Raging Right Wing Republican

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

Monday, October 31, 2005

Pro Choice? Who, Us?

Howard Dean appeared on "Hardball" tonight with Chris Matthews, and the DNC chairman could not bring himself to say that the Democrats are the party of abortion. But Matthews would not give up, and what followed was like some kind of weird improv game from the Drew Carey show. Matthews' goal was to get Dean to say "pro-choice." Dean's goal was to defend the pro-choice position without actually uttering the words, "pro-choice."
MATTHEWS: So the Democrats are the pro-choice party, period?

DEAN: The government...

MATTHEWS: The Democrats, your party, is the pro-choice party.

DEAN: No, my party respects everybody's views, but my party firmly believes that the government should stay out of people's personal lives.

MATTHEWS: But you're a pro-choice party, are you not? You sound like you're against them for being pro-life. Are you pro-choice?

DEAN: I'm not against people for being pro-life. I actually was the first chairman who met for a long, for a long time, who met with the pro-life Democrats...

MATTHEWS: This is a complicated thing for people. The people believe the Republican party because of its record supports the pro-life position. Does your party support the pro-choice position?

DEAN: The position we support is, a woman has a right to make, and a family has a right to make up their own mind about their health care without government interference.

MATTHEWS: That's pro-choice.

DEAN: A woman and a family have a right to make up their own minds about their health care without government interference. That's our position.

MATTHEWS: Why do you hesitate to use the phrase "pro-choice"?

DEAN: Because I think it's often misused. If you're pro-choice it implies you're not pro-life - that's not true. There are a lot of pro-life Democrats. We respect them, but we believe the government should...

MATTHEWS: Do you believe in abortion rights?

DEAN: I believe the government should stay out of personal, of the personal lives of families and women. They should stay out of our lives. That's what I believe.

MATTHEWS: I find it interesting that you have hesitated to say what the party has always stood for, which is the pro-choice position...

DEAN: The party believes the government does not belong in making personal decisions.

MATTHEWS: Okay, I'm learning things here about a hesitancy I didn't know about before.
Chris Matthews is starting to learn about liberal Democrats like Howard Dean what conservatives have always known: they have to obscure and lie about their beliefs in order to have them sold to the public. Unlike conservatives, who pride themselves on being unabashedly conservative, who champion their ideals, liberals like John Kerry try to wage a stealth ops campaign on the electorate in order to get elected.

It's a bit of a bind for them, really; every time a liberal appears that advances their cause with vigor, they go down in flames, as Dukakis and McGovern did. There's just no support in America for the abortion on demand, anti-religious, anti-war, socialist government dominated utopia liberal intellectuals have dreamed up. The most successful liberal Democrat politicians are those like Bill Clinton, who cloak themselves in conservative rhetoric while advancing their liberal agenda after getting elected. All those times John Kerry hedged on the war during the campaign; was it really that he couldn't make up his mind, or was it that he knew he'd get slaughtered if he came out and denounced the war and slandered the troops as he did in Vietnam? Instead, he clung to the "moderate" view while having others like Moore and Dean do the heavy lifting.

Of course, Matthews never bothered to pounce on the most obvious flaw in Dean's position: All the while he's employing this conservative rhetoric about keeping the government out of our lives, he represents the party that stands for higher taxes, more regulation and fewer economic liberties for average Americans. Talk about a grotesque perversion of small-government ideals. But Matthews must have been having so much fun tormenting Dean over the "pro-choice" issue, he didn't think about the bigger contradiction.

Here's the video courtesy of NRO.

What To Expect Democrats To Say

ON BUSH: The appointment was made "in weakness" to distract attention from "ethical problems."

"Capitulation, not leadership." Or said another way, the President pandered to the "extreme right wing" by withdrawing Miers and putting up a real Constitutionalist. Nevermind that nearly every segment of the Republican base opposed Miers, and it was those like Dobson who are traditionally thrown up as a boogeyman who originally supported her. (He later recanted his support, as well.)

And then there's the "another rich old white man" plank, as if any of that matters when picking a Supreme Court nominee. Democrats want a Rainbow Supreme Court.

ON ALITO: He's an "extreme" conservative who's going to turn back the clock on America and bring back slavery, as well as chain women to the laundry machines.

Don't forget Planned Parenthood v Casey; it was a ruling in which Alito participated in as the lone dissenter. The case had to do with a Pennsylvanian law which required wives to notify their husbands before getting an abortion; apparently this is unnacceptable. The law was later struck down by the Supreme Court, soldifying the reign of Roe. But whatever the policy, it's irrelevant, as that isn't what the Court was asked to adjucate. Instead of it's Constitutionality, which is what Alito ruled on, not the soundness of the policy (that is the legislature's responsibility), Democrats will attack him on the legislation.

Basically, he'll seek to limit the rights of _______, that being any Democrat party special interest group. He's going to be an activist judge who would "reverse American progress" (progress defined by whom?) along with that tired old canard of "making ________ look less like America." (In this case, the Supreme Court.)

I'm beginning to think the Democrats have these sort of statements already made out and all that's left to do is fill in the blanks with the appropriate adjectives and the institution "under attack."

Oh, and don't forget Schumer's "chance to unite the country and instead chose a candidate to divide it."

Democrats Caught Passing Alito Talking Points

And the best part is that they're not go after him for "civil rights violations" or abortion, but for being Italian! (View video)
MATTHEWS: "...I'm sitting here holding in my hands a disgusting document, put out not for attribution. But it come from the Democrats, they are circulating it, I can say that. It's a complaint sheet against judge Alito's nomination. The first thing they nail about this Italian-American is he failed to win a mob conviction in 1988. They nail him on not putting Italian mobsters in jail. Why would they bring this up this ethnically-charged issue?"
Translation: He didn't go after his fellow goombas.

Here's the full text of the smear document.

As for Matthews whining about "gender balance," it's irrelevant. Who cares what the gender of the nominee is as long as they're good?

Tired Of High Gas Prices?

[F]ederal and state taxes on gasoline production and imports have been climbing steadily since the late 1970s and now total roughly $58.4 billion. Due in part to substantial hikes in the federal gasoline excise tax in 1983, 1990, and 1993, annual tax revenues have continued to grow. Since 1977, governments collected more than $1.34 trillion, after adjusting for inflation, in gasoline tax revenues - more than twice the amount of domestic profits earned by major U.S. oil companies during the same period.
Tired of getting hosed at the pump? Then maybe we should lower gas taxes. Then oil companies wouldn't have to raise their prices to make up for the burden. While we get led through the nose at the gas station the government walks away with fistfuls of cash.

Priceless

Judge Alito's mother:
"Of course, he's against abortion," 90-year-old Rose Alito said of her son, a Catholic.
I love it.

Enter Alito, Stage Right


The nominee is Justice Alito, as I'm sure you've heard.

Did I peg that one, or what?

This is the best choice the President could have made. He's an excellent nominee, even more credentialed than John Roberts, as if that was possible. In other words, he's everything that Harriet Miers was not. Now if only he'd selected "Scalito" the first time around...

Alito's also got more experience than John Roberts, boasting more than a decade as a Justice, graduating from Princeton to go on to attend Yale Law School, and afterwards serving as an editor on the Yale Law Journal.
"Most of the labels people use to talk about judges, and the way judges decide (cases) aren’t too descriptive. ... Judges should be judges. They shouldn't be legislators, they shouldn't be administrators."
He's demonstrated a firm dedication to the Rule of Law, and that he won't substitute personal policy preferences into the Constitution when he's ruling. His lengthy years of public service - nearly three decades - demonstrates this, and there's a wealth of information to be mined from it.

He's highly qualified. In fact, he's so qualified that it would be absurd on its face to suggest otherwise, so like with John Roberts, I do not expect a filibuster, and the original "Gang of 14," the Senators who originally forestalled its' use and agreed to specific terms for its use, don't seem to be warming up to the idea of using it, either. As a strong legal conservative of moderate temperment, his qualifications, not to mention a humble reputation in the legal community for fairness, led him to be unanimously confirmed by the Democrat controlled legislature in 1990 when he was first nominated by President George H. Bush to the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

So he's been confirmed by the Senate twice, has impeccable credentials, and a hsitory as a crime-fighter: as U.S. Attorney, he prosecuted white collar and environmental crimes, drug trafficking, organized crime and civil rights violations. Democrats like John Kerry will be hard pressed to explain how they could've so enthusiastically approved him when they paint him as the anti-Christ now, but they'll try, anyway.

