding places; and corpses have even been rigged with explosives and set to detonate when Americans approach. So with the situation put in that context; with the soldier in such uncertainty, it is hard to condemn him.

Of course, investigations must be made to ensure that everything was legit.

Shadow Recount

While Kerry has officially conceded, various forces are about in Ohio to make 'every vote count' in the hopes that Kerry can close the 135,000 vote gap between him and Bush. In the interest of national unity and the legitimacy of the elections, Kerry saw the importance of conceding. This may ruin the spirit of his concession. As for the actual recount, it isn't going to achieve anything except cause strife; do you actually think Kerry and his advisers would've conceded if they thought they had a real chance of winning? It's pretty much impossible for him to win, since there are not enough provisional ballots to close the gap, and the absentee ballots tend to go disproportionately Republican, obviously. In fact, as continued counting has gone on over the nation some have hoped that Kerry would gain on Bush, but it turns out in an ironic twist that Bush is the one actually gaining votes.

Rolling Onward

(Cartoon courtesy of Cox and Forkum.)

Quote of the Day

George Orwell, notes on Nationalism, 1945:
The majority of pacifists either belong to obscure religious sects or are simply humanitarians who object to the taking of life and prefer not to follow their thoughts beyond that point. But there is a minority of intellectual pacifists whose real though unadmitted motive appears to be hatred of western democracy and admiration of totalitarianism. Pacifist propaganda usually boils down to saying that one side is as bad as the other, but if one looks closely at the writings of younger intellectual pacifists, one finds that they do not by any means express impartial disapproval but are directed almost entirely against Britain and the United States. Moreover they do not as a rule condemn violence as such, but only violence used in defense of western countries. The Russians, unlike the British, are not blamed for defending themselves by warlike means, and indeed all pacifist propaganda of this type avoids mention of Russia or China. It is not claimed, again, that the Indians should abjure violence in their struggle against the British. Pacifist literature abounds with equivocal remarks which, if they mean anything, appear to mean that statesmen of the type of Hitler are preferable to those of the type of Churchill, and that violence is perhaps excusable if it is violent enough. After the fall of France, the French pacifists, faced by a real choice which their English colleagues have not had to make, mostly went over to the Nazis, and in England there appears to have been some small overlap of membership between the Peace Pledge Union and the Blackshirts. Pacifist writers have written in praise of Carlyle, one of the intellectual fathers of Fascism. All in all it is difficult not to feel that pacifism, as it appears among a section of the intelligentsia, is secretly inspired by an admiration for power and successful cruelty. The mistake was made of pinning this emotion to Hitler, but it could easily be retransfered.

Amending the Courts Power

The entire battle over gay marriage is really a battle over federalism and democracy. Are we going to allow the people to voice their opinion's through the legislature or overrule it by judicial fiat, establishing what is essentially an oligarchy? The article presents exactly why the amendment is necessary; to stop an overreaching judiciary from ursurping the ideals of democracy and self rule:
The federalism proposed by the liberal opponents of a constitutional amendment is in fact a sham. It is a contrivance for permitting liberal state judges, abetted by sympathetic justices on the Supreme Court of the United States, to foist same-sex marriage upon the whole nation.

In the traditional or classic understanding of American federalism—expressed in the Federalist Papers and reflected in the design of the Constitution—democratically elected state legislators represent the citizens who elect them. Those legislators enjoy wide authority to make laws relating to marriage and family life, and promoting public health, safety, and morals. Because the U.S. Constitution vests state lawmakers with such wide-ranging powers in these areas, on the classic view, courts must defer to state legislatures. Such deference is no mere courtesy or convention, but a constitutional duty. A judge may invalidate state legislation relating to marriage and family life or on public health, safety, and morals only if it conflicts with norms fairly derived from the text, logic, structure, or original understanding of the state or the federal constitution. As private citizens, judges may object to a law or policy on prudential or moral grounds, but as judges, they must distinguish the desirability—even the justice—of a policy from its constitutionality. Virtually all judges still pay at least lip service to this obligation.

