Tomfoolery of the Highest Order

I just found this interesting tidbit. A $600 million dollar contract to repair electricity grids in Iraq was given to Perini Corporation. Funny how John Kerry and his liberal buddies always scream about Haliburton, yet never whine about this company.

That's because California Sen. Dianne Feinstein's husband, Richard Blum, has a nice stake in this company. Hmmmmm.

That is the first thought of those scumbags at the ACLU, CAIR, People for the American Way, etc, when they read this:

MI5 agents foil bomb plot

MI5 played a key role in foiling what the security forces believe could have been the most devastating bombing campaign in the UK, it emerged last night.
The domestic security service infiltrated the network of eight suspects who were arrested yesterday in one of the biggest anti-terrorist operations carried out on British soil. As many as 700 police took part in dawn raids, seizing the men and recovering half a tonne of ammonium nitrate fertiliser.

700 police officers? What kind of message does that send to Muslims everywhere? Talk about insensitivity!!

The suspects had been under surveillance by MI5 and Scotland Yard's anti-terrorist branch for several weeks. Those arrested were all born and brought up in Britain. Security sources played down suggestions of any direct link between the arrested men and al-Qaida.

Surveillance for several weeks? This is entrapment!! Without this illegal operation, these suspects would have just continued on with their peaceful existences.

Seriously, notice that these people were born and raised in Britian, yet hold no loyalty to her whatsoever? That is the result of multiculturalism. Believe that.

Eric the Viking Pundit supplies the laugh of the day. Nice work Eric!!

...to comment too much on this. I'll be up all night if I do.

Iraqis Drag 4 U.S. Bodies Through Streets

These scumbags may be evil, but they are not dumb. They see people like Kerry, Kennedy, Shumer, etc on CNN, and it gives them a little hope that if they do something like this, the U.S. will cut and run. A few months ago, our fine soldiers were able to cut down on the attacks through some cracking down. It is time to crackdown even harder now.

This cannot be a serious new story:

Court Orders U.S. to Review Mexican Cases

THE HAGUE, Netherlands - The world court ruled Wednesday that the United States violated the rights of 51 Mexicans on death row to receive diplomatic help, and ordered Washington to review their cases.

"The U.S. should provide by means of its own choosing meaningful review of the conviction and sentence" of the Mexicans, presiding judge Shi Jiuyong said.

Shi said the review, in all but three cases, could be carried out under the normal appeals process in the United States.

Take a look at that. A Chinese judge commenting on our judicial system. (Why not. I guess. That same judge would get laughed at back home in China.) The liberal media is making this out to be some sort of important thing, yet read closely what the Chinese judge said. Basically, the judge said that the U.S. should follow its own laws.

As for "ordering" Washington to do soemthing, I don't seem to remember us surrendering our judicial system to the Hague. if you need a laugh, here is the list of "judges" on that kangaroo court:

President Shi Jiuyong (China)
Vice-President Raymond Ranjeva (Madagascar)

Judges Gilbert Guillaume (France)
Abdul G. Koroma (Sierra Leone)
Vladlen S. Vereshchetin (Russian Federation)
Rosalyn Higgins (United Kingdom)
Gonzalo Parra-Aranguren (Venezuela)
Pieter H. Kooijmans (Netherlands)
Francisco Rezek (Brazil)
Awn Shawkat Al-Khasawneh (Jordan)
Thomas Buergenthal (United States of America)
Nabil Elaraby (Egypt)
Hisashi Owada (Japan)
Bruno Simma (Germany)
Peter Tomka (Slovakia)

I placed in bold the most hilarious ones, as if I would give a damn about what any of them think, especially the "judges" from those countries that have farcical legal systems

I am a proud guest blogger on Blogs For Bush. Take a look.

I was perusing that bird-cage liner, The Philadelphia Inquirer, and I found this interesting article:

Arab Americans turn to Kerry in 4 key states

Ribhi Mustafa is a swing voter who has already swung.

Yep, right off the bat they establish his "moderate" credentials.

Four years ago, he was frustrated with the slow pace of peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, and he cast his ballot for George W. Bush.

And, yep, another liberal media favorite, a disillusioned Bush voter.

"I figured it would be good to have some new blood - and it turned out to be worse," said Mustafa, 28, a registered Democrat from Northeast Philadelphia who works in his family's supermarket business. This year, he said, his choice will be Sen. John Kerry (D., Mass.).

Mustafa's personal shift illustrates a problem for President Bush, who in 2000 condemned anti-Arab profiling in a nationally televised debate, and then went on to win a healthy plurality of the Arab American vote in four of the largest battleground states, including Pennsylvania.

A recent poll suggests Arab American voters in these states have soured on the President because of the administration's unwavering support of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, the invasion of Iraq, and the government's crackdown on Arab and Muslim immigrants in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks.

What a crock. The Arabs have turned against Bush because the Israel-Palestinian conflict isn't settled, and of the "crackdown crackdown on Arab and Muslim immigrants in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks." Yeah, right. (They seemed to have missed a word, right before immigrants. they should have placed illegal in front of it.) Here's my favorite part, buried in the later part of the article:

Bush still enjoys majority support among Christian Arabs, as well as the Iraqi and Chaldean communities, which are large and influential in Michigan.

Now that's a point that should be explored somewhere. The question needs to be asked. Why do Christian Arabs solidly support Bush, while Muslim Arabs are running to Kerry? The answers are obvious. First, some Muslims really supported Bush in 2000 becasue they did not want to vote for Joe Lieberman, because he is Jewish. Second, some Muslim Arabs are sympathetic to radicals. Don't act like I made this up out of thin air. The evidence is out there. The only issue is whether you decide to ignore it or not.

After 9/11, I called a longtime friend named Ash, who is Egyptian. I wanted to reassure him that I still liked him a ton, and what happened changed nothing. The first thing out of his mouth: "I'm Christian. Why do you think my family came here? Christians aren't welcome in Egypt anymore."

No one in the media will dare speculate on what I just said, lest they be branded a bigot.

Arabs are not systematically discriminated against in this country. In fact, just like my call to Ash, Americans went out of their way to confort Arabs and remind them they are welcome and respected here. And Arabs have every opportunity. Just take a look at this example, supplied by Lee from Right-Thinking From the Left Coast.

This picture was not Photoshopped. It was taken directly from the Associated Press. Look at how cute Kerry looks with the flower zipper pull-up. Awwww.



Via Power Line

Here's the link that you complained about. What did you think, I made the story up?

I have been messing around on TypePad. Take a look and tell me what you think:

Tomfoolery of the Highest Order

Richard Clarke is a damn hypocrite weasel, being exposed more and more by the hour for the fraud that he is. He and the lapdog liberal media are calling for Condoleezza Rice to testify publicly in front of that kangaroo commission. Well, for the same reasons Rice is not testifying publicly (she has already spent 4 hours behind closed doors with them), Clarke (on my 28th birthday, no less) cited privilege in refusing to testify in front of the The Y2K Committee.

Clarke's hypocrisy is blatant and obvious here. No reason to expand on that. But, why isn't the liberal media running with this? We all know the answer. It helps Bush. If the media were intellectually honest, they would investigate this, and report that Rice (and Clarke was too) is well within her rights not to testify. This is a well-established precedent. Where can this precedent be found? Why, in one of the liberals' all-time favorite Supreme Court decisions, United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974)!!

Here are the relevant parts:

In support of his claim of absolute privilege, the President's counsel urges two grounds, one of which is common to all governments and one of which is peculiar to our system of separation of powers. The first ground is the valid need for protection of communications between high Government officials and those who advise and assist them in the performance of their manifold duties; the importance of this confidentiality is too plain to require further discussion. Human experience teaches that those who expect public dissemination of their remarks may well temper candor with a concern for appearances and for their own interests to the detriment of the decisionmaking process. Whatever the nature of the privilege of confidentiality of Presidential communications in the exercise of Art. II powers, the privilege can be said to derive from the supremacy of each branch within its own assigned area of constitutional duties. Certain powers and privileges flow from the nature of enumerated powers; the protection of the confidentiality of Presidential communications has similar constitutional underpinnings.

In more simpler terms, the President should be able to solicit honest advice for their advisors, without fear that what they say will be on full public display afterward. If this threat were apparent, it would place a "chilling effect" on the advice given to the President, who would not be able to make fully-informed decisions. And;

Absent a claim of need to protect military, diplomatic, or sensitive national security secrets, we find it difficult to accept the argument that even the very important interest in confidentiality of Presidential communications is significantly diminished by production of such material for in camera inspection with all the protection that a district court will be obliged to provide.

Simply put, in only a criminal proceeding can the claim of privilege for Presidential communications be trumped, but even then, only when a judge reviews the material in camera. (In the privacy of the judge's chambers)

It is beyond disgraceful that the 9/11 Commission is allowing itself to be used like this. And the usual suspects are out in force:

"Three thousand people died on our shores and on their watch. There should not be the slightest question that any White House staff member asked by the commission to testify under oath and in public must do so," he said.

There is only 2 reasons that Democrats want Rice to testify publicly:

1 - To destroy a possible future political threat. Is there any doubt that if she ran for President, Republicans would rally around her?

2 - To get her to say something like, "We discussed the possibility of airplanes being hijacked in a briefing," so that the lapdog media can run with the "Bush Knew" meme again.

The difference between the previous administration and the Bush administration is in full view right now, for all to see. Not once have we heard, nor will we hear, something like "There is controlling legal authority that Rice does not have to testify."

President Bush and Condi Rice cannot win on this, simply because of the dishonesty in the media. If she testifies, they'll find something (regardless of the truth) and pound it to death. If she doesn't, the "what are they hiding?" meme will go on for months.

This is the man that the Democrats actually think will beat President Bush. Here's John Kerry, who recently discovered that he must attend church every Sunday, had this to say yesterday.

"Today we are told that, after three million lost jobs and so many lost hopes, America is now turning a corner. But those who say that, they're not standing on the corner of Highland Street, where two 15-year-old teenagers were hit in a drive-by shooting last week."

And Liberals have the nerve to call Bush dumb?

This is a letter printed on OpinionJournal.com today. It made my day:

I served in Iraq, and it sucked. The dust storms that sandblasted your skin raw weren't fun. The heat was unbearable. We placed a thermometer in the sun in August, and it registered 157 degrees. At the same time, a thermometer in the shade read 137. Of course, for the most part, it was a dry heat, except I was in the South, and in late August and September, the wind would shift bringing moist air from the Persian Gulf. How about 120-plus and 90% humidity to brighten your day? Oh and the critters--rats, snakes, scorpions and my favorite, the camel spider. They live on the desert floor and have venom that numbs the poor camels they jump up on. After numbing the area, they chow down on the still-alive camel. The locals told me that its normal to see camels walking through the desert and their guts fall out because camel spiders eat their intestinal walls. The camel spiders also don't discriminate--people, camels, it's all the same to them. Did I mention the critters of the microscopic variety? Explosive doesn't do justice to the intestinal issues I encountered. Of course, I almost forgot the AK-47-wielding locals or the imported locals with explosives and rocket-propelled grenades.
Yes sir, it truly sucked. Would I do it again? In a heartbeat! If you could meet the sincerely grateful Iraqis that I helped liberate, you'd understand.

To answer your question, do I care if the president makes a crack about WMDs? Not at all. Based on my experience, I'd be perfectly happy if the president's reason for going to war wasn't WMDs but rather that he was just having a bad day and wanted a piece of Saddam.

--K.B., Army

Keep the politicians out of it, and the United States military is unbeatable, simply because we have guys like this.

In an egregious, racist policy of racial profiling, John Ashcroft has ruled that Luxor Air can't fly in the United States anymore:

The United States has banned Egyptian airline Luxor Air from flying in the country after one of its planes took "a completely abnormal" flight path.

Those "religion of peace" Egyptians shouldn't be scrutinized simply because they are Muslims. I am completely outraged at the racist policies of the Bush administration and I plan to call the ACLU at once.

Uh, wait. I made a mistake. The article actually reads:

Luxor Air Banned From Flying in France

PARIS - France has banned Egyptian airline Luxor Air from flying in the country after one of its planes took "a completely abnormal" flight path at low altitude over a French city, the head of civil aviation said.

Luxor Air's flying rights in France were suspended during an investigation into a March 21 flight from Luxor , Egypt, to Nantes in western France, Michel Wachenheim, director-general of France's Civil Aviation Authority, said late Saturday.

The plane, an MD-83, made a 1.2-mile deviation as it came in for landing and overflew the urban center of Nantes at an altitude of 660 feet — a "very low" altitude and "completely abnormal trajectory with respect to its normal flight path," Wachenheim said.

France's Bureau of Accident Investigation has asked Egyptian authorities for information about the flight crew, and background on the plane and airline, which is a small privately owned company.

Wait a second. What about the civil liberties and privacy rights of the flight crew? I thought France was this sophisticated country who is teaching us all that by appeasing radical Islam, they will not be targets, and will not have to live in fear of being a target. Just because this plane flew low and off course, that doesn't mean France should be alarmed.

From the Orange County Register, a terrific cartoon on Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg:

Here's a stunner:

French Lawyer Says He Will Defend Saddam

PARIS (Reuters) - The French lawyer known for defending Nazi war criminal Klaus Barbie and guerrilla Carlos the Jackal said Saturday that Saddam Hussein's nephew had chosen him to represent the deposed Iraqi president.

Verges, who is also defending former Iraqi deputy prime minister Tariq Aziz, said he had accepted the job of defending Saddam and suggested his strategy would focus on the role played by the United States and other countries in supporting the Iraqi leader in the 1980s.

"We know very well that the Anglo-Americans armed Saddam Hussein, that the chemical weapons were sold by the allies," Verges said in a telephone interview.

The circus is coming to Baghdad. I can hardly wait to see the Western press treat everything Saddam says like it is the gospel. They will believe every charge Saddam will make against Bush, Rumsfeld, Blair, you name it. After all, those guys are lying warmongers who desposed a democratically elected leader. Remember, Saddam did win his last election with 100% of the vote.

After this trial, I will challenge anyone to still say that we should have signed on to the International Criminal Court.

The love-fest with John Kerry continues. Get this, from an article in the New York Times:

Kerry Will Undergo Surgery for Tendon Tear in Shoulder

Ok, that's fine. I don't want the guy to be in pain or anything, I just don't want him as my President. But read this part:

KANSAS CITY, Mo., March 27 — Senator John Kerry plans to take about four days off the campaign trail next week to have minor surgery on his right shoulder. He aggravated a years-old injury while battling for the Democratic presidential nomination in Iowa in January.

What was he doing? Mud wrestling with Howard Dean? Re-enacting the old Frankie Goes to Hollywood video "Two Tribes?" You have to read a few paragraphs down to find out what "really" happened. He was injured while schlepping with the hoi polloi:

The tear apparently occurred aboard his campaign bus as it rattled through Iowa but is related to a shoulder injury he suffered while bicycling several years ago, Mr. Kerry said.

(chuckling...smirking...muted laughter)

The shoulder strain did not stop Mr. Kerry from a weeklong skiing and snowboarding vacation at his retreat in Ketchum, Idaho, that ended Wednesday, or from riding his racing bike in Boston a few weeks before.

It couldn't have happened while he was snowboarding now, could it? After all, "he doesn't fall." Just ask him.

"But there was at least no question about the Clinton administration's commitment to combat terrorism..."

Atrios? Oliver Willis? Kos? The Nation? No, it was...you guessed it, the New York "We'll fix Clinton's legacy article by article" Times.

University Says Blood Drive Biased Against Gays

MONMOUTH, Ore. — The American Red Cross may soon be banned from holding blood drives on one university campus because the organization prohibits some gay men from donating blood.

"We're looking at the practices of the Red Cross — whether they are discriminatory, and if they are, how it relates back to our policy," said Gary Dukes, vice president of student affairs at Western Oregon University.

This guy must be joking. (Here's his homepage if you feel the need to tell him he is nuts) Is that the price of political correctness these days, risking people's lives so as not to discriminate? Take a look at how the P.C. atmosphere infects students:

Some student government leaders say the question is homophobic and has no place on campus, even if that means less blood available to those who need it.

"There may be less blood in the blood supply, or we can continue to have a world full of hate and discrimination," said Shauna Bates, student senator at WOU.

What this dunce doesn't understand is that, in a perverse way, she is right. Better the blood supply be lessened rather than risk placing the blood of homosexuals in the pool. I am homophobic for pointing this out? You'll think so only if you deny reality. If this woman were being operated on, and she was asked, "Would you like the blood that is guaranteed not to have been taken from a homosexual?" does anything really think she would respond, "Oh, I don't care. It's all the same." Of course she wouldn't.

I have known 7 people personally in my life that were HIV-positive. 2 from college, 3 from the music industry when I worked in radio, 1 from another job, and one guy I grew up with. Take a guess what they all had in common. I'll give you a hint: They were homosexuals.

Denying that HIV and AIDS-tainted blood isn't a serious risk when taking blood donations from homosexuals is to deny reality. (i.e. Arthur Ashe)

Today is Saturday to me. But, to Richard Clarke it is Minute 15. He will be a footnote in history by Monday. Just remember this. Clarke said on 60 Minutes:

"There is absolutely no evidence that Iraq was supporting al-Qaeda ever."

Well, that might be true, were it nor for these minor details:

- The 1998 indictment of Osama bin Laden

And, (via Deroy Murdock)

On Wednesday, he told the September 11 Commission about Abdul Rahman Yasin, the al Qaeda operative indicted who federal prosecutors indicted for mixing the chemicals in the bomb that rocked the World Trade Center, killed six, and injured 1,042 people on February 26, 1993.

"He was an Iraqi," Clarke observed. "Therefore, when the explosion took place, and he fled the United States, he went back to Iraq." While Clarke believes Baghdad did not orchestrate that attack, he concedes that Hussein embraced this assassin.

"The Iraqi government," Clarke continued, "didn't cooperate in turning him over and gave him sanctuary, as it did give sanctuary to other terrorists."

And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

Get this:

GOP Moves to Declassify Clarke Testimony

WASHINGTON - In a highly unusual move, key Republicans in Congress are seeking to declassify testimony that former White House terrorism adviser Richard Clarke gave in 2002 about the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attack, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said Friday.

Frist said the intent was to determine whether Clarke lied under oath — either in 2002 or this week — when he appeared before a bipartisan Sept. 11 commission and sharply criticized President Bush's handling of the war on terror.

Is this any doubt in your mind that if Clarke testified against Clinton, this classified testimony would have been on the front page of the New York Times yesterday?

Arlen Specter, the Liberal senator from my birthplace, Pennsylvania, is a real scumbag. Since this will be his last term, if he is re-elected, the Democrats might as well count another vote for themselves. Yesterday, he voted for the Unborn Victims of Violence Act (probably hoping it will get struck down by some liberal judge). But, that was only after he voted for Dianne Feinstein's amendment, which would have made the bill a dead-letter, since it would have stated there is only one victim when a pregnant woman is attacked.

If you are a Pennsylvania Republican, support Pat Toomey in his bid to unseat Specter in the April primary.

[Update: Specter is an even bigger scumbag than I thought. He is so nervous, he is asking Democrats to switch party registration in order to vote for him.]

...that at last night's DUD, the biggest response from the Democrats in attendance came not for John Kerry, but for Howard Dean?

Looky here. We have the most impotent, do-nothing President of the 20th Century, the guy who was too busy getting his pimp on to take on terrorism, the sorest loser you'll ever see, and the future loser of the next Presidential election. Take a good look at these guys, Democrats. This is the best your party has to offer.

In some articles, I saw Michael Newdow referred to as Dr. Rev Newdow and Rev Dr. Newdow. I thought, "Reverend?" so I checked on it some more. Here is what I found:

Mike Newdow is an average guy who actually started his first religious institution while in junior high school in New Jersey. He finished high school there, and then undertook some university work in assorted locations. In 1977, he became an ordained minister, and has since lived his life according to the tenets of the Universal Life Church, which basically state: "Do what's right." In 1997, he started his second religious institution, the First Amendmist Church of True Science (FACTS). Although that ministry holds a firmly atheistic view of the world, it strongly supports the ideals behind the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

Huh? Read that again, and then ask yourself, "Who is trying to impose their religion on who?" (I mean, "his daughter."...yeah, ok) And, get this:

"One day I was just looking at the coins (that) is what brought this up. I saw 'In God We Trust' on my coins. I said, 'I don't trust in God,' what is this? And I recalled there was something in the Constitution that said you're not allowed to do thatand so I did some research. And as soon as I did the research, I realized the law seemed to be on my side and I filed the suit. It's a cool thing to do. Everyone should try it."