Brace yourself; the Left is going to go aploplectic at this decision. Everything they've been howling about has finally come to pass. Despite having been chosen for such a prestigious and important seat in the highest Court in the land, Alito is perhaps the least enviable person to be right now, as the Left is about to descend on him with every vicious attack in their arsenal in their effort to destroy him with the assistance of the media. Or as Keith Burgess-Jackson says:
I fired up the plasma television and turned to the Fox News Channel for news of the nomination. There on the screen was Bob Beckel, foaming at the mouth (literally), railing against Judge Alito. This is what's coming, folks. Leftists will misrepresent Judge Alito's rulings, distort his views and values, question his character, and try to make him out to be a fascist. (That's Brian Leiter's word for anyone to his right, which is everyone.) When the American people compare Judge Alito to what's being said about him, they will conclude that leftists are nuts. It's going to be a great show.
It's a fight worth having.

Expect the Left to make much of his dissent on Planned Parenthood v Casey, an abortion ruling that solidified Roe's standing.

I expect that with majority Republican support he will eventually be confirmed, barring some unexpected scandal. But it's going to be one hell of a fight pushing him through. The resistance will be fierce. And when I say "resistance," I mean people who would whine over any nominee to the right of Marx.

Pro-abortionists and other easily riled, hysterical Democrat interest groups are already sounding the alarms.
"Alito is a leader of the radical right legal movement to prevent the federal government from enforcing civil rights protections and otherwise acting on behalf of the common good," Ralph Neas
Yet it will allow the country to have the national discourse on the proper role of the Judiciary that conservatives have been aching for.

We've got our fight. The battle royale begins!

Les Miserables

Scooter Libby picked up some support from an unlikely source: John Kerry*. In a speech on the Senate floor, Kerry said:
Is there no one finding a countervailing proportionality in this case when confronted by our own congressionally created Javert who is not just pursuing a crime but who is at the center of creating the crime which we are deliberating on now?
"Think about it," Kerry continued. "When Mr. Starr was appointed, when we authorized an independent counsel, when the grand jury was convened, the crime on trial before us now had not even been committed, let alone contemplated."

Well, c'mon, you didn't really think Kerry would ever choose principle over partisanship, do you? The above comments, of course, were from 1999; here's what he said Friday:
"Today's indictment of the vice president's top aide and the continuing investigation of Karl Rove are evidence of White House corruption at the very highest levels, far from the 'honor and dignity' the president pledged to restore to Washington just five years ago."
Some people never change.

* Haughty, French looking Democrat Sen. from Massachusssetts, who by the way served in Vietnam.

CBS Reporter: Alito Is "Sloppy Seconds"

More fair and balanced - and tasteful! - questions from our professional information priesthood.

Sunday, October 30, 2005

Who's Next? SCOTUS Predictions

Based on the latest rumors emanating from Capitol Hill and the response to Miers' nomination, I predict the next nominee will be a conservative originalist, and one in the mold of Scalia or Thomas. It will also be somebody who has been vetted up and down before, and is a known quantity with a long paper trail, as the White House most likely does not have the time to go searching for any new candidates. I predict that it will either be Sameul Alito or Michael Luttig.

Alito is so like Scalia that he's earned the nickname "Scalito."

Luttig is as fine a jurist as Alito, though more easily confirmable.

Michael McConnel is another possibility, a solid pick with evangelical ties to soothe the withdrawal of Miers. Then there's Christopher Cox, a former Reagan counsel and Congressman, who could get the nod.

If the President goes on another tack and decides to nominate another woman, then I predict Edith Jones or Karen Williams.

Ultimately, it could be another complete and total surprise, but those are who I'm wagering on and hoping for.

Friday, October 28, 2005

2000 Dead, Party Time!

Do they look sad to you?

Trick Or Groping? ACLU Protects Sex Offenders' Right to Participate In Kids' Holiday of Halloween

It's "unconstitutional" to preclude convicted sex-offenders from dispensing candy to children?

The ACLU's beef is, of course, that it's "unconstitutional" to continue heaping punitive punishments (not as redundant as it looks, folks) on ex-convicts. But there are a lot of civil restrictions already on ex-cons, and nobody's complaining. Does the ACLU likewise support ex-cons' 2nd Admendment right to buy as many guns as they like?

Who knows, really? It's possible that the ACLU's love of criminals trumps its hatred of guns, and maybe they do think that convicted armed robbers, killers, and rapists should have free access to handguns and shotguns.

But whatever their stance is - it is not a criminal punishment to restrict the behavior of ex-cons as regards certain hazardous activities and purchases. It's almost a regulation, really - and liberals love regulation, don't they? So what's the problem?

Banning convicted child molesters from participating in Halloween is not like denying them any place to love or any ability to work at any job. It's one day a year, a minor holiday, and one intended chiefly for the children. Perverts can take the day off and save themselves the hassle of having to buy all those bags of miniature Clarke bars.

Thursday, October 27, 2005

UNSCAM UPDATE


"2,000 firms 'paid for Oil for Food kickbacks:'"
Preferential treatment was given to companies from France, Russia and China, the report says, all permanent members of the Security Council, who were more favorable to lifting the 1990 sanctions than the America and Britain.

The independent inquiry committee, which began its work in 2004, said in an earlier report that the program became deeply corrupted as Saddam arranged for surcharges and kickbacks while an overwhelmed UN headquarters failed to exert administrative control over the program.
This is more support for the Den Beste theory that France, et al., were opposed to invasion in part for fear that once Saddam was toppled we'd discover how much they'd been violating sanctions. Then there's this possibly related item:
The suspicion of past corruption tainting Jacques Chirac's presidency returned to haunt him yesterday when a court imposed suspended sentences and fines on his former henchmen. . . . The outcome of the trial, which highlighted kickbacks of £50 million from school building contracts, was another crushing indictment of a political system riddled with corruption from the late 1980s to the mid 1990s.
Riddled with corruption?

Quel surprise!
The investigators said Thursday's report would detail how Mr. Hussein first steered the program to gain political advantage with political allies and countries in a position to ease the United Nations sanctions. Both Russia and France are veto-bearing members of the Security Council.

"Then it got corrupted with a capital C when Saddam figured out how to make money off of it by putting on the surcharges and kickbacks," one investigator said.

Miers Withdraws

Huzzah!

Now the only thing left to do is appoint Ann Coulter to the Supreme Court, and our evil far right wing agenda will be complete.

Seriously, though, the originalist, conservative credentials of the next nominee are still up in the air; the President has never been one to pay much attention to public opinion, for better or for worse, and he may respond to the tanking of his close friend by throwing up somebody like Alberto Gonzalez to thumb us in the eye.

Nevertheless, this is a huge victory. Now the President can do as he promised and select a judicial nominee who will interpret the Constitution as it was intended. The Left will fight tooth and nail to block a Bush nominee; it may as well be one worth fighting for and that the Right can unite behind.

Wednesday, October 26, 2005

Demonizing Condi

USA Today gets caught doctoring a photo of Condoleeza Rice.

2000


(Cartoon courtesy of Cox and Forkum.)

The media hails it as "grim milestone," but what exactly is so special about the 2000th death, as opposed to the 1999th or the 2001st? Each death is tragic, but this is just an arbitrary landmark incident Iraq war detractors are fabricating as an excuse to lambast Bush.

Light Posting

I've been extremely busy lately, so updates will be sporadic.

Down With Miers

John Hawkins makes short work of 21 pro-Miers arguments. Her nomination was a mistake; it's time for the President to withdraw her and to follow through on his promise to appoint an originalist in the mold of Scalia or Thomas.

Saturday, October 22, 2005

Redhanded: Computer Snafu Reveals UN Whitewashing Harari Assassination Report

The Times of London, with a huge story today:
THE United Nations withheld some of the most damaging allegations against Syria in its report on the murder of Rafik Hariri, the former Lebanese Prime Minister, it emerged yesterday.

The names of the brother of Bashar al-Assad, President of Syria, and other members of his inner circle, were dropped from the report that was sent to the Security Council.


The confidential changes were revealed by an extraordinary computer gaffe because an electronic version distributed by UN officials on Thursday night allowed recipients to track editing changes. . . .

Mr Annan had pledged repeatedly through his chief spokesman, Stephane Dujarric, that he would not change a word of the report by Detlev Mehlis, a German prosecutor. But computer tracking showed that the final edit began at about 11.38am on Thursday - a minute after Herr Mehlis began a meeting with Mr Annan to present his report. The names of Maher al-Assad, General Shawkat and the others were apparently removed at 11.55am, after the meeting ended.