Even so, state judges today ignore or circumvent it in practice with alarming frequency, so that the kind of federalism we increasingly have is not one of state legislatures but of state judiciaries. For this, the late U.S. Supreme Court justice William Brennan bears considerable blame. In an influential 1977 article in the Harvard Law Review, Brennan noted that state constitutions, like the U.S. Constitution, include provisions that convey important legal norms and principles in abstract-sounding language. Such provisions sometimes admit of multiple interpretations, especially when jurists ignore the relevant history and precedents. Brennan urged state appellate judges to interpret the state constitutional provisions expansively to secure individual rights, just as the Supreme Court had done under Chief Justice Earl Warren.
Read the rest for a greater understanding into the reasons we need an amendment to stop judicial power run amok.

This solution to judicial tyranny is only a bandage on a body covered in lesions. But it's a start.

The Myth of the Working Poor

A great article, which debunks the preconceptions surrounding the foundation of the support for the welfare state, can be found here.
Two Americas? The scaremongering bestsellers that say so are economically illiterate.

Forty years ago a young, radical journalist helped ignite the War on Poverty with his pioneering book The Other America. In its pages, Michael Harrington warned that the recently proclaimed age of affluence was a mirage, that beneath the surface of U.S. prosperity lay tens of millions of people stuck in hopeless poverty that only massive government intervention could help.

Today, a new generation of journalists is straining to duplicate Harrington's feat—to convince contemporary America that its economic system doesn't work for millions and that only government can lift them out of poverty. These new journalists face a tougher task than Harrington's, though, because all levels of government have spent about $10 trillion on poverty programs since his book appeared, with disappointing, even counterproductive, results. And over the last four decades, millions of poor people, immigrants and native-born alike, have risen from poverty, without recourse to the government programs that Harrington inspired.

But brushing aside the War on Poverty's failure and the success of so many in climbing America's economic ladder, this generation of authors dusts off the old argument for a new era. Books like Barbara Ehrenreich's Nickel and Dimed and David Shipler's The Working Poor tell us that the poor are doing exactly what America expects of them—finding jobs, rising early to get to work every day, chasing the American dream—but that our system of "carnivorous capitalism" is so heavily arrayed against them that they can't rise out of poverty or live a decent life. These new anthems of despair paint their subjects as forced off welfare by uncompassionate conservatives and trapped in low-wage jobs that lead nowhere. They claim, too, that the good life that the country's expanding middle class enjoys rests on the backs of these working poor and their inexpensive labor, so that prosperous Americans owe them more tax-funded help.
Check it out.

Doctors Refuse to Treat Dying Baby

"I got down on my bended knees and begged and begged for Luke's life," Mrs Winston-Jones said last night. "I was weeping and saying: 'For the love of God, my baby is dying. You can save him, you know you can. There is nothing in the court ruling that prevents you giving him adrenaline. Save my little boy.' But the doctor wouldn't do it.

"He just stood there, cold as ice. He kept saying: 'I am not giving him adrenaline.' That was all he would say. I told him he was breaking the law, but he said he wasn't."

When Mrs Winston-Jones accused the doctor of doing nothing for her dying child and wagged her finger at him, security officers were called. "The doctor said to me: 'We are going to stop the heart massage now and Luke will die. I think he should be in your arms."

As the doctors left, Mrs Winston-Jones cuddled her dying son. "I kept telling him I loved him and I was sorry that I could not make them save him."
I thought doctors were supposed to save lives, not murder them? And it was totally legal. And what's with the use of quotations in referring to the mother's son as precious?

This is state run medicine, folks. This is the government telling you that they aren't going to save your son's life because it isn't 'in his best interests'. This is the government telling you what you and your son's best interests are.

In America, I've seen a doctor literally kneeling on top of a patient, doing CPR and screaming "DON'T YOU FUCKING DIE ON ME, YOU SON-OF-A-BITCH! YOU DO NOT DIE IN MY EMERGENCY ROOM!"

In Great Britain, doctors stand by while a child dies, and they don't do anything. Because in Great Britain, the State decides who can get medical treatment.

Not in my country.

(Found at Four Right Wing Wackos.)

