The Democrats have made leaks a powerful weapon in their attempts to destroy the Bush Administration. Together with their allies in the national Press corps, the Democrats have leaked information regarding US covert operations that have certainly put many agents at risk. As long as the leaks seem to put the Bush Administration in a disfavorable position, the Democrats are all ready to protect those law-breakers. However, they have condemned leaks that put themselves or their Press corps allies in an unfavorable light. However, since the firing of a CIA agent for leaking covert operation details to the New York Times, they are now protesting that they also do not condone leaking classified information.
The Valerie Plame case versus the recent firing of Mary McCarthy is a perfect example. As reported by the Washington Post newspaper, Democrats responded to the recent firing of a senior CIA officer, Mary McCarthy by claiming that there is a "double standard" in the way the leaks are handled. According to Rep. Jane Harmon, (D-CA), "...while leaks are wrong, I think it is totally wrong for our president in secret to selectively declassify certain information and empower people in his White House to leak it to favored reporters so that they can discredit political enemies."
Well, yes, Jane, there is a double standard. But not the way you think. If you had learned anything in your hippie school-days other than pot-smoking, you would know that the President has the authority to automatically declassify any information he wishes. In the Plame case, we have an open CIA agent who managed to convince her employer to send her husband on an all-expenses-paid junket which was neither approved nor requested by the White House. Said husband came back and lied about what he found and why he was sent. The President properly used his Constitutional authority to declassify information to disseminate the truth, which did discredit the husband, Joe Wilson, who was proven later by the Senate to be a liar. Nothing illegal about that. On the other hand, Mary McCarthy did NOT have the authority to declassify information.
And one other thing, Ms. Harmon. No one was endangered by the Plame situation. She was known to be a CIA employee, and was not actively under cover. On the other hand, McCarthy's disclosures, if that is what she was fired for, may have cost good men and women their lives. If we want to win this war, covert operations are going to be an integral part of the formula for victory. Getting the covert ops people endangered, or killed just because you don't like the President is pretty close to treason. Hopefully, Ms McCarthy will serve a good long prison term together with her firing. Seems like a pretty big difference to me. But of course, I actually studiedwhen I was in school. Something Ms. Harmon apparently did not, judging by her fatuous and ignorant remarks.
Monday, April 24, 2006
Dems Discover Leaking Is a Crime!
The Democrats have made leaks a powerful weapon in their attempts to destroy the Bush Administration. Together with their allies in the national Press corps, the Democrats have leaked information regarding US covert operations that have certainly put many agents at risk. As long as the leaks seem to put the Bush Administration in a disfavorable position, the Democrats are all ready to protect those law-breakers. However, they have condemned leaks that put themselves or their Press corps allies in an unfavorable light. However, since the firing of a CIA agent for leaking covert operation details to the New York Times, they are now protesting that they also do not condone leaking classified information.
The Valerie Plame case versus the recent firing of Mary McCarthy is a perfect example. As reported by the Washington Post newspaper, Democrats responded to the recent firing of a senior CIA officer, Mary McCarthy by claiming that there is a "double standard" in the way the leaks are handled. According to Rep. Jane Harmon, (D-CA), "...while leaks are wrong, I think it is totally wrong for our president in secret to selectively declassify certain information and empower people in his White House to leak it to favored reporters so that they can discredit political enemies."
Well, yes, Jane, there is a double standard. But not the way you think. If you had learned anything in your hippie school-days other than pot-smoking, you would know that the President has the authority to automatically declassify any information he wishes. In the Plame case, we have an open CIA agent who managed to convince her employer to send her husband on an all-expenses-paid junket which was neither approved nor requested by the White House. Said husband came back and lied about what he found and why he was sent. The President properly used his Constitutional authority to declassify information to disseminate the truth, which did discredit the husband, Joe Wilson, who was proven later by the Senate to be a liar. Nothing illegal about that. On the other hand, Mary McCarthy did NOT have the authority to declassify information.
And one other thing, Ms. Harmon. No one was endangered by the Plame situation. She was known to be a CIA employee, and was not actively under cover. On the other hand, McCarthy's disclosures, if that is what she was fired for, may have cost good men and women their lives. If we want to win this war, covert operations are going to be an integral part of the formula for victory. Getting the covert ops people endangered, or killed just because you don't like the President is pretty close to treason. Hopefully, Ms McCarthy will serve a good long prison term together with her firing. Seems like a pretty big difference to me. But of course, I actually studiedwhen I was in school. Something Ms. Harmon apparently did not, judging by her fatuous and ignorant remarks.
The Valerie Plame case versus the recent firing of Mary McCarthy is a perfect example. As reported by the Washington Post newspaper, Democrats responded to the recent firing of a senior CIA officer, Mary McCarthy by claiming that there is a "double standard" in the way the leaks are handled. According to Rep. Jane Harmon, (D-CA), "...while leaks are wrong, I think it is totally wrong for our president in secret to selectively declassify certain information and empower people in his White House to leak it to favored reporters so that they can discredit political enemies."
