..to the plate on immigration. If the federal government will not execute its constitutionally mandated duty to protect the border, then the states are using novel ways to step into the breach. In a story today, Breitbart.com reports that an Arizona judge has upheld a law used to target illegal immigrants and their smugglers.
According to the report, Judge Thomas O'Toole upheld the law despite arguments that it was never intended to target illegals- only their smugglers. Displaying a rare attack of common sense from a member of the legal profession, the judge said that their was no evidence the law "intended to exclude any prosecution for conspiracy to commit human smuggling." This allows the Maricopa County Attorney to continue to use the law to target illegal aliens and put them into prison or fine them if they are caught crossing the border.
This is very good news. Arizona and the other border states have suffered immensely from the illegal invasion, and since the US government seems more intent on protecting those who have no right to protection (the illegal aliens) than those whom they are legally sworn to protect (their constituents), the states are stepping up to the plate.
Hopefully, this will shame some Senators and Congresspeople into acting in Washington as well. It is time to stop pandering to people who have no right to be here and start thinking of the people who DO have a right to be here- the citizens and LEGAL residents of the United States. Are the Congress and the President listening?
Hat tip to Matt Drudge.
Saturday, June 10, 2006
Friday, June 09, 2006
Regarding LEGAL Immigration...
The service formerly known as the Immigration and Naturalization Service or INS (now renamed to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services- USCIS) is famous for capriciousness, arrogance, laziness and sheer incompetence. Having dealt myself with this agency on two separate occasions, I am intimately familiar with their complete lack of anything remotely resembling service. They rank on the same level as the IRS, without the latter's charm.
And apparently I am not the only person who so considers this agency to be in desperate need of a complete and total overhaul. A recent post on the near-miss of citizenship by a wounded LEGAL resident of the United States who was serving in the United States Armed Services by the estimable Japanese-born wife of Dayfdd ab Hugh is painfully true. Anyone who has ever had to deal with the capricious and arrogant inhabitants of this agency is well aware that they take great pleasure in treating anyone who is so unfortunate enough to deal with them in a manner calculated to provoke.
This agency needs a complete overhaul from top to bottom and it's leadership (if such incompetence can even be called leadership) needs thorough training in service. The supplicants of the USCIS are LEGALLY here, they did not swim the Rio Grande like the ILLEGAL ALIENS the Senate so badly wants to give amnesty to. On a slight tangent, I would like to make a note to our esteemed Senators- there is an enormous difference between people who came here LEGALLY and are trying to follow the Byzantine rules and regulations laid down by the USCIS and people who don't even respect us enough to follow the most basic of our laws- in short who break those laws in their illicit border crossings. I would think that the people who are trying their best to FOLLOW our laws and who are here LEGALLY (again, note the difference between LEGAL and ILLEGAL) are the people we should be trying to make welcome, not give them a bad impression of the US Government right off the bat. Again, having intimate experience with this agency gives me the knowledge that it is one that richly deserves all the contempt and disapprobriation that can be heaped upon it.
We need a replacement. Soon.
Hat tip to Sachi at Big Lizards.
And apparently I am not the only person who so considers this agency to be in desperate need of a complete and total overhaul. A recent post on the near-miss of citizenship by a wounded LEGAL resident of the United States who was serving in the United States Armed Services by the estimable Japanese-born wife of Dayfdd ab Hugh is painfully true. Anyone who has ever had to deal with the capricious and arrogant inhabitants of this agency is well aware that they take great pleasure in treating anyone who is so unfortunate enough to deal with them in a manner calculated to provoke.
This agency needs a complete overhaul from top to bottom and it's leadership (if such incompetence can even be called leadership) needs thorough training in service. The supplicants of the USCIS are LEGALLY here, they did not swim the Rio Grande like the ILLEGAL ALIENS the Senate so badly wants to give amnesty to. On a slight tangent, I would like to make a note to our esteemed Senators- there is an enormous difference between people who came here LEGALLY and are trying to follow the Byzantine rules and regulations laid down by the USCIS and people who don't even respect us enough to follow the most basic of our laws- in short who break those laws in their illicit border crossings. I would think that the people who are trying their best to FOLLOW our laws and who are here LEGALLY (again, note the difference between LEGAL and ILLEGAL) are the people we should be trying to make welcome, not give them a bad impression of the US Government right off the bat. Again, having intimate experience with this agency gives me the knowledge that it is one that richly deserves all the contempt and disapprobriation that can be heaped upon it.
We need a replacement. Soon.
Hat tip to Sachi at Big Lizards.
Democrats React To al-Zarqawi's Death
Scott Ott of Scrappleface blog posts a satire on the Democratic Party response to Zarquawi's death that is sadly not too far different from what the Drive-By Media and the Democrats on the Loony Left would really say if they thought they could get away with it. In this case, art imitates life a little TOO closely. However, it is still hilarious. Read the whole thing.
In the same Power Line post that brought this to my attention, there is also a link to a sober article by the esteemed Richard Miniter of the Human Events Online magazine on Zarqawi's atrocities (which interestingly the MSM are never eager to report on- much easier to excoriate the U.S. for holding terrorists in Guantanamo Bay) and a piece from the good folks at MEMRI on the reaction to Zarqwi's death in the Islamic media
(Note: the Iraqi paper Al-Rafadin called on al-Zarqawi and Hamas to go to hell after Hamas declared al-Zarqawi a martyr to the Arab nation. The Minneapolis Star-Tribue- yes, the same paper that illegally broke the news of the US breaking Japanese codes in WWII- fell far short of this standard in its own coverage iof the same event.) Read these as well. Interesting stuff. And the Drive-By Media will report on this, when.....?
Hat tip to the guys at Power Line.
In the same Power Line post that brought this to my attention, there is also a link to a sober article by the esteemed Richard Miniter of the Human Events Online magazine on Zarqawi's atrocities (which interestingly the MSM are never eager to report on- much easier to excoriate the U.S. for holding terrorists in Guantanamo Bay) and a piece from the good folks at MEMRI on the reaction to Zarqwi's death in the Islamic media
(Note: the Iraqi paper Al-Rafadin called on al-Zarqawi and Hamas to go to hell after Hamas declared al-Zarqawi a martyr to the Arab nation. The Minneapolis Star-Tribue- yes, the same paper that illegally broke the news of the US breaking Japanese codes in WWII- fell far short of this standard in its own coverage iof the same event.) Read these as well. Interesting stuff. And the Drive-By Media will report on this, when.....?
Hat tip to the guys at Power Line.
One Down- How Many Left?
I have been unable to post due to personal and professional commitments for the past few days, but the news from yesterday is simply too good to pass up. One of the biggest enemies to Western society and our way of life perished when the United States military, in conjunction with the Iraqi forces killed Abu Musab al-Zarqawi yesterday.
This news cannot be overstated, despite the near-gloom on the Left side of the blogosphere and the attempts of the Drive-By Media to downplay this. One commentator I heard made the very good point that the MSM seems highly pout out that the US is able to score a victory of this magnitude despite their determination that we have lost the war. Perhaps if they would spend a little more time actually reporting honestly on what is happening over in Iraq, fewer people would be against the war? The media has been trying since 2000 to destroy the Bush Presidency and they are determined to cause another Vietnam in Iraq, Interestingly enough, when I GOOGLE for al-Zarqawi's death, I cannot find any of the stories that ran yesterday on it. Could it be that the MSM do not want this story to be read? It is a thought....
I do not know the source of the media dislike for the United States, but I wish that they would either admit it or report objectively. The First Amendment is all well and good, but the Press needs to have some kind of oversight, since they are clearly walking very close to treason and in some cases (The New York Times comes to mind) they have already crossed that line, in my opinion.
However, this does not obscure the fact that AL-ZARQAWI IS DEAD!!!!!! We got the son-of-a gun, and hopefully the charred carcass of Bin Laden himself will not be far behind.
This also brings up an interesting point as to al-Quaeda's organization. With al-Zarqawi dead, the organization in Iraq lacks a leader. Bin Laden has been steadily more isolated and is running out of cohorts, as the US and its allies move ever closer to whatever cave he hides in. In Iraq, the al-Quaeda leadership has been decimated in recent months, according to documents and communications that have been intercepted. Now, with one stroke the US has wiped out the leader and several of his closest deputies, making it even harder for al-Quaeda to function. They may want to make a big splash, but they are finding it ever harder to move around and operate as the Iraqi forces become ever more efficient and the US troops move closer to their boltholes. This has already happened to the main al-Quaeda leadership- they are trapped in case and are not able to move freely anymore.
It will be very interesting to observe what happens now with al-Quaeda. I for one think their days are numbered. We are clearly winning on the battlefields. And if our media would display even a l;little patriotism, we would be winning here at home as well. Only the media's determination to destroy the United States and George Bush have given the Islamists the hope that they can win. Isn't it time to deploy the treason laws against the media, since it is easily provable that they are doing their best to help the enemies of the United States? It is proven from the terrorists' own mouths...
This news cannot be overstated, despite the near-gloom on the Left side of the blogosphere and the attempts of the Drive-By Media to downplay this. One commentator I heard made the very good point that the MSM seems highly pout out that the US is able to score a victory of this magnitude despite their determination that we have lost the war. Perhaps if they would spend a little more time actually reporting honestly on what is happening over in Iraq, fewer people would be against the war? The media has been trying since 2000 to destroy the Bush Presidency and they are determined to cause another Vietnam in Iraq, Interestingly enough, when I GOOGLE for al-Zarqawi's death, I cannot find any of the stories that ran yesterday on it. Could it be that the MSM do not want this story to be read? It is a thought....
I do not know the source of the media dislike for the United States, but I wish that they would either admit it or report objectively. The First Amendment is all well and good, but the Press needs to have some kind of oversight, since they are clearly walking very close to treason and in some cases (The New York Times comes to mind) they have already crossed that line, in my opinion.
However, this does not obscure the fact that AL-ZARQAWI IS DEAD!!!!!! We got the son-of-a gun, and hopefully the charred carcass of Bin Laden himself will not be far behind.