Former Kerry Girlfriend Writes Exposé

The juicy bits:
Nikki, a Harvard graduate, describes her politician lover as a "caveman" in the bedroom who would whisper sweet nothings to her in French - a language Mr Kerry speaks fluently. He also has a home on Beacon Hill, Boston, as does Mr Kerry.

In another part of Hedge Fund Mistress, Nikki tells a friend about a particularly wild encounter over dinner with her political paramour, Sen Jim Hoyt. "We were sitting at one end of the long dining room table and suddenly we were feeding each other and kissing, and all over each other, and undressing each other and plates were falling on the floor, food was everywhere, you know, our usual combustible frenzy, and then he carried me to the bedroom," she writes. Asked by her friend what happened next, Nikki says: "We made mad, passionate love and he immediately fell asleep." The unfortunate Nikki, however, almost dies as the senator lies snoring while she goes into anaphylactic shock from eating shellfish.

Monday, November 15, 2004

Loopy Loony

Can you spot the loons?

The Truth Is Out There

The Washington Post's Charles Krauthammer: 'Moral Values Myth'
In 1994, when the Gingrich revolution swept Republicans into power, ending 40 years of Democratic hegemony in the House, the mainstream press needed to account for this inversion of the Perfect Order of Things. A myth was born. Explained the USA Today headline: "ANGRY WHITE MEN: Their votes turn the tide for GOP."

Overnight, the revolution of the Angry White Male became conventional wisdom. In the 10 years before the 1994 election there were 56 mentions of angry white men in the media, according to LexisNexis. In the next seven months there were more than 1,400.

At the time, I looked into this story line -- and found not a scintilla of evidence to support the claim. Nonetheless, it was a necessary invention, a way for the liberal elite to delegitimize a conservative victory. And, even better, a way to assuage their moral vanity: You never lose because your ideas are sclerotic or your positions retrograde, but because your opponent appealed to the baser instincts of mankind.

Plus ca change ... Ten years and another stunning Democratic defeat later, and liberals are at it again. The Angry White Male has been transmuted into the Bigoted Christian Redneck.
(Courtesy of Cox and Forkum.)

Expect my own rigorous debunking of this latest leftist lie soon.

Communicating the Message

Kerry, still going at it:
Last Saturday night at H2O, a waterfront nightclub in southwest Washington, the Kerry campaign assembled for a final evening of drinking. To everyone's surprise, John Kerry himself flew down from Boston to attend the festivities. Trying to buck up his demoralized troops, the ex-candidate gave a short speech about how much his team had accomplished. "People are going to try to rewrite history and say we didn't have a message in this campaign," Kerry told his staff, according to one Democratic strategist. "And, let me tell you, the message never changed. The message we had in the final days of the campaign was the same as the one we had in the primaries." That was news to some of the boozy Kerry revelers. "Everyone in that room was on edge because everyone wanted to know: What was that message?" says the strategist.
Pegged it perfectly. For some reason, Kerry has the bizarre habit of taking his most obviously weak attributes and touting it as his most undeniable strength. Hence the "I've always had one position on Iraq." and other ridiculous claims.

Was it the South?

Some theories explaining the widespread beating the Democrats received this year.

It's Not Hard To Despise the French...

...when they do things like this: French consider naming streets after Arafat.
Several French municipalities governed by communist and left-wing majorities are considering naming a street or a square after Yasser Arafat.

The French police intelligence service, Renseignements Generaux, reportedly warned the Ministry of Interior that such initiatives might trigger heated polemics and tensions between Jews and Muslims, especially neighborhoods ridden by ethnic violence.

In several suburban cities near Paris and Lyons governed by communist mayors, large Muslim and Jewish populations live side by side.
I called it pretty close. And of course, it's the communist controlled municipalities and their ilk that advocate it.

The last word on Arafat's legacy:
It is a legacy in two parts: means and ends. The means? Violence. Arafat invented modern terrorism: airplane hijackings, kidnappings and the spectacular mass murder, like the Olympic massacre of 1972. Others had tried it. Arafat perfected it. He turned terrorism into a brilliantly successful political instrument, a vehicle to international recognition and respect. The man who murdered more innocent Jews than anyone since Hitler died an international hero. The president of France bowed to his casket. The secretary general ordered U.N. flags to fly at half-staff.