I thought it was his daughter being injured here. The media is on this guy's side, so, as you would expect, he is getting a free pass here. It is a shame no one is exposing him for what he is: A real scumbag who is pushing his beliefs on us, not vice versa. A real wonderful "religion," "do what's right." (And, recalled "there was something in the Constitution that said you're not allowed to do that?" I thought this guy had a law degree from the University of Michigan?)

Read again the first two words of his "church's" name: First Amendmist

A real scumbag this guy is.

The other day, I stated that I thought Bush should keep up the comedy when attacking John Kerry, because humor works. Last night, at the Radio and TV Correspondents Dinner, Bush was trying to be funny, and frankly, he bombed. Whoever wrote that for him should be fired and Bush should know better. Making light of "Where's the WMD's" was not exactly a smart thing to do, and he has given the Democrats a lot of fodder. You just know that him doing this will be in John Kerry's next set of comeercials. Plus, the media will remind us of this ad nauseum.

However, the Machiavellian in me thinks that his campaign planned this to get the spotlight off of 9/11 Commission and the Democrats Unity Dinner (DUD) tonight. Maybe, just maybe, the TV tonight will be forced to spend time at Bush's poor humor rather than playing up the Democrats, which most of the networks really want to do.

If I cared about daily polls, I'd tell you he'll take a hit on this. But, it won't last anyway.

Of course, John Kerry's feelings are hurt. Someone get him a tissue.

Fetus Protection Bill Nears Passage

WASHINGTON - Congress stood ready Thursday to send President Bush legislation making it a separate offense to harm a fetus during a violent federal crime, an issue that has become tangled with the battle over abortion.

The Senate cleared the way for passing the Unborn Victims of Violence Act by defeating an amendment, backed by abortion rights lawmakers, that would have increased penalties but maintained that an attack on a pregnant victim was a single-victim crime.

A single victim crime? The abortion promoters (they have long since passed being defenders) make me sick. If a pregnant woman is killed, there is 2 victims, end of story.

The key obstacle was an amendment by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., that would have imposed the same tougher penalties outlined in the DeWine bill but classified attacks on a pregnant woman as a single-victim crime, avoiding the issue of fetal rights and the question of when a person becomes a person.

Feinstein said that by defining when life begins, the bill was "the first step in removing a woman's right to choice, particularly in the early months of a pregnancy before viability." She said it could also chill embryonic stem cell research.

The fealty to the abortionists is staggering. When Stephanie and I went to our first ultrasound, I'll never forget how I felt. We saw the shape of Emily's head, the outline of her, etc. But, when I saw her spine clear as day, I was floored. That was when I started crying. At that point in time, Emily (we didn't know she was Emily until she was born. We did not find out in advance if she was a boy or girl. What can I say? I am old-fashioned) Emily may have not been "viable" according to Feinstein and NARAL, but that did not make her any less alive to us.

I am tired of the abortion promoters. I ask you this: How many women do you think regret their abortions? Now, ask your self how many women do you think regret not having an abortion. If you want to see what I mean about the pains of abortion regret, then read this powerful blog.

Kerry said at the rally that he had "respect and, more importantly, admiration for the conversation with America that Howard Dean began and we will now continue.''

"We indeed looked for the differences, but I tell you something, that we had to look hard for the differences,'' Kerry said.

They write this for me. I don't even have to work to make the case that Kerry is a Socialist. He does it for me. Please, Monsieur, keep reminding people that you and Howard Dean are exactly alike.

Get this, from the Houston Chronicle:

'Passion of Christ' moves man to confess killing 'suicide' victim

RICHMOND -- Detectives say the death of a 19-year-old woman originally ruled a suicide has turned into a murder case after a repentant man who'd watched The Passion of the Christ confessed to killing her because she was carrying his child.

Fort Bend County Sheriff's Detective Mike Kubricht said today that investigators thought Ashley Nicole Wilson had hanged herself in January. Earlier this month, however, 21-year-old Dan R. Leach of Rosenberg turned himself in after watching Mel Gibson's controversial movie about the last days of Christ and decided to seek redemption, Kubricht said.

The young woman's body was found by her mother Jan. 19 in her Richmond-area apartment. The Harris County Medical Examiner ruled her death a suicide caused by asphyxia due to external compression with a ligature.

Then, on March 7, Leach, who had known the victim for many years, walked into the Fort Bend County Sheriff's Department headquarters and confessed to killing her.

Look at that, he had already gotten away with it. If you saw this movie, you understand fully why this guy was motivated to confess. In my view, that is enough of a mitigating factor to give him a life sentence instead of the death penalty. (No matter what, I am a hard-ass on crime)

Just look for the follow-up story disparaging his confession. I'm sure that will be coming soon.

This is an e-mail I recieved this morning:

If you hate the New York Times so much, why do you keep writing about them? You sound like a guy who says he doesn't miss his ex-girlfriend, but talks about her all the time. If you hate it, stop [expletive deleted] reading it.

My answer to why I hate the Times can be found here.

One more post on the New York Times. Read this column by Nicholas Kristof:

Ethnic Cleansing, Again

ALONG THE SUDAN-CHAD BORDER — The most vicious ethnic cleansing you've never heard of is unfolding here in the southeastern fringes of the Sahara Desert. It's a campaign of murder, rape and pillage by Sudan's Arab rulers that has forced 700,000 black African Sudanese to flee their villages.

Countless thousands of black Sudanese have been murdered, and 600,000 victims of this ethnic cleansing have fled to other parts of Sudan and are suffering from malnutrition and disease. The 110,000 who have fled into Chad are better off because of the magnificent response of the Chadian peasants. Chadians are desperately poor themselves, but they share what little food and water is available with the Sudanese refugees.

Two things: One, if you were to replace "blacks" with "Jews" or "Christians," no one at the Times would care. Think I'm kidding? Where was all the reporting from the Sudan when they were killing off Christians and burning down churches? Two, where is the "unique legitimacy of the United Nations" to put a halt to this?

With that being said, I applaud Kristof for using the pages of the Times to inform us of what is going on there. I didn't know before I read that. But, Kristof made a omission, a rather important one: He uses the terms, "Arab rulers," Arab leaders," and "Arab raiders."

He doesn't call them what they are: Muslims

She is the New York Times' Supreme Court reporter. I stopped read her a while ago, because I just could not stand her liberal bias any longer. Get this characterization of Michael Newdow's argument:

But no one who managed to get a seat in the courtroom is likely ever to forget his spell-binding performance.

That is easy to say, considering the limited number of seats in the courtroom and the lack of video available. Who, in reality, would be able to contradict her?

Dr. Newdow engaged in repartee that, while never disrespectful, bore a closer resemblance to dinner-table one-upsmanship than to formal courtroom discourse.

and

Dr. Newdow, 50 years old, often spoke very rapidly but never appeared to lose his footing during the 30 minutes the court gave him. He managed a trick that far more experienced lawyers rarely accomplish: to bring the argument to a symmetrical and seemingly unhurried ending just as the red light comes on.

Gee, I wonder who she wants to prevail? The only thing Greenhouse seemed to miss was saying that "you could feel the ghosts of Clarence Darrow and Henry Clay in the air."

...then it's an epidemic of hunger in the United States under a Republican administration. Just ask the New York Times, who, since 2001, seemed to have rediscovered these social ills. To paraphrase the incomparable Mark Steyn, "You’d have to have a heart of stone not to be doubled up in laughter" after reading this article. Some excerpts:

Come payday, the tough choices begin for Roxie Jackson. Her salary as a physical therapist's assistant has sustained her family of five in the middle-class suburb of Bloomfield, N.J., since her husband lost his job two years ago and income from her second job, with Mary Kay, declined before she eventually left it. So each week, Ms. Jackson weighs which bills she must pay and which must wait. And one factor is ever-present in her budget deliberations: hunger.

Her husband lost his job two years ago? How? Why? And why hasn't he gotten another one? He has a family of five to feed. What kind of man is this loser? I work two jobs (even though I don't really have to) to make sure Stephanie can dedicate her life to Emily. There are jobs to be had, and it took all of one paragraph for me to lose any sympathy I might have had for this family.

On the surface, hunger may seem more severe and more intractable in the hearts of the largest cities. But experts say that more and more people who live in suburban and outlying areas are also having to make hard choices that sometimes leave them scrambling for their next meal.

Nationwide, the number of suburban households facing food shortages rose by roughly a quarter-million from 2001 to 2002.

Code for white, probable Bush voters, and it all got worse from 2001-2002, which is, coincidentally, right after Bush took office.

Charlene Nickle, 52, for example, has turned to the Human Needs Food Pantry in Montclair, N.J., where she lives, to help feed the three grandchildren she raises, who are 8, 10 and 14. Each week, she visits the pantry to pick up fresh fruits, vegetables and meats, when they are available, along with canned goods, rice, powdered milk and cereal.

Now, exactly whose fault is it that this woman's daughter is a loser who can't even care for her own children?

A few years ago, Maritza Rosa, was a single mother on welfare struggling to feed eight children. "I know firsthand how it is to have food stamps run out and have no place to go," she said. "It's either you pay a bill or you don't feed your kids." Now, Ms. Rosa works as the assistant director of the Father English Community Center Food Pantry in Paterson, N.J.

Read that again. Single mother with eight children? Where are the father/fathers? Why was this women continuing to have children if she was on welfare?

And here, the Times finally decides to use research from a conservative organization, but, as expected, only to imply that they are heartless and out-of-touch.

Experts agree that hunger in the United States is not typically severe to the point where people are suffering malnourishment, but some disagree about how serious the problem is. For example, a recent report issued by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative policy and research organization in Washington, concluded that nearly all hunger in the United States is short-term and episodic rather than continuous.

But for some suburban residents, the reality is different.

And, get this woman:

Patti Perry, 40, lives in Montclair despite the high cost because she wants her seven children to be in good schools.

Ms. Perry, who is raising her children on her own, was laid off from her job with a telecommunications company at the end of February but has since been rehired in a different position. She makes "a pretty decent salary," she said, but between bills and her monthly rent of $1,850 for a one-bedroom home that she has converted to four bedrooms, her paycheck never seems to go far enough.

Now it's a single mother with "only" seven children. Plus, no wonder she needs food. I'd have to go to the food bank if I had a monthly rent of $1,850.

Could the Times possibly find a bunch of more unsympathetic people? And, why are they not asking the important questions, like "How the hell did you allow yourself to get in this position?" Plus, if you are a regular reader of the Times, then you know their editorial stance is that traditional families are passe, and are not necessary. Yet look at the people affected by this "food insecurity." Single mothers, a Grandmother, and a Mom who, for all intents and purposes, is single, since she has a lazy bum prideless loser for a husband.

They really had to stretch to justify the premise of this crap, er, article.

While Kosovo burns, Kofi Annan shows real leadership, which should stop the violence immediately:

In New York UN Secretary General Kofi Annan urged all parties to halt the violence, "which jeopardises the stability of Kosovo and the security of all its people," his spokesperson said.

And this is the band of incompetent dopes that John Kerry wants to put in charge of Iraq?

If you are as interested as I am in the outcome of the Pledge of Allegiance case, then read this and this, two posts from people who were present at the Supreme Court this morning. The part I found most interesting:

The emotional peak of the argument came during Newdow's argument. In response to his assertions that the Pledge's reference to "under God" divides, rather than unites, the country, the Chief asked by what vote Congress added the phrase in 1954. Newdow responded that it was unanimous, to which the Chief joked, "That doesn't sound very divisive," to which Newdow responded, "That's because no atheist can get elected to office in this country." Several members of the audience then broke out in applause, a serious breach of decorum at this Court, causing the Chief to say angrily that the courtroom would be cleared if there was any more clapping.

Note to that publicity whore Newdow: (Who I just learned today is behind two other lawsuits, to rid of Congress's chaplains. The other is aimed at the Rev. Franklin Graham's prayer to Jesus at President Bush's inauguration) There is a reason an atheist can't get elected to Congress: Because the United States of America is, and has been since its founding, a religious nation. Newdow's argument, like so many others, is breathtakingly Orwellian. They say that things like the Pledge are forced indoctrination of the majority views, yet what Newdow is trying to do the same exact thing: Force his preferred atheism on the rest of us.

Sadly, the voice of the Godless is a lot louder than the voice of the religious. I guess religious people like me are too busy working to go to the Supreme Court and whine like babies over nothing.

One more thing: Listen to this ominous opening statement by Newdow:

"Every school morning, government agents, funded by tax dollars require..."

Words mean things. Not "teachers," which sounds docile, but "agents," which sounds Gestapo-like.

means that...

- You have to rip Bush for attacking Iraq on imperfect intelligence while simultaneously attacking Bush for not attacking Afghanistan on imperfect intelligence, which was by far less threatening than what we had on Iraq.

- You complain about Bush doing nothing to stop 9/11 but you know that you would have had a cow if he had every Arab in an American flight school was arrested based on the Phoenix FBI Memo.

- You think taxes are too low.

- You complain about the high price of gas while doing everything to prevent ANWAR drilling.

- You think the U.N. is a moral authority while ignoring their fraudulent "Oil for food" program.

- You think Iraq is a quagmire and Kosovo isn't.

- You think Aristide was legitimately elected and Bush wasn't.

More to follow sometime in the future. Think about these examples, and you undertsand how pathetic it is to be a liberal today.

What sank faster? The Titanic after hitting the iceberg, Paul O'Neill's credibility after he was on 60 Minutes, or Ricard Clarke's after he was on 60 Minutes. The liberal media has willfully missed this, but Clarke contradicted himself: Here's what he said on 60 Minutes:

"Frankly," Clarke told Stahl, "I find it outrageous that the president is running for re-election on the grounds that he's done such great things about terrorism. He ignored it. He ignored terrorism for months, when maybe we could have done something to stop 9-11. Maybe. We'll never know."

Here's what he said in 2002:

Actually, I've got about seven points, let me just go through them quickly. Um, the first point, I think the overall point is, there was no plan on Al Qaeda that was passed from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration...

And the third point is the Bush administration decided then, you know, in late January, to do two things. One, vigorously pursue the existing policy, including all of the lethal covert action findings, which we've now made public to some extent.

And the point is, while this big review was going on, there were still in effect, the lethal findings were still in effect. The second thing the administration decided to do is to initiate a process to look at those issues which had been on the table for a couple of years and get them decided.

So, point five, that process which was initiated in the first week in February, uh, decided in principle, uh in the spring to add to the existing Clinton strategy and to increase CIA resources, for example, for covert action, five-fold, to go after Al Qaeda.

Funny, when he is selling a book or trying to score himself some partisan points, he has forgotten many of the things he said before. I'll be reading the liberal bloggers tonight to see how they spin this.

And, remember, he told 60 Minutes that there was no al-Qaeda-Iraq connection, which was a direct contradiction of what he said in 1999.

Liberals are upset at the so-called "Republican attack machine." Funny how merely pointing out that what he is saying today is the opposite of what he said before is an "attack."

John Kerry's campaign has already raised a record-breaking $15 million over the Internet this month alone! And they're currently raising a million dollars a day. In fact, Kerry may very well raise a record $100 million before he accepts his party's nomination at the end of July.

We have to face up to the fact that the Bush campaign is already being outspent on the airwaves by shadowy liberal groups with hundreds of millions of dollars from limousine liberals like George Soros. Add Kerry's resources and we can expect a formidable barrage of anti-Bush ads on TV for the next several months.

Only you can help fight back against this assault. You have the power to even out the odds and give the Bush campaign the resources it needs to prevent an anti-war protester from becoming president.

Or maybe you'd prefer that President Kerry raise your taxes by a trillion dollars. He has already pledged to veto any attempt by Congress to extend the Bush tax cuts beyond their expiration date.

Today is Wictory Wednesday. Every Wednesday, I ask my readers to volunteer and/or donate to the Bush 2004 campaign.

If you've already donated and volunteered for the Bush campaign, then talk to your friends and enlist them in this battle for America's very soul.

From the home of Eric "What Liberal Media?" Alterman, MSNBC:

The report revealed that in a previously undisclosed secret diplomatic mission, Saudi Arabia won a commitment from the Taliban to expel bin Laden in 1998. But a clash between the Taliban’s leader, Mullah Mohammad Omar, and Saudi officials scuttled the arrangement, and Bush did not follow up.

Gee, what was Governor Bush thinking? Instapundit said it best: Why didn't he send the Texas Rangers to finish off Bin Laden?

Funny that John Kerry has a new ad showing himself in Vietnam. Where are all the people complaining that Kerry is using 58,000 dead for political purposes? The ad sucks, by the way.

Today, the Supreme Court will hear Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow. (A good summary of the case can be found here) Publicity whore Michael Newdow, who sued the United States Congress, inter alia, alleging that the Pledge of Allegiance was offensive to his delicate feelings, uh, I mean violated his daughter's constitutional rights and that the pledge violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Of course, he was able to get those scumbags at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to agree with him, led by the most far-left worthless judge in this country, Stephen Reinhardt, who just happens to be married to Romona Ripson, the Executive Director of the ACLU of Southern California. (The ACLU and the Americans United for the Seperation of Church and State have filed an amicus brief backing Newdow and the Ninth Circuit decision)

As you would expect, this selfish bastard is the hero of the liberal media. Time magazine made him Person of the Week. Get this:

We should all thank Newdow for giving us a reason to hope that one day, in the not-too-distant future, we will return to the America of September 10, 2001. To return to those days when we had nothing better to do than bicker over really critical issues like which politician is the most patriotic, or who has the biggest flag on the block. Thanks to Newdow's lawsuit charging the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional (due to that "under God" phrase), we've become reacquainted with that comforting place where flag-waving carries no sorrowful undertones, only simple pride or defiance.

This must be a joke. You can just feel the liberal disdain for patriotism and Americans who love their country. You just know this writer was disgusted with the outpouring of national unity after September 11th. Newdow is not one to be praised. He is a selfish weasel using his daughter as a prop to try and force his atheism on the rest of us, aided and abetted by like-minded liberal judges.

Newdow's ex-wife, who has primary custody of their daughter, feels differently. She and her daughter are church going Christians, while he is an avowed atheist. This is all about him and his vanity. What do you expect from a guy who has both a law degree and a medical degree? He even says as much:

Newdow, in an interview with Fox News, acknowledged that his daughter had been voluntarily saying the Pledge of Allegiance in her second- grade class in the Elk Grove (Calif.) school district. "This is more about me than her," he told Fox. "I'd like to keep her out of this."

To the Associated Press, Newdow asserted, "It's my parental right to keep the government off my child."

Yeah, but to get standing, he lied and said his daughter was injured. He is going to be arguing the case himself. I was flipping through the channels today and happened to see him on the Abrams Report. He was pathetic. If he argues in front of the Supreme Court like he conducted that interview, they will run all over him. After seeing how weak and unsure he was, I am even more upset that Scalia has recused himself from the case. Scalia would have mauled him.

Scalia made a huge mistake by speaking publicly against the decision, and made the right decision to recuse himself. (His integrity then was used against him in the Cheney case) Many people expect that, without Scalia, the decision will end up 4-4, thus keeping the Ninth Circuit ruling in place. However, I am not so sure. I would keep an eye on Justice Breyer, who may surprise many people and rule in favor of the Pledge. It is said that the Supreme Court follows the election returns, and I have think they may take notice of Congress' reaction to the Ninth Circuit decision as well.

If I had to make a prediction, the Court will avoid the Establishment Clause question by ruling that Newdow has no standing. If the Supreme Court rules the plegde unconstitutional, every vestige of Christianity in this country will be attacked, the "In God We Trust" on money, even the Supreme Court's opening call, "God save the United States and this honorable court." This assault in Christianity must be stopped right here and now.

Daniel Pipes, a controversial figure to the left, recently spoke at American University. There was an organized disruption of his speech, led by Matt Bowles, who is National Field Organizer at the American Civil Liberties Union.