This also brings up an interesting point as to al-Quaeda's organization. With al-Zarqawi dead, the organization in Iraq lacks a leader. Bin Laden has been steadily more isolated and is running out of cohorts, as the US and its allies move ever closer to whatever cave he hides in. In Iraq, the al-Quaeda leadership has been decimated in recent months, according to documents and communications that have been intercepted. Now, with one stroke the US has wiped out the leader and several of his closest deputies, making it even harder for al-Quaeda to function. They may want to make a big splash, but they are finding it ever harder to move around and operate as the Iraqi forces become ever more efficient and the US troops move closer to their boltholes. This has already happened to the main al-Quaeda leadership- they are trapped in case and are not able to move freely anymore.
It will be very interesting to observe what happens now with al-Quaeda. I for one think their days are numbered. We are clearly winning on the battlefields. And if our media would display even a l;little patriotism, we would be winning here at home as well. Only the media's determination to destroy the United States and George Bush have given the Islamists the hope that they can win. Isn't it time to deploy the treason laws against the media, since it is easily provable that they are doing their best to help the enemies of the United States? It is proven from the terrorists' own mouths...
Friday, May 26, 2006
No, MSM, You are Not Exempt...
...from refusing to testify in criminal cases. Or so ordered a federal judge today. "The First Amendment does not protect a news reporter or that reporter's news organization from producing documents ... in a criminal case," said United States District Judge Reggie B. Walton in a ruling released today. According to Breitbart News, Walton ordered Time Magazine and the New York Times to turn over parts of their reporters' notes to the defense team of former Vice-Presidential Chief of Staff Lewis Libby.
This is good news to those of us who find the Drive-By Media a little too imperial for our tastes. Ordinary citizens do not have a choice whether or not they can testify in a criminal case, and certainly are not able to withold information simply because they feel like it. The Press, however, has been throwing their weight around for some time pretending that the US Constitution's First Amendment somehow puts them above the law. They have even been agitating for an official federal shield law to allow them to be the ultimate arbiters of what is fit to print and what isn't - even if it is illegal, as the New York Times's publication of the NSA's phone database almost certainly was.
But do reporters have a right to withold information from judges in a criminal case? Let's review. The actual text of the First Amendment says:
I don't see anything in that Amendment allowing reporters to decide when they will testify in criminal cases and when they will not. Fortunately, the judge in this case resisted the media pressure and (correctly) found the same thing. Although I am sure the Press will appeal, this will hopefully prove to be a sobering impulse to a news media that is entirely too impressed with itself, despite the many documented failures of the Press to report the facts, such as Katrina, the Iraq war, the last two Presidential elections, the forged Bush Guard memos and others.
Hat tip to Matt Drudge.
This is good news to those of us who find the Drive-By Media a little too imperial for our tastes. Ordinary citizens do not have a choice whether or not they can testify in a criminal case, and certainly are not able to withold information simply because they feel like it. The Press, however, has been throwing their weight around for some time pretending that the US Constitution's First Amendment somehow puts them above the law. They have even been agitating for an official federal shield law to allow them to be the ultimate arbiters of what is fit to print and what isn't - even if it is illegal, as the New York Times's publication of the NSA's phone database almost certainly was.
But do reporters have a right to withold information from judges in a criminal case? Let's review. The actual text of the First Amendment says:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
I don't see anything in that Amendment allowing reporters to decide when they will testify in criminal cases and when they will not. Fortunately, the judge in this case resisted the media pressure and (correctly) found the same thing. Although I am sure the Press will appeal, this will hopefully prove to be a sobering impulse to a news media that is entirely too impressed with itself, despite the many documented failures of the Press to report the facts, such as Katrina, the Iraq war, the last two Presidential elections, the forged Bush Guard memos and others.
Hat tip to Matt Drudge.
Thursday, May 25, 2006
More MSM Lies?
Despite an offical announcement from the Justice Department that Speaker of the House of Representatives Dennis Hastert is NOT under investigation, ABC News apparently cannot let go their jihad (shared with the rest of the Drive-By Media) against all Republicans. They are continuing to report that Hastert IS under investigation despite the DoJ's denial. Note to the MSM: Knowingly continuing to do false reporting about someone that damages that person's reputation after the facts have been disseminated constitutes libel. You are not exempt from libel and defamation charges, and apparently Speaker Hastert intends to press those charges, based on this letter that his attorney sent to ABC News today.
I have no particular respect for Speaker Hastert or any other member of the pork-laden Republican leadership. However, the so-called 'Mainstream' news media has been reporting false, misleading and sometimes borderline treasonous stories about Republicans in general and President Bush in particular since the 2000 elections when the MSM tried and failed to illegally throw the election to Gore by mis-reporting the results in Florida. This is merely another example of a hack job, like the Fitzmas reports of a Karl Rove indictment that never seem to happen, yet the MSM continually is anticipating.
I think it is high time that someone used the libel and possibly even the treason laws that are already on the books against the MSM for their consistently false and misleading reporting. I would like to see the Press brought to heel more sharply, since they cannot or will not report the real stories. This SHOULD have happened after they broke federal election law by projecting Florida in 2000 to Gore while the polls were still open, thus disccouraging who-knows-how-many people in the heavily Republican north-western part of the state from even voting.
More recently, the MSM's infamous Katrina coverage, their clear sympathies with the terrorists and their related refusal to report succcess stories in Iraq, their attempt to throw the 2004 Presidential election with the George W. Bush National Guard forgeries which were comprehensively exposed by Dr. Joseph Newcomer, the constant libeling of the President, the leaking of national security secrets, all of these are black marks on the national media, yet no one seems to be able to bring them to account for these spectacular failures. It is high time that someone stood up to this arrogant, spoiled group of children and brought them back to Earth, instead tof the BDS fever swamps so many of them seem to inhabit. I will be rooting for Speaker Hastert in any court case against ABC News.
Hat tip to Matt Drudge.
I have no particular respect for Speaker Hastert or any other member of the pork-laden Republican leadership. However, the so-called 'Mainstream' news media has been reporting false, misleading and sometimes borderline treasonous stories about Republicans in general and President Bush in particular since the 2000 elections when the MSM tried and failed to illegally throw the election to Gore by mis-reporting the results in Florida. This is merely another example of a hack job, like the Fitzmas reports of a Karl Rove indictment that never seem to happen, yet the MSM continually is anticipating.
I think it is high time that someone used the libel and possibly even the treason laws that are already on the books against the MSM for their consistently false and misleading reporting. I would like to see the Press brought to heel more sharply, since they cannot or will not report the real stories. This SHOULD have happened after they broke federal election law by projecting Florida in 2000 to Gore while the polls were still open, thus disccouraging who-knows-how-many people in the heavily Republican north-western part of the state from even voting.
More recently, the MSM's infamous Katrina coverage, their clear sympathies with the terrorists and their related refusal to report succcess stories in Iraq, their attempt to throw the 2004 Presidential election with the George W. Bush National Guard forgeries which were comprehensively exposed by Dr. Joseph Newcomer, the constant libeling of the President, the leaking of national security secrets, all of these are black marks on the national media, yet no one seems to be able to bring them to account for these spectacular failures. It is high time that someone stood up to this arrogant, spoiled group of children and brought them back to Earth, instead tof the BDS fever swamps so many of them seem to inhabit. I will be rooting for Speaker Hastert in any court case against ABC News.
Hat tip to Matt Drudge.
Tuesday, May 23, 2006
About that Global Warming, Al....
Al Gore, the one-time center-left politician from Tennessee, and now a global-warming eco-freak, is running around the world crying wolf about human-induced global warming. And spending lots of money and gas to do it. If Gore is truly concerned about global warming, maybe he ought to think about the consequences of using five cars to go a few blocks for a movie premiere in Cannes? This latest evidence of Gore's arrogance is hilarious if John Lott is correct that walking would have been faster. I love folks who don't practice what they preach, but then that is a failing of lefties- they are so superior to us common folks, so they don't need to follow their own orders, don't you know?
In any event, opponents of the Kyoto Protocol and other international boondoggles have been saying for a long time that the entire idea of 'global warming' is simply not proven. And now there is more evidence that the global warming debate may be lots of hot air about nothing. The National Center for Policy Analysis has just published a new study stating that the science behind the global warming movement is "fatally flawed".
I am not a environmental scientist, and am still up in the air on whether or not global warming actually exists. However, I am firmly in the doubters' camp on the question of whther or not global warming is human-induced. Since there appears to be neither a consensus on the issue nor proof that humans are causeing the Earth's atmosphere to heat up, I am ready to listen to any reasonable argument. However, Hollywood tear-fests based on dubious sciennce and bankrolled by known left-wing moonbats are not my idea of a reasonable argument. The eco-freaks are like a blind religion, and their tactics of pushing their message in their lemming-like Drive-By Media (phrase courtesy of Rush Limbaugh) are not to my liking.
Again, while I have yet to make up my mind if global warming itself is a real issue, I would at least recommend that the opposing side get a hearing. I do not believe we can determine the truth (of lack thereof) in the global warming debate until both sides have an opportunity to present their evidence.
05/25/2006 UPDATE: When I initially posted on Al Gore's five-car entourage to go roughly 500 yards at Cannes, I was unable to find the original press story to link. However, I have been able to recitfy that. Reuters India has the story.
In any event, opponents of the Kyoto Protocol and other international boondoggles have been saying for a long time that the entire idea of 'global warming' is simply not proven. And now there is more evidence that the global warming debate may be lots of hot air about nothing. The National Center for Policy Analysis has just published a new study stating that the science behind the global warming movement is "fatally flawed".
I am not a environmental scientist, and am still up in the air on whether or not global warming actually exists. However, I am firmly in the doubters' camp on the question of whther or not global warming is human-induced. Since there appears to be neither a consensus on the issue nor proof that humans are causeing the Earth's atmosphere to heat up, I am ready to listen to any reasonable argument. However, Hollywood tear-fests based on dubious sciennce and bankrolled by known left-wing moonbats are not my idea of a reasonable argument. The eco-freaks are like a blind religion, and their tactics of pushing their message in their lemming-like Drive-By Media (phrase courtesy of Rush Limbaugh) are not to my liking.