At a press conference yesterday Herr Mehlis insisted that Mr Annan had not pressurised him into making changes. “No one outside of the report team influenced these changes and no changes whatsoever were suggested by the Secretary-General,” he said.
There's a lot about this story that isn't known. How independent was this reporting team? If nobody inside the UN not on the team influenced the changes, why were they made only after the report was handed in? And why so quickly afterwards?

If they left it out because they felt it would be too politically explosive, what does that say about the UN's ability to serve as an independent "chips fall where they may" investogator? (Stop laughing.) Why would anyone trust them again? Why did anyone trust them in the first place?

Wouldn't everybody be screaming their heads off in any other investigative agency on a homicide refused, for political reasons, to name the actual killer? Doesn't it make you question the institution itself?

THE "BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE" UPDATE: Apparently Kofi was responsible for the changes.

The Jerusalem Post has more:
he last-minute alterations made to the Detlev Mehlis report on the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri may have been made under pressure by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, Israel Radio reported Friday afternoon.
A diplomatic source reported that Annan had an interest in removing the name of Syrian President Bashar Assad's brother and brother-in-law, along with other important Syrian officials, from the list of suspects in the Hariri killing. . . .

Annan, according to speculations, was concerned that the harsh report could cause political instability in Syria, perhaps even leading to an overthrow of the Assad regime, and thus preferred a watered-down version of the report.
Speculation will now begin as to whether other countries signed off on the whitewash, such as the US, as a concession to get other countries to go along with the added pressure on Syria. This is not such a bad move, if so.

Still, it looks to have blown up in whoever's behind its' face. And all because someone lacked the "mad tech skills."

Friday, October 21, 2005

Multiculturalism Fails Yet Again

One of these is not like the others.

Wednesday, October 19, 2005

Concealed Carry Reduces Crime

John Stossel penned an excellent article on various myths put forward by anti-gun proponents. Among them is the curious fact that allowing more people to defend themselves reduces the amount of victims of violent crime. Imagine that!
Criminals buy their guns illegally and easily. The study found that what felons fear most is not the police or the prison system, but their fellow citizens, who might be armed. One inmate told me, "When you gonna rob somebody you don't know, it makes it harder because you don't know what to expect out of them."

What if it were legal in America for adults to carry concealed weapons? I put that question to gun-control advocate Rev. Al Sharpton. His eyes opened wide, and he said, "We'd be living in a state of terror!"

In fact, it was a trick question. Most states now have "right to carry" laws. And their people are not living in a state of terror. Not one of those states reported an upsurge in crime.

Why? Because guns are used more than twice as often defensively as criminally. When armed men broke into Susan Gonzalez' house and shot her, she grabbed her husband's gun and started firing. "I figured if I could shoot one of them, even if we both died, someone would know who had been in my home." She killed one of the intruders. She lived. Studies on defensive use of guns find this kind of thing happens at least 700,000 times a year.
In our democratic society, we constantly strive to achieve equality between our people. The handgun is the great equalizer. It is what puts the old grandmother on the same playing field as the overbearing thug and gives the 120 lb woman the power to ward off a criminal in an alley. And when every person, no matter how strong they appear to not be can pull out a handgun, the prospect of an easy steal, which is what invites the crime in the first place, vanishes.

After all, an armed society is a polite society.

Ask Hugo!

The BBC, always fawning over dictators and kleptocrats, is running a happy little Q & A so BBC viewers can again suck up to the land grabbing populist leader of a socialist personality cult.
Ask Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez

What do you want to ask Venezuelan President, Hugo Chavez?
Hm... So many options. How about an end game question, given that Chavez is a bullying gambler, and gamblers gamble 'til they lose? After he's finally stripped Venezuela of the last shards of democracy, free speech, and hard currency; after he starts wars with the US, Columbia, and Guyana, and turns it into an impoverished puppet state of Cuba; after it all comes tumbling down on top of him, my question is this: During the last days in his bunkey, will he shoot himself in the head, pull a Hitler and wimp out with cyanide, put on a hoop skirt and run away like Jefferson Davis, or get strung up by his heels like his neo-socialist hero, Mussolini? I really want to know.
Mr Chavez has been criticised by the United States for being Fidel Castro's ally and promoting left-wing causes in Latin America.
The BBC could've skipped the elliptical sleight of hand and just said, "Chavez is Fidel Castro's ally and promotes left wing causes in Latin America," but then they do have their "fascist friendly" reputation to maintain.
Since coming to power in 1998 he has split the country between those who say he has become increasingly autocratic, and those who say he speaks for the poor.
Those are not mutually exclusive answers. He's a typical left-wing autocrat, one who holds onto power by "speaking for the poor;" a technique mastered by Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Ho Chi Min, Pol Pot, Kim Il Sung, and Robert Mugabe. All of them returned land to the peasants, and then fertilized the soil with the decaying bodies of those very same people.
Benezuela is the world's fifth largest oil producer and a key member of Opec, supplying 15% of US oil imports.
Yet he keeps slapping the oil companies that pump the oil with higher and higher taxes, retroactive taxes, and mandatory requirements for joint state ownership, etc. Like all socialists, they have to suck from capitalists to fund their dysfunction.
Is President Chavez the voice of the poor? Or is he an autocrat? Is he a hero or a villain? What do you think of his attitude to the USA? Send your questions to President Hugo Chavez using the form on the right.

President Hugo Chavez will be answering your questions in a special edition of Talking Point this week.