As Pipes took the podium at approximately 8:15 p.m., almost a third of the crowd of 150 took out black pieces of cloth and, in unison, wrapped the cloth around their mouths as a sort of "gag." This was apparently meant as a form of symbolic and silent protest of Pipes's ideas.
Ten minutes into the lecture, and again in unison, the protesters stood up, turned and knelt in their chairs to face the crowd behind them. Ten minutes later, the protesters took out signs that denounced "Campus Watch," an initiative begun by Pipes that monitors and acts as a watchdog against Middle Eastern Studies in North America and attempts to improve them.

Ahhh. The good ol' heckler's veto. Get this:

The phrase "heckler's veto" occurs in passing in the Supreme Court decision that declared the Communications Decency Act unconstitutional. Reno v. ACLU, 117 S.Ct. 2329, 2349 (1997) (The statute "would confer broad powers of censorship, in the form of a 'heckler's veto,' upon any opponent of indecent speech who might simply log on and inform the would-be discoursers that his 17-year-old child ... would be present.")

Note that, to a lawyer familiar with the First Amendment law, the phrase "heckler's veto" means something different than the plain English interpretation of the words suggests. In First Amendment law, a heckler's veto is the suppression of speech by the government, because of [the possibility of] a violent reaction by hecklers. It is the government that vetoes the speech, because of the reaction of the heckler. Under the First Amendment, this kind of heckler's veto is unconstitutional.

So, according to the ACLU, the Hecklers veto is unconstitutional when it comes to keeping porn from children, but not when it involves rational discussion that does not conform with the ACLU's pro-Arab, pro-Palestinian, pro-terroris, anti-American, and anti-Israel stances. (Yes, I know the difference between government involvement and private speech, so save your e-mails. I am not interested in the legal niceties, I am interested in exposing ACLU hypocrisy)

Read the whole thing, especially how the ACLU tries to say this action was taken by Bowles as a private citizen, not as an ACLU member. (Talk about a distinction without a difference) Interesting that since, Bowles has been named Terrorism and Civil Liberties coordinator. Think about that title for a second. If you want to know about how the ACLU only cares about the civil rights of terrorists, (and homosexuals) and not about my right as a heterosexual male to no be killed, read this. I think your blood will boil just like mine did.

The liberal media has a lot invested in making sure that people continue to believe that Iraq has nothing to do with al-Qaeda, that Osama hated Saddam, and would never do business with him. Since I would rather wipe my ass with $20 then spend it on Clarke's book, I only know what is in it from what I have read. This is the first time I read about this, a chapter of the book that the liberal media seems to have not gotten to yet:

Clarke: Iraq Teamed up with Bin Laden to Produce WMDs

The media are fascinated with the parts of former White House terrorism czar Richard Clarke's book that trash President Bush as being out to lunch on the al Qaeda threat before 9/11.

But reporters aren't talking about the chapter of "Against All Enemies" that describes how Osama bin Laden cooperated with Iraqi scientists to make weapons of mass destruction - a development that, if true, would more than justify President Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq.

In his book, Clarke describes how the Clinton CIA determined in 1996 that Sudan's Shifa chemical plant, which was allegedly bankrolled by bin Laden, was producing the chemical EMPTA.

If Clarke is so credible, why aren't they reporting this? You already know the answer.

In Sandoval County, which is next to the one I live in (4 days a week) New Mexico, the County Clerk Victoria Dunlap has decided that she shall make policy and interpret the law how she sees fit. While eating some Raisin Bran Crunch this morning, I read this in the print edition of the Albuquerque Journal:

Dunlap said Monday evening she is tired of waiting on lawyers and lawmakers to clarify New Mexico marriage law.

What arrogance!! (Sadly, this woman is an elected official, so firing her or defunding her job is not an option.) Thankfully, a judge put a top to this nonsense, but read this, about how this woman has decidied that she is the ultimate interpreter of law:

Sandoval County Clerk Victoria Dunlap said she decided to resume the practice of issuing such licenses after reviewing state law governing marriage and deciding same-sex marriage is not precluded.

"It's not in the law. There is nothing in the law that prohibits it," she said.

This woman ought to be arrested for her flagrant violation of the law. Think of this analogy: Imagine if someone is out on bail pending appeal, and a prosecutor decides the convict should start his jail term now because he is tired of waiting for the appeals court to decide, and his own research has found that the appeal is without merit anyway. Just imagine the outrage that would follow.

Watch this flash video and you will see for yourself.

Take a look at the sign in the background: "Ex-French Citizen Proud U.S. Citizen"

Here's a usual New York Times neutral headline:

Despite the Sluggish Economy, Welfare Rolls Actually Shrank

WASHINGTON, March 21 — In a trend that has surprised many experts, the federal welfare rolls have declined over the last three years, even as unemployment, poverty and the number of food stamp recipients have surged in a weak economy.

Of course this has "surprised many experts." The so-called "experts" that the Times looks to are all Bush-bashing doomsayers. (especially Paul Krugman) They let their ideology cloud what they see right before them.

This part only adds to the obvious Clinton legacy massaging that The Times has been passing on its readers for some time now:

In fact, in the last three years, the number of families on welfare has declined slightly, to two million, which is less than half the number receiving public assistance when President Bill Clinton signed the welfare law in August 1996.

Gee, forgotten is the part where Clinton vetoed welfare reform twice, but signed it the third time when Dick Morris told him he would lose the 1996 election if he didn't sign it. Welfare reform was part of the GOP's Contract with America, led by Newt Gingrich.

Mark H. Greenberg, a lawyer at the Center for Law and Social Policy, a research and advocacy group, said, "One of the great mysteries of social policy in the last few years is why welfare caseloads have stayed essentially flat or declined in much of the country, despite the economic downturn."

And this is one of the so-called experts, from "an organization of program staff whose work is concentrated on family policy and access to civil legal assistance for low-income families" who have dedicated their efforts to this issue? The perpetual victimhood espoused by groups like this causes them to talk about solutions constantly, yet willfully fail to see them when they happen. In other words, the more they get what they are striving for, the less relevant they become. As such, there can never be any real progress.

This has got to be killing the Democrats, who need to breed government dependency to keep themselves in office. Get some of this denial:

But Shawn Fremstad, a policy analyst at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal-leaning research and advocacy group, said, "Falling caseloads amid rising poverty should be a cause for concern."

Wendell E. Primus, a welfare official in the Clinton administration who resigned to protest signing of the 1996 law, amplified that concern: "It's an indictment of the welfare law, the welfare system, that it has not been more responsive to economic conditions."

Read that again. To them, this only means that there isn't enough welfare being handed out right now!! And, they are so convinced that our economy is in the toilet, they refuse to see what is right before there eyes, that people may actually not be on welfare because they are working. People are taking personal repsonsiblity and aren't are poor as Democrats need them to be in this election year. Oh, the humanity!!

Joe Wilson, Rand Beers, and Richard Clarke. Mark Kilmer has the story.

"Liberating Afghanistan was a failure!!! It has taken 2 months to write a Constitution!! Bush has failed." You heard all of that right up until Afghanistan finished its new Constitution.

"Bush has failed in Iraq!! People are arguing over the Constitution!! It'll never happen." - You heard all of that right until Iraq ratified it's new Constitution.

With all due respect to Bob Dole (who unlike Kerry, had the decency to resign his Senate seat to run for President), where is the outrage at this?

June target set for European constitution

How long have them haggling over this thing now? A year or so?

Just like Paul O'Neill a few weeks ago, the media has a new hero, as we have all seen the past 2 days. A few things of note on Clarke. Read this article from February of last year, Richard Clarke's Legacy of Miscalculation. The money quote:

In happier times prior to 9/11, Clarke -- as Bill Clinton's counter-terror point man in the National Security Council -- devoted great effort to convincing national movers and shakers that cyberattack was the coming thing. While ostensibly involved in preparations for bioterrorism and trying to sound alarms about Osama bin Laden, Clarke was most often seen in the news predicting ways in which electronic attacks were going to change everything and rewrite the calculus of conflict.

Then, I read this in The Weekly Standard. Money quote:

IN HIS INTERVIEW with Stahl, Clarke goes to great lengths to suggest that there was no connection between Iraq and al Qaeda. At one point in the interview, Clarke makes a stunning declaration. "There's absolutely no evidence that Iraq was supporting al Qaeda, ever."

Leave aside the fact that Clarke was a key player in the decision to strike the al Shifa pharmaceutical plant in 1998. That strike came twenty days after al Qaeda bombed two U.S. embassies in Africa. Clinton administration officials repeatedly cited Iraqi support for Sudan's Military Industrial Corporation and al Shifa in their defense of the targeting.

Disregard, too, the fact that when the Clinton Justice Department blamed bin Laden for those attacks, the indictment specifically cited an "understanding" between Iraq and al Qaeda, under which the Iraqis would help al Qaeda with "weapons development" in exchange for a promise from bin Laden that he wouldn't work against the Iraqi regime.

Now Clarke is alleged to be some kind of terrorism czar, right? Then he (along with a lot of other people), needs to explain the assertion that Iraq and al-Qaeda had nothing to do with each other, when this connection is clearly stated in the indictment of Osama bin Laden, obtained by Janet Reno and the Justice Department in 1998:

al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically involving weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the government of Iraq.

Ask yourself why the media parrots the "there was no connection between al Qaeda and Iraq" meme, as well as the scandalous tone they use every time they talk about Bush wanting to find out if Iraq was involved in 9/11, when there is an indictment that clearly states there was an agreement between them. (More evidence of that connection here)

Then, after that, I read on Power Line that Clarke teaches a class at Harvard with Rand Beers, who, since lasy May, has been National Security/Homeland Security Issue Coordinator for...John Kerry!!

Funny how the liberal media seem to have been unable to earth this fact. Watch this guy fall apart and disappear as fast as Paul O'Neill did.

If you don't read Thomas Sowell religiously, you are cheating yourself. He is without a doubt one of the top 10 columnists today. His latest column is his usual excellence. An important excerpt:

What an irony that these two countries [France and Germany], with a track record of monumental foreign policy disasters, would be the ones to preen themselves on their superior wisdom in international affairs while impeding the American response to the terrorists' war. And what a pathetic thing that there are some Americans willing to accept French and German presumptions and condescension.

Read it.

Our Texas-based friend Calliope (Cynthia - I actually thought until now that Calliope was a guy! Silly me for assuming that) wanted me to make sure that this did not go unnoticed:



I see this crap and I am tempted to ignore it, since it is so outrageously beyond the pale. Free speech is a wonderful thing, and because of that, we have to put up with this. (Funny how the person holding this sign was less than anxiosu to have their own face exposed in the picture) When I lived in and around Philly, I used to go to NYC all the time. I haven't been there since September 11th, 2001, and, frankly, part of me does not want to, because I will be upset to see that empty space in the skyline. The dope holding this sign did not make it, someone else did. I would love to know who is behind it. Sadly, the compliant liberal media will never truly look into it, lest they hurt "Arab sensibilities." You just know a pro-Jihadist group is behind it somewhere, somehow.

(Via Drumwaster's Rants)

Via Cox and Forkum, who deserve to be syndicated in 200 newspapers. Let's hope they get the break they deserve soon.

Well, some much for that. I had Mississippi State taking the whole thing. Oh well, Go St. Joe's!!!

I blatantly jacked this image from Grapevine's Ramblings.

Somehow on this play, Donald Brashear of the Flyers got a double minor for clipping Teppo Numminen of the Dallas Stars. This depsite obvious visual evidence that it was Richard Matvichuk's stick that caught Numminen.



Unlike the Grapevine Sooner, as a lifelong Flyers fan, I did not appreciate that gift of 4 power play minutes to the Dallas Stars. However, this picture, in a nutshell, provides more proof of what I have said for years, that NHL officiating is about one step above pro wrestling.

The only decent referees/linesmen I have ever seen were Bill McCreary, Paul Stewart (a former goon for the Quebec Nordiques), and (80% of the time) Kerry Fraser, and Stephane Provost.

Other than those guys, the rest have to go. They are all inconsistent and erratic. Don Koharski definitely needs to "have another doughnut." Thankfully, that blind bat Leon Stickle has been retired for a while now. Mick McGeough lives up to his name every single game. (What he is, 6 foot 10, 6 foot 11?) If Terry Gregson were an NBA official, he would have been fired long ago. (He is always booed at the Wachovia Center when he is announced as the game's referee) Same for Don Van Massenhoven. Swede Knox needs to retire. Dan Marouelli needs to join him. Kevin Collins, that lanky prick, is possibly the second-worst linesman (behind Stickle) in NHL history. He never lets the players take care of business, and always forces minor incidents to escalate because the pussy players know he is going to protect them. And don't even get me started on Dave Jackson.

Nothing pisses me off more than the lack of obstruction penalties called. Thanks to such lousy officiating, the New Jersey Devils and their imitators have successfully turned back the clock on the NHL 100 years. Gary Bettman and Colin Campbell always say there is going to be a crackdown, and it usually lasts until the first week of December. I blame the officiating first and foremost for the decline in play in the NHL.

I watched John Kerry's appearance in front of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee from 1971 and I was repulsed. In his first few sentences, Kerry's hypocrisy and BS (much like what we see today) was on full display. He said something close to this, "I'm sorry, I didn't get much sleep last night because of the injunction." He was referring to a Supreme Court ruling that stopped people from camping out on the Mall in Washington. What a piece of work!! He wasn't sleeping in the Mall with his fellow protesters, he was staying in a Georgetown mansion!

Watching him talk about all of the atrocities committed by American soldiers was disgusting. While I am sure they happened, just not on the scale he alleged, his open and shameless back-stabbing and anti-Americanism should outrage everyone. He droned on about how blacks were discriminated against, of course, never mentioning how his organization, VVAW, were ideological bedfellows of the Black Panthers.

2 things bothered me most: Him saying that it did not matter to the peasants of South Vietnam whether or not they live under the control of Communists, and his complaining about how Vietnam veterans were treated awfully upon their return, their high unemployment rates, etc. What the hell did he expect? When people like HIM were all over the place trashing Vietnam Vets for all kinds of atrocities, did he think that they would return to a ticker-tape parade?

Think of the hypocrisy of Kerry's statements like this: It would be like someone being pissed off at their wife for not inviting his brother to their son's 5th birthday party after he told her his brother was a pedophile.

After what this man has done throughout his career, I refuse to believe that the majority of this country will find him worthy of the Presidency. His blame-America first for everything was astonishing, nothing different than what he does today. He had no hatred for Communism then, and has no hatred for terrorism now.

This man is not worthy of the Presidency. I hope a lot of people saw that speech tonight, for either a reminder or for a history lesson. (I was born about 3 months after he gave that speech)

Israeli Air Strike Kills Hamas Founder

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - Israeli helicopters fired missiles at Hamas leader Sheik Ahmed Yassin as he left a mosque near his house at daybreak Monday, residents said, and witnesses said he was killed.

Good riddance. I am here listening to Drudge radio, and the AP top of the hour news said that this "will probably spark another cycle of violence," as if Israel was wrong for taking this guy out. Oh well, I shouldn't be surprised at that attitude.

[Update: It seems the Palestinians are really pissed off at Ariel Sharon and want him dead:

Hamas leaders vowed Monday to "cut off" the head of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, after their spiritual leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin was killed in a missile strike by Israeli helicopter gunships in Gaza City.

"Sharon has opened the gates of hell and nothing will stop us from cutting off his head," leaders of the radical Islamic group vowed.

"Words cannot describe the emotion of anger and hate inside our hearts," said Hamas official Ismail Haniyeh, a close associate of Yassin in Gaza. He said that "the enemy should expect a response that will turn the ground under his feet to hell ... All of Palestine will turn into a volcano that will burn up the enemies."

Ok, and exactly how is this any different than the usual bile spewed by these scum?

I grew in Philly, and I know all about that RINO Arlen Specter, who is a conservative only 1 of each 6 years of his term, the election year. He submarined Robert Bork in 1987, less than a year after he was re-elected, but was an important Clarence Thomas backer in 1991, a year before he was for re-election, for example. He also voted for school vouchers when he knew President "innocent under Scottish law" Clinton would veto it, but voted against them when he knew Bush would sign it.

Because I despise Specter, I am supporting Pat Toomey in his bid to unseat Specter for the Republican nomination. Obviously, Specter is nervous, or he wouldn't go out there and be a Republican like he did today:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A former top U.S. security expert is harshly critical of the Bush administration for failing to act on terror threats before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks but a Republican senator said on Sunday the blame reaches back to former Democratic President Bill Clinton.

If Specter wins re-election again, this will be his last term, and no doubt he will be a Democrat. And, which worries me most, if he wins, he takes over the chairmanship of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Let's hope Pennsylvania Republicans send Specter to retirement 6 years earlier than he planned.

[Update: The left-wing "white students looking for an internship need not apply" Philadelphia Daily News supports Specter. That is all I need as proof that Specter needs to go]

From President Bush:

"Senator Kerry voted for the Patriot Act, for NAFTA, for the No Child Left Behind Act, and for the use of force in Iraq," the president said. "Now he opposes the Patriot Act, NAFTA, the No Child Left Behind Act, and the liberation of Iraq.

"My opponent clearly feels strongly about each of these issues," he added. "So strongly that one position is never just enough."

Bush could turn his campaign into a stand-up routine. And he should, because it will work.

This is Veteran's Stadium in Philadelphia, which was imploded this morning: (You can view some of the video here)





This is a sad day for me. Yes, The Vet was a dump, but it was my dump. I used to walk there as a kid to see the Phillies all the time, going up to the window and buying the $1 general admission ticket. (To get money to go to the games, I would stand outside the Pathmark or Acme supermarket to ask old ladies if they needed help with their bags for tips) Also, I sat in the 700 level watching countless Eagles games. But, my greatest memory of the Vet was on August 15, 1983, when I got to play there for the city championship in baseball for the 10-12 year old division. (We lost)

I will miss the Vet more than I could ever explain. Thank you to Steve Carlton, Pete Rose, Larry Bowa, Manny Trillo, Garry Maddox, Bake McBride, Bob Boone, Tug McGraw, Greg Luzinski, Lenny Dykstra, Darren Daulton, Curt Shilling, Jim Eisenreich, Milt Thompson, Mitch Williams, Dick Vermeil, Ron Jaworski, Wilbert Montgomery (my all-time favorite Eagle), Harold Carmichael, Mike Quick, Randall Cunningham, Duce Staley, Bill Bergey, Wes Hopkins, Buddy Ryan, Andre Waters, Reggie White, Clyde Simmons, Jerome Brown, Seth Joyner, Brian Dawkins, Donovan McNabb, Chuck Fusina, and Kelvin Bryant, among countless others, for many great memories.

The next time you see a protest on TV or read about it in your local rag, and the "objective" reporters act as if the protesters are regular people, like your friends and neighbors, who have legitimate gripes, remember this photo:



Just show up and pick a cause. (I would have picked up the "Hope Begins With Kucinich" poster in the middle)

Hundreds in S.F. protest war on anniversary

How many hundreds were there? Why, 400!! This is typical San Francisco welfare-state mentality:

"I'm here today because I am troubled that the United States is spending $80 billion to occupy a country that should be sovereign," said Sunaina Maira, —a professor of Asian American Studies at UC Davis who joined a group linking arms before the building. "We should be spending money for social services here."

A liberal professor? No way!!

Stephanie and her Mom had a yard sale this morning here in Albuquerque. 112 people stopped by in just over 3 1/2 hours. If they had stayed out there a bit longer, there may have been more people look at the clothes that don't fit Emily anymore than the number of people who protested in San Francisco today.

[Update: read this post at Little Green Footballs]

Yesterday, I was enjoying the 95 degree day in Phoenix, and I heard a clip on the Rusty Humphries Show of Richard Nixon calling John Kerry a "phony" and an "opportunist." Here's the transcript:

April 28, 1971, 4:33 p.m. President Richard M. Nixon takes a call from his counsel, Charles Colson.

"This fellow Kerry that they had on last week," Colson tells the president, referring to a television appearance by John F. Kerry, a leader of Vietnam Veterans Against the War.

"Yeah," Nixon responds.

"He turns out to be really quite a phony," Colson says.