Arafat also bequeathed a legacy of ends: uncompromising, irredentist ends. He didn’t just reject any settlement that would leave Israel intact, thereby setting a precedent that any successor dare not violate. He also raised a new generation to ensure that rejection. Deploying every instrument of propaganda — television, radio, newspapers and, most importantly, schools and summer camps for children — his Palestinian Authority fed his people a diet of such virulent anti-Semitism and denial of the Jewish connection with the land that no successor will even be in position to contemplate breaking Arafat’s rejectionist precedent.

Arafat’s most cherished achievement was to so poison the well that the revolution — until total victory — continues long after he is gone. As soon as he died, the most murderous terrorist wing of his Fatah movement, the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, changed its name to the Yasser Arafat Martyrs Brigades.

They understood their master. Which is why the prospects for peace upon his death are far more distant than the naifs (who got him wrong all through his life) now insist. Arafat’s legacy — the romanticization of violence, the rejection of Israel, the indoctrination of a new generation in intolerance and hatred — will require a long time to undo. It will require years, perhaps even generations. It will require brave new Palestinian leaders who are the very antithesis of Yasser Arafat.


The estimates over how much money Saddam skimmed from the Oil for Food program (previously standing at an estimated $11 billion) have been doubled.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Saddam Hussein's regime reaped over $21 billion from kickbacks and smuggling before and during the now-defunct U.N. oil-for-food program, twice as much as previous estimates, according to a U.S. Senate probe on Monday.

The monies flowed between 1991 and 2003 through oil surcharges, kickbacks on civilian goods and smuggling directly to willing governments, Senate investigators said at a hearing.

"How was the world so blind to this massive amount of influence-peddling?" asked Republican Sen. Norm Coleman, head of the investigations
Not so much blind but in for the cut. And what's worse, is that it is possible that the current insurgency is receiving its funding from this illegally skimmed blood money. How much deeper does the rabbit hole go?

The complete transcript of today's hearings contains some gems, no doubt, for those who would peruse it. (Hat tip to Instapundit)

Also, Safire says the UN is obstructing justice regarding the Oil for Food scandal.

And some more on the extent of corruption:
Saddam's military spending plummeted after sanctions were imposed in 1991 to a fraction of what it had been before, he said, adding that the vast majority of illicit income was from publicly disclosed trade agreements that the world well knew about "but winked at."

"Saddam Hussein attempted to manipulate the typical oil allocation process in order to gain influence throughout the world," Mark L. Greenblatt, a counsel for the Senate panel's permanent subcommittee on investigations, said in prepared testimony obtained by The Associated Press.

"Rather than giving allocations to traditional oil purchasers, Hussein gave oil allocations to foreign officials, journalists, and even terrorist entities, who then sold their allocations to the traditional oil companies in return for a sizable commission."

60 million!

Wow, the President continues to increase his lead over Kerry. Check out the latest vote tally here. It will be interesting to see how much emphasis will be placed on the merit of the popular vote now by those advocated abolishing the electoral college after 2000, no?

Desecrating the Dead

Some greedy people with no respect for the dead are using the tragedy of 9/11 for profit by making a video game capitalizing on it. Sick scenes of tragedy survivors call for ban.
A GORY video game is cashing in on the 9/11 Twin Towers tragedy.

The sick sequences show the World Trade Center towers collapsing and even use pretend images of real-life people caught up in the disaster.

The makers of Survivor, German-based Replay Studios, boast: "The player will encounter massive crowds of people running in panic. Cars, people, walls, burning objects will fly through the air, collide and cause damage." It adds: "The player will experience the most dangerous disaster situations and have to use all his skills to survive the horror ...the player is free to rescue persons - and become a hero - find hidden secrets and even loot."

The game - which also features other disasters like the sinking of the Titanic and the WW2 atom bomb drop on Hiroshima - has outraged 9/11 survivors.

A member of the British survivors group said: "This is beneath contempt. To attempt to make money out of the deaths of so many defies description. These people must be sick - the game should be banned."