The following comments reflect the balance of opinion we have received so far:
Surely, these represent the balance of BBC viewer opinion only after most of the questions are vetted by Castro. I've taken the liberty of supplying answers for Chavez.
Mr Chavez, you are to be commended for your stand against poverty, and the less than sympathetic capitalist nations. I know socialism is the only reasonable form of government, and that it can work. It worked in Britain in the 1960s, and I trust will work for many years in Venezuela.
Michael Grimes, Trenton, Ontario, Canada
You are correct, comrade Grimes. True socialism is the only reasonable form of government. It really can work for many years, or at least until the canned goods run out.
Honourable Mr Chavez, I salute you for your admirable stand with the people of the third world. Your courage in drawing a line between Venezuela and the powerful arrogant superpower is encouraging to others! God bless. Would we see a unified front from the third and developing countries on the international issues?
Hossain, USA
Comrade Nom de Uno in the fascist USA, the new socialist state of Venezuela will maintain our unity with the third world by never leaving it, despite our possession staggering oil reserves! Poverty is dead. Long live poverty!
Mr President Hugo Chavez - I believe you are working, to improve the lot of the needy and the poorest of your countrymen. Standing up to a bully is never easy. Take for example Canada's softwood lumber export - US does not wish to honour NAFTA. So what is the point an "agreement" with the US? Or its disagreement they respect more. You are not a colony of US as some like to think.
JD Singh, Ottawa, Canada
No, we are not a colony of the US, and we will never let ourselves be exploited by Yankee pigs, unlike a person from a former colony of Britain who's now living in a British dominion, whoring himself for the interests of the big Anglo lumberjacks and big lumber.
President Chavez I like your policy in south America, you are about bring a great change in Latin America, they need a men like you to transform south America into a new world of equality. I hope others look into your leadership and learn from it.
Roh, New York
Indeed, I am setting the standard of pomposity for the region, exceeding even the great Benito Mussolini in strutting like a rooster, and in vacuous rhetoric, buffoonery, pointless boasting, empty threats, and pretentions of military genius.
As a socialist, I constantly bemoan what seems to be the inability of progressive governments to enact long-term institutions that will create permanent change. I worry that after your time in office is over, Venezuela will cease to be a guiding force of progressivism in Latin America. What will you do to ensure that your legacy remains beyond your tenure? Additionally, as the example of the Soviet Union clearly shows, a "socialist" state with an elite vanguard is no socialist state at all. True democracy, with its freedoms of speech and association is the bedrock upon which any lasting socialist state must be founded. What do you plan to do to ensure that these rights are protected and that their exercise is encouraged? Thank you!
Elisa Gomez, Dearborn, Michigan
The inability of progressive governments to enact permanent change has stemmed from their temerity at punishing the revanchist elements within, their failure at standing up to International Jewish capitalism, and their lack of vast oil reserves, which we can use to trade for black bread and black beans once our economy grinds to a complete halt as we cut off the world's oil.
Western media characterizes you as a man who would follow the paths of men like Simon Bolivar, Fidel Castro, and Che Guevara. Is this true? If so, do you support the overthrow of other Latin American governments in order to realize a common Marxist state in Latin America as was once supported by Castro and most notably, Guevara? Would such an ambition not plunge the whole of the Americas into turmoil and, if so, how do you plan to limit what you call your own revolution within Venezuela and maintain the tenuous geological stability in which we have all lived, both northern and southern Americans, for the past few decades?
Daniel Wall, Chicago, U.S.
You will die in a river of gringo blood, you fascist provocateur.
President Chavez: I think you are a bright light amongst an otherwise dim group of world leaders - a Bobby Kennedy for Latin America. It seems that most politicians and institutions are mostly concerned about enhancing and protecting the wealth of the super-rich while the rest of us are increasingly on our own. What actions are necessary to establish or maintain a healthy middle class as the predominant political power of a country?
Anthony, Irvine, CA, USA
The key to maintaining political power lies in avoiding shortcuts through hotel kitchens and keeping all four wheels on the bridge. Oh, and screw the soft middle-class Americans that keep sucking up Venezuelan crude and Columbian coke.
What is Venezuela doing to encourage freedom, social justice and self determination in the more reactionary states of Latin America?
Bill Goldman, Annapolis, MD, USA
We have no time for such laudable things, as we are spending the last of our resources building shore defenses to slaughter all the Yankee sailor boys from Annapolis Maryland. Only once we have defecated on American Imperialism and Anglo-Saxon capitalism, everywhere, will we have time to indulge such bourgeois concepts as freedom and self-determination.
Why don't the Latin American countries form a common market block, where they can stand up to the dominance of the developed countries, and they can get good trade agreement that help their citizen?
Abdallah, Chicago, USA
Instead of offering political prescriptions to Catholics, Abdallah, why don't you do something useful, like strapping on a suicide vest and killing some gringo infidels at a White Sox game?
Some in the US have labelled your government as Marxist or Communist. It seems obvious from your many market-friendly and pro-capitalist economic policies this is not entirely the case, but I am curious what model(s) of government you do see as exemplary of your administration. Are there particular historical/current day examples you could point to as inspiration for your brand of politics?
Kimrey Batts, Ann Abor MI, USA
Traditional Marxism is flawed, but not nearly as much as capitalism. I follow the third way, the most innovative political idea of the 20th century, in which the worker joins hands with management and forms an efficient collective state enterprise. We combine this with strong reassertion of the interests of the exploited working-class nations, like Venezuela, against the Anglo-American Imperialist exploiter nations. There are historical examples I could point to, but since the policies of the Italian Fascist Party fell into disfavor, slandered by the Anglo-American capitalists it fought, I just tell people to vote for Hugo.
President Chavez, I have been to Venezuela several times, since 1994 and am still concerned about the country's prospects. Why is your cabinet continuing to undermine the independence of Venezuela's institutions, when you are popular enough to reverse a legacy of weak accountability and transparency?
Fouad, Beirut, Lebanon
At least I don't shell my own capital, Fouad in Beirut. At least not yet.
Mr President, I think it is important for Venezuelans to know that, despite the Bush administration and “fruitcake” right-wing televangelists, many Americans support the work you are doing to help the poor and working people of your country. You have advocated socialism for your country. The term “socialist” scares many Americans (I am not a socialist myself), even those who otherwise support a “progressive” agenda. Do you see 21st century socialism as a temporary bridge for the poor and working class to raise their economic status, who will then transition to a more conventional “free market” economy. Or do you see 21st century socialism as a permanent trend and a solution that will be more successful in developing your people in the long run?
Scott Milinder, Palm Harbor
I see 21st century socialism as advancing the cause of equality everywhere, defeating imperialist capitalism, quite unlike 20th century socialism that produced only genocide, police states, poverty, and despair. 20th century socialism suffered from a failure of brilliant leadership, which obviously has not happened in Venezuela, so this time we'll do it right.
What is the main goal of the government for the year 2006?
Leandro Chique, Preston, UK
Worldwide socialism and the transfer of all global assets to the office of President of Venezuela, from where it will be redistributed to the people based on need, not that people really need very much under enlightened socialism.
I would love to hear Mr Chavez answer to the listeners quiz about who he would like to have running the world. I would also like to know what Mr Chavez thinks are the most important problems facing us today. Thank you for wonderful programs!
Luci Smith, Copenhagen, Denmark
What a silly question, Luci. You must be a redhead. Obviously, I should run the world, and the most important problems facing us are the remaining obstacles to that inevitable rule.
What guarantees are you making on paper, in your government (amendments/laws) that will solidify your economic system of fairness to insure that when you are gone Venezuela will never be able to be taken advantage of by a select few again? Is it not possible to make it a law that an exact percentage of Venezuela's resource/export wealth must be spent in a certain way (health care, schools, public works etc)?
Carlton, Framingham, MA USA
Another silly question. I will never "be gone," as you say, yet to protect against even the possibility of my overthrow or assassination by the American storm troopers and their CIA, I'm having all the oil wells and other Venezuelan people's assets rigged with explosives. I shall probably have all the Venezuelans similarly rigged, just to be sure. I shall walk around with a kill switch and a heart monitor, to ensure that Venezuela will proudly die with me, instead of falling prey to the capitalist exploiters, having its lifeblood sucked out by fascist pigs, and getting raped by evil Zionist puppets.
I love your stance on matters of international politics and so on, but I wanted to know what are your long term plans for the people of Venezuela and the difference between the rich and the poor? And what can Venezuela do to help solve this oil price crisis. Thank you Mr Chavez.
Thierry, Winnipeg, Canada
After my reforms are complete, there will be no excess rich, only me, playing the role for my people, to provide them with an example of how Hugo is happiness - Chavez is chic. I will lead a harmonious, efficient state where the people will live in perfect equality, and no one has more than another, using the mathematical ingenuity of the Mugabe equation to multiply personal income by zero, yielding zero. Oh, and there is no oil crisis; there's a money crisis. I don't yet have enough, and that will be the first of my many changes.

Death to the fascist gringos. Long live fascism.

Noam Chomksy World's "Top Intellectual"

A British poll says more about its audience than the winner when it names deranged linguist Noam Chomsky the world's "top intellectual."

Once again, anti-Americanism is a twisted passive-agressive form of patriotism. Europeans are too "naunced" to engage in genuine nationalistic chauvinism flag-waving (except the French - the only thing I credit them for), so they instead sublimate their national pride, which cannot be openly expressed, by simply bashing American. It's the politically correct, sophisticated neo-Marxist way of saying, "We're number one! We're number one!"

When you bash something, you are by implication calling yourself superior to the object of your scorn.

The relations between America and Europe could improve a bit if Europeans could get over their passive aggressive "anti-jingoist" jingoism and simply say, as Americans do, that they're proud to be citizens of the countries of their births. Of course, that would require them to step forward and begin taking care of themselves in world affairs rather than relying on America's net of military power, which Europeans both need and resent because of the contrast it illuminates. This is what makes much of the criticism of American policy all the more hypocritical, for they reap the benefits of our policies without having to invest in it, and know that if they were in the same position of the world's biggest and perhaps only superpower, they would have to make similar decisions.

Or to put it like the Washington Post, "They're there when they need you."

Is there much national pride left in Britain? With the British currently consumed with their own politically correct self-flagellation in apology for years of "imperialism," it seems to me that a lot of the people making a strong case for Britain's quite noble and proud role in world history are Americans, not the British themselves.

More Than One Quarter Of Europeans Are Crazy

Gosh, I never would have figured:
Mental illness affects over 27% of European adults every year, and is responsible for the majority of the annual 58000 deaths by suicide, more than the number who die in traffic accidents.
The European Commission adopted Monday a Green Paper with the aim to launch an action plan on how better to tackle mental illness and promote mental well-being in the EU.

Mental health levels can have a significant influence on the economic and social welfare of society.

"More than one in four Europeans suffer from mental illness every year, and it can cost our economies up to four per cent of GDP in lost productivity and other social costs," said Markos Kyprianou, EU Commissioner for Health and Consumer Protection.
Awesome. Europe's answer to depression and other mental illnesses will be more obtrusive and condescending government programs.

I'm not one for predictions, but I'll go out on a limb here: This one just can't fail.

European Bureaucrats

Because the road to hell doesn't just pave itself, you know.