Well, yes, Jane, there is a double standard. But not the way you think. If you had learned anything in your hippie school-days other than pot-smoking, you would know that the President has the authority to automatically declassify any information he wishes. In the Plame case, we have an open CIA agent who managed to convince her employer to send her husband on an all-expenses-paid junket which was neither approved nor requested by the White House. Said husband came back and lied about what he found and why he was sent. The President properly used his Constitutional authority to declassify information to disseminate the truth, which did discredit the husband, Joe Wilson, who was proven later by the Senate to be a liar. Nothing illegal about that. On the other hand, Mary McCarthy did NOT have the authority to declassify information.
And one other thing, Ms. Harmon. No one was endangered by the Plame situation. She was known to be a CIA employee, and was not actively under cover. On the other hand, McCarthy's disclosures, if that is what she was fired for, may have cost good men and women their lives. If we want to win this war, covert operations are going to be an integral part of the formula for victory. Getting the covert ops people endangered, or killed just because you don't like the President is pretty close to treason. Hopefully, Ms McCarthy will serve a good long prison term together with her firing. Seems like a pretty big difference to me. But of course, I actually studiedwhen I was in school. Something Ms. Harmon apparently did not, judging by her fatuous and ignorant remarks.
Friday, April 21, 2006
Economy & Media
The United States economy is roaring along, by all accounts. Unemployment is hovering well below the average for the 70s, 80s or 90s (yes, that includes the vaunted 'Clinton Boom') but according to a new report, a majority of Americans trust Democrats to handle the economy more than Republicans. Never mind that the Democrats have produced exactly one economic boom (Clinton's) and that had to be forced on them by the Federal Reserve chairman! Meanwhile, the Republicans produced the booms of the 1980s and the 2000s, despite the attacks of September 11, and the resulting war.
So why don't Americans recognize this? Well, the main reason is a national Press corps that is bound and determined to get the Democrats into power at the first available opportunity, and which hates the Bush White House with deep passion. This Press will not report any good economic news and will emphasize anything that is bad, thus delivering a false picture of economic growth. And this Press will lie and deceive Americans as far as they are able in order to get their lemans in the Democratic Party back in power.
So what can Republicans do about it? Well, they need to start talking very loud about their achievements. And they need to do it in local papers and news stations that are less connected to the Bush-deranged national Press corps. They need to talk about what this administration has accomplished- and its accomplishments are many, despite the haters in the Media. But unless Republicans have the guts to do this, I think their chances of success in the elections are minimal.
In one regard, a Democratic victory in the midterm elections will put the onus on the Democrats to actually do something. They will no longer be able to simply carp and complain. But as their policies are surrender, retreat and cowardice (with the exception of Joe Lieberman), I fear that we cannot afford to open Americans' eyes to the true nature of the Democratic Party. They will pull out of Iraq, cower to the Chinese and the Iranians and kowtow to the UN. All of which puts us in mortal danger.
So why don't Americans recognize this? Well, the main reason is a national Press corps that is bound and determined to get the Democrats into power at the first available opportunity, and which hates the Bush White House with deep passion. This Press will not report any good economic news and will emphasize anything that is bad, thus delivering a false picture of economic growth. And this Press will lie and deceive Americans as far as they are able in order to get their lemans in the Democratic Party back in power.
So what can Republicans do about it? Well, they need to start talking very loud about their achievements. And they need to do it in local papers and news stations that are less connected to the Bush-deranged national Press corps. They need to talk about what this administration has accomplished- and its accomplishments are many, despite the haters in the Media. But unless Republicans have the guts to do this, I think their chances of success in the elections are minimal.
In one regard, a Democratic victory in the midterm elections will put the onus on the Democrats to actually do something. They will no longer be able to simply carp and complain. But as their policies are surrender, retreat and cowardice (with the exception of Joe Lieberman), I fear that we cannot afford to open Americans' eyes to the true nature of the Democratic Party. They will pull out of Iraq, cower to the Chinese and the Iranians and kowtow to the UN. All of which puts us in mortal danger.
Thursday, April 20, 2006
The Dookie Scandal
Posting has been light of late while I deal with some medical issues. However, I am back in the saddle, and I must say that the Duke rape case is getting interesting, though I deplore the mindset of the media that attracts them to such spectacles. Needless to say, as a Tar Heel, I have little sympathy for the elite and obnoxious behavior that is so often associated with the rich and spoiled New Yorkers and NorthEasterners who inhabit Duke University. However, I cannot remain silent while there is a clear bias as well.
According to the Durham, North Carolina Herald-Sun, a teen-aged (probably black) murder suspect, had his bail set at $50000. However, the accused Duke lacrosse players had to post $400000 in order to secure their release. This in a case where there is serious doubt that a crime has even occurred, according to the evidence released thus far. And in a case where at least one of the indicted students apparently was already gone from the party when the supposed 'rape' occurred.
I would never argue that rape is a minor offense. However, it seems that all a woman has to do is cry 'Rape' and immediately the accused are considered guilty in the Court of the Press. The woman, as in the Kobe Bryant case, clearly has credibility issues, and her story, at least on the available evidence, does not stand up well. Yet she is a 'victim' and her name cannot even be published. While the students are dragged across the dirty pages of the nation's scandal-mongers. Is this fair? I do not think so. If the woman were the same color as the students, this would be left off the front pages. If the woman were white and the players black, would race even be mentioned? Of course not. It's open season on whitey. But if the 'victim' is black, then of COURSE he/she must be a VICTIM. Gosh, he/she COULDN'T have maybe been an agent in this mess.