"Well, he is sort of a phony, isn't he?" Nixon says.

Yes, Colson says in a gossiping vein, telling the president that Kerry stayed at the home of a Georgetown socialite while other protesters slept on the mall.

"He was in Vietnam a total of four months," Colson says "He's politically ambitious and just looking for an issue."

"Yeah."

"He came back a hawk and became a dove when he saw the political opportunities," Colson says.

"Sure," Nixon responds. "Well, anyway, keep the faith."

There was more to this. Nixon talked about he Kerry was eating at the best restaurants too.

Does anyone have this audio clip or know a link where it can be found? It is hilarious to hear Nixon talk about the Kerry of 30 years ago, because it sounds just like the Kerry of today. Please e-mail or leave a comment on where it can be found.

Notice something? Everyone that is coming out with an anti-Bush book, the media are more than happy to provide mounds and mounds of free publicity? Yet, when a pro-Bush book comes out, there is no 60 Minutes interview to be seen?

A few months ago, Paul O'Neill was the man of the hour. By the end of the week, he was exposed as nothing more than a pathetic man with an ax to grind. Now, Richard A. Clarke, the former White House counterterrorism coordinator, has a book out telling everyone what a dolt Bush is and how he tried to warn Bush about al-Qaeda, but was ignored.

Ex-Aide Says Bush Doing 'Terrible Job'

The media wants you to think that this is some Bush insider that is being a heroic whistle-blower. But, actually, Richard A. Clarke is a career government official who was from May 1998, (who was President then?) the first National Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Counter-terrorism.

Now, after spending years getting a government salary, Clarke has his chance to cash in. Get this part:

Almost immediately after the Sept. 11 terror attacks, Clarke said the president asked him directly to find whether Iraq was involved in the suicide hijackings.

"Now he never said, 'Make it up.' But the entire conversation left me in absolutely no doubt that George Bush wanted me to come back with a report that said, 'Iraq did this,'" said Clarke, who told the president that U.S. intelligence agencies had never found a connection between Iraq and al-Qaida.

"He came back at me and said, 'Iraq! Saddam! Find out if there's a connection,' and in a very intimidating way," Clarke said.

You gotta love liberal logic. Because Bush demanded to find out of there was a connection, he must have wanted him to invent and, and tried to scare him into doing so. What, did he Bush expect to say, "Hey Rich, check to see if anyone else in involved. Make sure you investigate everyone from Arabs, to Somoans, to Norweigans, because we don't want to be seen as doing racial-profiling. Get back to me with a report by, say, March or April, ok?"

Clarke retired early in 2003 after 30 years in government service. He was among the longest-serving White House staffers, transferred in from the State Department in 1992 to deal with threats from terrorism and narcotics.

From the State Department, the world's lawyer to America, to the Clinton administration, who did next to nothing about terrorism, and we are supposed to act as if this guy is some sort of soothsayer, who knew better than anyone else about al-Qaeda? Yeah, OK.

Take a minute and think about September 11th. At the time, I was 30 years old studying for my degree in Political Science at Arizona State University. That morning, while watching two TVs at once with my buddy Chris, I speculated that it could only be 1 of 5 possibilities: Iraq, al-Qaeda, Libya, North Korea, or China. I dismissed China, who as a rational actor, would not pull this off because that would be the end of them. North Korea I only dismissed as it was discovered that Arabs were behind it. I never discounted Iraq or Libya, even after it was determined that al-Qaeda was behind it. (Iraq had a huge hand in the 1993 WTC blombing, a story that has been buried for years. See this also.) President Bush and Secretary of Defense would have been totally irresponsible to NOT demand that we find out if Iraq was involved. I cannot believe that both the liberals and the media (the same thing msotly anyway) are acting as if Bush looking at Iraq is some sort of scandal. Saddam has supported terrorism all over the world. Do they actually expect me to believe that Saddam supported just about every terrorist organization going except the most successful one in the world? Oh, please.

Saddam must still be laughing at all the free lawyers he is getting in the Western press. He'll parrot all of this at his trial, and the media will eat it up. You watch. There is a segment of this country that would vote for Saddam if he were running against Bush in November. Believe that.

Here's my favorite part: Clarke will discuss in his book about how he and the Clinton administration briefed the incoming Bush administration about the urgency of dealing with al-Qaeda and bin Laden. Think about that: Clinton had 8 years to do something. If they knew the urgency of dealing with terrorism, why didn't they do something? (Talk about passing the buck) Clarke will discuss how the USS Cole investigation was coming together, etc. This in reality should show the worthlessness of the law enforcement approach to terrorism.

...has lost it. Why doesn't he just come out and support Kerry? After all, he is an openly-gay, HIV-positive commentator. If he isn't afraid to hide that, then why is he hiding his hopes that John Kerry wins.

I used to read Sullivan every day. I read him once a week at best now, because Sullivan has become what a despise: Someone who is so worried about "gay rights," nothing else matters to him. Not terrorism, not taxes, nothing. It is all about homosexual politics to him. I used to read him daily because I actually believed he wasn't like every other homosexual out there. I was wrong. Read this post to understand what I mean:

MCCAIN ON KERRY: Here's a question worth asking: whatever John Kerry's record, could he afford in office to be weak on terror? Wouldn't he be obliged to continue Bush's policies in Iraq and Afghanistan and even, as he has already promised, actually increase troop levels in those countries? I don't think it's out of the question. John McCain knows Kerry and says he doesn't believe he'd be "weak on defense." Sometimes, a Democrat has to be tougher than a Republican in this area - if only to credentialize himself. I can certainly conceive of Richard Holbrooke being a tougher secretary of state than Colin Powell. I'm not yet convinced and want to hear much more from Kerry. But I'm persuadable. Four more years of religious-right social policy and Nixonian fiscal policy is not something I really want to support.

As you read that, you come to realize that Sullivan is no different than any other liberal trying to convince himself to support Kerry. What in Kerry's history makes Sullivan think that Kerry, once in office, would be any different than he has been in the last 30 years, a one-world socialist who will never put America's interests first if it means having Europe or the liberal interests groups not like him? And, Richard Holbrooke is just another internationalist who would show nothing more than fealty to the United Nations.

Sullivan now thinks that Bush is some religious zealot because he publicly stated his support for a Constitutional amendment defending traditional marriage, or banning gay marriage, whichever way you choose to look at it. The only difference between Bush and about 85% of the politicians in this country is that Bush had the guts to come out and be honest about his opposition to gay marriage. Even some of the most dedicated liberals in this country (i.e.Dianne Feinstein) won't even support gay marriage. There is a reason that gay marriage is not legal anywhere in the country, and that is because only a small minority who want it. And no one should be forced to accept it because a few unelected judges said that we must. If this country is run by some religious-right cabal, then I would love to here Sullivan explain why Christians today are more discriminated against than ever. I'd argue that Christians are more discriminated today than homosexuals, especially in the court system.

Andrew Sullivan is a left-wing militant homosexual. I realize that now. And I feel like I've been had.

Yasser Arafat Says Gibson Film Not Anti-Semitic

RAMALLAH, West Bank (Reuters) - Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat watched Mel Gibsons's controversial "Passion of the Christ" at a private screening on Saturday and said it was not anti-Semitic, officials said.

Who would know better than the world's foremost anti-Semite?

Yesterday, there were the beloved Cinderella team in the country. Today, there are a second-rate bunch of tournament choke artists.

Raise your hand if you had 10th-seeded Nevada going to the Sweet Sixteen. I thought not.

Not only is John Ashcroft trampling on the rights of woman, immigrants, minorities, homosexuals, and, well, everyone, with his Gestapo-like tactics. Now, reporters out to expose him for the evil potentate that he is are feeling his wrath:

Reporter following trail of corruption arrested

Oh, wait. Maureen Dowd got a hold of my keyboard. This is the actual headline:

Reporter following trail of corruption in EU arrested

Police arrested a leading investigative journalist yesterday on the orders of the European Union, seizing his computers, address books and archive of files in a move that stunned Euro-MPs.

Hans-Martin Tillack, the Brussels correspondent for Germany's Stern magazine, said he was held for 10 hours without access to a lawyer by the Belgian police after his office and home were raided by six officers.

"They asked me to tell them who my sources were. I replied that was something I would never do. Now they have all my sensitive files, so I suppose they'll find out anyway," he said last night.

"The police said I was lucky I wasn't in Burma or central Africa, where journalists get the real treatment," he added.

Mr Tillack said the raid was triggered by a complaint from the EU's anti-fraud office, OLAF. He was accused of paying money to obtain a leaked OLAF dossier two years ago, which he denies.

Can you imagine if that went on here? The people would be outraged!! But, this is the current state of liberalism, ramapant corruption and intimidation of those who dissent. And to think, liberals in this country think that those Euro-trash are more sophisticated and morally superior to us Neanderthal Americans. To think, George W. Bush is villified for not bowing to those criminals. Unlike those blame-America first dopes amongst us, Bush sees those Euro-criminals for what they are, not what he wanst them to be. Get this part:

OLAF was created to replace the old fraud office UCLAF, which was accused of covering up abuses by the disgraced Santer Commission. Many UCLAF staff were transferred to OLAF.

Read that again. UCLAF was corrupt, yet they kept most of the people and just changed their name. (Talk about repainthing a '7 Datsun and calling it a new car. It sounds like a Democrat poverty program that failed. Just pass more laws and spend more money)

Do the Palestinians want Israel to stay or go? I wish they would just make up their minds.

Palestinians worry that Israeli withdrawal could lead to anarchy

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - Many Palestinians here are brooding about the prospect of a sudden Israeli withdrawal, even though they have fought for the removal of Jewish settlers and soldiers for years.

But now that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon appears poised to leave this 139-square-mile rectangle and its scattered Jewish settlements, which are difficult and expensive to defend, many Gaza residents are uncomfortable with the prospect and deeply suspicious of Israeli intentions.

"If Sharon considered this withdrawal as a benefit for Palestinians, he wouldn't be doing it," said Talal Okal, a Gaza-based analyst for Al Ayyam, a leading Palestinian newspaper. "The price is very high for this withdrawal, but we don't have a choice. It's something that is being imposed on us."

I thought I was reading Scrappleface.

That allegedly free country, situated directly north of the greatest country to ever appear on Earth, has perhaps reached a new low in liberal tomfoolery:

Corrections Canada won't let guards at maximum-security prisons wear stab-proof vests because it sends a confrontational "signal" to prisoners, says a department spokesman. "If you have that kind of presence symbolized by (a stab-proof vest), you're sending a signal to the prisoner that you consider him to be a dangerous person," said Tim Krause.

Oh the humanity!! Guards protecting themselves might hurt the delicate feelings fo hard-core criminals. Boo-f'n-hoo. This is the proper attitude:

Kevin Grabowsky, regional president of the Union of Canadian Correctional Officers and a Max guard for 25 years, said the notion that inmates might be "offended" by the sight of a guard wearing light armour is a "complete crock."

"You don't go to a max pen for stealing candy from the 7-Eleven," he said. "A lot of these guys are career criminals.

I wonder what the sheriff from my county (3 days a week), Joe Arpaio, (known as America's toughest sheriff) would think of that nonsense.

You must watch this new RNC video. Hilarious!!!

John Kerry - International Man of Mystery

Kosovo clashes 'ethnic cleansing'

The Nato commander in overall charge of Kosovo has likened the recent violence in the province - in which at least 28 people have died - to ethnic cleansing.

The source is the British Bullshit Corporation, so you decide how authentic it is.

This is an example of good triangulation and excellent realpolitik.

U.S. Considers U.N. Command in Iraq

WASHINGTON - U.S. officials are exploring ways to persuade Spain to keep its troops in Iraq (news - web sites), including the possibility of a separate United Nations (news - web sites) command to oversee international forces.

Under that scenario, the U.S. military would continue to lead its own soldiers, while troops from Spain and other countries could be led by the United Nations, a State Department official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

While the liberal media would spin this as, "See, we told you the U.S. needed the U.N.," I see the benefits of this clearly. By having a segment of the coalition under exclusive U.N. command, it takes away John Kerry's "Get the U.N. in there" argument, it puts Spain, Poland, and every other wobbly member of the coalition, as well as others that say they would only help under the U.N.'s auspices to the moment of truth, forcing them to do what they have said all along or be exposed as frauds. If that happens, or if the U.N.-run part of Iraq turns to shit (which it will), Bush is given indisputable proof (as if he really needs it, but there are a lot of dopes out there) that the U.N. is an impudent organization that can do nothing in practice or reality.

One other thing: I have little confidence in the State Department. Instead of being the United States' representative to the world, it has become the world's representative to the United States. (I read this brilliance somewhere else, I think from Joel Mowbray) I would not be surprised in the least if this was leaked by an anonymous official in an attempt to hurt Bush.

From Calliope's hometown rag:

Ginsburg ties to activist group under fire

WASHINGTON -- Thirteen Republican members of Congress on Thursday asked Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to withdraw from all future cases having to do with abortion because of her affiliation with the NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund.

The House lawmakers said in a letter to the liberal justice that they were concerned about her lending her name and presence to the Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Distinguished Lecture Series, which is co-sponsored by the defense fund, because the fund often files legal briefs in cases before the Supreme Court.

"As legislators, we believe your actions call into question your ability to rule with impartiality on any case involving abortion," the 13 lawmakers wrote.

They should have added her 8 years as a leader of the ACLU Women's something or other, and asked her to recuse herself in any case that the ACLU has a stake in too.

Looks like the gutless liberals around the world have fine-tuned their message about how President Bush, not the terrorists, Saddam Hussein, or Osama bin Laden, have made the world dangerous:

French Official: War Made World Dangerous

Blix says Iraq war may have worsened terror threat

Understand this: the world loves us when we are dying. Look how quickly they sympathized with us after September 11th, and how quick it disappeared after we defended ourselves.

French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin: "Terrorism didn't exist in Iraq before. Today, it is one of the world's principal sources of world terrorism."

He means either one of two things: We never saw any terrorism because we were blinded by the $100 billion of oil contracts we had with Saddam, which we needed to continue funding our massive welfare state. Or, he meant, America should be fighting terrorists in New York or Philadelphia, not in Baghdad.

Now, here's the bullshit-artist Hans Prix, uh, Blix:

Blix said his task of seeking weapons of mass destruction in Iraq was undermined by the Bush and Blair governments, which probably knew they were exaggerating the threat to justify the invasion. "(The war) was more punitive than preemptive," he said.

Apart from removing Saddam from power, Blix said he saw no benefit from the invasion and was skeptical of U.S. claims that Libya's subsequent decision to disarm was based on a fear that it could be next.

What bothered him most, he said, was the manipulation of intelligence on Iraq and the lack of support for the weapons inspections process and the UN in general.

Blix is a lying asshole. Someday, when I am taking a shit and I inevitably think of Blix as I hear the plop in the toilet, I will find some past statements by Blix which contradict what he is pushing now. (It is a mere coincidence, of course, that he is currently promoting a book.) Blix was Saddam's protector, not a dispassioned inspector like he wants everyone to think he was.

It pisses me off to no end that Blix, who does not give one damn about America's security, is treated with more repect in the press than President Bush. I'm really sure that the terrorists now infesting Iraq were at home humbly attending to their goat farms when they were antagonized by the imperialist Americans, who only invaded the Middle East to steal the oil and the riches of the Arabs, so Haliburton could make a few bucks. You have to be a real dope, or a real lying sack of shit, to push that nonsense.

How many times did the liberal media carry the Democrats bag for them by ripping Bush for not meeting soldier's caskets at Dover Air Force base? Too many to count. How come they never seem to emphasize this?

Bush and his wife, Laura, met privately for about an hour and a half with families of 46 fallen soldiers.

Bush always does this, and it is always low-key. Where is the media's usual complaints of "secrecy" in the Bush administration?

Fort Campbell has lost 72 soldiers, and Bush goes there to a rousing reception. The President shows them respect, and they respond in kind. That is why Al Gore sent scores of attorneys to Florida in an effort to disqualify military ballots. The military knows who respects them, and it ain't the Democrats.

Interviews with troops here suggested Bush has strong support among soldiers.

"It's about time we got somebody in a key position to do what we need to do" in leading the military, said Sgt. Jerry Tucker, who served in Iraq.

There is justice in the world:

Readers aren't burning for "Burning Down My Masters' House," Jayson Blair's memoir of his ill-fated New York Times career.
Nielsen Bookscan reports the book sold just 1,386 copies through last Sunday, according to yesterday's PW Newsline, an E-mail from Publishers Weekly.

Bookscan tracks roughly 70% of the market, excluding Wal-Mart, so the total would be higher. But given Blair's wide exposure on NBC, a variety of local affiliates and the cable news networks, the results look low indeed.

I have been to 3 Wal-Marts in 2 states in the last week, and his book isn't for sale. Besides, I don't think the Wal-Mart buyer cares too much for this type of book anyway.

F Jayson Blair. Still, his final con paid off for him. His probably sitting at home laughing at how he not only got over on the New York Times, but his publisher too.

Why not? Just look at how well the Milosevic trial is going.

Israel has an enemy within, their Supreme Court. (see here, and here for examples.) Now, they have stopped the construction of Israel's "seperation barrier."

JERUSALEM (AP) - Hundreds of Palestinians protested Thursday at a building site of Israel's West Bank separation barrier, after the Supreme Court halted construction indefinitely at a nearby location.

And, you guessed it, Israel's soldiers hurt a poor child who was protesting against the barrier that was "cutting tens of thousands of people off from their lands, services and schools."

A 12-year-old boy was seriously hurt by soldiers firing tear gas and rubber bullets...Soldiers fired tear gas and rubber-coated steel bullets to disperse stone throwers in the crowd. A 12-year-old boy suffered a fractured skull from a rubber bullet, hospital officials said.

Hmmm. Why is it Israeli soldiers are always firing into crowds, and all they seem to hit is 12 year old boys? Could it be that this is propaganda? No way!! That never happens.

By the way, read the article I linked above. Notice it is a picture that is from an unknown time, showing some poor, injured Palestinian. They don't even try to disguise it. Any picture of a poor, injured Palestinian will do.

Get this story:

SECURITY bosses fear al-Qaeda are plotting to attack the BBC.

An alert was sparked when a Moroccan posing as a newspaper photographer was seen taking pictures of the TV Centre in White City, West London.

When he was challenged, he gave false details — and fled in a car driven by another Arabic looking man.

Security has been stepped up at all BBC buildings since the incident on Sunday.

On the same day, two more Arabs asked reception staff at the TV Centre for a tour of the premises — and for details about the building’s lay-out.

A BBC insider said: “We are on a state of alert. Security is tight and these incidents have made people nervous.”

A security source said: “The BBC is considered a prime target for terrorists because of the publicity it would generate worldwide

This is hypocrisy of the highest order!! If you watch the pro-Palestinian, pro-terrorist, pro-Jihadist BBC, you would think that Arabs are victims of Western imperialism who are only fighting to defend themselves. Yet, as soon as an Arab man is seen taking pictures nearby, they get fearful of being attacked. Now, why doesn't their editorial position reflect their honest instincts on Arab terrorism?

J.J. Jackson, an original MTV VJ, died today. I always liked him. He was on MTV when I actually watched it.

I laughed when I read this, simply because it is so true.



When I spent 3 weeks in 1998 on a jury, the day we finally reached the verdict, it was about 10:45 in the morning. Now, there is a man sitting in the courtroom not knowing if he is going to spend the next 10 years in prison, and another juror wants to wait until after lunch, since they are not are paying for it, before we announce the verdict. I objected, and someone said, "Hey's let vote on it." 8 of the 12 voted to get the free lunch before we told the judge we had a verdict. When we received our club sandwiches, I immediately stood up and walked over to the trash can, and SLAMMED!! it in the trash. It was a quiet lunch, and a quick one too.

By the way, we found the defendant not guilty.

Thank you Manhattan for winning today. There is always a 5-12 upset, and I guessed correctly. Anyway, in my pool, my Final Four are:

Oklahoma State over Georgia Tech
Mississippi State over Connecticut

NCAA champ: Mississippi State

add yours in the comments.

Go St. Joseph's!! Since they are the only Philly school in it, I'll be rooting hard for them.

Does anyone actually believe that John Kerry would get this kind of reception from our troops?