Liberal 9th Circuit: Fish > Farmers

Today we have yet another example of a liberal court run amok. The 9th Circus Court of Appeals ruled today that Bureau of Reclamation's plan to divert more water from the Klamath River in Oregon to farmers who have suffered the effects of drought violates the Endangered Species Act because it might harm some salmon. This means that thousands of farms will be ruined, because the interests of the fish come first. Says the Court in their opinion, in which they disregarded and did not accept the Bureau of Reclamation's findings that the diversion of water would not harm the salmon:
Notably, during dry and critically dry years, under the regime proposed in Phases I and II, the flows could be substantially lower during the summer...Nothing in the discussion of Phases I and II explains why the coho population would not face jeopardy from these significantly lower flows during the summer months of the first eight years of implementation. . . It is not enough to provide water for the coho to survive in five years, if in the meantime, the population has been weakened or destroyed by inadequate water flows. . .If that happens, all the water in the world in 2010 and 2011 will not protect the coho, for there will be none to protect.
Translation: The 9th Circuit is replacing it's own judgement for that of the experts at the Bureau of Reclamation in order to achieve the desired result - protecting the salmon over the farmers, many of whom lost nearly everything in the drought of 2001.

The distress conservatives have shown over Harriet Miers isn't just about abortion - it's about a runaway liberal judiciary extra-Constitutionally imposing its desires from above onto the population at large. What they can't achieve, like the rest of us, through the ballot box, they legislate from the bench.

"warning: desturbing facist imagry/contents"

This is a joke.

A really, really long, involved, and detailed joke.

Right?

No Explanation Needed

Thursday, October 13, 2005

Liberal Bias In Story Selection

John Tierney's column on Tuesday was excellent. I'm getting to it late, but it's worth it. Here's the key quote:
I realize, from experience at six newspapers, that most journalists try not to impose their prejudices on their work. When I did stories whose facts challenged liberal orthodoxies, editors were glad to run them. When liberal reporters wrote stories, they tried to present the conservative perspective.

The problem isn't so much the stories that appear as the ones that no one thinks to do. Journalists naturally tend to pursue questions that interest them. So when you have a press corps that's heavily Democratic - more than 80 percent, according to some surveys of Washington journalists - they tend to do stories that reflect Democrats' interests.

When they see a problem, their instinct is to ask what the government can do to solve it. I once sat in on a newspaper story conference the day after an armored-car company was robbed of millions of dollars bound for banks. The first idea that came up for a follow-up story was: Does this robbery show the need for stricter regulation of armored-car companies?

We kicked this idea around until I suggested that companies in the business of transporting cash already had a fairly strong incentive not to lose it - presumably an even stronger incentive than any government official regulating their security arrangements. That story idea died, but not the mind-set that produced it. . . .

To some extent, this is a problem of self-selection. Journalism attracts people who want to right wrongs, and the generation that's been running journalism schools and media businesses came of age when government, especially the federal government, was seen as the solution to most wrongs. These executives, like the tenured radicals in law schools and the rest of academia, hired ideological cronies and shaped their institutions to reflect their views.

But those views are no longer dominant outside newsrooms and academia. A lot of young conservatives and libertarians have simply given up on the traditional media, either as a source of news or as a place to work.

Instead, they post on conservative blogs and start careers at magazines like The Weekly Standard and Reason [don't forget National Review, talk radio, etc.], knowing these credentials will hurt their chances of becoming reporters for ''mainstream'' publications - whereas a job at The New Republic or The Washington Monthly wouldn't be a disqualifying credential.

Their Perspective


(Cartoon courtesy of Cox and Forkum.)

Wednesday, October 12, 2005

Pentagon Stuns Terrorists With "Non-Checkmate" Move In Homeland Security Chess Match

Experts hail revolutionary non-profiling approach to winning game


Tactical experts from around the world have been awed by the pentagon team's pawn-siege technique, utilizing the rooks. Islamic opponents say the move underscores American tactical superiority over them.

Washington - An Islamic chess team was "knocked completely off guard" this weekend, as a crack team of Pentagon chess savants unleashed what is being called "the move" in inner gaming circles.

"It literally felt like the Americans had handed us our collective heads," said Ahmad Chalaban, 30. "I was literally numb for minutes."

"The Move," as coined by the cognoscenti, was in this case a situation of using the two white rooks to sequester the opponents' only remaining black pawn - a technique pentagon insiders believe has a "severe and complete demoralizing effect" on the opposing player.

Still, nay sayers claim the move misses the larger point.

"A move exactly perpendicular to the one being touted would have won the game," said one source. "But we do concede a secondary strategic brilliance to the other move. Any ominous potential existing within that pawn was immediately neutralized the minute Mr. Rook hit the corner grid."

Still, others claim that a "rush to checkmate" predisposes the King to "stereotypical aristocratic pigeonholing."


A hasty approach to chess ushered in antiquated approaches to checkmate like the one pictured above. Pentagon insiders say they have "all but replaced" such tactical dinosaurs with "less judgmental ordinance."

"Who are we to assume that just because he's a black king, that the apex of the game revolves around him?" said one chess expert. "This is 2005. We need to act like it's 2005, and the rules of chess need to rise from their anachronistic myopia. There is no room for profiling, as exemplified by the brilliant tactical gamesmanship of the Pentagon team."

"Chess is a game of peace," said Chalaban. "To that end, we are no match for the Americans."

Dean al-Zarqawi

Howard Dean's Democracy for America continues to demand a set timeline for getting out of Iraq.

The difference between a "timeline" versus a "plan" (you know, what John Kerry claimed to have for everything ailing society) is vitally important. Dean and his liberal cronies want to know, right now, exactly when our last troops will be pulled away from protecting the fledgling democracy in the heart of the Middle East.

The President, of course, has a plan which sets out a series of events that take place, one building on the other, until the country has a good chance of standing on it's own two legs. Unlike the frequently fickle and factious Left, the President put his plan into place way back in 2003 and is still following it today. Iraq is getting quite close to completing step five (write a Constitution) and step six (ratification) is scheduled for Saturday.

If the Constitution is not ratified, then the Iraqi people must return to step five and do it again until step six is successful. A plan allows for that - a timeline would become nonsensical in that event.

Meanwhile, al Qaeda is hoping that Dean is successful and the United States cuts and runs according to a timeline rather than a plan:
In a letter to his top deputy in Iraq, al-Qaida's No. 2 leader says the U.S. "ran and left" in Vietnam and the jihadists must have a plan ready to fill the void if the Americans suddenly leave Iraq.

"Things may develop faster than we imagine," Ayman al-Zawahri wrote in a letter to his top deputy in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. "The aftermath of the collapse of American power in Vietnam - and how they ran and left their agents - is noteworthy. ... We must be ready starting now."
The similarity to Vietnam is of paramount importance in this debate. In Vietnam, the press waged a sociopolitical war on the war effort and the military, thus weakening political will at home, and forced the withdrawal from an engagement that we were winning on the battlefield. They are attempting to do the same in Iraq. To allow them to succeed will be to show the United States is a paper tiger, after all; to be dismissed as a gutless adversary in the drive to establish an Islamic state.

Further, al-Zawahri's letter shows the geopolitical importance of Iraq:
"It has always been my belief that the victory of Islam will never take place until a Muslim state is established ... in the heart of the Islamic world," al-Zawahri writes.

The letter lays out his long-term plan: expel the Americans from Iraq, establish an Islamic authority and take the war to Iraq's secular neighbors, including Lebanon, Jordan and Syria.
Replace a few words and you will see an eerie echo of the President's vision. It would be perfectly natural for the President to say, "It has always been my belief that the victory of freedom will never take place until a democratic state is established ... in the heart of the Islamic world. This is our long-term plan: expel the terrorists from Iraq, establish a democratically elected authority and take the gift of freedom to Iraq's despotic neighbors, including Lebanon, Jordan and Syria."

Thankfully, the President will remain President long enought o see the first fruits of his plan - before the Left and their media mouthpieces can make the American public "go all wobbly" on the war on Islamofascism.

(The Director of National Intelligence has published al-Zarqawi's letter in its entirety. Powerline weighs in.)

President Bush Invaded Iraq Because God Told Him To?

Don't believe it. It's a hoax; another example of what passes for journalism these days.

Schroeder Wins World's Biggest Crybaby Award

From the people who coined the phrase "degenerate subhuman," we get the classic example.

Unable to lose like a grown man, this son of a Nazi still doesn't know when it's time to cart himself off the stage with a measure of dignity.

Poor little Gerhard called an election a year sooner than he needed to. He lost, just like everyone on the planet predicted he would.

So what does someone who's entire career is based on hatred of America and capitalism do for a farewell? He makes a speech filled with hatred of America and capitalism! But even he can be right once in a while:
He quickly composed himself, hitting his stride in a passionate defense of a strong German state and lashing out at "Anglo-Saxon" economic policies favoured in Britain and the United States, which he said had "no chance" in Europe.
That's right, mein Fuhrer, no chance at all in Europe.