Again, while I have yet to make up my mind if global warming itself is a real issue, I would at least recommend that the opposing side get a hearing. I do not believe we can determine the truth (of lack thereof) in the global warming debate until both sides have an opportunity to present their evidence.
05/25/2006 UPDATE: When I initially posted on Al Gore's five-car entourage to go roughly 500 yards at Cannes, I was unable to find the original press story to link. However, I have been able to recitfy that. Reuters India has the story.
China Dumbs Down?
China is attempting to make their language easier for their citizens to understand. According to a Reuters story, China's media is using fewer characters in their publications. The story states that out of the thousands of extant characters, one only needs around 900 to understand 90 percent of a typical news story. This is interesting in that one needs roughly 2000 characters to function in everyday life in Japan. It had been my understanding that the number of characters required for everyday life in China far exceeded the number necessary in Japan. However, it appears I was mistaken.
The Chinese government began simplifying the Chinese syllabary after their victory in the Chinese Civil War of 1949. However, the Communist version of Chinese, known as Simplified Chinese, has heretofore not gained wide usage amongst overseas Chinese and non-mainlanders. Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macao and most overseas communities still use Traditional Chinese characters, not the newer Simplified. In their attempt to simplify the syllabary, the Chinese are following the lead of Japan, which performed a similar operation in 1945, when they simplified the common characters into the current 1945 Joyo Kanji 常用漢字 (you will need to set your browser to ISO 2022-JP in order to view these), plus the special characters used in Japanese names.
This effort also brings to mind similar effforts by the US education establishment to dumb down the curriculum of American education following the Second World War. In that case, much of the classical education required of young men and women has been lost, leading to an educational system that far too frequently fails to teach our young people anything of value. Touchy-feely education has never replaced a good hard regimen of learning. Throughout our history until very recently, most Americans were expected to have a more than passing familiarity with the classics of Western Civilization, and to have exposure to the great writers such as Shakespeare. Actual knowledge and expertise in the mathematics was also a requirement. That has all gone by the board, as modern teachers seem more interested in pushing a hard-left ideology than actually teaching their charges the necessities that will give them a leg up on life.
In the case of China, this is not an issue, as they are trying to pucsh themselves up, not tear themselves down as we seem to be. However, I am not sure how this will eventually play out, as despite the attempt to simplify the language, one still needs to know a large number (the Reuters article states that a university graduate typically knows around 6000 characters) to function in more than the bare minimum of daily life situations. Even in Japanese, one often encounters rarely-used or classical characters in business or academia. However, the spirit of the Chinese attempt to simplify their language seems to be in good sense, as all languages that use a complicated script like Chinese make it difficult both for practitioners of the language to interact with non-native speakers, and it serves as a barrier to foreign investment as well.
The Chinese government began simplifying the Chinese syllabary after their victory in the Chinese Civil War of 1949. However, the Communist version of Chinese, known as Simplified Chinese, has heretofore not gained wide usage amongst overseas Chinese and non-mainlanders. Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macao and most overseas communities still use Traditional Chinese characters, not the newer Simplified. In their attempt to simplify the syllabary, the Chinese are following the lead of Japan, which performed a similar operation in 1945, when they simplified the common characters into the current 1945 Joyo Kanji 常用漢字 (you will need to set your browser to ISO 2022-JP in order to view these), plus the special characters used in Japanese names.
This effort also brings to mind similar effforts by the US education establishment to dumb down the curriculum of American education following the Second World War. In that case, much of the classical education required of young men and women has been lost, leading to an educational system that far too frequently fails to teach our young people anything of value. Touchy-feely education has never replaced a good hard regimen of learning. Throughout our history until very recently, most Americans were expected to have a more than passing familiarity with the classics of Western Civilization, and to have exposure to the great writers such as Shakespeare. Actual knowledge and expertise in the mathematics was also a requirement. That has all gone by the board, as modern teachers seem more interested in pushing a hard-left ideology than actually teaching their charges the necessities that will give them a leg up on life.
In the case of China, this is not an issue, as they are trying to pucsh themselves up, not tear themselves down as we seem to be. However, I am not sure how this will eventually play out, as despite the attempt to simplify the language, one still needs to know a large number (the Reuters article states that a university graduate typically knows around 6000 characters) to function in more than the bare minimum of daily life situations. Even in Japanese, one often encounters rarely-used or classical characters in business or academia. However, the spirit of the Chinese attempt to simplify their language seems to be in good sense, as all languages that use a complicated script like Chinese make it difficult both for practitioners of the language to interact with non-native speakers, and it serves as a barrier to foreign investment as well.
Monday, May 22, 2006
Baby-Boom Ethos Reaches Japan
It has long been recognized by most responsible people that the Baby Boomers, especially the free-love, drug-addiicted, lefties who are the face of the late Sixties and Seventies in this country are responsible for severely damaging the United States' long and proud tradition of self-reliance through their spoiled, arrogant assumption that only they know best. People like Barbra Streisand, Jane Fonda and Teddy Kennedy- cosseted, spoiled brats who have never had to work for a living and have not been forced by the largely partisan media into paying for their sins. However, it appears that this phenomenon is not unique to the United States.
Acccording to the Japanese Shukan Post (週間ポスト) there is a similar, though probably less-dangerous impulse currently sweeping Japan as well. According to the Post, young Japanese are engaging in sex at younger ages and refusing to enter into the all-out work life that marked their forebears. The Post also comments that their paerents are increasingly living in joyless lives of their own and are seeking romance outside of marriage, as well as increasingly not enjoying the fruits of marriage between themselves. The general drift is that society is breaking down and the new generation will be the death of the Japanese nation.
While I do not believe that the young Japanese are as bad as the Post seems to think, I do agree that the breakdown of society is not always a good thing. The so-pleased-with-themselves Baby Boomers have contributed virtually nothing positive to the United States (despite their claims to the contrary) and the young Japanese risk falling into the same trap. So the Post's article comes as a warning shot. Too bad the media in this country are too busy trying to destroy another Presidency they dislike to take heed to the dangers they are attempting to sow.
Hat tip to Mentok.
Acccording to the Japanese Shukan Post (週間ポスト) there is a similar, though probably less-dangerous impulse currently sweeping Japan as well. According to the Post, young Japanese are engaging in sex at younger ages and refusing to enter into the all-out work life that marked their forebears. The Post also comments that their paerents are increasingly living in joyless lives of their own and are seeking romance outside of marriage, as well as increasingly not enjoying the fruits of marriage between themselves. The general drift is that society is breaking down and the new generation will be the death of the Japanese nation.
While I do not believe that the young Japanese are as bad as the Post seems to think, I do agree that the breakdown of society is not always a good thing. The so-pleased-with-themselves Baby Boomers have contributed virtually nothing positive to the United States (despite their claims to the contrary) and the young Japanese risk falling into the same trap. So the Post's article comes as a warning shot. Too bad the media in this country are too busy trying to destroy another Presidency they dislike to take heed to the dangers they are attempting to sow.
Hat tip to Mentok.
More Immigration Stupidity
So, what part of illegal alien does our wonderful Senate NOT understand? According to the Washington Times, I see that the Senate has so far killed the penalty for employing illegals, and has also given them access to Social Security funds that they have got by lying and breaking American law In addition, they are apparently ambivalent on protecting the border by building an actual, real WALL and they have also, as Senator Sessions of Alabama said made it even more imperative for more Mexican wetbacks to swim the border by pushing for a massive amnesty.
This is NOT what the American people want. Poll after poll, as demonstrated by this FoxNews poll show sizable majorities of Americans want enforcement first. Even sizable (60-70percent) of women and Democrats favor using troops on the border to stop illegal immigration. Why are our Senators unable to understand this? The House didn't seem to have any problem with the concept, except for the usual left-wing moonbats like Nancy Pelosi and Barbara Lee. I also fail to understand why our elected representatives in the Senate are so blind to the fact that they are increasing the load on American citizens and legal residents (the folks who got here by obeying the law and jumping through all the INS' hoops) in favor of uneducated, anti-American, law-breakers who respect not our cculture, nor our language nor our traditions and certainly not our laws.
So you think I am being harsh on these poor Mexicans by referring to them by the derogatory term 'wetback'? Well, let's review. As I have mentioned before, there are two kinds of immigration- though you would never know by reading what Rush Limbaugh hilariously (and truthfully) calls the 'Drive-by media"! There are legal immigrants who are usually educated, and who have stood in line and filled out many forms and who are actually interested in being Americans. I have a number of good friends who are originally from China. One of them recently became a citizen, after many years of being a legal resident, and I remember when he got back from his ceremony, he was so proud that he was now a citizen. My own wife, who is a legal resident and who is originally from Japan, received her green card a few years back, and she also was both proud and a little amused at the INS' vagaries. However, both my wife and my friend are educated professionals who are law-abiding, valuable assets to this country. My friends are mostly engineers and my wife is a nurse. They didn't jump the border and they are not demonstrating in the streets for rights that they have not earned. Why can't our elected representatives give people like my friends and my wife the respect they have earned instead of throwing them under the bus in favor of a wave of American-hating, entitlement-wanting La Raza scumbags?
Being in the United States is not a right, it is a privilege. And it is absolutely the duty of every American citizen to let these idiots in the Senate know that. It is time to pull in the welcome mat for our southern border. Put the United States Army down there and build a wall along the lines of the Great Wall to protect our citizens from these criminals. And then if Mexico's government wants to push, let them. And if they want a war, we are more than ready. It is time to call this illegal onslaught from Mexico and the southern hemisphere, aided and abetted by rich, corrupt politicians who don't want to upset their little cronyist applecart the invasion that it is. When the Mexican government is publishing handbooks on how to break US law, it is time to make Mexico understand that their are consequences to being unfriendly. And I for one am tired of Mexico running immigration policy in Washington.
Hat tip for the text of the Sessions speech to Joe Guzzardi of the blog VDare.com. Hat tip on the Washington Times article to the inestimable Michalle Malkin, who as usual is on top of this disgrace.