This week, everyone is a "key" ally in the war on terror:

WARSAW, Poland - President Aleksander Kwasniewski, a key Washington ally, said Thursday he may withdraw troops early from Iraq and that Poland was "misled" about the threat of Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction.

From the headline and the opening of the article, you get the impression that Poland is going wobbly on us. That isn't the case.

Earlier in the day, Kwasniewski said Poland may start withdrawing its troops from Iraq early next year, months earlier than the previously stated date of mid-2005. He cited progress toward stabilizing Iraq.

"Everything suggests that pullout from Iraq may be possible after the stabilization mission is crowned with success and, in my assessment soon, it may be the start of 2005," Kwasniewski told RMF-FM radio.

Just a reminder to those who are forgetful: Who liberated Poland from the Communists? That would be the United States, less than 20 years ago. I think Poland isn't going anywhere, and this is wishful thinking on the part of the liberal media.

Read this post from Lee at Right Thing from the Left Coast on how the media airbrushed a portion of a picture of the aftermath of the Madrid bombing.

Watch this Bush flash video.

I thought the Democrats sent this guy home already. Why does anyone even give a damn what Howard Dean thinks?

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Thursday's bombings in Madrid proved that the overthrow one year ago of the regime in Iraq has not made the world safer, former presidential candidate Howard Dean said, assailing President George W. Bush's foreign policy.

"For the president of the United States to assert that we were safer because (former Iraqi President) Saddam Hussein is in jail is ludicrous, given what happened three days ago in Spain," Dean, a Democrat and former Vermont governor, told NBC's "Meet the Press."

Funny, isn't it? Dean got destroyed in the primaries, disappeared for a while, re-appeared last week, and now is out running this crap? Can you say, "John Kerry's surrogate?" Think I'm kidding? Then take a look at what he said yesterday, in a conference call arrnaged by the Kerry campaign:

WASHINGTON -- Former Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean said yesterday that President Bush's decision to send troops to Iraq appears to have contributed to the bombing deaths of 201 people in Spain.

A growing international investigation is focusing on Islamic militants possibly linked to Al Qaeda as those responsible for the Madrid train bombings on Thursday.

Dean referred to the videotape when asked whether he was linking US troops in Iraq to the deaths in Spain.

"That was what they said in the tape," Dean said. "They made that connection, I'm simply repeating it."

That is the same exact M.O. that Dean used to insinutae that Bush was informed of the 9/11 attacks in advance by the Saudis.

Howard Dean is a pathetic man.

At least Howard Dean agrees with me on this:

"John Kerry is an internationalist," Dean said.

That's right, Kerry is. Please keep reminding everyone you can.

Yesterday, I listed some reasons why I evacuated Philadelphia 3 years ago. Read this article about wht MTV's Real World will not be filmed there after all:

MTV show abandons Phila.

Philadelphia proved a little too real for The Real World.

After squabbling with local unions, the producers of the MTV series today gave up on Philadelphia as the site of its 15th season. Taping was to begin in three weeks.

I am openly anti-union. The days of Samuel Gompers and their usefulness are long since past. Unions, who own the Democratic Party part and parcel, are nothing without the cronyism and inflated contracts lavished on them by self-interested modern Whig-like politicians. Read this part to understand why unions hurt business and do not create jobs, they lose them:

The Real World's departure comes less than a year after the city, state and unions resolved a crippling labor controversy. At the Convention Center, union labor costs and ugly jurisdictional disputes chased away repeat business. New labor rules were negotiated last summer.

Since then, only one major trade show has booked a multi-day stay, the first in five years. The center is still trying to regain business from large professional associations. Many that came to Philadelphia from 1998 through 2000 did not return because of labor costs.

How pathetic is that? Philly has a beautiful new convention center, and groups refuse to book multi-day stays and decide not to come back, thanks to outrageous union labor costs. I can only imagine the millions of dollars of revenues the city lost, and the untold number of jobs lost by a bunch of people who think that having zero jobs is preffered over not having as many as you want.

I grew up in Philly. I know how it works there. Half my friends are union workers. And I've told them to their face that I am anti-union. Unions don't create, they destroy.

Look at this poor woman:



"He had so much hate in his eyes."

That's what 48-year-old Sylvia Aldren said after being pummeled and flayed by a kangaroo in the Australian state of Queensland.

Speaking of anger, her response?

"I always thought they were cute animals, [but] now I want them culled," Aldren said, according to the report.

What happened to tolerance, acceptance, and diversity? She must be a bigoted "species-ist."

The brilliant and beautiful Michelle Malkin has more on Kerry playing defense. (And pandering to firefighters too)

Money quote:

Kerry's big proposal to fight the global war on terrorism (borrowed from Bill and Hillary Clinton) is to add 100,000 "first responders" to the ranks of firefighters and emergency medical personnel in cities and towns across the United States. In other words: Wait until the terrorists strike us again and then do a really, really good job of cleaning up the mess afterward.

Gee, I wonder how this could be?

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Newspaper publisher New York Times Co. on Tuesday warned that first-quarter profit and revenues could fall far below Wall Street expectations, reflecting a sluggish advertising market so far this year.

Bonus tomfoolery:

One bright spot in February was a 7.7 percent increase in help-wanted ad revenue, reflecting increases at each of its three newspaper groups for the first time since September 2000, the company said.

While Paul Krugman is writing about how people are so discouraged that they stopped looking for work, and Bob Herbert is writing about the longer lines at food banks and soup kitchens because of Bush, their paymasters are making their best money on help-wanted ads.

Oh, what delicious irony.

I never blog on polls, because they are a waste of time, and are nothing more than manufactured news. But, when the liberal media hides the results they don't like, I'll bring it to your attention. Get this headline in the New York "Once Upon A" Times:

Nation's Direction Prompts Voters' Concern, Poll Finds

Well, no shit, that is why I am voting for Bush hands down. "The nation's direction" is the basis for every Presidential election. But, the Times uses this headline because the results of the poll aren't want they want. (Notice how far down you have to read to see them. If it were Kerry ahead, it would be in the first sentence) If this were an honest report, the headline and the first paragraph would have read:

New Poll Shows Bush beats Kerry; Nader a Non-Factor

George W. Bush would be re-elected if the election were held today, the latest New York Times/CBS News poll shows. Mr. Bush would be re-elected whether or not Ralph Nader's third-party candidacy is factored in.

But, no. This is how it starts:

George W. Bush and John Kerry enter the general election at a time of growing concern among Americans that the nation is veering in the wrong direction, the latest New York Times/CBS News poll shows. Mr. Bush faces unrest over his management of the economy, while the public has doubts about Mr. Kerry's political convictions.

You have to read until the 8th paragraph to find the results of the poll, which are, of course, prefaced by the Times' favorite trick, quoting a Republican who sounds as if he is against Bush. (And, as a bonus, the guy is from Texas)

"Our priorities need to be reshuffled," Darrell Griffin, 64, a Republican retired engineer from Hemphill, Tex., said in a follow-up interview. "The protection of the homeland and our allies from terrorism is important, but our economy in our own country and Social Security and things like that here at home are pretty important, too. "

The Times/CBS News poll offered the latest evidence that the race for president was as tight as has long been predicted. Even after two weeks in which Mr. Bush has run televised advertisements promoting himself and attacking Mr. Kerry, and in which Mr. Kerry has enjoyed the glow of favorable coverage that greeted his near-sweep of Democratic primaries, the two men are effectively tied, with 46 percent of voters saying they supported Mr. Bush and 43 percent backing Mr. Kerry.

The candidacy of Ralph Nader looms as a potentially lethal threat to Democratic hopes of regaining the White House: With Mr. Nader in the race, Mr. Bush leads Mr. Kerry by 46 percent to 38 percent, with Mr. Nader drawing 7 percent of the votes. In a sign of the polarized electorate Mr. Bush and Mr. Kerry are facing, three-quarters of supporters of each candidate asserted they would not change their mind before the election.

Oh, that liberal media. When the next poll showing Kerry beats Bush is out, I'll blog about it and we'll compare how different the Times treats those results.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Washington offended Libya with its display of the north African nation's dismantled nuclear weapons, an official close to the United Nations nuclear watchdog said on Tuesday.

Boo-f'n-hoo. I am offended that Libya has behind the murders of hundreds of Americans and other innocent people, in the Pan-Am bombing and the Berlin disco bombing. Tell Reuters to write about that.

"Libya was quite unhappy with this dog-and-pony show because it hurts them domestically (and) in the Arab world," said the senior official close to the U.N. watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency.

"It looks like unilateral U.S. disarmament of Libya and Libya wants it recognized as disarmament under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and IAEA auspices," the Vienna-based official added.

Uh, no. It is the IAEA who are upset for being exposed as the worthless frauds they are. And, if Libya is upset over how it looks, then too f'n bad. They should be happy that we didn't disarm them in another manner, bombing the shit out of Tripoli.

Stephanie gave me Emily 3 moths ago, and I have never been happier. I know exactly how happy these people are right now:

Jeffery and Sheryl McGowen waited a dozen years to have a child, praying, hoping and taking fertility drugs.

On Monday morning, they hit the gestational jackpot.

Jacob, Jacoby, Jason and Justin -- two sets of twins weighing from 2 pounds, 5 ounces to 3 pounds, 4 ounces -- were delivered healthy by Caesarean section at the Woman's Hospital of Texas.

Although there is no exact data on such extraordinary events, the odds of having a pair of identical twins is about 1 in 11 million, the couple's doctor told them.

Stephanie and I got lucky, as Emily came less than 11 months after we decided to have a baby. I can only imagine how much time and effort these fine people went through in order to experience this joy. This part got me choked up:

In the past few months the parents showed little concern about taking care of four children, Moore said.

"Sheryl said she would take all that God would give her," Moore said.

I'll say it again. I hate abortion. However, I think it should be legal for the first trimester, and then illegal thereafter. I really f'n hate partial-birth abortion. It is infanticide, plain and simple, and has no place in a civilized society.

God Bless this fine couple and their 4 children.

If you want to read slanted, lie-filled economics, then read Paul Krugman. It you want to understand reality, then read Thomas Sowell, one of the most underrated columnists of our time. His latest column on outsourcing is top-notch. An example:

Anything that increases economic efficiency -- whether by outsourcing or a hundred other things -- is likely to cost somebody's job. The automobile cost the jobs of people who took care of horses or made saddles, carriages, and horseshoes.

Computers sent typewriter manufacturers into bankruptcy.

Whole political movements are based on a refusal to accept that benefits have costs. Protectionism is just one of these movements. Environmental extremists often refuse to accept even the smallest costs for such benefits as the building of much-needed housing or the dredging of rivers and streams to prevent flooding and save human lives.

Ironically, those politicians who complain most loudly about the outsourcing of jobs often advocate the outsourcing of the job of making foreign policy and safeguarding American national security to the United Nations or to our allies in Europe.

Thomas Sowell, a man of brilliance.

Philadelphia has been run by Democrats since 1930. As a result, the city has been circling the drain for a long time, especially since that Boss Tweed-lite John Street has been the mayor. Now, thanks to "crooked, venal management, political manipulation, a bungling customer relations operation and a costly software meltdown," Philadelphia Gas Works, who is a billion dollars in debt, wants to charge more money to those people who actually pay their bills.

Its solution, as proposed in a request to the state Public Utility Commission, is for the city's paying customers to pony up an average $80 per year to cover some of the costs of deadbeats who don't pay their bills.

Without rate relief, PGW argues in its PUC filing, "it simply will be unable to pay all of its obligations when they become due in the fall of 2004."

The planned surcharge, which would last two years, would raise an estimated $47 million annually. The charge would not be levied on 50,000 low-income customers in the company's customer responsibility program.

No wonder the population of Philadelphia has been nearly vut in half over the past 20 years. My family evacuated the place in 1986. I left the entire area in 2001. We are all tired of paying for the incompetence of Democratic cronyism.

The New York Times has backed down from its threats against the National Debate for its corrections page parody. This is great news for all of us in the blogosphere.

A new report on global warming is out, and we are all doomed. (Listed on OneWorld.net and AP)

Damage from Warming Becoming 'Irreversible,' Says New Report

We are quickly moving to the point where the damage will be irreversible," warned Dr. Jonathan Pershing, director of WRI's Climate, Energy and Pollution Program. "In fact, the latest scientific reports indicate that global warming is worsening. Unless we act now, the world will be locked into temperatures that would cause irreversible harm."

WRI researchers estimate that greenhouse gas emissions such as carbon dioxide rose 11 percent over the last decade, and will grow another 50 percent worldwide by 2020. Under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, the international agreement that sets out specific targets to follow up on the treaty, 38 industrialized countries were supposed to reduce their emissions by an average of seven percent below 1990 levels by 2012.

And, here's my favorite part:

The administration of former President Bill Clinton signed the Kyoto Protocol, but President Bush withdrew the U.S., which currently emits about 25 percent of the world's greenhouse gases, from negotiations over Kyoto's implementation.

I am so f'n tired of seeing the liberal media run out this lie again and again. Read this for the truth. I am too pissed to write it again.

A Boston Globe reporter now says he made a mistake when he reported that Kerry said foreign leaders wanted him to win:

"I mistranscribed a key word," explains Patrick Healy, a political reporter for the BOSTON GLOBE who covered the event in a pool capacity.

Wow. I have never heard any reporter who said that Bush called Iraq "an imminent threat" rush to say they made a mistake.

I will believe this guy only if I hear the tape for myself. Still, from all the years I spent producing radio shows, I know the power of a digital editor. Give me a Ted Kennedy speech and an editor, and I'll make him sound like Barry Goldwater.

I also ask this question: Why didn't Kerry deny it any of the times he had the chance? Instead, he stated it was "none of your business" to the guy in Bethlehem, and responded to Bush bringing it up by criticizing the White House press secretary for working on Bush's campaign. He never said, "I never said that." (He will know) Surely, he knows best what he said.

Until I hear proof, I will not believe otherwise. He said it. Look who is on the run now.

[Update: I just watched Kerry on FOX News, taped yesterday, where Kerry said he wouldn't name who he talked to. Nice try by the Boston Globe reporter. By the way, The Boston Globe is owned by the New York Times]

His latest column in the Telegraph about Spain and Europe's overall view of terrorism is a must-read. His conclusion says in a few words what I could only say in hundreds:

The only fighting that there is going to be in Europe in the foreseeable future is civil war, and when that happens American infantrymen will want to be somewhere safer. Like Iraq. There are strong horses and weak horses, but right now western Europe is looking like a dead horse.

Bonus fun fact: Spain was Washington's principal Continental ally, and what does that boil down to in practice? 1,300 troops. That's fewer than what the New Hampshire National Guard is contributing.

Don't read or buy this dope's book. I am watching him on O'Reilly, and he is running the "root causes" line, that terrorism comes from poverty, politics, etc, and is running the "we should negotiate line." Liberal scumbag dope.

The National Debate, threatened with a lawsuit by those scumbag two-faced wankers at the New York Times for mocking their corrections page, has retained a hard-core trademark attorney and has told the Times to "Bring It On!!"

The National Debate's response to the New York Times is brilliant:

"In an era when media conglomerates control the rights to vast amounts of intellectual property, routine elevation of copyright to a right of censorship could easily squelch active debate and criticism of important ideas."

Where did they get this brilliant response from? Why, a New York Times editorial titled, "Gone With The First Amendment." The abstract of that editorial:

Editorial scores decision by Federal Dist Judge Charles Pannell Jr, stopping publication of Alice Randall's The Wind Done Gone, parody of Margaret Mitchell novel Gone With the Wind presented from slave's point of view; says ruling trumped First Amendment, adding that right to produce comic parodies of prior works is well established in law.

F the New York Times. They should spend more time worrying about their accuracy instead of people pointing it out.

Get this headline from CNN:

Iraq war protesters march on White House

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- More than 100 people gathered Monday in Washington for a march to the White House, calling for an end to U.S. military action in Iraq...

More than 60 protesters met at the hospital before embarking on the 4-hour trek. Others joined along the way, and still more joined the protest at the park.

There were that many people in front of me on the waiting list for dinner at Cracker Barrel this weekend.

Read this and decipher the logic:

Kerry Criticizes Bush Record on Terrorism

WASHINGTON, March 15 — Senator John F. Kerry attacked President Bush on national security issues today, asserting that Mr. Bush has played politics with the battle against terrorism and that the bombings in Spain show how ineffective his policies have been.

"When it comes to protecting America from terrorism, this administration is big on bluster and they're short on action," Mr. Kerry, the Massachusetts senator and presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, said. "But as we saw again last week in Spain, real action is what we need. The Bush administration is tinkering while the clock on homeland security is ticking. And we really don't have a moment of time to waste."

So, Bush failed to protect America because of what happened in Spain? I thought the train bombings were in Madrid, Spain, not Madrid, Iowa or Madrid, Nebraska. Silly me. Next thing you know, he'll tell you that because 15,000 died in France because it got hot, Bush's health care policied are obviously a failure.

Note to Kerry: Keep up with this line of blaming America for the real of the world's shortcomings. It is a sure loser.

...could interpret the election results in Spain as a "blow to Bush."

WASHINGTON, March 14 — The ouster of the center-right party in Spain, only days after a terrorist bombing that may be linked to Al Qaeda, is the first electoral rebuke of one of President Bush's most steadfast allies in the Iraq war.

When France and Germany balked at supporting the war on Iraq, the Spanish prime minister, José María Aznar, stood publicly by Mr. Bush at a summit meeting in the Azores a year ago this week, and just days before the war began. Now voters have elected the opposition Socialists, although the center right was leading in the polls until the terrorist attack.

Perhaps the Times hasn't been keeping up with the huge losses that Schroeder's party has suffered, despite his decision to not join the coalition.

The Bush administration must now fight the perception, accurate or not, that acts of terror against America's allies can sway nations into rethinking the wisdom of standing too closely with Mr. Bush.

Time after time, President Bush has responded to critics who say he has alienated America's closest allies by pointing to Mr. Aznar as a courageous example of a leader who ignored poll numbers — upward of 90 percent of Spaniards opposed the war — and who acted in Spain's best interests.

The vote changes nothing. Aznar did act with courage. Sadly, his party was rewarded with defeat by the gutless appeasers who have learned nothing. They can blame America all they want. But, when push comes to shove, where will they look to save their asses? To us, of course.

This election in Spain was the first one I was interested in since Quebec had a secession vote in 1995. Frankly, I don't give a damn what the world thinks. Hating us instead of their real enemy will result in their downfall, not ours. Bush had 3 choices on Afghanistan: 1) Do nothing 2) Bomb them back to the 12th century and forget about them, or 3) Knock out their leadership and help them rebuild. He chose #3 because it was the humane thing to do while protecting us, and it was in the tradition of our rebuilding of Germany and Japan after we crushed them. But, if another 9/11-type attack happens here again, while there will be those in this country ready to blame us first, the majority of the country will be bloodthirsty like no time in our history, and few will care about being as humane as we are now.

Europe is on its way to the dust heap. The question is not if, but when. It will not be in my lifetime, but it will be in my daughter's. Muslims will runover them demographically, and will not be nearly as tolerant towards non-Muslims. They will not care about political correctness, diversity, and multiculturalism. And where will those who are displaced move to? The United States, of course.

If I were President, I would announce that we will protect anyone who was with us, i.e. England, Australia, Poland. Everyone else is on their own. I am damn tired of our country being shit on, both home and abroad.

If you hate America so much, and if you want gay marriage, free health care, the rich to pay outrageously high taxes, and you think terrorism isn't a real threat, the place for you is quite close: Canada. Get going, you ungrateful bastard, and live among the like-minded.

Seems that some fine Pennsylvanian took Kerry to task about his statement that foreign leaders want him to win. (Disclosure: For what's it is worth: I used to work for the 2 radio stations that were in the same building as the TV station website I linked to) I don't know if this is a wire story or a station story, but let's just say I am not one bit surprised, knowing what I know about that station, that this incident is buried in the article.

The town meeting was contentious at times, with 52-year-old Cedric Brown repeatedly pressing the candidate to name the foreign leaders whom Kerry has said are backing his campaign.

"I'm not going to betray a private conversation with anybody," Kerry said. As the crowd of several hundred people began to mutter and boo, Kerry said, "That's none of your business."