Tory homeland security spokesman Patrick Mercer said: "To use this as a form of entertainment verges on the sick." And even the official PlayStation.2 magazine - which has regularly featured gory video games - described the 9/11 sequences as "arguably the most tasteless shots ever". Replay Studios are in talks about selling the game - but so far there have been no takers.
Not sure what to think about the calls for banning it. We already have some limits on free speech; obscene and certain tasteless elements are controlled, as well as speech that can cause harm ("No shouting 'fire!' in a crowded theater".). Is this worth banning?


Cheney must be cringing, but nevertheless... It must be shown! BEHOLD. Overexposed.
Joining Vice President Dick Cheney's motorcade in Green Bay, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel photographer Dale Guldan hoped to capture a unique image during an otherwise scripted campaign visit in September.

Did he ever.

[...] The normally serious Cheney flashed a winning smile for Borkin, and Guldan snapped an attention-grabbing photo that would later be chosen for the front page of the paper's September 11 Metro section.

Guldan got a call from a reader the next day. "Did you notice anything unusual about that picture?," the reader asked.

Upon closer inspection, it seems the vice president's smile was not his biggest, ahem, asset. Is that what we think it is?

"You're not imagining it,"Guldan says of the unintentionally revealing photo.
What's wrong with this picture?


Shock and awe.

(Via Wizbang!)

Sunday, November 14, 2004

Red VS Blue

No, not Halo...

I was pondering how exactly the Republicans and Democrats ended up assigned with the colors that they are represented by. Especially, I wondered why blue was the color of Gore states and red the color of Bush; after all, red has traditionally been the color of lefties around the world, and some past elections had the Democrats brandishing their true-to-spirit red color.

Well, I digged around a bit and it turns out that the formula since we attained the technology to have color TV is to rotate the colors for the incumbent party every four years to avoid charges of having a "better" color.







Blue = Ford

Red = Carter



Red = Carter

Blue = Reagan



Blue = Reagan

Red = Mondale



Red = Bush

Blue = Dukakis



Blue = Bush

Red = Clinton



Red = Clinton

Blue = Dole



Blue = Gore

Red = Bush



Red = Bush

Blue = Kerry

In every election the Democrats happened to be red except once, before 2000, but that's just how the cycle worked out during that period. And I wonder what's gonna happen when after all this polarization and talk about red state/blue state divides we have to flip colors again.

Saturday, November 13, 2004

Marlboro Men At Fallujah

PIKEVILLE, Ky. – The mother of a Marine from eastern Kentucky now fighting in Iraq said she was thrilled to see her son's photograph on the front pages of newspapers this week.

Maxie Webber of Robinson Creek said the close-up of Lance Cpl. Blake Miller, his face covered with dirt and a cigarette hanging from his lips, let her know that her son was OK.

Miller, 20, a graduate of Shelby Valley High School, is serving with Charlie Company of the U.S. Marines First Division in Fallujah, an insurgent stronghold.

Lance Cpl. Blake Miller was featured on the front page of The Dallas Morning News and other papers earlier this week. Fallujah has been the site of some of the most severe battles with the Iraqi insurgency, and this week U.S. troops began a fierce battle for control of the city.

The photo, taken by Los Angeles Times photographer Luis Sinco, has appeared in newspapers across the nation. Webber said she first saw it when CBS News anchor Dan Rather showed it to viewers on Wednesday. Photo editor Alan Hagman confirmed Friday that the photo was of Miller.

"I just sat here and I thought, that's my son," Webber said. "I couldn't believe it. To me, it's just God's way because Blake is a Christian. It's just like God saying, 'I'm letting you know he's OK."'

Webber said she stays home as much as possible in case her son calls.

"I don't want to miss his call because you never know if that call will be the last one," she said.

Webber said she also bought an answering machine for her phone just in case Miller, the oldest of her three sons, calls while she's out. She has one message on the answering machine from Aug. 1.

"And when I get lonely, and it's been a few days, I play that tape," Webber said.

Webber said her son's decision to join the Marines has changed the way she thinks about America.