Ah, Gerhard Schroeder. I love that he's still running on anti-Americanism even as he concedes defeat. I also love how he completely broke down while saying goodbye. I don't even imagine it to be somewhat-manly-choked-up-and-misty kind of semi-crying Nixon did as he went out. No, the report calls it "tearful," which to me says full on blubbering like a schoolgirl who didn't get a pony for her birthday.

Goodbye and good riddance!

Today's Human Rights Guessing Game

What prison has had the following comments?

The worst ever seen.

It has "squalid and inhumane" cells also described as "dungeons."

"Prisoners, mainly illegal immigrants, [go] without food, drink and lavatory paper as they huddle together for warmth."

"There have been numerous violent attacks and cases of detainees mutilating themselves and smearing their blood on the walls."

Guantanamo?

Nope.

Some other U.S. prison, then?

Nope.

The historic Palais de Justice in Paris.

I await the media's condemnation.

In a massive example of understatement, the cited article in The Telegraph concludes:
The interior ministry said that Mr Gil-Robles's findings would be studied diligently.
Oh, I bet.

Tuesday, October 11, 2005

Live Sex Acts Constitutionally Protected "Speech"

So says Oregon's Supreme Court. Yep, "Harder, faster!" now ranks right up there with the Federalist Papers. What isn't free speech according to these people? It was originally envisioned by the Founders as a way to ensure protection of those in opposition to the government, not screwing the pooch on the front lawn. It's a political right, not one that applies to every single possible action one could take. Somehow I doubt these public displays of indecency are really a dissertation on President Bush's fiscal policy.

Iraqis Reach Deal On Constitution

Iraqi leaders reached a breakthrough deal on last minute changes in the constitution Tuesday, and at least one Sunni Arab party said it would reverse its rejection of the document and urge its supporters to approve it in next weekend's referendum.
Publius has much more. Bottom line: "The Iraqis have worked out a very good deal amongst themselves."

Ten Che Guevara Myths

Above all, Guevara's enduring status in film and populist imagery is proof of mankind's pathetic inability to recognise evil when its guise is beauty and its lie is love.
As we near the anniversary of Che's timely death, it seems to be an excellent occasion to break out some of those pesky facts to disperse some of the glamor surrounding his persona. Ten Shots At Che Guevara; here's a sample:
1. HE WAS AGAINST CAPITALISM. ["State capitalism"; marxist jargon for fascism] In fact, Guevara was for state capitalism. He opposed the wage labor system of "appropriating surplus value" (in Marxist jargon) only when it came to private corporations. But he turned the "appropriation of the workers’ surplus value" into a state system. One example of this is the forced labor camps he supported, starting with Guanahacabibes in 1961. [So, after all the theorizing, he was for forced labor camps, just like the original fascists!]

[...]

8. HIS ADVENTURES WERE A CELEBRATION OF LIFE. Instead, they were an orgy of death. He executed many innocent people in Santa Clara, in central Cuba, where his column was based in the last stage of the armed struggle. After the triumph of the revolution, he was in charge of "La Cabaña" prison for half a year. He ordered the execution of hundreds of prisoners-former Batista men, journalists, businessmen, and others. A few witnesses, including Javier Arzuaga, who was the chaplain of "La Cabaña", and José Vilasuso, who was a member of the body in charge of the summary judicial process, recently gave me their painful testimonies.
Don't miss the other 8.

More on Che Guevara's flagrant disregard for life:
During the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962 Che was more bullish even than Castro or Khrushchev, seemingly unconcerned that the whole world was holding its breath over the outcome. 'The worst thing I heard about him,' says Hitchens, 'is that he was in favour of launching the missiles. That, for me, is a contradiction too far. You can't be a great revolutionary who wants to free the world and be a guy who wants to push the button. You can only be one or the other.'
I suppose it would be hard to stand for peace when one of your professed goals is to start a nuclear holocaust with the United States.

Che Guevara, despite his dramatization, is at the core nothing more than a brutish thug; Castro's right hand man and executioner. While he spit platitude after platitude of spreading "democracy," he helped spread Stalinism through Latin America, and unfailingly took orders from Moscow. He was brutal and was known to muse how fond he was of violence and spilling blood. His supposed connection to the "people" proved as false as the rest of his idolized figure when it was those same peasants he was allegedly fighting for that turned him into the authorities, mercifully granting us reprieve from his existence.

Pakistan Aid

The United States has decided to give $50 million in relief aid to help the survivors in Pakistan and India. Yet despite the fact that this surpasses any other country, we are still chastised by those we are giving money to.
The United States, which was under pressure to increase a pledge of $500,000 (£280,000) considered almost derisory by many Pakistanis when it was made over the weekend, announced it intended to give $50m in emergency aid.

The gesture, intended to make up for the resentment caused by an initial pledge which, along with the British offering of £100,000, was labelled as "peanuts" by Qazi Hussain, the leader of the Pakistani opposition party Jamat Islami, was greeted as a major boost to the struggling relief effort.
Pakistan is a country in perpetual turmoil; it's leader barely manages to keep a lid on affairs, and as such has done an excellent job in assisting the United States in prosecuting terrorism while balancing against unrest at home. This assistance, along with any further we provide, will go a long way towards showing those in the region how valuable having an ally like the United States in your corner in a time of need can be. Contrast this with Osama, who is believed to be hiding somewhere in Pakistan, and his head sawing minions, and we'll have an easier time getting tongues wagging as to his whereabouts.

Nutty BBC

The BBC, raking in viewer input, assembled a list of people most people would like to lead a fantasy world government:
1 - Nelson Mandela
2 - Bill Clinton
3 - Dalai Lama
4 - Noam Chomsky
5 - Alan Greenspan
6 - Bill Gates
7 - Steve Jobs
8 - Archbishop Desmond Tutu
9 - Richard Branson
10 - George Soros
11 - Kofi Annan
Chomsky? Soros?! Annan?!
Serving politicians were generally absent from the winning list. British Prime Minister Tony Blair narrowly missed out, coming 12th.

US President George W Bush was placed 43, ranking below two of his fiercest adversaries on the world stage, Fidel Castro - 36th - and Hugo Chavez, 33rd.
On the other hand, Bono came in 14th, followed by Michael Moore at 15th.

Are these people onto something? No, the more likely scenario is that they're on something, because Osama Bin Laden came in at 70th out of 100. How did he even earn a single vote? Clearly, the people who assembling this list are all crazy. But then again, this is the same group that gave the title of greatest philosopher to that dunce Karl Marx.

UNSCAM Update

PARIS (AP) - France's former U.N. ambassador has been taken into custody as part of an investigation into allegations of wrongdoing in the Iraq oil-for-food program, judicial officials said Tuesday.

Jean-Bernard Merimee, 68, who also was ambassador to Italy from 1995-98 and to Australia in the 1980s, is suspected of having received kickbacks in the form of oil allocations from the regime of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. He was also a special adviser to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan from 1999 to 2002.
The noose tightens.

The interesting thing to me is the Guardian is now stating "Saddam manipulated the program" as a forgone conclusion. No longer is the press treating this as if it "alledgedly" happened. One wonders how long it will take the mainstream media to make the connection between the lucrative income generated by this scam and the "international resistance" to the war in Iraq.

"It's Gore Time"

Anyone here have high blood pressure?
Is Al Gore coming back? If allies we talked to have their way, the former veep will be the next president. "It's Gore Time," says a political strategist and fundraiser who is opening a bid to get Gore into the race.
Well, this one's for you.

After all, laughter is the best medicine.

Monday, October 10, 2005

Al Qaeda Detainees: 80% Of Northern Iraq Network Is "Devastated"

Quagmire!
One of the great pieces of information we got recently is 80 percent of the al Qaeda network in the north has been devastated. And those are not our figures, those came from the last six leaders in Mosul, al Qaeda leaders that we captured; they informed us of that. We also had a letter that was captured from Abu Zaid (sp) going to Zarqawi.

We recently killed Zaid (sp) and we had that letter, and it also talked about the desperate situation for the al Qaeda and the insurgents in Mosul and in the north. And then also, sources we have inside the al Qaeda network up here have also informed us of that...

Hilarious

Mohamed ElBaradei and the [United Nations] International Atomic Energy Agency that he heads won the 2005 Nobel Peace Prize Friday for their efforts to stop the spread of nuclear weapons.
What a joke! Should we look at what "achievements" occured under ElBaradei's watch?
  • India announced it officially possessed nuclear weapons.

  • Pakistan announced it had nuclear weapons.

  • Libya announced that it had a highly developed nuclear weapons program, and after the invasion of Iraq, turned it over - lock, stock and barrel - to the United States. (Interesting that it was Bush and Blair they came to, and not the UN...)