The race-baiters strike again. Only when they are as willing to condemn the violence committed by blacks against whites as they are the reverse will they command my respect. And unfortunately, they are completely unwilling to do that.
According to the Durham, North Carolina Herald-Sun, a teen-aged (probably black) murder suspect, had his bail set at $50000. However, the accused Duke lacrosse players had to post $400000 in order to secure their release. This in a case where there is serious doubt that a crime has even occurred, according to the evidence released thus far. And in a case where at least one of the indicted students apparently was already gone from the party when the supposed 'rape' occurred.
I would never argue that rape is a minor offense. However, it seems that all a woman has to do is cry 'Rape' and immediately the accused are considered guilty in the Court of the Press. The woman, as in the Kobe Bryant case, clearly has credibility issues, and her story, at least on the available evidence, does not stand up well. Yet she is a 'victim' and her name cannot even be published. While the students are dragged across the dirty pages of the nation's scandal-mongers. Is this fair? I do not think so. If the woman were the same color as the students, this would be left off the front pages. If the woman were white and the players black, would race even be mentioned? Of course not. It's open season on whitey. But if the 'victim' is black, then of COURSE he/she must be a VICTIM. Gosh, he/she COULDN'T have maybe been an agent in this mess.
The race-baiters strike again. Only when they are as willing to condemn the violence committed by blacks against whites as they are the reverse will they command my respect. And unfortunately, they are completely unwilling to do that.
Thursday, April 13, 2006
Energizing the Dem Base...
...or not. According to a new Los Angeles Times poll, (which should be taken with a large grain of salt, considering the lack of trustworthiness the Times has displayed recently, it appears that Democrats are less enthusiastic about a guest-worker program than Republicans. It also appears that among Democrats without a college degree, only 38 percent support legalizing the aliens who are invading our country. The support among Democrats in general is at only 59 percent, as opposed to 67p percent among Republicans.
Mickey Kaus, comments on this in the online version of Slate magazine, writing, "I think this means that black Democrats without a college degree oppose guest-worker plans by something like a 3-1 ratio, but the Times doesn't give the "especially low" breakout. Talk about demoralizing the base! Can Democrats afford to alienate the black vote going into the midterms?"
I wish that this was true. However, I would remind Mr. Kaus that the black vote has been loyal to the Democrats despite repeated evidence that the Republicans are actually much more aligned with their interests. They have been loyal despite bigots like Byrd and Kennedy sitting in Congress. The Democratic Party bought the black leadership a long time ago, and in election after election, the blacks vote the same party line without so much as a chirp. The few who do think for themselves are the Condoleeza Rices and the Thomas Sowells of the world- and they vote conservative. It seems that most blacks either cannot or will not get off the victimhood train- and will not think for themselves either. Apparently they would rather let their so-called 'leaders' do their thinking for them- as long as the welfare checks keep coming. And this embrace of victimhood is irritating, especially to sometone who has seen real racism- and it isn't here in the United States! As long as we are on the subject, the Asian immigrants, most of whom are legal, by the way, (Chinese, Japanese, etc) had a much harder time when they first got here than did the blacks post-Civil War. And they have mostly turned out fine, though they also seem to vote in a Dedmocratic bloc, which I don't reallly understand, unless they are hoping for some of the same victimhood handouts as the blacks and Latinos usually get.
In any event, while I respect Mr. Kaus' opinions, I do not think that the Democratic Party has much to worry about as regards their black membership. They can say or do anything and those reliable, 'disadvantaged' dupes will still vote the Democratic party line, sending racist ignoramouses like Cynthia McKinney to Congress, no matter what. Makes one sad, doesn't it?
Hat tip to Glenn Reynolds.
Mickey Kaus, comments on this in the online version of Slate magazine, writing, "I think this means that black Democrats without a college degree oppose guest-worker plans by something like a 3-1 ratio, but the Times doesn't give the "especially low" breakout. Talk about demoralizing the base! Can Democrats afford to alienate the black vote going into the midterms?"
I wish that this was true. However, I would remind Mr. Kaus that the black vote has been loyal to the Democrats despite repeated evidence that the Republicans are actually much more aligned with their interests. They have been loyal despite bigots like Byrd and Kennedy sitting in Congress. The Democratic Party bought the black leadership a long time ago, and in election after election, the blacks vote the same party line without so much as a chirp. The few who do think for themselves are the Condoleeza Rices and the Thomas Sowells of the world- and they vote conservative. It seems that most blacks either cannot or will not get off the victimhood train- and will not think for themselves either. Apparently they would rather let their so-called 'leaders' do their thinking for them- as long as the welfare checks keep coming. And this embrace of victimhood is irritating, especially to sometone who has seen real racism- and it isn't here in the United States! As long as we are on the subject, the Asian immigrants, most of whom are legal, by the way, (Chinese, Japanese, etc) had a much harder time when they first got here than did the blacks post-Civil War. And they have mostly turned out fine, though they also seem to vote in a Dedmocratic bloc, which I don't reallly understand, unless they are hoping for some of the same victimhood handouts as the blacks and Latinos usually get.