Typical Kerry attitude. I'm sure the media will run with this story. Yeah, sure they will. And they sure won't let facts get in the way of writing this crap:

In his remarks, Kerry said Pennsylvania has lost 154,000 manufacturing jobs since Bush took office. And he passed the microphone to hear from those who've suffered economic setbacks Kerry sought to blame on Bush.

Jerry Green, president of a United Steelworkers Union local, said he lost pension and health benefits when Bethlehem Steel went bankrupt. "We desperately need help here," he said.

Funny, when Bush was protecting the steel industry with tariffs he was getting criticized for it everday. What the media neglects to tell you that Bethlehem Steel was the 25th steel company to file for bankrutpcy, and the steel industry has been in decline for a long, long time. And, they won't tell you that Bethlehem Steel's financial woes started long before Bush was President and these same people out of work (their unions anyway) would not make any type of concessions to keep the business up and running.

One more interesting note in the article:

Kerry opened his day by attending Mass at Sts. Cyril and Methodius Church, just a few blocks from the decaying Bethlehem Steel factory.

Wow. Who knew Kerry was the religious type? I'm sure even he didn't until recently.

While watching billiards on ESPN2, I just had this thought:

Why are the same people who have denied that al-Qaeda and Iraq were connected, or have said that Saddam and Osama hated each other and would never work together, now saying that al-Qaeda attacked Spain because of their support in Iraq? It defies logic, but when has the left ever been concerned about logic?

In light of the Socialist Party victories in the Spanish elections, I am now more concerned than ever about what we face between now and our election on November 2nd. While I am normally skeptical about anything the AP reports, I actually believe there is truth to this:

Many voters said they were furious with the government for backing the U.S.-led war in Iraq and making Spain a target for al-Qaida, which claimed responsibility for the bombings.

"I wasn't planning to vote, but I am here today because the Popular Party is responsible for murders here and in Iraq," said Ernesto Sanchez-Gey, 48, who voted in Barcelona.

Whether or not the murders in Madrid caused this outcome is a matter for pundits to argue. (I'd agree that it was.) However, there is no doubt in my mind that al-Qaeda will interpret this outcome as a victory for thir cause. And, that will be reinforced if the new government of Spain pulls all of its support in Iraq. This will embolden them to pull out all the stops here on American soil in order to have President Bush defeated.

al-Qaeda may be a murderous terrorist organization, but they are surely not dumb. Unlike liberals, they are full believers of realpolitik, and have no illusions on the workings of our political systems and how it will affect them. They know that a Kerry presidency will allow them to replenish their losses. All they will have to do is lay low for a while. Kerry will convey false comfort in ways that al-Qaeda could themselves never dream of. A Bush second-term, especially since Bush will not be facing re-election, means the end of al-Qaeda. They know they'll continue to be on the run, and soon enough, they will not be able to hide anymore. Bush's legacy will be terrorism, and you can bet Bush will want history to record that he demolished it.

Democrats have been vocal in their belief that there will be an "October surprise," and bin Laden will be caught right before the election. Put me on the record right now for saying that the capture of bin Laden will hurt Bush. That's right. There are two types of people in this country, those who think we are at war, and those who think we aren't. If bin Laden is caught, many people who know believe we are in war will believe the war is over, because they want it to be. The attitude then, which will be conveyed by the Democrats and their parrots in the liberal media, will be "OK. The war is over, we caught bin Laden and eliminated Saddam's threat. Now it is time to get back to domestic issues that Bush has neglected, and Kerry is the better person to get us back to life before 9/11." And you know what, that strategy might just work.

As the election comes near, I expect several things to happen, more so because of Spain's message of appeasement. First, the terror alert will be raised to orange, and possibly even red. The Democrats will respond just as you would expect them to. They'll say, "Bush is promoting fear to help his re-election chances." If an attack is thwarted before people are killed, the Democrats will respond, "Set up by the Bush administration to scare people before the election." The press will run fawning stories about the innocent family men (who will be called Pete or Jimmy instead of their real Arabic names) wrongly scapegoated for political gain. (You know that is true. How many times have you seen this already, i.e. Maher "Mike" Hawash) And, if there is a terrorist attack similar to what happened in Madrid here on American soil right before the election, Democrats will respond, "Bush has had 4 years to keep us safe and he has been an utter failure." No matter what, Bush cannot win in this area.

Make no mistake, an attack will be attempted. I know this, you know this, and surely, the Bush administration knows this. Take a look at what he has been, and will continue to be, up against. While he is cracking down on terror groups and their money, Democrats are busy screaming about so-called violations of civil liberties. While he is reminding people about what we are up against, and what happened on 9/11, he is being blasted for "expoltation." While he is showing the face of terrorism on his ads, he is being ripped as if he made up the fact that it is Arab terrorists we are fighting.

John Kerry says this is "a law enforcement operation." In other words, we'll arrest those responsible after they kill us. His vitriol towards the Patriot Act clearly shows he would do nothing before an attack, let we violate the civil liberites of terrorists. Read this response to a question by John Kerry, in his own words, so you can't accuse me of being Maureen Dowd:

Q: Under what future conditions would you support a pre-emptive military strike against another nation without wide international approval?

KERRY: Only when the US is so threatened that it is required for the survival of our country or for the accomplishment of some extraordinary humanitarian goal. Look, this administration misled the American people, abused the power that they were given, and has run an ineffective war on terror. Saddam Hussein was way down the list, with respect to the targets, even on the Pentagon's own list of targets. And what they did was supplant Iraq for the real war on terror, which is Osama bin Laden, Al Qaeda, and terror across the world. The war on terror is less of a military operation and far more of an intelligence-gathering and law-enforcement operation. And we deserve presidential leadership that knows that and knows how to make America safer, and I will do that.

Nice to know they he will let our country get to the brink of destruction, or if someone needs our military to act as social workers, before he defies the U.N. (or in the case of Aristide, he'll use our force to prop up a dictator who is popular with those racists in the Congressional Black Caucus.)

I reiterate my point: An attack will be attempted. Bush will be villified if he stops it, and villified worse if he doesn't. Ask yourself this question: Do you believe that there is a segment of this country that would trade 200 lives (or even more) 3 days before the election if it meant Kerry would win? I surely do. Moreover, I am convinced there are a lot of people secretly hoping for it. What's a few hundred lives when gay marriage and socialized health-care are at stake? And, there is a faction in this country that believes that terrorism and other problems will go away if "Bush just stopped picking on them." They are delusional.

Ask yourself this question: Where does prestige come from? You know the answer. It comes from taking on the top dog and coming out on top. Who would you want to beat at chess? Me or the world's best, Garry Kasparov? In golf, who would you rather beat, your old college buddy or Tiger Woods? In boxing, Lennox Lewis or some tomato can? Prestige comes from knocking off the top dog. The United States of America is the undisputed top dog. Taking it to anyone else is meaningless. No matter who is President, we will always be a target. Who is President only determines how we will respond. We know how Bush will, and we know how Kerry will, which is why Bush must be re-elected.

The baby and Stephanie are in bed, and I'm watching a high school basketball game, full of 5-foot-10 white guys who couldn't score in a woman's prison. Oh well, that Ron Jeremy infomercial should be on soon.

From today's corrections (buried somewhere in the middle):

An article last Sunday about attempts to create democracy in Iraq misstated the precedent in the Mideast. Iraq would become the region's second functioning democracy, after Israel, not its first.

I'll say it again: You don't even have to make it up. They write it for you.

Yeah, life is too short to read the old sea hag, but I gotta mention her latest trash. She wrote:

In an interview with The Guardian, the weapons sleuth David Kay said it's time for Mr. Bush to take personal responsibility: "It's about confronting and coming clean with the American people. . . . He should say: `We were mistaken and I am determined to find out why.' "

Sure sounds bad, doesn't it. She leaves you thinking that David Kay ripped Bush and called him a liar. Well, here's what she left out from that same interview:

Kay clearly admires Bush, and believes he went to war in Iraq in good faith because he thought Baghdad was a threat to the American people. Nevertheless, he thinks the president has to go further to regain public trust. "It's about confronting and coming clean with the American people, not just slipping a phrase into the state of the union speech. He should say: 'We were mistaken and I am determined to find out why'."

Maureen Dowd, taking something out of context in order to disparage Bush? I'm shocked. Shocked!!

This is hilarious. Pure, unadulterated, you-can't-make-this-up liberal tomfoolery. NBC fisks its own poll.

I never mention polls because I know polls, and I don't trust them. I spent an entire semester at Arizona State as part of a team conducting a campus-wide poll as part of my getting a B.S. in Political Science, and I know quite a bit about how they are conducted. First, takes a good look at this B.C. cartoon, which sums up everything you need to know about polls very succinctly.



There is no doubt in my mind that both parts of this poll were conducted at the same time, using the same exact respondents. The first part is about the economy, and this screaming headline is used:

Public’s faith in economy plummets

Americans have sharply lost confidence in the economy in recent weeks, according to an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll released Wednesday, which showed that the presumed Democratic nominee for president, Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, had pulled into a statistical tie with President Bush.

They love the first part, so it gets the bold headline. The second part of the poll does not fit with their editorial stance. It says:

The NBC/Journal poll found Bush and Kerry in a dead heat eight months before the general election. Bush was favored by 47 percent of respondents, while 45 percent backed Kerry, a difference that was within the poll’s reported margin of sampling error of 3.1 percentage points.

The header for this part of the poll they don't like as much:

Results at odds with other recent polls

Now look at how they fisk themselves:

It was difficult to gauge the importance of the result, which was notably at odds with those of other polls in the past week, which have found Kerry with a statistically significant lead in a head-to-head matchup. Kerry led Bush by 9 points in the latest Washington Post/ABC News survey and by 8 points in the latest USA Today/CNN poll.

After reading this, the question becomes obvious: If the results of the second half of the poll are in question, why isn't the first part also in question? Like I said, one fits what they want to say, and one doesn't.

Take another look at the comic strip I posted above.........finished?...good. Here is life imitating art:

The NBC/Journal question also did not account for independent Ralph Nader, even though he had announced his intention to run almost three weeks previously. Other polls have indicated that Nader could draw enough support — as high as 6 percent in some surveys — to swing the election either way, with most of his strength being drained from Kerry.

Is that comic strip not dead-on balls accurate? They obviously wanted the Kerry-beats-Bush result, so they ignore Nader, who they clearly know hurts Kerry's numbers. So, like the pollster in the cartoon, they decided which results they want first before designing the questions. And some say there is no liberal media.

Eric Alterman works for MSNBC. I'd like him to explain that one away too. Yeah, that liberal media.

I was reading a Tim Blair post about some kangaroo "journalist" I never heard of, some pro-jihadist bitch, and this thought crossed my mind: Why would a journalist, especially a woman, be so supportive of these terrorist scumbags when, if they were to ever actually get their way, the first thing they would do is kill all the journalists and subjugate all the women?

Here's a story I once heard that fits in here:

A woman is walking home, and sees a snake dying. The snake begs her, "Help me, please." The woman takes the snake home and nurses it back to health. When healthy, the snake bites the woman. Why she is laying there dying, she asks, "How could you do this to me, after I saved your life?" The snake replied coldly, "Look bitch, you knew I was a snake when you brought me here."

A few days ago, I said this about Blair:

Jayson Blair is so full of shit with so little shame. Poor him, he's a victim of everything, just ask him. Depression problems, drug and alcohol problems, tough life being black, and (my favorite), he claimed to be sexually abused. He was so casual about it, frankly, I idn't believe a word of it. At least many of the callers took him to task. Only in America can you lie, deceive, and con, claim racism when you are caught, and cash a big check. The only PC-problems he didn't claim to have were AIDS and McDonald's caused obesity.

Now, I just watched him tell Rita Cosby about his time in a mental institution. Oh, please. Just like I said, this weasel has had every PC-problem known to man. And, he was defending himself, saying it was his talent, not his race (it played a small role to him) or affirmative action, that got him the job at the New York Times. (I'm sure that if I, as a white guy, somehow "forgot" to finish getting my degree, the Times would not have been so willing to overlook it) This guy is every bit the charmer and the bullshit artist people have said all along that he was. (As of this posting, despite all of the publicity this guy is getting, his book is tanking. His sales rank on Amazon is 1,777.)

Jayson Blair is a walking billboard against affirmative action. Not because he lied after getting a world-class position that he didn't deserve, but because he finds himself forced to defend himself as something other than "an affirmative action hire." Without affirmative action, no one of color would be forced to be on the defensive like that. When I hear so-called "black leaders" scream racism at anyone who wants to end it, I want to go up and slap them in the face. They are saying to their own people, "you aren't good enough, but, don't worry, we're here to help you."

Without affirmative action, blacks might hurt in the short-term (and I emphasise might), but that would not last long. Allow me to quote a man who was far more brilliant than I will ever be:

"It is better to show a man how to make a place for himself than to put him in one that some one else has made for him."

[African-Americans] cannot improve [their] condition by any short-cut course or by artificial methods. Above all, he must not be deluded into believing that his condition can be permanently bettered by a mere battledoor and shuttlecock of words, or by any process of mere mental gymnastics or oratory. What is desired along with a logical defense of his cause are deeds, results, -- continued results, in the direction of building himself up, so as to leave no doubt in the mind of any one of his ability to succeed.

Who was this racist right-wing bigot? Booker T. Washington

Hmm...link after link that is embarrassing to John Kerry just keep disappearing. Amazon has up a page where Kerry calls Arafat a "statesman," and now it is gone. The U.K. Guardian ran an article (I saw it nowhere else) where Kerry said:

"The obligation of the United States government is to rapidly internationalize the effort in Iraq, get the target off of American troops, bring other people, particularly Muslim-speaking and Arab-speaking Muslim troops, into the region,'' Kerry said.

Muslim-speaking? I never heard of the Muslim language. The link was here, but it magically disappeared.

Of course, Free Republic has it. If Bush had said this, how often would we be forced to hear about his "insensitivity" to Muslims?

...a college newspaper, or the New York Times? It is hard to tell sometimes. Get this unintentionally hilarious column by Nicholas Kristof. He manages to downplay terrorism, highlight the dangers of eating, AIDS, climate change, and villify S.U.V.s in one column, no doubt to the delight of the Times' editors.

Read this part: Sheer New York Times liberalism on display.

Mr. Bush's intensity and unwavering purpose comforted the nation in the aftermath of 9/11. But America is too complex to have national policy reduced to the single overarching priority of counterterrorism.

"It's an important threat, but it cannot be the organizing principle of our foreign policy," argues Ivo Daalder, a former national security official who is co-author of "America Unbound," an excellent (and respectful) book about Mr. Bush's administration. "There are worse threats out there. Climate change. H.I.V./AIDS."

Or, I would say, nuclear proliferation. Or cars.

Pure liberal tomfoolery. I'd love to see Kerry try to push this idea. This next part really drew my ire:

"Driving a car is one of the most dangerous things we do," note Barry Nalebuff and Ian Ayres, two Yale professors, in their book about innovative thinking, "Why Not?" They note that a major effort by Sweden has reduced traffic deaths by encouraging seat belt use, converting intersections to traffic circles (they "soothe" traffic), replacing rigid guardrails with new rails or cables that absorb or "catch" cars, and exhorting cyclists to wear helmets. The upshot is that Sweden 's accident rate is one of the lowest in the world.

I won't even go on a rant about the nanny-state Sweden. But traffic circles? Give me a break!! If you are from New Jersey, or have driven there, you know all about traffic circles, and you hate them as much as I do. New Jersey has spent the last decade or so dismantling traffic circles because of how unsafe they are. But, hey, if you have to drive in circles like Clark Griswold, what's the big deal right?

I understand the concerns about traffic safety. Losing someone you love in a traffic accident is a devestation I don't wish on anyone. But, to discuss traffic safety in comparison to terrorism is nothing more than a false dichotomy.

And I say that as a law school student.

The media just loves that Ted Kennedy is always hanging around John Kerry, as if Kennedy's word actually means something. (just ask President Tsongas and President Dukakis how much Teddy helped them win)

Parties See Asset in Kennedy Backing Kerry



Don't they look just cute together? Just remember I said this: Before you know it, you will not see Kennedy anywhere near Kerry, just as soon as Kerry's focus groups tell him what he should already know: Kennedy is political dynamite everywhere in this country that is not a bastion of the far left. For him to go anywhere else to speak, it needs to be controlled. In the article we are told:

In the current campaign, Kennedy made several stops in Iowa, helping draw large crowds, then warming them up with rousing introductions. He also traveled to New Hampshire, New York, Maine, Michigan, Arizona, Florida and Illinois, raising money as well as campaigning.

When he came here to Phoenix, he spoke to a bunch of old geezers, lying like the weasel that he is about how Bush is trying to take away Social Security, about the Medicare entitlement Bush signed, you name it. He spoke to about 25 people. As far as I know (and I would know if he were here, the Chevas Regal supply would be dangerously low), he has not done anything else here.

Ted Kennedy is a one-man justification for term limits. Sometimes I actually feel sorry for him. He is basically Roger Clinton, Neil Bush, or Billy Carter with an elected office, the second-rate brother of a President.

I have posted the flag of Spain to show any citizen of Spain who might read this that the United States of America, unlike "Old Europe," will stand behind you with more than words. Spain supported us when we needed it, and they shall fInd out that America is the best friend you can have in a time like this.

...then The Battle of the Biographies in The Weekly Standard needs to be it. Money quote:

Lives do not always proceed in predictable patterns, and we may have a choice between a classic late bloomer who has just reached his powers, and a morning glory, who hit his peak early and has not matched it since. In the late 1960s, John Kerry was the better man, as well as the far more mature one. In 2004, in terms of political maturity and courage, the far better man is George W. Bush.

Mona Charen has the truth about John Ashcroft requesting the medical records of women who have had partial-birth abortions. (Which is infanticide. Make no mistake about it)

Someone needs to explain to me why some woman have made the continuance of the unnatural deaths of unborn babies their life's work.

Donald Rumsfeld has a souvenir of the plane that crashed into the Pentagon. Oh the humanity!! Of course, family members of September 11th vicitms, who seem to be on speed dial, ready to rip anyone in the Bush administration on a moment's notice, are not happy:

Surviving family members were surprised by the news.

"Unbelievable," said William Doyle, whose son was killed in the World Trade Center.

Here's the reality:

Pentagon spokesman Lawrence Di Rita said Friday night that Rumsfeld has a shard of metal from the jetliner that struck the Pentagon on a table in his office and shows it to people as a reminder of the tragedy Pentagon workers shared on Sept. 11, 2001.

Donald Rumsfeld is the Secretary of Defense, second only to the President in importance when it comes to responding to terrorism. Does anyone really, besides liberals, want him to forget what happened on September 11th? He should have a daily reminder of what he is up against. Criticizing him for this is nothing more than gratuitous, and the AP should be embarrassed. Of course, they aren't at all.

Let me add this. When I was young, before my mother got re-married, we were dirt poor. I used to eat grilled cheese sandwiches 4-5 nights a week for dinner. When I was in college, and it exam time, or when I was writing an important paper, I would eat grilled cheese to remind myself how important it was that I did well. I f'n hate grilled cheese because of what it reminds me of, but I eat it at critical moments. Rumsfeld has the souvenir for this same reason, and I applaud him for rubbing it in on himself, to keep him motivated. We should thank God he is in charge of defending us.

The woman who was arrested for spying yesterday worked for 4 different Democrats in her career, most prominently for Carol Mosley-Braun, who (yeah right) "doesn't remember her." Yer, this is the AP headline:

Accused Spy Is Cousin of Bush Staffer

Yeah, that disgraceful, shameless liberal media.

You just can't make this stuff up.

THE UN Security Council has voted unanimously to immediately blame Basque militants ETA for the Spanish train bombings.

Think about they hypocrisy. When presented with mounds and mounds of evidence (i.e. Iraq, Kosovo, and Rwanda) the U.N. does nothing. But, with no evidence, only suspicion, they run to condemn the ETA. Who do they think they are kidding? This is the U.N. trying to protect al-Qaeda!! Al-fucking-Qaeda!! If it was the ETA, then explain this.

MADRID, Spain (Reuters) - Spanish investigators said Thursday they had found a van containing seven detonators and a tape in Arabic, the first suggestion of any possible militant Islamist link to Madrid bombings that killed 192 people.