  • North Korea has continued violations of the treaty and is unabashedly seeking nuclear weapons.

  • Iran has repeatedly violated the treaty and is unabashedly seeking nuclear weapons.

  • Pakistan has helped spread what it has learned about nuclear weapons throughout the Muslim world.
  • Quite an impressive track record! Once again the UN demonstrates it's fecklessness.

    Cruciphobia, Revisted

    Smash has another example of why hostility to the courts is reaching epic proportions.

    It's going to get worse before it gets better.

    If It Worked For The Nazis & The Soviets, Why Not PETA?

    A new PETA campaign hopes to turn children against their carnivorous parents. It even features a gory comic called Your Daddy Kills Animals! [.pdf]


    Best bit: In an effort to convince people that fish are intelligent, PETA asserts that fish use tools.

    Fish.

    Using tools.

    Like you saw in the acclaimed documentary Finding Nemo.

    We all know from Blade Runner that having an insufficient empathy for animals is the sign of sociopathy and/or being an android. If so, it has to be a mental disorder to be this concerned about animals. Consider all this insane energy that could be used helping people. Children starving. People dying of diseases eradicated in the westernized world for lack of immunization. Children used as slaves. Women abducted into prostitution. People being blown up by unmarked landmines. War. Famine. Pestilence. Human suffering.

    Instead, these people spend their time trying to save flounder.

    What's wrong with these people? The empathy that should be directed towards human beings is instead funneled exclusively towards saving dumb (yes, dumb) animals. I can't help but think that the stage of emotional development, when four year olds stop caring exclusively about puppies and kittens and ponies and unicorns and start caring about people, just sort of passed the PETA folks by.

    Le Fraude on Le Values

    Not hard to guess the content on this story from the headline: John Kerry calls for reopening values debate.

    Let me guess: Health care for all?
    Kerry said he has continued to push for some of the things his presidential campaign talked about last year, including the "fundamental notion" that all children should have access to affordable health care. . . .

    "I can't find anything in any religion anywhere, I certainly cannot find anything in the three-year ministry of Jesus Christ, that says you ought to take health care away from poor children or money away from the poorest people in the country to give it to the wealthiest people in the nation," Kerry said.
    Yes, you see, because that money used to belong to the poor, but Bush gave it to the rich people. Not only that, but the poor people's children used to have healthcare (which of course is a euphenism for "health insurance").

    Don't you love that? It's how proponents for gay marriage framed the debate as well; Bush is trying to take it away from gays. Nevermind that gay marriage never existed in this country.

    Sex & Politics In Canada

    I often enjoy looking to other countries to see how their different political systems deal with the same problems we encounter, and what we can learn from their attempts at solving them. Now I know that other countries often have a multitude of political parties that must form coalitions to decide who is really in charge. But the Canadian province of British Columbia seems to have taken things to a whole new level: there were no less than 45 (!) parties on the ballot last May:
    Groups like the Marijuana Party, the Work Less Party (whose tag line is "Alarm clocks kill dreams") and the Annexation Party, which would like to see B.C. become America's 51st state.

    It's surprising the latter hasn't set up shop in Alberta, which is already more than halfway there.

    Then there was the Platinum Party of Employers Who Think and Act to Increase Awareness (Huh?); the People of British Columbia Millionaires Party (donations not needed but welcome); the Party of Citizens Who Have Decided to Think For Themselves And Be Their Own Politicians (would that even fit on a lawn sign?); and Your Political Party (whose motto, if it isn't, should be "Of course we'll never win but it's your party, so cry if you want to.").

    And let's not forget the two never-say-die dinosaurs: The Social Credit Party and the Communist Party of B.C.

    The Commies, by the way, managed to grab only 244 votes -- 0.01% of the popular vote -- in the last B.C. election, whereas the Sex Party's three candidates garnered 305 votes, 0.02% of the popular vote.
    But the latest entrent into Canadian politics is... unusual:
    Because the next step in the sexual revolution is about to take place.

    The Sex Party is planning to run candidates in the next federal election.

    Or maybe you should say next federal "erection." Haw, haw, haw.
    Don't you just love international politics?

    Electoral College

    Journalist Gregory Kane makes a case for returning to the Electoral College to what the Founding Fathers intended because:
    Some people are too stupid to be trusted with the ballot.
    Funny, and he definitely has a point.

    America's Government Controlled Healthcare System

    The following will demonstrate the total lack of knowledge most Americans and foreigners sadly have when referring to the American healthcare system as a "market failure."

    Our healthcare system is virtually government dominated, and is the single most regulated industry in our entire nation.

    People are sick and dying not because the market prevents "access" to healthcare, but because the government has caused the prices to skyrocket astronomically by regulating and taxing the industry out of control.

    If one is to believe the self created haze of the mainstream media when it comes to healthcare in the United States, the vast majority of US citizens are:
  • Sick and dying
  • Lacking health insurance (implying lack of actual healthcare)
  • Denied access to any form of healthcare
  • Being carted to a hospital every 15 minutes
  • One nanosecond away from a catastrophic health emergency at all times
  • In the "minds" of many, all these problems and more stem from the fact that public spending on healthcare is non-existent at any government level in the US. A fringe group in Paris, the OECD, has a publication titled Factbook 2005. Factbook has a section regarding healthcare. How does the US stack up against other industrialized nations when it comes to publicly funded healthcare? "Other" industrialized nations are reported to have perfect healthcare systems. Perfect in the mind of the Left because the systems are largely government controlled.

    In 2002, how much public (ie. government) spending per capita on healthcare was there?


    Source, OECD Factbook 2005.
    Luxembourg not included as the population is too small.

    Lest one think that 2002 is some sort of fluke year, a time series of public (ie. government) spending per capita healthcare:


    Source, OECD Factbook 2005.
    Luxembourg not included as the population is too small.

    The US also has the rather nasty habit of including private (ie. non-governmental) spending in the healthcare mix. What happens when private spending per capita is added to public spending per capita on healthcare in 2002?


    Source, OECD Factbook 2005.
    Luxembourg not included as the population is too small.

    "Oh," you say, "the problem in the US is not public spending on healthcare, but paying healthcare insurance premiums." Our brothers and sisters in government controlled healthcare systems don't have to pay these healthcare insurance premiums; they get healthcare for "free." Our lucky brothers and sisters under the government controlled systems have premiums to pay as well. These premiums are called "taxes."


    Source, OECD Taxing Wages 2002-2003.

    Of course, the information above does not fit the end-of-the-world template of many on the Left. But if the information were the other way around... "lowest per capita spending on healthcare of any industrialized nation" would be ringing throughout the newsrooms coast-to-coast on both sides of the Atlantic.

    Just some information to remember the next time any mainstream media outlet decides to run a "Dead and Dying in America" type of series.

    Woman Thrown Off Plane For Wearing Obscene Shirt

    It's funny enough that she apparently thought she could wear it on the plane without getting thrown off, but now she's crying that her civil rights were violated.

    Given that Southwest is a private company, and she failed to live up to her end of the contract of carriage on a privately owned plane, how exactly were her civil rights violated?

    It's a shame that an organization like the ACLU, which should play a very important role in our society, turns itself into a joke by acknowledging cases like this one.

    7 Myths About Islam

    A new website run by historians who are determined to set the record straight on historical illiteracy has popped up. The Historical News Network's Mr. Furnish, PhD (Islamic History) dismantles seven myths about Islam. Here are the seven, boiled down to their core points:
    1) First, it is untrue that Islam is the world’s fastest-growing religion.

    2) Second, despite the claims of even President Bush in a number of public statements, Islam is not solely a “religion of peace.”

    3) Third on the misinformation parade is the allegation that jihad does not mean holy war.

    4) Fourth is the whopper that Islam spread peacefully from Arabia.

    5) The fifth tiresome myth is that the European Catholic Crusaders started the war with Islam.

    6) Another fairy tale about Islam is that poverty produces terrorists. [This seems more a piece of liberal fiction than an anything having to do with Islam.]

    7) And finally, we have politically-correct mendacity number seven, which even British Prime Minister Tony Blair recently repeated: that Islam has been "hijacked" by terrorists.
    The problem with viewing Islam as a religion of moderation having been hijacked by terrorists and the like is that most in the Middle East agree with them on most of their viewpoints; they simply don't wish to go as far as Osama Bin Laden in achieving those goals. The moderates are the true minority, not the extremists, and the moderate view has to be empowered to eventually become the dominant view.

    Friday, October 07, 2005

    Perils Before Swine


    (Cartoon courtesy of Cox and Forkum.)