In any event, while I respect Mr. Kaus' opinions, I do not think that the Democratic Party has much to worry about as regards their black membership. They can say or do anything and those reliable, 'disadvantaged' dupes will still vote the Democratic party line, sending racist ignoramouses like Cynthia McKinney to Congress, no matter what. Makes one sad, doesn't it?
Hat tip to Glenn Reynolds.
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
Nuclear Mullahs
Iran has claimed on Tuesday that they have successfully enriched uranium for the first time. This was accompanied by a claim from the so-called 'President' that the Iranian nuclear program is 'peaceful'.
This is bad news all around. The Iranian leadership has shown on many occasions since 1979 that they do not respect the United States or international agencies. They have repeatedly flouted the UN's nuclear watchdog, and they are serious that they want to destroy the United States and establish Muslim rule (preferably led by themselves, naturally) over the entire globe.
When will the US leadership wake up? This problem could have been taken care of some years ago, but now the US is not able to do anything other than invade or try a massive air strike to knock out the Iranians' nuclear ambitions. The former may not be possible, thanks to the bitter antagonism shown this Administration by the Press and the Washington elites. Their savage attacks on the President and their unceasing hostility toward any attempts to defend this country against radical and hate-filled regimes (Saddam Hussein, the mullahs, Venezuela's Chavez, al Quaeda, etc) have seriously weakened the US credibility and may have put the possibility of military action out of reach for this President.
However, this needs to be addressed. There are two regimes in the world that must be stopped- North Korea and Iran. Removing China from the grip of the Communists would also be nice, but is not possible. Therefore, we need to pull the teeth of these two nations, so that the world can continue to dream away as Islam slowly takes their countries away. But at least we will be safer. And that is really the only question. Is the United States safer with Iran and North Korea out of the nuclear business? Yes. Both would have no compunction about selling nuclear weapons to a terrorist group, and both hate the United States deeply.
One hopes that President Bush will pull together his political willpower, especially now that he no longer needs to run for election and put the Iranians' nuclear program into deep freeze. And it would behoove us to use those troops in Iraq, if Iran makes any further noises about their nuclear program. Let's see if the mullahs' army is any better at fighting than was Saddam Hussein's. And quickly- before the Iranians really do unlock the nuclear genie, in which case we are in a world of trouble.
Hat tip to Matt Drudge.
This is bad news all around. The Iranian leadership has shown on many occasions since 1979 that they do not respect the United States or international agencies. They have repeatedly flouted the UN's nuclear watchdog, and they are serious that they want to destroy the United States and establish Muslim rule (preferably led by themselves, naturally) over the entire globe.
When will the US leadership wake up? This problem could have been taken care of some years ago, but now the US is not able to do anything other than invade or try a massive air strike to knock out the Iranians' nuclear ambitions. The former may not be possible, thanks to the bitter antagonism shown this Administration by the Press and the Washington elites. Their savage attacks on the President and their unceasing hostility toward any attempts to defend this country against radical and hate-filled regimes (Saddam Hussein, the mullahs, Venezuela's Chavez, al Quaeda, etc) have seriously weakened the US credibility and may have put the possibility of military action out of reach for this President.
However, this needs to be addressed. There are two regimes in the world that must be stopped- North Korea and Iran. Removing China from the grip of the Communists would also be nice, but is not possible. Therefore, we need to pull the teeth of these two nations, so that the world can continue to dream away as Islam slowly takes their countries away. But at least we will be safer. And that is really the only question. Is the United States safer with Iran and North Korea out of the nuclear business? Yes. Both would have no compunction about selling nuclear weapons to a terrorist group, and both hate the United States deeply.
One hopes that President Bush will pull together his political willpower, especially now that he no longer needs to run for election and put the Iranians' nuclear program into deep freeze. And it would behoove us to use those troops in Iraq, if Iran makes any further noises about their nuclear program. Let's see if the mullahs' army is any better at fighting than was Saddam Hussein's. And quickly- before the Iranians really do unlock the nuclear genie, in which case we are in a world of trouble.
Hat tip to Matt Drudge.
More Media Hubris
It appears that the Page 6 reporter from the New York Post, cannot believe that other reporters aren't rallying around. According to the Editor & Publisher website, the reporter in question, one Jared Paul Stern, reportedly said "I was surprised that the coverage wasn't a little more balanced." the magazine also reported Stern said the hostility against him will eventually "rebound."
Really? You attempt, by all reports to blackmail a (Democratic) billionaire, get caught, and of COURSE the Press will not come to your rescue. If Stern wanted the rest o the media to rally around, he ought to have tried to blackmail a Republican billionaire. Of course, those might be hard to find. Poll after poll has shown that it is the Democrats who rely on deep-pocketed donors (George Soros, Ben & Jerry, Steve Jobs, etc), not the Republicans
However, this exposes once again, the hypocrisy and arrogance of the media. The expectation that the Press would support him, is totally alien to most people caught doing something illegal. However, the MSM has shown time and time again that they believe that laws are for other people when they disagree. From the despicable leaking of black ops by the New York Times to the relentless refusal to portray the Administration in a positive light, the MSM have shown that they work as a pack and do not take anything laws seriously if it will advance their radical agenda. Even the recent coverage of the illegal alien protests showed this tendency. In the MSM, did you see any reporting about the anti-American groups who organized the rallies? International ANSWER, for example? MEChA? Of course not, the media believes that open borders and a radical, anti-American Latino lobby is a Good Thing. SO they will not report on anything that would discredit that belief.