Yeah, I am pissed. Spain and their Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar have supported us in Iraq, and it is time to return the favor. (For the record, if this had happened in Paris or Berlin, I would be just as pissed) The Spanish people will now discover what their Aznar surely knows already: The United States, not France, Germany or the U.N., are real friends, and will act on their behalf when they need us.

Like my Pop always said, "If it smells like shit, looks like shit, and tastes like shit, then, holy shit, it's shit." This is not the ETA. They don't have the ability or the balls to pull something like this off.

By the way, why did our ambassador vote for this resolution? It is long past time for us to pull out of the U.N. Send them to Belgium.

A Democrat, of all people, arrested for helping Iraq:

NEW YORK - A former journalist and one-time press secretary for four members of Congress was arrested Thursday on charges she served as a paid agent for the Iraqi intelligence service before and after the U.S. invasion.

Her response:

I'm an anti-war activist and I'm innocent," Lindauer told WBAL-TV as she was led to a car outside the Baltimore FBI office. "I did more to stop terrorism in this country than anybody else. I have done good things for this country. I worked to get weapons inspectors back to Iraq when everyone else said it was impossible. I'm very proud and I'll stand by my achievements."

She'll be getting those sympathetic interviews with Katie Couric and Larry King before you know it. The liberal media will love her.

By the way, here's my favorite quote from the article:

"Her position was eliminated in the downsizing following the 1994 elections," said Josh Kardon, chief of staff for now-Sen. Wyden.

Hilarious terminology!!! He really means, "After the Republicans kicked our asses in the 1994 midterm elections, a lot of Democrats lost their jobs." Just hilarious.

It is only a matter of time before this is blamed on us:

173 People Killed in Madrid Explosions

MADRID, Spain - Ten terrorist bombs tore through trains and stations along a commuter line at the height of Madrid's morning rush hour Thursday, killing 173 people and wounding at least 600 before this weekend's general elections. Officials blamed Basque separatists for the worst terror attack in Spanish history.

These murderous thugs will say it was their response to Spain's support for the United States in the Iraq war and that will be music to the ears of sympathetic liberals everywhere, especially in the press.

You didn't really think that being in the hospital would stop our overzealous despotic Attorney General from stomping down your door for downloading music, did you? Take a look at what he is up to now:

Internet users who download music illegally face home raids

Wait. That's not Ashcroft. That's the socialist utopia known as the European Union. You know them. The guys that took longer to hammer out a Constitution (that is still not done) than Afghanistan and Iraq. And you thought that having socialized health care didn't cost anything.

Liberal Talk Radio Network to launch March 31

Al Franken is going to call his show, the O'Franken Factor. Seems that Al doesn't realize that goading Foc and O'Reilly for publicity is a one-trick pony. Anyone want to start a pool on how long this crap lasts? Put your best guess in the comments. I predict that it will last until 3 weeks after the election, only because I believe the money budgeted for it by its backers will guarantee is stays on, even if the ratings are lower than UPN's. And they will be.

From the incomparable Michelle Malkin, who rightfully praises and defends John Ashcroft in her latest column:

(By the way, where are all the gun controllers to praise the Justice Department for pursuing strict enforcement of their laws? Hmm? They must be out to lunch with all the moderate Muslim leaders getting ready to praise Ashcroft for going after fanatical extremists who give their religion a bad name. Right?)

If you told me that Michelle Malkin was the top columnist in the United States today, I would have a tough time arguing with you. I love her attitude of Family, God, and Country, above all others. As Bill O'Reilly once said, "She is definitely looking out for you."

Take a gander at tomorrow's forecast in Phoenix. I may work on my tan. Eat your heart out Viking Pundit. Hey Power Line guys, here-ya-are!! Sorry Professor Yin, I'll be laughing at you come tomorrow.

Speaking of piss-poor weather, read this:

Blizzard in 1993 Tops New Rating List

In their study of 70 major Northeastern storms, only two — the storm of March 1993 and the January blizzard of 1996 — fell into the "extreme" category with a 5 rating.

I was living in Philly when those two storms hit. But, because God loves me, I missed them both due to vacations planned months in advance. In 1993, I was at Disney World in Orlando, and in 1996 I was in San Diego. I still laugh at my family for that.

The Jackson Clarion-Ledger, which is the statewide newspaper for Mississippi, is doing there part to protect John Kerry from, well, himself. First, read this quote from Kerry, who was speaking about the comparison of gay rights issues and the civil rights movement, at a town meeting at Tougaloo College:

"Let me tell you something, when Matthew Shepard gets crucified on a fence in Wyoming only because he was gay," and 'when Mr. King gets dragged behind of a truck down in Texas by chains and his body is mutilated only because he's gay--I think that's a matter of rights in the United States of America.'"

This is a serious gaffe by Kerry. It wasn't "Mr. King," it was Mr. James Byrd, who was dragged to his death because he was black, not because he was gay. (The people of Texas approporiately expressed their outrage by sentencing those responsible to death.)

Now, read reporter Julie Goodman's version of the same quote, using the old Maureen Dowd ellipsis trick:

"Let me tell you something, when Matthew Shepard gets crucified on a fence in Wyoming only because he was gay ... I think that's a matter of rights in the United States of America."

Hmmm. Now, does anyone actually think that if President Bush made the same mistake, the NCAAP and the Congressional Black Caucus, aided and abetted by their like-minded cohorts in the liberal media, would not have turned this into a national outrage? Of course!! They would have screamed about "Bush's insensitivity" etc. They would have done everything short of calling Bush an outright racist. But, since Kerry is their man, he'll be protected like this now until election day. (Think I'm kidding? Then why do we still hear about "misunderestimated" and Bush's pronounciation of "nuclear" to this day?)

What liberal media? Oh, that liberal media.

The memo is out. I hear all of the Kerry's supporters now saying that it is Bush who flip-flops on issues. Funny how they try to turn around everything on Bush, and accuse him of being exactly what Kerry is. At this rate, by May they'll call Bush a Massachusetts liberal who marries rich women.

Abstinence doesn't stop STDs. Who knew? So why miss out? Screw away and keep the abortion industry profitable and those family planning clinics humming along with more patients. That's the message of this pure bullshit alleged scientific study. Get this part:

"The message is really simple: 'Just say no' may work in the short term but doesn't work in the long term."

They might was well say you have just as good of a chance dying whether you jump in front of bus today or 5 years from now, so get out there and jump. And, get this crock:

"It's a tragedy if we withhold from these kids information about how not to get STDs or not to get pregnant," said Dorothy Mann, executive director of the Family Planning Council, an organization dedicated to reproductive health services.

Funny that these people don't have the same attitude when it comes to a 24-hour waiting period before a woman can have an abortion, lest a woman discover that there is an increased risk of breast cancer and infertility as a result of abortions, and (gasp!) she might change her mind.

Liberal scum. They make me sick. If am a far-right ideolgue to them simply because I always err on the side of life, then that is what I am.

Jayson Blair is so full of shit with so little shame. Poor him, he's a victim of everything, just ask him. Depression problems, drug and alcohol problems, tough life being black, and (my favorite), he claimed to be sexually abused. He was so casual about it, frankly, I idn't believe a word of it. At least many of the callers took him to task. Only in America can you lie, deceive, and con, claim racism when you are caught, and cash a big check. The only PC-problems he didn't claim to have were AIDS and McDonald's caused obesity.

Oh well, at least Larry King didn't have Phyllis Diller or Liza Minelli's queer husband on for a change.

You may not want to view the picture below, if you are a member of the ACLU, NARAL, NOW, GLAAD, People for the American Way, Southern Poverty Law Center, the Freedom from Religion Foundation, the NEA, or the Democratic Party. It may cause you to get the vapors, high-stress levels or heart failure.



Pictured here is my beautiful daughter Emily, who turns 3 months old tomorrow. She is laying on an extremely patriotic blanket, which contains many images of American flags and flag-waving yahoo teddy bears. And, (the horror!!) it has written on it The Pledge of Allegiance, the complete and Ninth Circuit un-approved version, with the words "Under God" appearing right where it belongs. Since I am pictured with a fresh haircut, paid for by Bush's tax cuts (it's the Government's money after all, just ask any Democrat), this picture is obviously government promotion of religion, and in violation of the First Amendment. I expect to get a call from Anthony Romero or one of his boyfriends any minute now.

And, just as horrifying, she is the product of a heterosexual relationship, with a mother who not only had the temerity not to exercise her constitutional abortion rights, but has also rejected her career as a teacher in order to stay at home to raise her!! As her father I am equally a Neanderthal, as I believe that it is my job to work and support my family while Mom takes care of the homefront. Oh the humanity!! And, adding to this obvious child abuse, Emily has already attended church several times and will be Christened a Catholic in the next few weeks!! Moreover, we plan to continue this outrageous abuse by sending her to a (private) Catholic school, trampling on her right to know how to use a condom or to understand how wonderful it is that "Jenny has 2 mommies" before she can even write a five-word sentence or count to 20.

As you can see from the picture, Emily is a happy baby. How dare I not explain to her that she is the victim of the white, male, Christian, Eurocentric oppresive power structure bent on forcing her, as a female, to a life of fealty? Without this vital knowledge, I am forcing her to be happy. What a cruel life she is doomed to.

(if you click on the link above, you will see the Emily has a full life. Swimming, sledding, and visiting the zoo, all in the same month!! She has a better life than I do, as it should be. (Just be glad that you were not me in the the picture in the top right-hand corner, when Emily decided the room needed a "new scent." 2 reasons for this post: One, to gratuitously brag about my beautiful little girl, and two, to mock liberal hypocrisy and nonsense when it comes to raising children. Think about what I said for a minute.)

Here we go again. Another New York Times editorial offering as fact that Bush said Iraq was an "imminent threat." (Read the truth here) Read this editorial that is astonishing in its hypocrisy:

The Bush administration's case for invading Iraq was based on a supposedly imminent threat from Iraqi unconventional weapons. No imminent threat was found. But Iraq's scientists clearly know how to make those weapons and if continued chaos leads to a new dictatorship, covert work might resume. That gives America a practical interest in developing stable democratic structures that can outlast American military occupation.

Read that again. And again. And again. The entirety of the Times editorial position has been that the Iraq was was unjustified, and Iraq did not have WMD. Now, they say we must succeed in rebuilding Iraq lest they will restart their WMD programs. Bush has said from day one that Iraq cannot be allowed to threaten the world with WMD. The Times has done everything short of calling Bush an outright liar when it came to his Iraq WMD pronouncements.

Out-f'n-rageous.

I watched a thing on CNN last night that followed the rise and fall of Howard Dean's campaign. (They completely skipped over him yelling at the old man, the moment I think killed his candidacy) I took one thing out of it: Kerry will never win. I watched Dean supporters, right or wrong, who were dedicated to that man. While it did not translate into votes in Iowa and New Hampshire, the man did excite a lot of people. (I am convinced that if more liberal states voted first, or even if some other states went first, Dean may have yet won the nomination)

Kerry, on the other hand, is exciting no one. He is only the nominee because of the imagined "electability" factor. Dean lived and died on his level of Bush hatred. To win the nomination, Kerry was forced to go the same route, and will end up with the same fate. Eight months of this guy, and even Democrats will want to send him to Guantanamo Bay.

Shamelessly lifted from one our my favorite blogs, the Viking Pundit:

From today's Boston Globe story: "Kerry looks to neutralize 'Massachusetts Liberal' tag" - "Kerry and his advisers say that by emphasizing core values, while fighting back against political labeling, Kerry can solidify the Democratic base and bring swing voters into his camp."

Why does everybody criticize Senator Splunge's lack of core values? He's been standing up for his beliefs ever since he was a member of the Yale Young Republicans.

Aristide Defiant, to Sue US, France, Over Kidnapping

BANGUI (Reuters) - Ousted Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide appealed from exile in Africa on Monday for peaceful resistance to what he called the "occupation" of Haiti and insisted he had been abducted by U.S. forces.

"I am the elected president and I remain the elected president," Aristide told a news conference, looking composed in a dark blue suit with his wife seated at his side. "I am pleading for the restoration of democracy."

One of Aristide's lawyers, Gilbert Collard, said in Paris he and an American colleague would file lawsuits in France and the United States in the next few days, alleging that French and U.S. authorities had kidnapped the Haitian president, once they received full authorization from Aristide.

Imagine for a second that the United States was a signatory to the International Criminal Court. Is there any doubt that this kangaroo court would run to Aristide's defense, and rule that the United States must restore him to power and pay him billions of dollars?

The world wants Kerry to win, which is more than enough reason why he should lose. Get this:

"I've met foreign leaders who can't go out and say this publicly, but boy they look at you and say, 'You've got to win this, you've got to beat this guy, we need a new policy,' things like that," he said.

Of course they want him to beat Bush. They know his is a gutless, ass-kissing, America-second internationalist who will never do anything that might upset France, Germany, or some lowlife despot.

Imagine if Bush made this error:

"Let me tell you something, when Matthew Shepard gets crucified on a fence in Wyoming because, because, only because he was gay," Kerry said, "and Mr. King gets dragged behind a truck down Texas by chains and his body is mutilated only because he's gay, I think that's a matter of rights in the United States of America."

Uh, that would be James Byrd, and he was dragged by a bunch of racists. The people of Texas rightly expressed their outrage by sentencing the scum responsible to the death penalty.

It was John Kerry who said this. If it were Bush, the media outrage would be explosive, "Bush is racially insensitive," etc, you name it. But, of course, that liberal media will give him a pass.

Memo to Kerry: Keep it up with the gay marriage = fight for civil rights. It is a loser.

With a hat tip to Right-Wing & Right-Minded, read this Jack Kelly column that discusses what Kerry will be doing with our military should he win in November. I think you'll find it as despressing as Jack Kelly did.

Money quote:

Kerry would not intervene in Iraq to overthrow a tyrant who was a danger to the United States. But he would intervene in Haiti to prop up a tyrant who was an enemy of the United States. There is a depressing consistency in this.

Men Can't Close the Gender Gap
sub-headline: Kirui wins men's title, but Pozdnyakova takes the overall crown in Los Angeles Marathon

That's right, a woman won the Los Angeles Marathon. David Kirui, according to the L.A. Times:

[F]ailed to catch the top two female finishers who started more than 20 minutes ahead of him.

Get that. He was a "failure" because he did not beat the fastest woman by 20 minutes!! (As expected, the article did not mention that 15 men ran a better time than she did. I had to hear that fact on KFI-AM)

His time: 2 hours 13 minutes 41 seconds
Her time: 2:30:17 (interesting that they decided to use two different time formats. Hmmmm...)
The Los Angeles Marathon's math: Kirui finished 3 minutes 54 seconds behind women's winner Tatyana Pozdnyakova.

So, thanks to unequal rules promulgated by the L.A. Marathon, a woman wins the L.A. Marathon, obviously to the delight of the Los Angeles Times, who makes sure to imply that she actually beat him straight up. Feel-good liberalism in its purest form.

For reasons that have nothing to do with Howard Stern, I haven't listened to him since I left Philadelphia a little over 3 years ago. My thoughts on whether he should fined or taken off the air are consistent with everything else I feel about the media. Let the marketplace sort it out. If you are offended by Stern, don't listen. If enough are offended and don't listen, then Stern will be gone. No government interference, no censorship, just old-fashioned capitalism at work.

However, I do have one problem with all of this, and it is Stern's whining that he may be off the air for good soon. That is typical Stern, hyping everything that promotes him. And that is fine. But, him acting-like it is some religious right cabal led by the Bush administration that is trying to do him in is an outrageous statement that flies in the face of history. Stern is brilliant. He knows that blaming Bush will get him huge sympathethic play in the media, which brings more attention to his show, which helps his ratings. I was in the radio business a long time, and that is the game, and he is the best. You don't have a top-rated show for nearly 20 years without knowing how to keep yourself relevant.

My issue here is that this is not the first time this has happened to Stern, where he (well, his employers at Infinity actually) was on the wrong end of a record FCC fine. I remember hearing the show that got him the fine. It was 1996, Clinton was President and in a re-election campaign (sound familiar) but I was driving to my then-girlfriend's graduation at Villanova University, and Stern had a guy on who was not only the manager of a porn star, he was her father!! Stern asked the guy if he could pick out his daughter's vagina from a set of pictures he had. I think Stern (Infinity) was fined over a million bucks for that. (I know it was a lot of $$, and I could not find a link to back it up)

These types of crackdowns are Stern's lifeblood. This is not the first time Stern has come under the microscope, and it will not be the last, regardless of who the President was and is. (He'll invite it again when his show starts to flounder sometime in the future) Infinity will pay it as a cost of doing business, Howard will milk the sympathy for all it is worth, and that will be the end of it. He will never get tossed off the air, no matter what he says, because there are about 10 media companies who would love to get the ratings and revenues he brings with his show. The market always wins.

(side note: Don't bring up Opie and Anthony not being on the air. They have collected millions while sitting on their asses, waiting for their contract and no-compete to expire. Hard to feel sorry for them.)

An ad being run by MoveOn.org, called "Worker," goes like this:

Announcer: Times are tough. So you work overtime to make ends meet. Then you find out George Bush wants to eliminate overtime pay for 8 million workers. Two million jobs lost. Jobs going overseas. And now, no overtime pay.

As you would expect from those weasels, it's simply not true. Get the facts here.

One other thing: As an hourly employee (I told them I'd refuse the job offer it is were salaried), nothing would make me happier than if a option I once heard about became an available choice: Using overtime hours worked towards future days off. (i.e work 48 hours in a week, get paid for 48 hours at your regular rate, take a future day off. My job is very busy at the end of the month and the first few days of the month. It is slow in the middle. My company allows me a 10-hr OT maximum, so there are times I have to wait until Monday to work again, and that sucks for me. I'd trade those extra hours of work to get a week straight off in the middle of the month in a second.

Absolutely nothing:

'The Passion' Soars Beyond $200 Million

LOS ANGELES - Mel Gibson (news)'s "The Passion of the Christ" took in $51.4 million in its second weekend to remain the top movie, racing past the $200 million mark in just 12 days.

The box-office numbers are staggering, despite that the liberal media and many of those "too cool for the room" atheists and agnostics have done their best to destroy this movie. (Note: I am referring to the Eric Alterman types, those who are not religious and who are not only proud of it, they also think it makes them better than you if you are religious, especially a Christian. I am not referring to decent people who are not religious. You know which category you yourself falls in to.)

This movie is a success because we are a Christian nation. We were founded on Christian values, and we are still predominantly Christian today. This is true today and will continue to be no matter how hard the so-called intelligensia and the liberal media try to deny, distort, or disparage this. Controversy did not make this movie a success. Controversy may generate box office, but it doesn't generate $215 million in 12 days.

I will say it again: Many wanted this movie to fail because a new appreciation for what Jesus was and is hurts the efforts of those who are pushing gay marriage down our throats and the abortion-promotion lobby. Well, the only failure here was that of those who tried to ruin both Mel Gibson and this movie.

The best part of this: Many people who were either blind before or just didn't care have seen the truth: The so-called eiltes are out of touch, and their values aren't the values of this country in general. The press has been exposed, as has Hollywood, for the liberal frauds that they are.

And it's about time. Tonight's episode was a nice beginning to what I expect to be a great season, much better than the last 2. (The last 2 were good, but not nearly as great as the first 2) I think Tony is going to fly off the handle and be a meaner, angrier prick than he ever has been. And that's a good thing.

I like the idea of adding the new blood, even though I don't expect some of them to last very long. The show owes us some more action, especially after making us wait 15 months for a new season.

Perhaps I put a lot of stock in The Sopranos since it is the only show on TV that I watch regularly. I hope this 5th season meets my expectations.

Prediction: Dr. Melfi takes the dirt nap first.

For comedy purposes, I read liberal blogs from time to time. Atrios is screaming bloody murder over this sound bite from the Laura Ingraham show, demanding that she be taken off the air.

Liberals love free speech. As long as you agree with them.