"Until my son went into the Marines, I never really realized what that flag stood for – but now I do."
Show them your support and that we care at Operation Gratitude.

Fat Man Has The Button

Michael Moore apparently is in a new ad.

Friday, November 12, 2004

Oil for Food Watch

Turns out the UN is stonewalling Oil for Food investigations.
NEW YORK — Two U.S. senators investigating the U.N. Oil-for-Food (search) program have told U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan (search) in a letter that they were "troubled" by his decision to withhold documents or witness testimony from lawmakers.

Sens. Norm Coleman (search) of Minnesota and Carl Levin (search) of Michigan sent a letter to Annan Tuesday in which they blasted Annan for "affirmatively preventing" their congressional panel from getting requested information.

"They are not providing access to U.N. personnel, not providing access to U.N. internal audits," Coleman told FOX News
What a surprise.

At Half Staff...

Arafat isn't even a member of the UN... Did they do this when Reagan died?

Thursday, November 11, 2004

The Greased Frog Speaks!

Apparently Carter wasn't alone:
PARIS (Reuters) - French President Jacques Chirac, confirming Yasser Arafat's death, has hailed the Palestinian leader as a man of courage and conviction who embodied the Palestinian struggle for a state.

"It is with emotion that I have just learnt of the death of President Yasser Arafat, the first elected president of the Palestinian Authority," Chirac said in a written statement on Thursday. "I offer my very sincere condolences to his family and to people close to him."

Chirac urged the international community to persevere with efforts to ensure an international peace plan known as the road map is put into effect in the Middle East.
Are they going to build him a memorial next?

Two Peas in a Pod

Arafat is dead, (and this time he is staying dead) and there is a great article on the world's oldest terrorist. How Arafat got away with it.
It is considered bad form to speak ill of the dead, but I will make an exception for Yasser Arafat, the pathetic embodiment of all that went wrong in the Third World after the demise of the European empires.

All too many rulers of "liberated" nations in the second half of the 20th century — the likes of Mao Tse-tung (China), Sukarno (Indonesia), Robert Mugabe (Zimbabwe), Moammar Kadafi (Libya) and Gamal Abdel Nasser (Egypt) — proved to be devotees of the Louis XIV school of political philosophy: L'etat, c'est moi. Their rapaciousness knew no bounds. Neither did their cruelty.

Yet even as these rulers were torturing their own people, they were lionized in the salons of the West. European and American intellectuals, motivated by a combination of guilt for their countries' past conduct, vicarious zest for revolutionary adventure and condescension toward Africans and Asians who were thought incapable of conforming to Western standards, were willing to excuse any crime committed in the name of "national liberation."

Arafat benefited from this deference ever since taking over the Palestine Liberation Organization in 1969. He and his cronies pocketed billions of dollars and kept their grip on power through the cruel application of violence against various enemies and "collaborators." In return, Arafat reaped worldwide adulation and a Nobel Peace Prize.

There has been no more successful terrorist in the modern age. Yet his biggest victims were not Israelis. It was his own people who suffered the most. If Arafat had displayed the wisdom of a Gandhi or Mandela, he would long ago have presided over the establishment of a fully independent Palestine comprising all of the Gaza Strip, part of Jerusalem and at least 95% of the West Bank. In fact, he seemed well on his way toward this goal when I met him in 1998 as part of a delegation of American scholars and journalists.

The place was his Ramallah compound, the time after midnight (Arafat was a night owl). He was wearing his trademark fatigues, and his hands and lips were shaking uncontrollably. Much of the session was conducted via translator, but Arafat broke into English when asked a question about Palestinian violations of the Oslo accords. It was the kind of query a democratic statesman would have batted away without a second thought.

Arafat, however, grew visibly agitated and stammered: "Be careful when you are speaking to me! Be careful, you are speaking to Arafat!" The threat of violence hung in the air as we left. Clearly Arafat had not quite mastered the art of being a politician or, rather, he was a politician in the mold of Mugabe or Mao.