In Stern's case, he will be tried and if the evidence is as extensive as has been reported so far, he will probably be found guilty. Then he will have a long time in prison to consider his crimes. However, for the rest of the MSM, the only way to punish them for their hubris, their elitism, and their stubborn refusal to print anything that they disagree with is to turn them off. Hit them in their pocketbooks. That seems to be the only thing that their masters understand.
Hat tip to Matt Drudge.
Really? You attempt, by all reports to blackmail a (Democratic) billionaire, get caught, and of COURSE the Press will not come to your rescue. If Stern wanted the rest o the media to rally around, he ought to have tried to blackmail a Republican billionaire. Of course, those might be hard to find. Poll after poll has shown that it is the Democrats who rely on deep-pocketed donors (George Soros, Ben & Jerry, Steve Jobs, etc), not the Republicans
However, this exposes once again, the hypocrisy and arrogance of the media. The expectation that the Press would support him, is totally alien to most people caught doing something illegal. However, the MSM has shown time and time again that they believe that laws are for other people when they disagree. From the despicable leaking of black ops by the New York Times to the relentless refusal to portray the Administration in a positive light, the MSM have shown that they work as a pack and do not take anything laws seriously if it will advance their radical agenda. Even the recent coverage of the illegal alien protests showed this tendency. In the MSM, did you see any reporting about the anti-American groups who organized the rallies? International ANSWER, for example? MEChA? Of course not, the media believes that open borders and a radical, anti-American Latino lobby is a Good Thing. SO they will not report on anything that would discredit that belief.
In Stern's case, he will be tried and if the evidence is as extensive as has been reported so far, he will probably be found guilty. Then he will have a long time in prison to consider his crimes. However, for the rest of the MSM, the only way to punish them for their hubris, their elitism, and their stubborn refusal to print anything that they disagree with is to turn them off. Hit them in their pocketbooks. That seems to be the only thing that their masters understand.
Hat tip to Matt Drudge.
Sunday, April 09, 2006
America Responds to the Illegal Alien Lobby
We have seen in the past few weeks a number of protests where American flags were burned,
carried upside down (as seen in the photo to the left), flown below Mexican flags and otherwise treated with contempt. The most recent of these events occurred on April 10, 2006 and once again, the United States flag was disrespected by these so-called "patriotic undocumented workers", as is shown in the afore-mentioned photo. As I said in an earlier article, these illegals may indeed be patriotic, but their loyalty clearly does not lie with their would-be adopted country. Rather, it either lies with their country of origin, or worse, with the racist and revolutionary sentiments espoused by such groups as MEChA. For an unbiased look at what MEChA is, please see the American Patrol's MEChA Site. From their own words (Por La Raza todo. Fuera de La Raza nada. = For the Race everything, outside the Race, nothing), they are a Latino equivalent to the Ku Klux Klan or the Nazi Party. Purity of Race anyone?
Now, a group of Americans who (like me and many other Americans) are sick and tired of these illegal (and racist) aliens demanding privileges they have not earned, and throwing their weight around when they are clearly in the wrong on this debate (unless you care to argue that the US has no right to enforce its own sovereign border, which is an argument that will get you laughed out of court by any judge) has decided to take the battle to the Mexicans themselves. The group of patriotic Americans, who call themselves the Border Guardians, identify themselves on their website as follows:
We are a group of American citizens who believe that defending America'’s sovereignty is the most important issue in the illegal immigration problem. For too many decades, American citizens have been subjected to a relentless psy-ops (psychological operations) and propaganda war by the left-wing advocates of illegal immigration. Some of these groups include the governments of Mexico and the United States, La Raza, ACLU, Border Action Network, MALDEF, Derechos Humanos, and No More Deaths. It is time for American citizens to fight back in the same way!
Clearly the Border Guardians are tired of this long campaign intended to undermine the sovereignty of the United States, and as an American, I find their logic entirely understandable. Apparently deciding to give these illegal fifth-element types a does of their own medicine as to how one's national banner should be treated, they burned a Mexican flag in front of the Mexican consulate in Tucson, Arizona, provoking many Mexicans into comments like "this is not a gesture of humanity, this is a gesture that provokes."
Really? A gesture that provokes? If the woman who said that feels this way, once might ask her why so many of her countrymen and countrywomen who are illegally in the United States are doing the same (and far worse) to the American flag? Does not the flag of the country that has given them far better lives and far more courteous treatment than their illegal and anti-American actions justify not also deserve respect? I would say yes. When I lived in Japan, I always remembered that I was a guest, and that as long as I lived there, the local laws were to be given more respect than even those of my native land. But then remember, those who agitate for amnesty are people who have so little respect for the laws and customs of the United States that they are willing to break any and every law of the US in their attempt to win privileges that no American has ever been granted in Mexico (or any other Latin American country, for that matter)!