    Say goodbye to Piglet! Making a pig's ear of defending democracy, by Mark Steyn:
    Is it really a victory for "tolerance" to say that a council worker cannot have a Piglet coffee mug on her desk? And isn't an ability to turn a blind eye to animated piglets the very least the West is entitled to expect from its Muslim citizens? If Islam cannot "co-exist" even with Pooh or the abstract swirl on a Burger King ice-cream, how likely is it that it can co-exist with the more basic principles of a pluralist society? As A A Milne almost said: "They're changing guard at Buckingham Palace/ Her Majesty's Law is replaced by Allah's."
    Britain seems to be leading the way in inventing new ways to be politically correct.

    Subway: Leave No One Unoffended

    The headline reads, french bashing alive and well in America:
    Two years after relations between the US and France soured over the Iraq war, French-bashing in America appears alive and well in light of a recent ad campaign by a fast-food chain linking France and cowardice.

    The ad by the Subway chain touted a cordon bleu chicken sandwich with the words "France and chicken, somehow it just goes together". A photo of a chicken dressed like Napoleon accompanied the advertisement.

    Subway ran the ads in about 10 US states for nearly a month and pulled them in September following an outcry by members of the French expatriate community and other customers offended by the racist undertone.
    Remember, this is chicken cordon bleu, i.e., a French chicken dish. The restaurant didn't mean offense. Says the spokesman, "The perfect match of French cuisine and the Subway chicken ... that was the intent of this advertising."

    But some were offended because, of course, there is more than a little grain of truth in putting a French uniform on a chicken. But the AFP article makes a big deal about the acceptability of French-bashing in America.

    Of course there's no mention that Subway has stores in 81 countries, including France.

    Nor is there any mention of the much more offensive advertising found in about 100 German Subways last year.

    Like the image at the left that was featured on a Subway tray in Germany:
    The trayliner asks "Why are the Amis {Americans} ["Amis" - a derogatory term for Americans] so fat?" and includes a caricature of the Statue of Liberty as an obese woman holding fries and a hamburger.

    The tray liner was part of an advertising campaign for Morgon Spurlock's hack documentary (hackumentary?) "Supersize Me" in which Spurlock claims to gain 24 pounds in 30 days by eating exclusively at McDonalds three times a day. If asked if he would like the meal "supersized" he always accepted and consumed everything, even if it meant gorging to the point of vomiting later. And he made it a point to not exercise

    There is, of course, no mention of Soso Whaley's follow-up documentary in which she at nothing but McDonalds for 30 days but chose things like salads, but still ate fries with chocolate shakes and even Big Macs. She lost 10 pounds in 30 days. And another 8 pounds the next 30 days. In fact, she stayed on the plan for 90 days and lost almost 30 pounds.

    It amazes me that a hack like Spurlock gets so much attention, even after his "work" has been so thoroughly debunked.

    After a large American outcry, the (American) company removed the offensive advertisements from their German stores.

    But I digress: back to Subway's horrible display of anti-Americanism, because it didn't stop at the tray liner.

    The image of a giant cheeseburger crashing into two skyscrapers appeared in a nutritional guide. Figures running from the towers include a man in a cowboy hat (gee, I wonder who that's supposed to be?).

    The company tried to defend this image:
    Les Winograd, another spokesman for the sandwich company, said Subway headquarters in the United States contacted the German stores, which claim "they've never even seen it (the press kit/nourishment diary)."

    Selbert confirmed that information in an interview with CNSNews.com.

    "Those were for journalists and they were never made available at the Subway stores," she said. But she could not explain how a customer at a Munich Subway obtained one.

    Selbert said her company was surprised to see images from the press kit popping up on Internet sites.
    Yeah, right.

    On the other hand, Subway isn't clearly anti-American; they offend everyone in the pursuit of profits - a fine capitalist tradition! And dressing a chicken in Napoleon's uniform is a stroke of genius.

    Thursday, October 06, 2005

    Sex Offender Attempts To Rape Baby In Public Library

    Maybe more than "attempted;" police seem to be careful about giving out details for obvious reasons:
    A homeless man who's a registered sex offender was arrested after police said he grabbed a toddler and sexually assaulted her in the men's room of the downtown public library. . . .

    James C. Effler Jr., 32, was charged with first-degree kidnapping, second-degree sexual assault and failure to comply with rules of the Iowa Sex Offender Registry, because he was not living at the address listed.

    Police said Effler grabbed a 20-month-old girl as she played near a computer being used by her babysitter. Library employees helped the babysitter search for the child before hearing the girl cry from the restroom, which was locked, police said.

    Employees called police and removed the door handle to reach the girl, then held Effler until officers arrived, Capt. Kelly Willis said.

    "Most of the police work was done by the library staff before we even arrived," Willis said.

    The child was taken to a hospital for evaluation. The extent of her injuries was not made public.
    It was the wisdom of our Supreme Court that only a direct involvement in murder could be punishable by death. But this is close to worse. Is somebody really going to argue that this babyraping monster shouldn't get a painless little injection of liquid death?

    For some, there is no possible hope of redemption. At least not in this world; if the scumbag "finds Christ" before he's a corpse in the ground, that's nice and all. But here, on Earth? No redemption: kill him.

    After all, consider the environmental benefits of one less human being consuming fossil fuels on this globally warmed overcrowded species-losing world.

    Wednesday, October 05, 2005

    BREAKING: Iran "Behind Attacks On British"

    Iran 'behind attacks on British'

    Britain has accused Iran of responsibility for explosions which have killed eight British soldiers and injured two others in Iraq this year.

    A senior British official, briefing correspondents in London, blamed Iranian Revolutionary Guards.

    He said they provided the technology to a Shia group in southern Iraq.

    Our world affairs correspondent says that while British officials have hinted at an Iranian link before, they have never been so specific.
    I wouldn't be surprised. Iran, along with Syria and Saudi Arabia, are responsible for much of the chaos in Iraq right now. It wouldn't be too hard to mobilize some of that war equipment and the terrorists down there to an other location...

    "Peace For Mankind!"

    This video is so good it can't be real, can it?

    Sunday, October 02, 2005

    Business & Politics

    Jonah Goldberg:
    "If you want to know why business takes such an interest in Washington, the answer can be found in your low-flow toilet, in the warning labels adorning your cars, in your 8 zillion page tax returns. It can be found while you wait on hold trying to get a human to answer your questions about your health insurance. And the answer is most certainly somewhere in your box of cereal, made with grains subsidized by Uncle Sam and coated in sugar that has no business being grown in the United States of America. Corporations meddle in Washington because Washington meddles with them.

    It is simply naive to believe that a businessman will have no interest in politics when politicians have taken a great interest in him. And it is grotesquely unfair to assume that businesspeople are corrupt simply because they want to support politicians less inclined to hurt them.

    Microsoft CEO Bill Gates used to brag that he barely spent a dime on lobbying - "I live in the other Washington," he liked to say. But the very moment that government - federal and state - tried to tear apart his company, Gates abandoned his view that the New Economy could ignore the Old Politics. Now D.C. is awash in Microsoft lobbyists. Wal-Mart is only now learning the same lesson. If you don't get in the game, you might be regulated out of it."

    Squirrel Hunter Fatally Shoots Teen

    And then he makes the predictable excuse:
    He told police he thought he was shooting at a squirrel until he heard Hammes scream.
    He thought he was shooting at a squirrel? When you discharge a firearm, you have a moral and legal duty to do more than think you've identified the target. You must know you've identified the target.

    Rule: Know your target and what lies beyond it.

    Lock him up. String him up! (See below.)

    ADDED: The hunter, 24-year-old Russel Schroeder, told the teen he would go get help. But instead, he left the boy to bleed to death while he went to play video games!

    Saturday, October 01, 2005

    Busted!

    Every once in a while somebody writes something so good you wonder why you never thought of it. Here's an example; Zombie Time examines a photograph that appeared on the front page of the San Francisco Chronicle, thus being seen by many thousands of people. The photo is of an African-American teenager who participated in a San Francisco anti-war rally:


    She's wearing a bandana that says, "People of Color Say No to War," a sentiment with which the Chronicle agrees. Here's how the Chronicle captioned the photo:
    Jasmine Williams, 17, a student with the leadership group Youth Together, joins the Iraq war protest in San Francisco.
    There is, however, much more to the photograph and the "leadership group" than meets the eye and which the Chronicle chose not to show. Fortunately, Zombie Time was there to show the rest of the story; you can see how even the most innocuous features of a news report are tied into those presenting it. This is how they... surround the facts of the story.