His refusal to compromise, his unwillingness to give up the way of the gun consigned his people to economic and moral suicide. The current intifada, launched in September 2000 after Arafat turned down a generous peace offer from the Israelis at Camp David, has claimed three times as many Palestinian as Israeli victims. It has also led to a precipitous plunge in living standards in the West Bank and Gaza Strip — not something Arafat's wife and daughter would notice from their cozy Paris residence.
Of course, he had barely died before the media began to sing with adultation and admiration for this 'wonderful man', romanticizing his life ala Che Guevera. How is it that such twisted men get so many accolades? Enter Carter. The jackass crawls out of whatever corner he was residing in to blather on about one of the worst terrorists in the Middle East, that gangster thug Arafat that finally croaked to the benefit of all. What does he have to say? Shouldn't be a surprise. Really, it's Carter:
MIAMI (AFP) - Former US President Jimmy Carter called Yasser Arafat "a powerful human symbol and forceful advocate" who united Palestinians in their pursuit of a homeland.

"Yasser Arafat's death marks the end of an era and will no doubt be painfully felt by Palestinians throughout the Middle East and elsewhere in the world," Carter said.

"He was the father of the modern Palestinian nationalist movement. A powerful human symbol and forceful advocate, Palestinians united behind him in their pursuit of a homeland," he said in a statement distributed by his Atlanta, Georgia-based Carter Center.

He said that while Arafat provided "indispensable leadership to a revolutionary movement" and played a key role in forging a peace agreement with Israel in 1993, he was excluded from negotiations in recent years.
Somebody smack this man.

Both got Nobel Peace Prizes, which should say something how much it has declined in worth. The only indispensable 'leadership' Arafat provided was the tyranny which oppressed his own fellow Palestinians much worse than the Israelis. I guess all those suicide bombers were just bearing gifts.

Wednesday, November 10, 2004

Al Qaeda: Falling Apart At the Seams

Apparently Al-Qaeda is doing their best to imitate the structure and organization of the Kerry campaign. As much as I know it pains al-Reuters to report this: Al-Qaeda to disintegrate in 2 years.
LONDON (Reuters) - Al Qaeda will begin to disintegrate within two years as its various factions start to squabble and militants return to their local roots, a senior British parliamentary adviser predicted on Wednesday.
And why is that? Why... It couldn't be because of Bush's anti terrorism policies, could it? No! It can't be! I thought fighting terrorism is futile? Weren't we supposed to be establishing a dialogue with these people? Fighting them only makes them stronger! You know, like it did with the Nazis.
Professor Michael Clarke, a specialist adviser to lawmakers on the House of Commons defense committee, said the consequence would be that the security services would be able to win the "war on terror" as the group's structure fell apart.
Yes, and this was especially apparent in Afghanistan on election day, which is farther along in security than Iraq, and experienced nary a peep during the voting process. You'd think the terrorists would try and thwart the most monumental obstacle to their power, but curiously, nope.
"I think (cracks) are going to start to appear in the next 12 months to two years," he told Reuters at a security conference in London.

"It's going to start to fragment and split up," he said.

Clarke said he envisaged the network breaking down into smaller, disparate cells which would be more easily infiltrated and dealt with, bringing an end to the group's ability to carry out major attacks along the lines of the Sept. 11 attacks

"Terrorism will go back to being about more local issues. It will be reduced to a level which people can live with," he said.

Al Qaeda's pyramid structure -- with Osama bin Laden (news - web sites) and about 30 associates at its head spreading out to a loose franchise of affiliated networks -- would begin to prove a major weakness when it was once a strength, he said.
This is, I must add, exactly what happened to Osama's power base in Afghanistan after we flushed him out. He's alive, but he's hardly as able to harm us as he once was; Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi is by far the most dangerous of the two now, where he was practically a sidekick in comparison.

And as for breaking terrorism down into local levels that the authorities can deal with... That's where the Patriot Act comes in. If we don't all get crushed beneath the iron heel of Herr Bush first, that is.
Groups associated with al Qaeda across the world, such as those in southeast Asia, would start to pursue their local agendas, he added.