This is NOT what the American people want. Poll after poll, as demonstrated by this FoxNews poll show sizable majorities of Americans want enforcement first. Even sizable (60-70percent) of women and Democrats favor using troops on the border to stop illegal immigration. Why are our Senators unable to understand this? The House didn't seem to have any problem with the concept, except for the usual left-wing moonbats like Nancy Pelosi and Barbara Lee. I also fail to understand why our elected representatives in the Senate are so blind to the fact that they are increasing the load on American citizens and legal residents (the folks who got here by obeying the law and jumping through all the INS' hoops) in favor of uneducated, anti-American, law-breakers who respect not our cculture, nor our language nor our traditions and certainly not our laws.
So you think I am being harsh on these poor Mexicans by referring to them by the derogatory term 'wetback'? Well, let's review. As I have mentioned before, there are two kinds of immigration- though you would never know by reading what Rush Limbaugh hilariously (and truthfully) calls the 'Drive-by media"! There are legal immigrants who are usually educated, and who have stood in line and filled out many forms and who are actually interested in being Americans. I have a number of good friends who are originally from China. One of them recently became a citizen, after many years of being a legal resident, and I remember when he got back from his ceremony, he was so proud that he was now a citizen. My own wife, who is a legal resident and who is originally from Japan, received her green card a few years back, and she also was both proud and a little amused at the INS' vagaries. However, both my wife and my friend are educated professionals who are law-abiding, valuable assets to this country. My friends are mostly engineers and my wife is a nurse. They didn't jump the border and they are not demonstrating in the streets for rights that they have not earned. Why can't our elected representatives give people like my friends and my wife the respect they have earned instead of throwing them under the bus in favor of a wave of American-hating, entitlement-wanting La Raza scumbags?
Being in the United States is not a right, it is a privilege. And it is absolutely the duty of every American citizen to let these idiots in the Senate know that. It is time to pull in the welcome mat for our southern border. Put the United States Army down there and build a wall along the lines of the Great Wall to protect our citizens from these criminals. And then if Mexico's government wants to push, let them. And if they want a war, we are more than ready. It is time to call this illegal onslaught from Mexico and the southern hemisphere, aided and abetted by rich, corrupt politicians who don't want to upset their little cronyist applecart the invasion that it is. When the Mexican government is publishing handbooks on how to break US law, it is time to make Mexico understand that their are consequences to being unfriendly. And I for one am tired of Mexico running immigration policy in Washington.
Hat tip for the text of the Sessions speech to Joe Guzzardi of the blog VDare.com. Hat tip on the Washington Times article to the inestimable Michalle Malkin, who as usual is on top of this disgrace.
Tuesday, May 16, 2006
Mexico Wants to Sue
...so let them sue. According to a report by the AP, Mexico is threatening to sue if National Guard begin detaining illegal aliens on the US/Mexican border. My reaction, is to go right ahead. Every country has the right to secure its own sovereign borders and what Mexico does in purusing an open border into the US for its citizens, yet not reciprocating with rights for illegal US immigration is a disgrace. If Mexico cannot control its people, there is no reason why we Americans have to foot the bill.
I would actually push for much more stringent enforcement. There have been reports in the past that the Mexican military has encroached on US soil to help illegal aliens ccross the border. Maybe the National Guard can cut down on that. I don't think Mexico is ready for a war with the US, and if a National Guardsman is killed by a Mexican illegal or one of Mexico's soldiers, I think that there will be a backlash that dwarfs what we have so far seen. Most people in this country are not in favor of the open borders ideals espoused by Mexico. If they are so fond of open borders, how come other South Americans are not permitted to enter their country the same way they want us to permit their citizens to enter ours?
Finally, I think this is a wonderful opportunity for Congress to rein in the court system. The next federal judge who rules that we cannot enforce our own borders ought to be impeached and removed from his or her position post-haste. We are not required to suspend all ofr our own laws and customss just because a not-always-friendly foreign government wants to use us as a release valve for their own corrupt system. And if our politicians can't understand that American wishes matter more than illegal alien wishes, then they deserve to lose their next elections. And that goes for Republicans as well as DEmocrats. No one should pander when the subject is control of our sovereign borders. If Mexico wants to suborn our own system, then maybe we ought to teach them a lesson- a military one. I doubt they are any more ready to defeat us now than they were in 1848.
I would actually push for much more stringent enforcement. There have been reports in the past that the Mexican military has encroached on US soil to help illegal aliens ccross the border. Maybe the National Guard can cut down on that. I don't think Mexico is ready for a war with the US, and if a National Guardsman is killed by a Mexican illegal or one of Mexico's soldiers, I think that there will be a backlash that dwarfs what we have so far seen. Most people in this country are not in favor of the open borders ideals espoused by Mexico. If they are so fond of open borders, how come other South Americans are not permitted to enter their country the same way they want us to permit their citizens to enter ours?
Finally, I think this is a wonderful opportunity for Congress to rein in the court system. The next federal judge who rules that we cannot enforce our own borders ought to be impeached and removed from his or her position post-haste. We are not required to suspend all ofr our own laws and customss just because a not-always-friendly foreign government wants to use us as a release valve for their own corrupt system. And if our politicians can't understand that American wishes matter more than illegal alien wishes, then they deserve to lose their next elections. And that goes for Republicans as well as DEmocrats. No one should pander when the subject is control of our sovereign borders. If Mexico wants to suborn our own system, then maybe we ought to teach them a lesson- a military one. I doubt they are any more ready to defeat us now than they were in 1848.
Thursday, May 11, 2006
President vs Press, Round Two
Well, it is about time, in my opinion. According to a report published in the national Examiner.com, the new White House press secretary, former Fox pundit Tony Snow, came out firing at the biased press coverage of the White House. His first act was to issue detailed and specific rebuttals of the current "news" in emails sent to the various press organizations. He specifically targeted the New York Times and CBS News, sending an email stating “CBS News misleadingly reports that only 8 million seniors have signed up for Medicare prescription drug coverage,” Wednesday’s missive said. “But 37 million seniors have coverage.” His email about the Times said “The New York Times continues to ignore America’s economic progress,”.
This is a good sign. For too long, the White House has allowed the nation's biased and partisan press corps to portray the Adminstration in an unflattering light. Their consistent refusal to print any good news and their unrelenting attacks on the President and his staff has been long untroubled by any counter-attack from the President. Hopefully Mr. Snow will be able to change that. In any case, a vigorous, truthful offense as this is, is a better alternative than a passive defense. Keep up the good work, Mr. Snow. And maybe the rest of the Adminstration will follow this example. It is not enough to be right- one must be able to present one's case to the public as well, especially in the face of a hostile and anti-American Press.
Hat tip to Matt Drudge.
This is a good sign. For too long, the White House has allowed the nation's biased and partisan press corps to portray the Adminstration in an unflattering light. Their consistent refusal to print any good news and their unrelenting attacks on the President and his staff has been long untroubled by any counter-attack from the President. Hopefully Mr. Snow will be able to change that. In any case, a vigorous, truthful offense as this is, is a better alternative than a passive defense. Keep up the good work, Mr. Snow. And maybe the rest of the Adminstration will follow this example. It is not enough to be right- one must be able to present one's case to the public as well, especially in the face of a hostile and anti-American Press.
Hat tip to Matt Drudge.
Tuesday, May 09, 2006
Common Sense
I may have said this before, but Jerry Pournelle is a voice of real common sense in an increasingly nonsensical time. Back in February of this year, he wrote a commentary on liberalism that remains required reading for those of us who are avowed conservatives, libertarians and such.
Read the whole thing. If I have linked to this before, my apologies. However, I believe that it can never be read too many times. And there is much of interest on the rest of his site as well, including an amusing comment on the Great Illegal Walkout. Mr. Pournelle's report makes me wish the illegals would stage walkouts every day of the year.....
Hat tip to Mentok.
Read the whole thing. If I have linked to this before, my apologies. However, I believe that it can never be read too many times. And there is much of interest on the rest of his site as well, including an amusing comment on the Great Illegal Walkout. Mr. Pournelle's report makes me wish the illegals would stage walkouts every day of the year.....
Hat tip to Mentok.
Return of Star Wars
They called former President Ronald Reagan an idiot for even suggesting the famed Space (CORRECTION: Strategic) Defense Initiative back during his term in office. And his critics in the media and the Democratic party (which amounts to roughly the same thing) were legion. However, as a recent article by James Thayer for the Weekly Standard online magazine points out, despite the naysayers, Reagan had the right idea. And as a result, missile defense is almost a reality at last. Well, it wouldn't be the first time that Reagn was proven right and his critics wrong. Does anyone remember his "Tear down this wall, Mr. Gorbachev!" speech? How many Democrats would have dared to say that? Maybe Joseph Lieberman, but no one else I can think of. And how many in the media give him credit for his steadfast vision and courage?
Although the system is not complete, and it is not 100 percent perfect, tests are encouraging and most of our true allies (Australia, Britain, Poland, Japan) are jumping on board. As Donald Rumsfeld said regarding the system, "Did we have perfection with our first airplane, our first rifle, our first ship? I mean, they'd still be testing at Kitty Hawk, for God's sake, if you wanted perfection." I find this an entirely appropriate comment. Of course, the critics don't want perfection- they want surrender.
If we can get a reliable missile defense system deployed, then Iran and North Korea can threaten all they want, and we can simply tell them to do what they wish, sionce they are completely unable to harm us. I am certain that we would be happy to provide our closest allies (Israel comes to mind) with this technology as well. And that would be a blow to the mullahs, as their little nukes would no longer be of any use to them As Michael Ledeen of the National Review likes to say, "Faster please".
05/26/2006 CORRECTION UPDATE: I mistakenly typed "Space Defense Initiative" in my original post. I am not sure what I was thinking, but the correct name of Reagan's proposed program was the Strategic Defense Initiative.
Although the system is not complete, and it is not 100 percent perfect, tests are encouraging and most of our true allies (Australia, Britain, Poland, Japan) are jumping on board. As Donald Rumsfeld said regarding the system, "Did we have perfection with our first airplane, our first rifle, our first ship? I mean, they'd still be testing at Kitty Hawk, for God's sake, if you wanted perfection." I find this an entirely appropriate comment. Of course, the critics don't want perfection- they want surrender.