Maybe this act will show the illegals and their handlers that respect for one's hosts is actually important. So far, the illegal movement has shown neither respect nor even courtesy to the country in which they are currently living. If they are angered when their own flag is burned, maybe they might get the hint that their own antics, which I described above, are equally anathema to the Americans whose hospitality they have so badly mistreated.
Hat tip and photo credit to Matt Drudge.
Friday, April 07, 2006
Economy Improves!
But you won't find anything about that in the Mainstream Media. The New York Times and it's slavish devotees in the other so-called mainstream 'news' organizations (ABC, NBC, CBS, etc) can't be bothered to report that the economy is steaming along at a rate that actually surpasses the fabled Clinton Boom.
According to Breitbart.com, unexpectedly large employer hiring brought the U.S. unemployment rate down to a record 4.7 percent, which according to the report is the lowest it has been in 4 and a half years. (Remember that the Clinton Era ushered in a decline in it's closing years, and the events of September 11, 2001 did not help the economy at all.) The fact that we have not only avoided a recession but have actually showed steady growth is a testament to the power of supply-side economics. When will the MSM make note of this and cease their socialist wailing?
in a related report, which the MSM also chose to ignore, it appears that consumer confidence rose to 89.4 on Ipsos' 100-point scale. This despite the MSM doing their best to create and maintain an atmosphere of gloom about the economy, in their ongoing attempts to sabotage Republican election prospects in general, and Geroge W. BUsh's Presidency in particular.
One wonders what it would take for the MSM to actually report on the news, instaead of their personal dreamlands. Maybe actually getting out of their elitist conclaves might help. But I think the only real cure for the malaise that afflicts the MSM is reader flight. As Michael Ledeen of National Review likes to say, "Faster, please."
According to Breitbart.com, unexpectedly large employer hiring brought the U.S. unemployment rate down to a record 4.7 percent, which according to the report is the lowest it has been in 4 and a half years. (Remember that the Clinton Era ushered in a decline in it's closing years, and the events of September 11, 2001 did not help the economy at all.) The fact that we have not only avoided a recession but have actually showed steady growth is a testament to the power of supply-side economics. When will the MSM make note of this and cease their socialist wailing?
in a related report, which the MSM also chose to ignore, it appears that consumer confidence rose to 89.4 on Ipsos' 100-point scale. This despite the MSM doing their best to create and maintain an atmosphere of gloom about the economy, in their ongoing attempts to sabotage Republican election prospects in general, and Geroge W. BUsh's Presidency in particular.
One wonders what it would take for the MSM to actually report on the news, instaead of their personal dreamlands. Maybe actually getting out of their elitist conclaves might help. But I think the only real cure for the malaise that afflicts the MSM is reader flight. As Michael Ledeen of National Review likes to say, "Faster, please."
Mag-Lev and Rail
I was first introduced to mag-lev (magnetic levitation) was in the 1986 Vancouver World Expo, where Japan's exhibit had a short mag-lev train for riding. I have been aware that Japan has continued to push ahead with their own mag-lev research, but until today, I had not kept up with developments in the United States.
However, according to Business Week, Senator Harry Reid has been continuously salting away research money for a mag-lev train from Anaheim to Las Vegas. This is interesting. Although mag-lev is a fascinating technology, I wonder if a train from Anaheim to Vegas is a worthwhile investment.
While I would be interested to see a practical use of the mag-lev technology, I also wonder if Americans can be convinced to once again use trains in preference to air travel. In Japan, the rail system is both very good and very extensive. In this country, that is not the case, and has not been the case for a good long time. Therefore, unless we can guarantee that Americans will embrace a rail travel that is still not as fast as air travel, I doubt this is a good investment.
While I am not a fan of the many stupidities of the DHS connected with air travel, I do not see a viable alternative at this time, especially in this age of time-is-of-the-essence business thinking. I like trains. But when I need to get to a business meeting today, I will fly. Even to Vegas.
My reasoning is that mag-lev is not particularly energy-efficient, and the number of passengers from LA to Vegas may or may not be enough to keep the train in the black. Also, is this really something that the federal government should be spending money on? If there is a company that thinks they can make a profit, by all means they should make some investments, but I do not think the Federal government should be spending taxpayer dollars for the benefit of LA and Las Vegas, two of the high-dollar tourist attractions already.
This also points to the problem of pork in the federal budget. While this can be rationalized as a good expense (R & D on a potentially useful technology), there are many similar earmarks salted away that have no such excuse. As a taxpayer, I am more than a little upset that the federal government exercises such laxity with our money. Maybe if they had to spend their own money for these things, they might understand the Pork-Busters movement. And if they don't it is time to replace them. The problem is that neither party shows any real budget restraint. The Republicans are spending like drunken sailors. Unfortunately, the Democrats' record is even worse- and they are also un-serious about security. So what is a frustrated taxpayer to do? Support a small-government candidate in the next primary. Let's get these big spenders out of Congress and give someone else a chance!
However, according to Business Week, Senator Harry Reid has been continuously salting away research money for a mag-lev train from Anaheim to Las Vegas. This is interesting. Although mag-lev is a fascinating technology, I wonder if a train from Anaheim to Vegas is a worthwhile investment.