Clarke pointed to Iraq (news - web sites), where Baathist supporters of deposed president Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) were fighting alongside foreign Jihadists linked to al Qaeda although the groups had nothing in common.
This is exactly what I have been saying all along. There is no popular uprising; there is no Vietnam-esque rebellion amongst the populace. The terrorist attacks have mainly been perpetrated by the disgruntled remnants of Saddam's Baathist regime and foreign islamofascists flooding in from countries like Iran and Syria. In addition to that motley crew we've got the legions of crooks, thugs, and murderers stowed away in the depths of Iraq's prisons which Saddam unleashed prior to being overtaken. The native Iraqis don't much like them, obviously, since they take the brunt of the death toll, nor do they have any reason to. Interestingly enough, the continued terrorist presence in Fallujah has begun to increase our own support there as the people living there have grown tired of the fascists imposing their theocratic autocracy upon them.
Ultimately the Baathists would go their own way and pyramid would be weakened.
And that can only happen if we stay the course! (Luckily, I don't have to say this much more, judging from the results of the election.)
Clarke noted that even association with bin Laden's network had proved damaging to the cause of other militants such as Chechen separatists.

Clarke, director of the International Policy Institute at London's King's College, said this would be fueled further as the "glamour" surrounding bin Laden started to wear off and political in-fighting took hold.
Another benefit of having Osama live in refuge as a pathetic leftover of his former power is that much like Saddam, he will not be martyred, and will not serve as a cause for great inspiration amongst followers; rather he will fade away and like Saddam serve as an icon of what attempting to terrorize the West will get you: dishonor and defeat, which are worse than death in the bravado laden islamic world.
"Whenever you get a general movement, people will vie for prominence and that's what I think is the next stage," he said.
True to form, as Osama leaves the power void, stragglers like Zarqawi come in with their own splintered factions to fight for the scraps.
He said a major failing of al Qaeda was its complete misunderstanding of western society and the belief it could terrorize governments into achieving their aims.
Intriguing. This principle appears to apply in particular to Osama Bin Laden, who not only miscalculated our reaction to the September 11 attacks, but to the video which he released before election day. Beholding America as a paper tiger that would fold if given the push in the right direction, he instead only served to push his arch-nemesis Bush into power. How richly ironic.
"They are not going to frighten Western society out of policies, they are not going to bring down the House of Saud, their first real objective, by terrorism," he said.

"They can cause great inconvenience but they can't damage them in the way they think they can."
Yes, and as democracy spreads to Iraq and Afghanitsan, that same unshakability will be transferred to those societies, as well, further marginalizing the terrorist forces.

The next another Bush hater starts to rant about how our efforts in Iraq are futile, we're wrecking our image in the world, not defeating the terrorists, etc, etc, you'll have to wonder if they read anything like this. Anyone want to make any bets on how much coverage this is gonna get? Front page NYT anyone? Any takers?

Pork & Barrel In the Crosshairs

Remember all the whining about deficit spending? If this gets enacted, we can bid a fond farewell to pork barrel spending run amok. Let's see how those same people respond to a solution to the problem, shall we? Bush seeks return of line-item veto.
WASHINGTON — Six years after the Supreme Court took away the president's ability to veto specific parts of legislation, President Bush (search) is asking Congress to bring back the line-item veto (search) to let him make precision strikes against projects and tax provisions he doesn't like.

At a news conference after his re-election, Bush said he wanted a line-item veto that "passed constitutional muster," explaining it would help him work with lawmakers "to make sure that we're able to maintain budget discipline."

Presidents have been saying similar words since the first line-item veto proposal was introduced in the 1870s. It wasn't until 1996, when the new Republican majority in the House made the tool part of its "Contract With America," (search) that Congress responded.

President Clinton happily signed the legislation, and in 1997 he used his new power 82 times to negate specific projects in larger spending bills. Congress overrode his veto 38 times, although it still resulted in savings of almost $2 billion.
And for those out there that allege that it is unconstitutional, here is Clause 2 of Section 7 in Article I of the Constitution.
Clause 2: Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law."
So can anyone tell me where it prohibits a line-item veto? For balance, giving Congress a line item veto override might be prudent, though that might end up being abused, thus nullifying the entire purpose of it.