If we can get a reliable missile defense system deployed, then Iran and North Korea can threaten all they want, and we can simply tell them to do what they wish, sionce they are completely unable to harm us. I am certain that we would be happy to provide our closest allies (Israel comes to mind) with this technology as well. And that would be a blow to the mullahs, as their little nukes would no longer be of any use to them As Michael Ledeen of the National Review likes to say, "Faster please".
05/26/2006 CORRECTION UPDATE: I mistakenly typed "Space Defense Initiative" in my original post. I am not sure what I was thinking, but the correct name of Reagan's proposed program was the Strategic Defense Initiative.
Monday, May 08, 2006
And another Note on Illegals
My good buddy Mentok has posted on his blog some hilarious poetry that is applicable to the subject of illegal aliens. And Doug Giles has a wonderful column on TownHall.com that is also very required reading for all who are interested in the topic.
Go read it. Go read both. And there is an email which is (possibly) apocryphal going around which states that on the Great Walkout Day, sales across the US went down by approximately four percent. But shoplifting went down by 67 percent! So the merchants did good. I have a messsage for the wetback/La Raza/Reconquista racists. Take some more days off. Help our merchants make more money by reducing crime! Think about it as you read Mentok's poetry. For more (similar) efforts, check out Craig's List starting HERE and the post that started it all HERE. Enjoy, y'all....
Go read it. Go read both. And there is an email which is (possibly) apocryphal going around which states that on the Great Walkout Day, sales across the US went down by approximately four percent. But shoplifting went down by 67 percent! So the merchants did good. I have a messsage for the wetback/La Raza/Reconquista racists. Take some more days off. Help our merchants make more money by reducing crime! Think about it as you read Mentok's poetry. For more (similar) efforts, check out Craig's List starting HERE and the post that started it all HERE. Enjoy, y'all....
Some Questions...
Courtesy of my friend Mentok, I am posting the following questions, for discussion together with my take:
Q: What do you think of treating the terrorists by the platinum rule? Meaning, if they're giving us hell, giving them hell via lard dipped bullets, etc.
A: I think this is an excellent idea. My only concern is that we are already winning both the military and the propaganda war in Iraq, and this might push us backward if we hit the wrong folks at all. And that might happen- mistakes do happen in wartime, as we all know. We already know the enemy in Iraq are losing- only the American MSM has apparently not yet read (or more accurately won't report on) the most recently translated al-Quaeda letter, which clearly shows their lack of strength. However, it would be so nice to pay them back in their own coin. And what the h*ll are these idiots at Guantanamo Bay doing still with their Korans? Do any Americans in Iraq get bibles? Or any other Muslim country? Take away those damn Korans. These are terrorists, not POWs!
Q: What do you think of Stephen Colbert and his *ssraping of the US Press Corp on CSPAN?
A: Not having seen Colbert's little "comedy routine" I have no opinion to offer. Mentok says that "not only did he rake President Bush over the coals, he also managed to make a laughingstock of the US MSM." Well, since the MSM already ARE a laughingstock for their blatant bias, their determination to not report the truth and their equal determination to ruin this country, that wouldn't be difficult. However, I will take Mentok at his word. For anyone interested in viewing the routine, Google (yes the hypocritical ChiCom censor enabler for those keeping score at home) has the complete video feed here.
Q: Should the US media be entitled to protection from the United States military?
A: Not anyone from CNN, NBC, CBS, or the New York Times, no. Seriously, if the US MSM insists that they are above being patriotic and that they do not have to support their own country, then why the heck should our soldiers have to risk their lives protecting these useless traitors? The MSM is apparently on very good terms with the enemy- let THEM be responsible for protecting these so-called reporters who only report what they want, not what is true. And if a reporter is traveling with a terrorist group, he/she should be a legitimate target. They certainly would not lift a finger to protect the soldier if they had knowledge of an attack, so why should the soldier lift a finger to protect the reporter? Only if the reporter is embedded and has agreed to follow the military's terms (and that includes reporting both the good and the bad news) should a reporter be entitled to military protection.
Q: Should we repeal the 'Baby Anchor' law?
A: Absolutely. Even though it will require a Constitutional amendment. There is no reason why just being born in the United States should make anyone a citizen- especially not with illegals slipping across the border just to have their babies in US hospitals- which by government fiat cannot ask if they are even citizens! The upshot is that we have just increased our own tax burden with yet another illegal family. Get rid of the baby anchor law and also remove the requirement that healthcare has to available to illegals. If you are not a citizen or legal resident, you should not be entitled to free healthcare. I am a citizen and I don't have it. Why should illegal aliens have benefits that citizens do not?
Q: What to do about Iran?
A: Well, we may not have a choice much longer. I say we give the UN till the end of the year, then start telling Tehran that our forces in Iraq will be moving in unless they unconditionally disarm. And that means a full apology and compensation for 1979 as well. Otherwise, we will remove the mullahs militarily. And let the Iranian people decide who will rule them next. Just like Iraq. And since Iran is the main financier of the "insurrection" in Iraq, there won't be anything a fifth element in Iran since most of the people are much more pro-American that are any other population in the area. Delay is fatal. Remember 1939. Hitler could have been stopped in 1938, but France and Britain did nothing and ended up fighting a six-year war. Can we afford to do that again? Can we afford a nuclear-armed Iran?
Q: What to do about North Korea?
A: Give nuclear weapons to Taiwan, Japan and South Korea. Well, maybe not South Korea. They are a little bit too ungrateful already for my taste. But Japan and Taiwan? Absolutely. The last thing China wants to see is a nuclear-armed Taiwan. And that will make China think twice about whether having North Korea as a client is worth the consequences. Since China will not be helpful, why should we enable their little dreams of power?
Post what you think in the Comments section. As usual, any profanity will be removed. Be polite, be courteous, behave.
Credit for questions 1 and 2 to Mentok.
Q: What do you think of treating the terrorists by the platinum rule? Meaning, if they're giving us hell, giving them hell via lard dipped bullets, etc.
A: I think this is an excellent idea. My only concern is that we are already winning both the military and the propaganda war in Iraq, and this might push us backward if we hit the wrong folks at all. And that might happen- mistakes do happen in wartime, as we all know. We already know the enemy in Iraq are losing- only the American MSM has apparently not yet read (or more accurately won't report on) the most recently translated al-Quaeda letter, which clearly shows their lack of strength. However, it would be so nice to pay them back in their own coin. And what the h*ll are these idiots at Guantanamo Bay doing still with their Korans? Do any Americans in Iraq get bibles? Or any other Muslim country? Take away those damn Korans. These are terrorists, not POWs!
Q: What do you think of Stephen Colbert and his *ssraping of the US Press Corp on CSPAN?
A: Not having seen Colbert's little "comedy routine" I have no opinion to offer. Mentok says that "not only did he rake President Bush over the coals, he also managed to make a laughingstock of the US MSM." Well, since the MSM already ARE a laughingstock for their blatant bias, their determination to not report the truth and their equal determination to ruin this country, that wouldn't be difficult. However, I will take Mentok at his word. For anyone interested in viewing the routine, Google (yes the hypocritical ChiCom censor enabler for those keeping score at home) has the complete video feed here.
Q: Should the US media be entitled to protection from the United States military?
A: Not anyone from CNN, NBC, CBS, or the New York Times, no. Seriously, if the US MSM insists that they are above being patriotic and that they do not have to support their own country, then why the heck should our soldiers have to risk their lives protecting these useless traitors? The MSM is apparently on very good terms with the enemy- let THEM be responsible for protecting these so-called reporters who only report what they want, not what is true. And if a reporter is traveling with a terrorist group, he/she should be a legitimate target. They certainly would not lift a finger to protect the soldier if they had knowledge of an attack, so why should the soldier lift a finger to protect the reporter? Only if the reporter is embedded and has agreed to follow the military's terms (and that includes reporting both the good and the bad news) should a reporter be entitled to military protection.
Q: Should we repeal the 'Baby Anchor' law?
A: Absolutely. Even though it will require a Constitutional amendment. There is no reason why just being born in the United States should make anyone a citizen- especially not with illegals slipping across the border just to have their babies in US hospitals- which by government fiat cannot ask if they are even citizens! The upshot is that we have just increased our own tax burden with yet another illegal family. Get rid of the baby anchor law and also remove the requirement that healthcare has to available to illegals. If you are not a citizen or legal resident, you should not be entitled to free healthcare. I am a citizen and I don't have it. Why should illegal aliens have benefits that citizens do not?
Q: What to do about Iran?
A: Well, we may not have a choice much longer. I say we give the UN till the end of the year, then start telling Tehran that our forces in Iraq will be moving in unless they unconditionally disarm. And that means a full apology and compensation for 1979 as well. Otherwise, we will remove the mullahs militarily. And let the Iranian people decide who will rule them next. Just like Iraq. And since Iran is the main financier of the "insurrection" in Iraq, there won't be anything a fifth element in Iran since most of the people are much more pro-American that are any other population in the area. Delay is fatal. Remember 1939. Hitler could have been stopped in 1938, but France and Britain did nothing and ended up fighting a six-year war. Can we afford to do that again? Can we afford a nuclear-armed Iran?
Q: What to do about North Korea?
A: Give nuclear weapons to Taiwan, Japan and South Korea. Well, maybe not South Korea. They are a little bit too ungrateful already for my taste. But Japan and Taiwan? Absolutely. The last thing China wants to see is a nuclear-armed Taiwan. And that will make China think twice about whether having North Korea as a client is worth the consequences. Since China will not be helpful, why should we enable their little dreams of power?
Post what you think in the Comments section. As usual, any profanity will be removed. Be polite, be courteous, behave.
Credit for questions 1 and 2 to Mentok.
Stupid College Tricks, Part One
There have been a number of wonderful Top Ten lists since David Letterman introduced the phenomenon back in the 1980s. However, one of the best I have read is curently to be found on TownHall.com. The irrepressible Dr. Mike Adams, a criminology professor at University of North Carolina-Wilmington, put together his Top Ten Stupid Conspiracy Theories list. A sample taken from the list is as follows:
10. “911 was a conspiracy planned between the Bush administration and the Jews. They wanted an excuse to attack Arabs and the ignorant public bought into it.” (from a now-deceased college professor).