While I would be interested to see a practical use of the mag-lev technology, I also wonder if Americans can be convinced to once again use trains in preference to air travel. In Japan, the rail system is both very good and very extensive. In this country, that is not the case, and has not been the case for a good long time. Therefore, unless we can guarantee that Americans will embrace a rail travel that is still not as fast as air travel, I doubt this is a good investment.
While I am not a fan of the many stupidities of the DHS connected with air travel, I do not see a viable alternative at this time, especially in this age of time-is-of-the-essence business thinking. I like trains. But when I need to get to a business meeting today, I will fly. Even to Vegas.
My reasoning is that mag-lev is not particularly energy-efficient, and the number of passengers from LA to Vegas may or may not be enough to keep the train in the black. Also, is this really something that the federal government should be spending money on? If there is a company that thinks they can make a profit, by all means they should make some investments, but I do not think the Federal government should be spending taxpayer dollars for the benefit of LA and Las Vegas, two of the high-dollar tourist attractions already.
This also points to the problem of pork in the federal budget. While this can be rationalized as a good expense (R & D on a potentially useful technology), there are many similar earmarks salted away that have no such excuse. As a taxpayer, I am more than a little upset that the federal government exercises such laxity with our money. Maybe if they had to spend their own money for these things, they might understand the Pork-Busters movement. And if they don't it is time to replace them. The problem is that neither party shows any real budget restraint. The Republicans are spending like drunken sailors. Unfortunately, the Democrats' record is even worse- and they are also un-serious about security. So what is a frustrated taxpayer to do? Support a small-government candidate in the next primary. Let's get these big spenders out of Congress and give someone else a chance!
About that Media 'Professionalism'...
it is apparently for sale to the highest bidder. According to the New York Daily news, a senior writer for the Page 6 gossip column tried to shakedown a billionaire in exchange for positive coverage.
Not that this comes as any surprise. The MSM has long been less a news source than a propaganda machine. They have provided positive coverage for free to the Left and to the Democratic Party in exchange for the advancement of their favored views. However, ask any Republican (other than John McCain) about how they are covered. Even the outrageously incompetent and racist Cynthia McKinney is presented positively by the MSM, despite her unconscionable accusations.
Coupled with the revelations of BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome) oin display recently at ABC, and the infamous attempts in 2000 and 2004 to throw the Presidentianl elections, the MSM no longer has a leg to stand on. Like the Mafia, they need to be reined in.
But what to do? I would recommend that a law be passed that any incorrect coverage must be either immediately corrected in the same location as the original mis-statement or the paper/news source must be fined in the range of five million dollars per incorrect story. The news organ would have 48 hiours from the time that the story was proven false to correct it, otherwise the fines would kick in. Also, if a news organ can be proven to have a systematic pattern of false or misleading stories aimed at one particular political POV or person, the old slander and libel. These are good laws. We need to start using them against the out-of-control media.
Not that this comes as any surprise. The MSM has long been less a news source than a propaganda machine. They have provided positive coverage for free to the Left and to the Democratic Party in exchange for the advancement of their favored views. However, ask any Republican (other than John McCain) about how they are covered. Even the outrageously incompetent and racist Cynthia McKinney is presented positively by the MSM, despite her unconscionable accusations.
Coupled with the revelations of BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome) oin display recently at ABC, and the infamous attempts in 2000 and 2004 to throw the Presidentianl elections, the MSM no longer has a leg to stand on. Like the Mafia, they need to be reined in.
But what to do? I would recommend that a law be passed that any incorrect coverage must be either immediately corrected in the same location as the original mis-statement or the paper/news source must be fined in the range of five million dollars per incorrect story. The news organ would have 48 hiours from the time that the story was proven false to correct it, otherwise the fines would kick in. Also, if a news organ can be proven to have a systematic pattern of false or misleading stories aimed at one particular political POV or person, the old slander and libel. These are good laws. We need to start using them against the out-of-control media.
Monday, April 03, 2006
Illegals and The Media
So the MSM have once again refused to meet the hordes of barbarians. In this case, that would be the intolerant racists who are the organizers of the Aztlan dreamers, otherwise known as MEChA.
These racists showed their true colors when they raised the American flag upside down under a Mexican flag in the Los Angeles area. Despite the claims of being 'American', there was little 'American' about these illegal aliens trying to force Congress into giving them carte blanche to break (and continue to insult) American sovereignty and law.
The Mexican-American War was fought over a hundred years ago, and it should have settled the question of ownership over the US southwest. If these hotheads want to try reconquering, then let them form an army and fight it out. If they do not have the courage to fight for it, then they do not deserve it. And I fear that so many of our so-called 'elites in the government and the Press (especially the Press) are too cowardly to defend their own culture and land.
Speaking off the Press, what is this mysterious desire for domination so many of them display? They call the Minutemen (a group of peaceful citizens who are attempting to rally support for actual enforcement of our laws and who desire a protected border) 'racists'. Yet I have yet to notice a single organ of the MSM calling MEChA's La Raza protests, and their mythical Aztlan dreams as racist. I have yet to hear a MSM reporter talk about the fact that most of these protestors were chanting in Spanish about how they were going to reclaim their land. What land, wetback? You are no more a native than are the descendents of the Pilgrims.