Hilarious stuff. I highly recommend reading the entire list. Unless you are one of the unfortunates with Bush Derangement Syndrome who inhabits the fever zones of the Daily Kos, I can guarantee your enjoyment. The sad part is that all of the theories on the list were propounded by eeither college professors or college students. And that is all the more eveidence of how the Left's stranglehold on public (and private) education has ruined our educational system in this country. A pity.
10. “911 was a conspiracy planned between the Bush administration and the Jews. They wanted an excuse to attack Arabs and the ignorant public bought into it.” (from a now-deceased college professor).
Hilarious stuff. I highly recommend reading the entire list. Unless you are one of the unfortunates with Bush Derangement Syndrome who inhabits the fever zones of the Daily Kos, I can guarantee your enjoyment. The sad part is that all of the theories on the list were propounded by eeither college professors or college students. And that is all the more eveidence of how the Left's stranglehold on public (and private) education has ruined our educational system in this country. A pity.
Thursday, May 04, 2006
Some Light (Noise) Relief
As in this article posted today in the BBC. Seems that maybe trombones DO qualify as lethal weapons. Now if the BBC wouold spend as much time worrying about real weapons of mass destruction in the hands of our enemies as they do about noisy trombones, maybe we could all sleep a little more securely at night. Of course, that would require the BBC to actually commit to to reporting the news accurately instead of always spinning things so as to reflect badly on their own countries.....
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.
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.
Tuesday, March 28, 2006
So Leaking IS a Crime....
Not that one would notice from the behavior of the vast majority of the MSM- to them, leaks are only criminal when they embarrass or otherwise discomfit members of their favored breed (Democrats or other liberal icons). However, a federal judge ruled today that gaining material illegally and then turning it over to the media is NOT a Constitutionally protected action.
According to Breitbart, Representative Jim McDermott broke federal law when he illegally wiretapped a phone call between then-Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and current Majority Leader John Boehner. Despite the pleading of most of the MSM (apparently they are not satisfied with leaking inside dish- they want to be able to use illegal materials- though they would not allow police to use similar methods), the appeals court was unswayed and correctly ruled.
It seems that the MSM are wanting rights and privileges that they would be loath to allow any other group not utilize. Along with the federal shield law, reporters are always trying to become a favored group under law- as if they do not have enough power already. What this country needs is a lessening of the power wielded by the MSM- not a strengthening. I am glad that in this case at least, the MSM failed to get their way. And now that the decision did not go their way, I can almost guarantee that there will be snarky articles in most of the MSM regarding this decisions.
Hat tip to Matt Drudge.
According to Breitbart, Representative Jim McDermott broke federal law when he illegally wiretapped a phone call between then-Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and current Majority Leader John Boehner. Despite the pleading of most of the MSM (apparently they are not satisfied with leaking inside dish- they want to be able to use illegal materials- though they would not allow police to use similar methods), the appeals court was unswayed and correctly ruled.
It seems that the MSM are wanting rights and privileges that they would be loath to allow any other group not utilize. Along with the federal shield law, reporters are always trying to become a favored group under law- as if they do not have enough power already. What this country needs is a lessening of the power wielded by the MSM- not a strengthening. I am glad that in this case at least, the MSM failed to get their way. And now that the decision did not go their way, I can almost guarantee that there will be snarky articles in most of the MSM regarding this decisions.
Hat tip to Matt Drudge.
Monday, March 27, 2006
The Senate Does Not Understand Security
As was proven by their decision to ignore the dangerous aspects of illegal immigration and pass a sweeping amnesty bill. And what is worse, not only did the Senate pass the amnesty, they also removed the criminal penalties for being in the United States illegally.
I sometimes wonder about the short-sightedness of our so-called leadership here in this country. The illegal immigration lobby is anti-American (MEChA, etc) and is all about taking privileges that they have not earned. I do not buy the 'they do jobs no American would' argument- I think that if those jobs did not have illegal aliens doing them, the wages would rise so that Americans would actually do them. And I completely disagree with people like Teddy Kennedy, who only want illegal immigrants because they think (probably correctly) that the illegals will vote mostly Democrat.
However, the Democrats fail to realize that the illegal immigration lobby will only vote Democrat until they can get enough votes to realize their true dream- taking the southwestern United States and making it part of Mexico. The Democrats are too cowardly to stand up for their own countrymen, and they certainly lack the intestinal fortitude to stand up to the illegal immigration lobby- even though the protests are decidedly anti-American- nothing promoted by MEChA could be anything else.
I hope that the coming elections provide Senator Kyl of Arizona with some assistance to bring the Senate to its senses. And I hope and pray that the illegal immigration lobby has over-reached with these massive protests. I think most real Americans, like myself, are pretty tired of law-breakers lecturing us about what they 'deserve' and how they should be allowed to gain citizenship even though they clearly do not respect us.
For more information on MEChA, please click American Patrol's MEChA Page or the Official MEChA Sites.
Hat tip to Matt Drudge.
I sometimes wonder about the short-sightedness of our so-called leadership here in this country. The illegal immigration lobby is anti-American (MEChA, etc) and is all about taking privileges that they have not earned. I do not buy the 'they do jobs no American would' argument- I think that if those jobs did not have illegal aliens doing them, the wages would rise so that Americans would actually do them. And I completely disagree with people like Teddy Kennedy, who only want illegal immigrants because they think (probably correctly) that the illegals will vote mostly Democrat.
However, the Democrats fail to realize that the illegal immigration lobby will only vote Democrat until they can get enough votes to realize their true dream- taking the southwestern United States and making it part of Mexico. The Democrats are too cowardly to stand up for their own countrymen, and they certainly lack the intestinal fortitude to stand up to the illegal immigration lobby- even though the protests are decidedly anti-American- nothing promoted by MEChA could be anything else.
I hope that the coming elections provide Senator Kyl of Arizona with some assistance to bring the Senate to its senses. And I hope and pray that the illegal immigration lobby has over-reached with these massive protests. I think most real Americans, like myself, are pretty tired of law-breakers lecturing us about what they 'deserve' and how they should be allowed to gain citizenship even though they clearly do not respect us.
For more information on MEChA, please click American Patrol's MEChA Page or the Official MEChA Sites.
Hat tip to Matt Drudge.
Sunday, March 26, 2006
The Quran- In Translation
For those useful idiots of the Left who insist that Islam does not want to displace, supplant and otherwise dominate all facets of the lives of its believers (and who also insists that Islam is kind to non-believers in its midst), I present two translations of the Muslim Holy Book. This holy book has a number of transliterations, but the most common are either 'Koran' or 'Quran'. In the course of this post, I shall use both interchangeably.
The first was done by Dr. TB Irving. Be aware that the Doctor is himself an Islamic apologist. However, this is one of the more readable and accessible translations. It also includes a lengthy explanation of the Doctors methodology and some of the aspects of Islam itself in the Forward. The Irving translation can be found at http://isgkc.org/translat.htm.
There is also another text, which like Irving's was done for a university, available from the University of Michigan. Translated by M.H. Shakir, it uses the name 'Allah' as opposed to the term 'God' used by Irving. The Shakir translation can be found at http://www.hti.umich.edu/k/koran/.
I strongly recommend that you take a thorough look at both of these translations. One of the most important dictums in war is to know thy enemy. Only by actually reading the Quran can we understand the root of the Muslim attack against the West, and then we can determine the best method to defeat it.
The first was done by Dr. TB Irving. Be aware that the Doctor is himself an Islamic apologist. However, this is one of the more readable and accessible translations. It also includes a lengthy explanation of the Doctors methodology and some of the aspects of Islam itself in the Forward. The Irving translation can be found at http://isgkc.org/translat.htm.
There is also another text, which like Irving's was done for a university, available from the University of Michigan. Translated by M.H. Shakir, it uses the name 'Allah' as opposed to the term 'God' used by Irving. The Shakir translation can be found at http://www.hti.umich.edu/k/koran/.
I strongly recommend that you take a thorough look at both of these translations. One of the most important dictums in war is to know thy enemy. Only by actually reading the Quran can we understand the root of the Muslim attack against the West, and then we can determine the best method to defeat it.
San Francisco & 'Tolerance'
This post is a day late. It should have gone up last night, but familial events intervened. So, here goes:
San Francisco, according to their Board of Supervisors, are "America's most tolerant and progressive city". However, that tolerance does not appear to include anyone with whom the San Franciscans disagree. According to SFist.com, a group of evangelical Christian youth has been holding gathering, which is part of the nationwide 'Battle Cry 2006' campaign to promote Christian values and protest the so-called degrading popular culture.
One would suppose that "the most tolerant and progressive city in America" would welcome a group whose mission is anathema to most of San Francisco's inhabitants. However, it appears that San Francisco's so-called tolerance is only for those groups with whom the Supervisors agree. The San Francisco Board of Supervisors condemned the rally, calling it (according to the SF Chronicle) an "act of provocation". The Board went on to call the Christian group "anti-gay" and "anti-choice", along with claiming that they "aim to negatively influence the politics of America's most tolerant and progressive city".
They may be trying to influence the politics of San Francisco, but what are the pro-gay groups doing? Exactly the same thing! And unlike the Christians, the pro-gay, anti-American groups like Code Pink ARE negatively influencing politics. I don't know how else to characterize their attempts to remove Christianity and the military while introducing pro-Sharia, pro-deviant lifestyles. Just because the Supervisors are themselves anti-Christian doe not give them the right to try to muzzle groups they oppose. That is called censorship- something that only the Left appears to practice.
According to an article in Saturday, March 25's San Francisco Chronicle by reporter Joe Garofali, the gathering included over 25000 young Christian activists from all over the United States. A counter-protest by the usual leftists suspects got only around 50 people. And what's more, according to one of the SF police officers assigned, the Christians invited the Navy SEALs to do a pro-American demonstration.
Now what is interesting, the same reporter wrote who wrote a sympathetic article about several SF organizations' attempts to remove the US Navy as one of SF radio station KMEL's sponsors for a concert. The organizations are the usual suspects- Code Pink, etc. These anti-American organizations are 'concerned' because apparently KMEL has more listeners than any other Bay Area station, and about 40 percent are 'people of color' (Leftist code for black/Hispanic- Asians, people from Africa itself do not count, apparently).
So let's recap. The City of San Francisco claims to be 'the most tolerant city in America' yet they do not tolerate Christians. The Christians also appear to be strong supporters of their country and welcome the US military at their functions- something the City of San Francisco CANNOT claim. And finally, the same groups which claim these Christians are 'negatively influencing the politics...' are themselves trying to force their own military- the same people who protect these anti-Americans- out of the Bay Area completely. And they STILL claim to be 'tolerant' and 'progressive'????
Apparently along with not understanding the meaning of the First Amendment, the Supervisors also do not understand the meaning of the terms 'tolerance' and progressive'. Their actions can be defined under neither of those two terms. Perhaps if they spent more time fixing the streets and less playing politics, they might eventually come to understand that. But wait- these are San Francisco leftists. Understanding? True tolerance? I fear that they will remain eternally in the dark. Perhaps if they attended a few sessions of Battle Cry, they might gain enlightenment- but I doubt it. These are, after all, San Francisco leftists.
03/26/2006: 2128 PST UPDATE: The original aritcle by Joe Garofoli is now online at SFGate.com. Hat tip for the link to Matt Drudge.
San Francisco, according to their Board of Supervisors, are "America's most tolerant and progressive city". However, that tolerance does not appear to include anyone with whom the San Franciscans disagree. According to SFist.com, a group of evangelical Christian youth has been holding gathering, which is part of the nationwide 'Battle Cry 2006' campaign to promote Christian values and protest the so-called degrading popular culture.
One would suppose that "the most tolerant and progressive city in America" would welcome a group whose mission is anathema to most of San Francisco's inhabitants. However, it appears that San Francisco's so-called tolerance is only for those groups with whom the Supervisors agree. The San Francisco Board of Supervisors condemned the rally, calling it (according to the SF Chronicle) an "act of provocation". The Board went on to call the Christian group "anti-gay" and "anti-choice", along with claiming that they "aim to negatively influence the politics of America's most tolerant and progressive city".
They may be trying to influence the politics of San Francisco, but what are the pro-gay groups doing? Exactly the same thing! And unlike the Christians, the pro-gay, anti-American groups like Code Pink ARE negatively influencing politics. I don't know how else to characterize their attempts to remove Christianity and the military while introducing pro-Sharia, pro-deviant lifestyles. Just because the Supervisors are themselves anti-Christian doe not give them the right to try to muzzle groups they oppose. That is called censorship- something that only the Left appears to practice.
According to an article in Saturday, March 25's San Francisco Chronicle by reporter Joe Garofali, the gathering included over 25000 young Christian activists from all over the United States. A counter-protest by the usual leftists suspects got only around 50 people. And what's more, according to one of the SF police officers assigned, the Christians invited the Navy SEALs to do a pro-American demonstration.
Now what is interesting, the same reporter wrote who wrote a sympathetic article about several SF organizations' attempts to remove the US Navy as one of SF radio station KMEL's sponsors for a concert. The organizations are the usual suspects- Code Pink, etc. These anti-American organizations are 'concerned' because apparently KMEL has more listeners than any other Bay Area station, and about 40 percent are 'people of color' (Leftist code for black/Hispanic- Asians, people from Africa itself do not count, apparently).
So let's recap. The City of San Francisco claims to be 'the most tolerant city in America' yet they do not tolerate Christians. The Christians also appear to be strong supporters of their country and welcome the US military at their functions- something the City of San Francisco CANNOT claim. And finally, the same groups which claim these Christians are 'negatively influencing the politics...' are themselves trying to force their own military- the same people who protect these anti-Americans- out of the Bay Area completely. And they STILL claim to be 'tolerant' and 'progressive'????
Apparently along with not understanding the meaning of the First Amendment, the Supervisors also do not understand the meaning of the terms 'tolerance' and progressive'. Their actions can be defined under neither of those two terms. Perhaps if they spent more time fixing the streets and less playing politics, they might eventually come to understand that. But wait- these are San Francisco leftists. Understanding? True tolerance? I fear that they will remain eternally in the dark. Perhaps if they attended a few sessions of Battle Cry, they might gain enlightenment- but I doubt it. These are, after all, San Francisco leftists.
03/26/2006: 2128 PST UPDATE: The original aritcle by Joe Garofoli is now online at SFGate.com. Hat tip for the link to Matt Drudge.
Friday, March 24, 2006
The Iraqi' 'Civil War'
Charles Krauthammer of the Washington Post weighed in today on whether the much-balleyhooed 'civil war' in Iraq that the MSM has been pushing so hard is really a civil war. Among other comments, he says:
I confess that I have been one of the many who does not consider this a civil war, but Krauthammer's logic is convincing, as is his conclusion that:
I think that this all depends on what we categorize a 'civil war'. I would define it as a US-style civil war where there are two organized opponents. The MSM, who have little if any knowledge about war in general and their own Civil War in particular, would define anything a civil war- so long as it embarrasses the White House. However, I agree with Mr. Krauthammer in that a successful conclusion, where the Iraqis take charge of their own country and the Sunnis who are at the heart of the entire bloody mess slowly abandon their support for it, is definitely do-able, to use his terminology.
Further, I would argue that we have already made a strong start on that conclusion, in that we have successfully brought off three elections, and the Sunnis appear to have lost some of their fervor for the opposition. We are even receiving reports that the foreigners (al-Quaeda) are being attacked by the local Sunni 'insurgents' (I hate that word- it seems so inappropriate for the Sunni ex-Baathists and sundry thugs who are running the Sunni attacks). To mer, this seems to indicate that if we can only stay the course, we are going to win. But then, I actually have some military understanding and have studied war. Pity the MSM can't say the same. If they did, they might actually get something right once in a while regarding this war, instead of being the same old cowardly, anti-American herd that they were during the last American conflict.
This whole debate about civil war is surreal. What is the insurgency if not a war supported by one (minority) part of Iraqi society fighting to prevent the birth of the new Iraqi state supported by another (majority) part of Iraqi society?
By definition that is civil war, and there's nothing new about it. As I noted here in November 2004: "People keep warning about the danger of civil war. This is absurd. There already is a civil war. It is raging before our eyes. Problem is, only one side" -- the Sunni insurgency -- "is fighting it."
I confess that I have been one of the many who does not consider this a civil war, but Krauthammer's logic is convincing, as is his conclusion that:
But is it not our entire counterintuitive strategy to get Iraqis who believe in the new Iraq to fight Iraqis who want to restore Baathism or impose Taliban-like rule? Does not everyone who wishes us well support the strategy of standing up the Iraqis so we can stand down? And does that not mean getting the Iraqis to fight the civil war themselves?
I think that this all depends on what we categorize a 'civil war'. I would define it as a US-style civil war where there are two organized opponents. The MSM, who have little if any knowledge about war in general and their own Civil War in particular, would define anything a civil war- so long as it embarrasses the White House. However, I agree with Mr. Krauthammer in that a successful conclusion, where the Iraqis take charge of their own country and the Sunnis who are at the heart of the entire bloody mess slowly abandon their support for it, is definitely do-able, to use his terminology.
Further, I would argue that we have already made a strong start on that conclusion, in that we have successfully brought off three elections, and the Sunnis appear to have lost some of their fervor for the opposition. We are even receiving reports that the foreigners (al-Quaeda) are being attacked by the local Sunni 'insurgents' (I hate that word- it seems so inappropriate for the Sunni ex-Baathists and sundry thugs who are running the Sunni attacks). To mer, this seems to indicate that if we can only stay the course, we are going to win. But then, I actually have some military understanding and have studied war. Pity the MSM can't say the same. If they did, they might actually get something right once in a while regarding this war, instead of being the same old cowardly, anti-American herd that they were during the last American conflict.
More Dhimmis-In-Waiting
There is a long-standing unwritten rule of hospitality that says that when a guest visits one's home, that guest should abide by the rules set in place by one's host. This dictum is even more important when used in connection with foreign visitors to a nation-state. However, it appears that not only has the St. Paul city government lost comprehension of this rule, they are not even able to defend their own culture from those who would replace it.
According to the Minneapolis/St. Paul Star-Tribune, the St. Paul city government has removed an Easter bunny because the 'human rights director' (by the way, why does a city need a 'human rights director'?) is afraid of being 'offensive to non-Christians". Well, what about being offensive to Christians- who make up roughly 80 percent of the United States last time I checked? What gives the local government the right to disrespect that 80 percent? The United States has it's own traditions and some of them may be offensive to non-Christians, like the American tradition of giving women a voice- something that Muslims are definitely not in favor of. Or traditions like a Christmas tree, or celebrating the resurrection of Jesus Christ. All of these things might be offensive to non-Christians. Too bad. If they are offended, they can go home. The other point is that no one is forcing these non-Christians to participate. But by removing them, you are definitely forcing your majority to be dictated to by a minority.
The United States is a Christian nation, like it or not. And if the human rights director of St. Paul doesn't understand that, then she has no business being in her exalted position. Maybe she ought to go live as a non-Muslim in Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia for a while and see how non-Muslims are treated in those countries (hint- It is much more restrictive). However, those are not Christian countries and they do have the sovereign right to rule themselves as their people wish. But so do we- and that right includes being able to openly practice our own religions and traditions, whether they offend or not. I think my friend Mentok puts it best when he wrote his blog entry Why I-distrust- Muslims. This was in response to a Craigslist poster who complained that he/she was 'tired of people hating me". Mentok's response is very blunt, but it is refreshing that there are still people willing to lay down the law to these Pan-Islamists. Even the original Craigslist poster says in his/her diatribe "I worship Allah...the only real god. You are all going to die for not loving only him. Jesus is a fraud." Well, buddy,, if you really feel that way, what in the name of God are you doing in a mainly Christian country? We don't agree with your comments. And since it is OUR country, not yours, that is our right. Period.