I can only hope that these protests eventually provoke a big enough backlash that we actually enforce our borders. La Raza already lost THAT war, and I'm damned if I am going to sit back and let them try to overturn the results of the Mexican-American War by street violence. Especially since the MSM is cheering them on. What makes the MSM so fervent for dhimmitude, whether it be La Raza or Islam? They won't stand up to Muslim claims of superiority, even going so far as to do their utmost to help the Islamists win against their own culture. And now they go out of their way to report on the riots as being 'peaceful' and 'patriotic'. Peaceful? Maybe. Patriotic? Only for Mexico.
I fail to understand why our leaders cannot understand that these people are here ILLEGALLY. They have no right to anything in this country, having broken the most basic law already- entering illegally. This country doesn't owe them anything- in fact it is quite the reverse. They are openly calling for the 'return' of the entire US Southwest and they show no respect for American culture, or law. We need to crack down on these illegals. Now.
On the other hand, I welcome LEGAL immigrants. These people stand in line patiently and many of them have something useful to offer to this great nation. The illegals may be convenient when you need crops picked or your lawn watered, but they offer no other useful service to the United States. But what to do about them? Well, I have a few suggestions.
I would like to see a wall along the lines of the Great Wall erected along the southern border and permanently manned with US Army members. And if an illegal is caught in the US, he/she will serve without pay for one year at whatever menial task the court assigned and he/she will then be dumped back across the border. Oh, and one other point. Once caught, that illegals' entire family is forever barred from seeking US residency or citizenship..
But what about the employers? Well, build the wall, and then crack down. Set crippling fines for being caught and make those fines per head, so that if a Mexican/Chinese/ethnic restaurant is caught with say three illegal employees, the restaurant is fined for each employee. I think a million dollar fine per illegal sounds about right.
In any event, I trust that the naked display of what the illegal immigrant lobby REALLY wants (Aztlan, Mexican ownership of the southwest US, etc) will trigger the US Congress into actually doing something about this flood of illegals. In peacetime, perhaps we could turn a tolerant eye, but this is war. And these illegals have already shown by their actions that they do not feel any allegiance to the United States.
These racists showed their true colors when they raised the American flag upside down under a Mexican flag in the Los Angeles area. Despite the claims of being 'American', there was little 'American' about these illegal aliens trying to force Congress into giving them carte blanche to break (and continue to insult) American sovereignty and law.
The Mexican-American War was fought over a hundred years ago, and it should have settled the question of ownership over the US southwest. If these hotheads want to try reconquering, then let them form an army and fight it out. If they do not have the courage to fight for it, then they do not deserve it. And I fear that so many of our so-called 'elites in the government and the Press (especially the Press) are too cowardly to defend their own culture and land.
Speaking off the Press, what is this mysterious desire for domination so many of them display? They call the Minutemen (a group of peaceful citizens who are attempting to rally support for actual enforcement of our laws and who desire a protected border) 'racists'. Yet I have yet to notice a single organ of the MSM calling MEChA's La Raza protests, and their mythical Aztlan dreams as racist. I have yet to hear a MSM reporter talk about the fact that most of these protestors were chanting in Spanish about how they were going to reclaim their land. What land, wetback? You are no more a native than are the descendents of the Pilgrims.
I can only hope that these protests eventually provoke a big enough backlash that we actually enforce our borders. La Raza already lost THAT war, and I'm damned if I am going to sit back and let them try to overturn the results of the Mexican-American War by street violence. Especially since the MSM is cheering them on. What makes the MSM so fervent for dhimmitude, whether it be La Raza or Islam? They won't stand up to Muslim claims of superiority, even going so far as to do their utmost to help the Islamists win against their own culture. And now they go out of their way to report on the riots as being 'peaceful' and 'patriotic'. Peaceful? Maybe. Patriotic? Only for Mexico.
I fail to understand why our leaders cannot understand that these people are here ILLEGALLY. They have no right to anything in this country, having broken the most basic law already- entering illegally. This country doesn't owe them anything- in fact it is quite the reverse. They are openly calling for the 'return' of the entire US Southwest and they show no respect for American culture, or law. We need to crack down on these illegals. Now.
On the other hand, I welcome LEGAL immigrants. These people stand in line patiently and many of them have something useful to offer to this great nation. The illegals may be convenient when you need crops picked or your lawn watered, but they offer no other useful service to the United States. But what to do about them? Well, I have a few suggestions.
I would like to see a wall along the lines of the Great Wall erected along the southern border and permanently manned with US Army members. And if an illegal is caught in the US, he/she will serve without pay for one year at whatever menial task the court assigned and he/she will then be dumped back across the border. Oh, and one other point. Once caught, that illegals' entire family is forever barred from seeking US residency or citizenship..
But what about the employers? Well, build the wall, and then crack down. Set crippling fines for being caught and make those fines per head, so that if a Mexican/Chinese/ethnic restaurant is caught with say three illegal employees, the restaurant is fined for each employee. I think a million dollar fine per illegal sounds about right.
In any event, I trust that the naked display of what the illegal immigrant lobby REALLY wants (Aztlan, Mexican ownership of the southwest US, etc) will trigger the US Congress into actually doing something about this flood of illegals. In peacetime, perhaps we could turn a tolerant eye, but this is war. And these illegals have already shown by their actions that they do not feel any allegiance to the United States.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