It has been written by those more erudite than I that if we do not have the strength of will to defend our own culture, that culture will be overthrown. This is one more reminder that too many of American's Leftists do not have the strength or even desire to defend the culture that gives them their freedom. When they wake up in burkhas, I wonder if then they might gain a glimmer of understanding that appeasement is always wrong and that trying to 'respect' groups like the Muslims by hiding one's own symbols only leads to demands for more submission. Never forget- Islam means 'Submission', and Muslims are dreaming of a return to the days when Christians and Jews (and Hindus, Buddhists, etc) DID actually bend their heads in fear and submission before the worldwide Caliphate. This cowardly and unnecessary step by the city government in St. Paul is only one more step on the road to dhimmitude- and I for one have no intention of allowing it to go any further. If the Left wishes to submit, then go to Saudi Arabia and submit. But don't keep dragging those of us who are proud of our country, our culture and our religion into dhimmitude with you.
Hat tip to Matt Drudge.
According to the Minneapolis/St. Paul Star-Tribune, the St. Paul city government has removed an Easter bunny because the 'human rights director' (by the way, why does a city need a 'human rights director'?) is afraid of being 'offensive to non-Christians". Well, what about being offensive to Christians- who make up roughly 80 percent of the United States last time I checked? What gives the local government the right to disrespect that 80 percent? The United States has it's own traditions and some of them may be offensive to non-Christians, like the American tradition of giving women a voice- something that Muslims are definitely not in favor of. Or traditions like a Christmas tree, or celebrating the resurrection of Jesus Christ. All of these things might be offensive to non-Christians. Too bad. If they are offended, they can go home. The other point is that no one is forcing these non-Christians to participate. But by removing them, you are definitely forcing your majority to be dictated to by a minority.
The United States is a Christian nation, like it or not. And if the human rights director of St. Paul doesn't understand that, then she has no business being in her exalted position. Maybe she ought to go live as a non-Muslim in Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia for a while and see how non-Muslims are treated in those countries (hint- It is much more restrictive). However, those are not Christian countries and they do have the sovereign right to rule themselves as their people wish. But so do we- and that right includes being able to openly practice our own religions and traditions, whether they offend or not. I think my friend Mentok puts it best when he wrote his blog entry Why I-distrust- Muslims. This was in response to a Craigslist poster who complained that he/she was 'tired of people hating me". Mentok's response is very blunt, but it is refreshing that there are still people willing to lay down the law to these Pan-Islamists. Even the original Craigslist poster says in his/her diatribe "I worship Allah...the only real god. You are all going to die for not loving only him. Jesus is a fraud." Well, buddy,, if you really feel that way, what in the name of God are you doing in a mainly Christian country? We don't agree with your comments. And since it is OUR country, not yours, that is our right. Period.
It has been written by those more erudite than I that if we do not have the strength of will to defend our own culture, that culture will be overthrown. This is one more reminder that too many of American's Leftists do not have the strength or even desire to defend the culture that gives them their freedom. When they wake up in burkhas, I wonder if then they might gain a glimmer of understanding that appeasement is always wrong and that trying to 'respect' groups like the Muslims by hiding one's own symbols only leads to demands for more submission. Never forget- Islam means 'Submission', and Muslims are dreaming of a return to the days when Christians and Jews (and Hindus, Buddhists, etc) DID actually bend their heads in fear and submission before the worldwide Caliphate. This cowardly and unnecessary step by the city government in St. Paul is only one more step on the road to dhimmitude- and I for one have no intention of allowing it to go any further. If the Left wishes to submit, then go to Saudi Arabia and submit. But don't keep dragging those of us who are proud of our country, our culture and our religion into dhimmitude with you.
Hat tip to Matt Drudge.
Thursday, March 23, 2006
Truth in the Exempt Media
...comes at last, via a private email sent from an ABC News executive' corporate email account. According to the Drudge Report, John Green, an executive producer on Good Morning, America wrote in an email sent from his private account:
"Bush makes me sick...If he uses the 'mixed messages' line one more time, I'm going to puke,"
Note that this email was sent from an ABC corporate account. The media like to proclaim that media bias is merely a conservative delusion, but when things like this pop up, it is harder and harder to discount. Since it is clear that many members of the so-called Mainstream Media such as Dan Rather & Mary Mapes, Eason Jordan and now John Green hold these strong, anti-Bush, anti-Republican views, I think the least we can do is to distrust anything they say until they can prove it. They no longer deserve to be help as trustworthy and they certainly are not discharging their responsibilities to report news honestly and accurately.
Accordingly, I believe that the MSM needs to be held as accountable as they are trying to hold this Administration. Why is it that Clintonian abuse went unreported, yet Bush is considered a criminal by the MSM? Why is it that Republicans can never get a sympathetic audience from Beltway reporters? Why are committed anti-Republicans like the socialist/Communist mouthpiece Helen Thomas still taking up space in the White House press corps, when able members of the media such as Michelle Malkin or Glenn Reynolds are considered 'unprofessional' because they post their entries on a weblog as opposed to a old-style newspaper?
I have some advice for the media. Your days of unquestioned power are gone. Your lies, deceptions and biased attempts at promoting the Democratic party line are now open to the light of day, and it is time for you to face your own medicine. Your days of abusing your power are gone. No one elected you to be the ultimate arbiters of information, and it is time that your wings were severely clipped, until and unless you can learn that bias is fine- as long as said bias is acknowledged up-front. One can hold biases and still discharge their jobs, but pretending to be unbiased while you perpetrate one hack job after another on our elected President and his Administration is both dishonest and cowardly.
I am grateful Mr. Green (like Ms. Thomas, Dan Rather and Mary Mapes before him) let his honest feelings show. There is nothing wrong with letting your personal feelings and biases show, so long as you honestly attempt to do your job with professional objectivity. However, the MSM is now infamous for pretending that they are above biases, yet they march lockstep considerably to the left of the vast majority of Americans. Then they savage an Administration that has committed no crimes and has the support of more Americans than does the MSM. So go ahead, members of the Exempt Media! Let your biases into the light of day! Let the people judge. But your current mode of behavior will only end in your losing even more audience, as more Americans become ever more disgusted with your lack of honesty, your lack of objectivity and your utter lack of any principles.
"Bush makes me sick...If he uses the 'mixed messages' line one more time, I'm going to puke,"
Note that this email was sent from an ABC corporate account. The media like to proclaim that media bias is merely a conservative delusion, but when things like this pop up, it is harder and harder to discount. Since it is clear that many members of the so-called Mainstream Media such as Dan Rather & Mary Mapes, Eason Jordan and now John Green hold these strong, anti-Bush, anti-Republican views, I think the least we can do is to distrust anything they say until they can prove it. They no longer deserve to be help as trustworthy and they certainly are not discharging their responsibilities to report news honestly and accurately.
Accordingly, I believe that the MSM needs to be held as accountable as they are trying to hold this Administration. Why is it that Clintonian abuse went unreported, yet Bush is considered a criminal by the MSM? Why is it that Republicans can never get a sympathetic audience from Beltway reporters? Why are committed anti-Republicans like the socialist/Communist mouthpiece Helen Thomas still taking up space in the White House press corps, when able members of the media such as Michelle Malkin or Glenn Reynolds are considered 'unprofessional' because they post their entries on a weblog as opposed to a old-style newspaper?
I have some advice for the media. Your days of unquestioned power are gone. Your lies, deceptions and biased attempts at promoting the Democratic party line are now open to the light of day, and it is time for you to face your own medicine. Your days of abusing your power are gone. No one elected you to be the ultimate arbiters of information, and it is time that your wings were severely clipped, until and unless you can learn that bias is fine- as long as said bias is acknowledged up-front. One can hold biases and still discharge their jobs, but pretending to be unbiased while you perpetrate one hack job after another on our elected President and his Administration is both dishonest and cowardly.
I am grateful Mr. Green (like Ms. Thomas, Dan Rather and Mary Mapes before him) let his honest feelings show. There is nothing wrong with letting your personal feelings and biases show, so long as you honestly attempt to do your job with professional objectivity. However, the MSM is now infamous for pretending that they are above biases, yet they march lockstep considerably to the left of the vast majority of Americans. Then they savage an Administration that has committed no crimes and has the support of more Americans than does the MSM. So go ahead, members of the Exempt Media! Let your biases into the light of day! Let the people judge. But your current mode of behavior will only end in your losing even more audience, as more Americans become ever more disgusted with your lack of honesty, your lack of objectivity and your utter lack of any principles.
Tuesday, March 21, 2006
About that new Microsoft OS...
It seems that Microsoft still can't get the new Windows right. Providing yet another stark contrast to Apple Computer, Microsoft announced today that their new operating system, code-named VIsta, will be delayed until at least 2007.
This news comes as no surprise to those of us who remember the much-hyped 'Longhorn' operating system that Microsoft waws planning to release some years ago, thus eclipsing Apple's OS X. Since then, Apple has released increasingly powerful and easy-to-use iterations of the Macintosh OS X while Microsoft is still fixing security holes and promising the Next Big Thing- while utterly failing to deliver. This latest failure to deliver the oft-delayed successor to Windows XP, coming as it does on the heels of the well-known security weaknesses of Windows, makes those of us who utilise alternative operating systems even more secure in our choices, risky thought they seemed at the time!
So in future, as you poor Windows-users curse your balky and buggy systems, remember, there is an easy cure for your travails- GET A MAC!
This news comes as no surprise to those of us who remember the much-hyped 'Longhorn' operating system that Microsoft waws planning to release some years ago, thus eclipsing Apple's OS X. Since then, Apple has released increasingly powerful and easy-to-use iterations of the Macintosh OS X while Microsoft is still fixing security holes and promising the Next Big Thing- while utterly failing to deliver. This latest failure to deliver the oft-delayed successor to Windows XP, coming as it does on the heels of the well-known security weaknesses of Windows, makes those of us who utilise alternative operating systems even more secure in our choices, risky thought they seemed at the time!
So in future, as you poor Windows-users curse your balky and buggy systems, remember, there is an easy cure for your travails- GET A MAC!
Monday, March 20, 2006
Symbols of the Left
The moonbats of the Left might need some additional education at their expensive universities, since they apparently can't distinguish between the international peace symbol and the international symbol of Mercedes-Benz! Must be because most of these so-called 'peace' activists are all wanna-be elitists at heart. In any case, this is hilarious.....
Hat tip to Michelle Malkin.
Hat tip to Michelle Malkin.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