Friedman actually wrote a good column on why the worry over outsourcing is misguided. He extolls the many great things about America, and why we are built to succeed. An inpsirational column, which, during this election cycle, I would not normally expect the pro-Kerry New York Times to run. However, this is Friedman we are talking about, so he had to get in something that parrots the liberal agenda:

These institutions, which nurture innovation, are our real crown jewels that must be protected — not the 1 percent of jobs that might be outsourced. But it is precisely these crown jewels that can be squandered if we become lazy, or engage in mindless protectionism, or persist in radical tax cutting that can only erode the strength and quality of our government and educational institutions.

Typical wishy-washy Friedman. Rips protectionism (a Kerry platform) and equally rips "radical" tax cutting (a Bush platform). It is just hard for people like him to completely leave the liberal plantation. Less tax income means less government, which means less bureaucracy to get in the way of innovation, which he himself spends the rest of this column praising up and down. And, just take a look at Washington D.C. and New York City to know that more money does not equal more educational success.

Friedman Kool-Aid drinkers may fail to see how he contradicts himself time and time again, but honest readers know better.

Revealed: how 'war hero' Kerry tried to put off Vietnam military duty

Senator John Kerry, the presumed Democratic presidential candidate who is trading on his Vietnam war record to campaign against President George W Bush, tried to defer his military service for a year, according to a newly rediscovered article in a Harvard University newspaper.

He wrote to his local recruitment board seeking permission to spend a further 12 months studying in Paris, after completing his degree course at Yale University in the mid-1960s.

The revelation appears to undercut Sen Kerry's carefully-cultivated image as a man who willingly served his country in a dangerous war - in supposed contrast to President Bush, who served in the Texas National Guard and thus avoided being sent to Vietnam.

Does anyone actually think that the media won't go deaf, dumb, and blind on this story?

Kerry to make election referendum on Bush

WASHINGTON (AFP) - John Kerry will make the 2004 presidential election a referendum on George W. Bush's handling of Iraq and the economy, but he has more style than substance to offer as an alternative, analysts say.

As opposed to what, a referendum on who would decorate a nicer holiday tree? Like James Taranto always says, "What would we do without analysts?"

John Kerry has iron balls to make this statement:

“I will never send our troops into harm’s way without enough firepower and support.”

This from the same guy who voted against funding the troops because his presidential aspirations depended on it. But, why shouldn't Kerry be a two-faced sneak? The liberal media is carrying his water:

That drew an immediate response from Bush campaign spokesman Scott Stanzel, who said Kerry's charge was "the latest example of his astonishing ability to say one thing and do another." He accused Kerry of voting against money to pay for the troops.

What liberal media? A clear FACT is worded like it was just another political accusation without basis. Oh, that liberal media.

Six high school students deeclared themselves eligible for the NFL Draft. I hope none of them get drafted. They must be kidding themselves, thinking that they could play with the big boys right out of high school. I looked up some of the guys and could not even find two of them. Here's one I found interesting:

Offensive tackle Ken Petitt of Redford High School in Detroit. Offensive lineman? This guy was a second team defensive lineman in the Detroit Public School West league in 2002. (I couldn't find any updated information on this guy)

These guys have just thrown away their lives for nothing. If they were of that quality, surely there is a Division I scholarship for them somewhere. But, F them. I don't want these guys drafted so it will scare off any other dopes who think they are ready to take on Ray Lewis or Brian Dawkins, because younger players will destroy the quality of the NFL just as they have the NBA.

John Hawkins has done the research on the people who are outraged that Bush is "exploiting" 9/11.

Oh, that liberal media.

Victor Davis Hanson is a man of brilliance, smarter that half the readers of this blog combined. Read this terrific piece about the successes of the Bush Presidency in foreign policy, and how they'll likely be thrown away by a Kerry administration. Some money quotes:

Just as a presidency of earlier ossified liberals like Michael Dukakis or Walter Mondale probably would have led to support of a utopian nuclear freeze and subsequent Russian intimidation of Europe, unilateral cuts in military preparedness, and acquiescence to the Soviet Union, so too the election of John Kerry may well undo much of what has been achieved these last three years as we return to the old, normal way of doing business.

More likely, if President Bush loses, the war against terror will return, as promised, to the status of a police matter — subpoenas and court trials the more appropriate response to the mass murder of 3,000 at the "crime scene" of the crater in New York. Europe will be assured that our troops will stay while we apologize for the usual litany of purported unilateral sins. North Korea will get more blackmail cash, while pampered South Korean leftists resume their "sunshine" mirage. Iraq will be turned over to the U.N. as we abruptly leave, and could dissolve into something like the Balkans between 1991 and 1998. Iran and Syria will let out a big sigh of relief — as American diplomats once more sit out on the tarmac in vain hopes of an "audience" with despots. The Saudis will smile that smile. Arafat will be assured that he is now once again a legitimate interlocutor. And strangest of all, the American Left will feel that the United States has just barely begun to return to its "moral" bearings — even as its laxity and relativism encourage some pretty immoral things to come.

As a side note, I placed in bold somethine else to consider. What Hanson surely is referring to here is the time that Clinton's Secretary of State was sitting in his plane at the Damascus airport, and the Syrian dictator Assad stiffed him!! Of course, those gutless liberals made all kinds of excuses for the dictator, even our State Department!!

I mention this because I wanted you to consider this: Does anyone actually think Assad would have the balls to snub Colin Powell, James Baker, or anyone that President Bush sent? Of course not!! He would cancel a meeting with Allah himself to meet Powell at the airport.

I like Oliver Willis. Unlike Atrios, at least he has the guts to put his name and his face to his opinions. (Not to mention posting gratuitous photos like this, which are always a welcome sight.) Like his liberal cohort, however, Oliver tends to say some ridiculous stuff. Get this musing from Oliver:

The Shadow Government

An idea, now lovingly fleshed out.

Some of my picks...

President: John Kerry
Vice-President: John Edwards/Evan Bayh
Sec. of State: Bill Clinton/Joe Biden
Sec. of Defense: ?
Sec. of Homeland Security: Wes Clark
National Security Advisor: ?
Sec. of Veterans Affairs: John McCain
Attorney General: John Edwards/Elliot Spitzer
Sec. of Labor: Dick Gephardt

How hilarious is that? Oliver can't even think of a Democrat worthy enough to fill the two most important positions, Secretary of Defense and National Security Advisor. (I'll bet he agonized over worthless bureaucratic positions like Secretary of Labor) This is too easy sometimes.

About 14-15 years ago, I remember listening to an Andrew Dice Clay tape. (I think it was The Day The Laughter Died) Dice told a real nasty joke about a woman, and you could just hear the audience groan. He retorted, "Don't look at me like I made this up. You write this shit for me!!" Brilliant. And very true.

President Bush should just say this at the end of his commercials: "I'm President Bush and I approve this message. Hell, we didn't even have to write it. The Democrats did it for us."

Our friends at the Los Angeles Times are at it again. Their liberal bias on abortion has once again made them a mockery. (Didn't their editor put out a memo last year saying that the Times is "not going to push a liberal agenda in the news pages of the Times" in response to a ridiculously biased article about the possible connection between abortion and breast cancer?)

Well, it seems that it is business as usual at that leftist rag. Get this piece of liberal bias in an opera review!

Last week, the L.A. Times' Mark Swed filed a review of the opera "Die Frau Ohne Schatten" at the Music Center. He wrote that the Richard Strauss epic is "an incomparably glorious and goofy pro-life paean..." But when it ran in the paper, pro-life had been changed to anti-abortion.

Swed was reportedly mortified, since the opera is not remotely about abortion. On Feb. 25, the Times ran this correction:

Opera review -- A review of Los Angeles Opera's "Die Frau Ohne Schatten" in Tuesday's Calendar section incorrectly characterized the work as "anti-abortion." In fact, there is no issue of abortion in the opera, which extols procreation.

The writer was not happy, so they ran this second correction:

Opera review -- A correction in Wednesday's paper about the review of Los Angeles Opera's "Die Frau Ohne Schatten" incorrectly implied that it was the reviewer who characterized the work as "anti-abortion" in Tuesday's Calendar. As the correction should have made clear, the lead paragraph submitted by the reviewer was incorrectly changed to include the term "anti-abortion." There is no issue of abortion in the opera, which extols procreation.

Thank God for the blogosphere. In the old days, the Los Angeles Times would get away with this thanks to like-minded lefty wankers. I'm sure they pine for those days.

Does anyone actually think that if a family member of a 9/11 victim said, "I wish the Democrats hated Osama bin Laden as much as they hate George Bush," the media would blare that quote everywhere?

I'm sure there are a lot of people who lost loved ones saying, "I'm glad we have a President who is doing everything possible to exact punishment on those who are responsible for killing my [loved one]."

[Update: Line of the day, shamelessly lifted from Allah Is In The House:

Allah reader "rock lover" suggests this ad for the Bush campaign:

On September 11th, 2001, 2900 of our countrymen perished in a vicious attack on our nation. In response we have liberated 29 million humans from tyranny. That's ten thousand men, women and children freed in honor of each lost American. This is my policy and I'm sticking to it.

States Bent on Collecting Internet Taxes

States can go scratch. Taxes on the internet? F-off. Stop spending on social and welfare programs instead. This part pisses me off to no end:

The National Governors Association estimates state and local governments will lose at least $35 billion this year from Internet sales.

That's right. It's their money, not yours. Just ask them.

UPN Show Is Called Insensitive to Amish

Several weeks ago UPN, a sister network to CBS, announced a new reality series tentatively called "Amish in the City," in which Amish teenagers would face the shock and temptations of the big city for the first time.

How would the Amish be offended? They wouldn't even know this was happening, since they shun modernity and don't have any TVs.

I have been to Amish country in Lancaster, Pa quite a few times, and I have a lot of respect for them and their lifestyle. And, no one makes a better rug or higher quality furniture than they do. If done right, this show could actually show people that the Amish people are decent and are to be respected. Of course, we know better. This is UPN we are talking about. I don't think I would be too amused if the Amish were used as for cheap laughs since they are not in a position to defend themselves.

The Amish themselves dress simply, live quietly, often reject technology and automobiles and work in rural communities. The Philadelphia Inquirer, in an editorial in January about the show, said, "The Amish, young and old, aren't hapless innocents but in fact know a great deal about the real world (which is why they choose to keep a distance from it)."

I can hardly blame them sometimes.

Furor over Bush's 9/11 ad

Bush's opponents have been just waiting for Bush's ads so they could pounce on him. Isn't it sad that the seminal event of Bush's Presidency, and the most important reason for him to be re-elected, is now reduced to something to be ignored, lest it be called political expolitation? Bush has every right to remind the public of his top-notch leadership after the loss of 3,000 people. The "ABB' crowd wants everyone to forget it, and John Kerry and his ilk are just dying to return to the September 10th world. Just listen to them and try to tell me otherwise.

(Remember the Democrats cried like the bitches they are when Bush ran an ad in Iowa the week before the primary? They whine about everything.)

I don't want to minimize the feelings of those who lost loved ones on 9/11, so I'll just say this: Isn't it funny how quickly the press got negative comments from relatives of the victims? Hmmm.

Here's something else to consider:

Harold Schaitberger, president of the International Association of Fire Fighters, on Thursday called the ads disgraceful and said they should be pulled.

Harold Schaitberger, president of the International Association of Fire Fighters, on Thursday called the ads disgraceful and said they should be pulled.

"We're not going to stand for him to put his arm around one of our members on top of a pile of rubble at Ground Zero during a tragedy and then stand by and watch him cut money for first responders," Schaitberger said. He said his union is politically independent even though it endorsed Kerry and has donated money to Republicans.

There's no bias there. They endorsed Kerry but donate money to Republicans. (probably some local councilman.) Everywhere Kerry has gone, he has said something about us "closing firehouses in [whatever city he was in that day] and opening them in Baghdad.

Democrats know they are weak internationalist let's-not-upset-the-French pussies on defense. There will be a lot more of this pissing and moaning, helped along by their friends in the liberal media.

One other thing. Since we lost 50,000 people in Vietnam, why isn't being Kerry accused of exploitation? We all know the answer to that.

This 19 year old Saudi had two choices: Be a 19 year old unemployed bum screaming "Death to Israel" and "Death to America" all day, or start up an honest sheep washing business. He wisely chose the latter.

Nineteen-year-old Muhammad Salman has established the Kingdom’s first sheep laundry near Jeddah’s central sheep market after all attempts to find a job failed.

I wonder how long before one of the 86,000 princes they have in Saudi Arabia decides to close up his business.

From Oliver Willis:

Also, does saying "I'm President Bush and I approve this message" really meet the new requirements? I thought you had to say your actual name. Unless he changed his first name to "President".

That speaks for itself, doesn't it?

I actually thought this was legit until I read the next to last paragraph.

(Hat tip: The Discount Blogger)

I thought Abe Foxman and the Anti-Defamation league was dedicated to "fighting anti-Semitism through programs and services that counteract hatred, prejudice and bigotry." I didn't know they were a pro-gay organization too.

Note to ADL members: Abe Foxman is marginalizing your group more and more every week. Dump him.

By now, I am sure you heard about that Mom who found out her daughter, the one she thought died as an infant in a fire, was still alive. Here's an update on the story, and two things caught my eye:

"Right now I want to see my daughter," Pedro Vera said. "I am so happy. I just want to see my daughter."

It will be up to a Family Court judge to determine where the little girl will live.

What??? DNA tests have proven that she is indeed this woman's daughter. Why isn't this woman holding her daughter right now??!!! This is why I often refer to New Jersey as the "Communist State of New Jersey." It is a ridiculously high-taxed regulatory state that can't keep it's nose out of every aspect of people's lives. That's why hardly any company will write auto insurance policies there. And, it is only getting worse. They need to stop dragging their feet and get their outrageous child services out of this woman's life and give her her daughter right away. The New Jersey Division of Youth and Family Services is a criminal enterprise.

And, this part caught my eye too:

Carolyn Correa, of Willingboro, N.J., who was wanted on charges of arson and kidnapping surrendered to police in Philadelphia Tuesday afternoon, said her attorney, Jeffrey Zucker.

Jeffrey Zucker is an expensive mofo. I'd love to know how she got him. Probably the publicity value for him, I suspect. I highly doubt she can afford him. Plus, he was the defense attorney in a case that I spent 3 weeks on a jury for. He was a slick bastard, raising reasonable doubt on everything. We acquitted his client, but only because the State presented some real weak evidence. (I wanted to convict the defendant anyway, but I just knew I couldn't on the evidence at hand. My gut instinct said he was guilty, but you can't convict on that in this country. You just can't)

Boy, this quest to discredit The Passion of the Christ has gone to ridiculous lengths. Get this:

NEW BRITAIN -- A local woman with psychological problems purposely drove her car into the water at A.W. Stanley Quarter Park in an attempt to re-enact a scene from the blockbuster film, "The Passion of the Christ," police said.

Although police could not say which specific scene motivated the woman, they believe she was attempting to be baptized.

You know, I can't recall that scene. Perhaps I wasn't watching closely enough. It might have happened in the scene right after Jesus e-mailed his cousin Jimmy because he couldn't get a signal on his cell phone, but I could be mistaken.

Even funnier was this comment found on Right Thinking From the Left Coast:

Maybe she was actually trying to reenact a scene from The Passion of Teddy Kennedy.

Priceless.

Get this:

Michigan teacher must cover cost of substitute while on military duty

GRAND RAPIDS -- A Michigan school district told a teacher activated for military duty that he must cover the cost of a substitute during part of his absence and give the district some of his military pay.

The blatant disrespect for a man who has spent 10 years in the National Guard and is now naswering his call to duty is astonishing. And look how they spin it:

"It's inaccurate to say we didn't do anything for him. We did provide significant assistance," the superintendent said, adding that the district continues to provide Bernhardt with all his other benefits during his absence. (How kind of them)
In the end, the teacher will receive $573 more than he would have after the two-week military leave, Gillette said. Bernhardt will give the district only six days' worth of his military pay, and he also will receive a military housing allowance.
When compared to employees of private companies, the district is doing what it should to protect Bernhardt's financial stability, Gillette said.
"It's a fact that he's not losing money, that he's making money. Whatever way you look at it, he's still making money," he said.
In neighboring Grand Rapids Public Schools, teachers called to duty receive two weeks of unpaid leave but are not required to pay for a substitute teacher.
As a result of Bernhardt's situation, Kenowa Hills school board members now are likely to create a specific policy covering employee military leave.
"In the future, he's not going to get out that well," Gillette said.

That's right, to them, he's making out like a bandit. I'll bet if he were running off to San Francisco to "marry" his boyfriend, they would have said nothing, and probably would have thrown him a bridal shower. Notice this part:

During the 10 days Bernhardt will be gone from the classroom, he will use two personal days and two compensation days during his time off.

So, basically, he is asking for 6 days off without pay to serve his country, and they are trying to squeeze him. All this in a state that spent over $9 million to defend it's right to anti-white and anti-Asian racists, under the ruse of A "compelling state interest" to be racist.

I'm sure this fine American, Barry Bernhardt, is laughing all the way to the bank with that $573.

This is a picture of that dirtbag weasel scumbag who is giving Mr. Bernhardt a hard time. His name is James "Jim" Gillette, Superintendent of the Kenowa Hills Public Schools.



E-mail that scumbag at jgillett@remc8.k12.mi.us or click here and tell him that you think what he is doing is shameful.

Kerry was a radical, medal-throwing Vietnam war protester who did everything possible to undermine the war effort, even as our soldiers were being shot at. He accused them of committing genocide. He participated in a march where demonstrators threw their medals over the White House wall (Kerry, of course, threw away someone else's medals.) He worked with Jane Fonda to organize anti-war rallies. The organization he was a member of, Vietnam Veterans Against the War, took the American flag off its offices because its members were offended by the flag.

Now this man wants to be the most powerful man in the world. He wants to be your president. And you know what's really scary? It could happen!

Today is Wictory Wednesday. Every Wednesday, I ask my readers to volunteer and/or donate to the Bush 2004 campaign.

Via Everything I Know Is Wrong, I'll add these:

1. Read this article: (A Shameful Past - Don't play the Vietnam card with me, John Kerry) by Laura Bartholomew Armstrong. It is a heartfelt examination of Kerry's post-service behavior.

2. Read this article: Why I Oppose Kerry and Support Bush by Ed at the Captain's Quarters. It is the most concise Bush apologetic I have seen. I agree with every word.

And, most importantly, register to vote!!!

Morris has Kerry pegged in one sentence:

In the coming weeks, Bush will hammer at Kerry until we look back and wonder why we ever thought the Massachusetts senator could have won in the first place.

With that headline, you just now it's about the New York Times. This morning, while waiting out (another) delay at the Albuquerque Airport, I wasted a dollar and bought today's paper. In it, they had an op-ed from a law professor at NYU named Stephen Gillers who wants Kerry to pick Clinton as his running mate. Not Hillary mind you, but Bill!! This, of course, falls right in line with the editorial wet dreams of the New York Times, but they could not come out themselves and say it. The prospect of Bill Clinton as VP must have gotten them real excited, because their editors seemed to have missed a major factual error. Here's the print edition:

Mr. Edwards himself is an obvious choice: a skilled campaigner, he would also attract Southern voters. Other possibilities include Govs. Evan Bayh of Indiana and Bill Richardson of New Mexico, who have both regional appeal and executive experience, and dark-horse candidates like former Senator Sam Nunn of Georgia.

Bayh is still the Governor of Indiana? Someone forget to tell him. Here's the online edition:

Mr. Edwards himself is an obvious choice: a skilled campaigner, he would also attract Southern voters. Other possibilities include Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana and Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico, who have both regional appeal and executive experience, and dark-horse candidates like former Senator Sam Nunn of Georgia.

How nice of them to correct it. Anyway, this piece tells you all you need to know about the mindset of the Democrats. They miss Bill Clinton, and pine for him daily. But, why would Kerry ever do this unless he thought he could not win otherwise. (I guarantee you if this pipe dream ever happened, it would sink Kerry for sure, although I think he'll be sunk soon enough, all on his own) Clinton would get all the media attention. Kerry knows this, and would never give up his day in the spotlight. I think he'd rather lose than throw that away.

Update: James Taranto mentions this today:

Gillers, however, does not mention the 12th Amendment, ratified in 1804, which provides that "no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States." Is Bill Clinton ineligible to the office of president? As always, that depends on the meaning of is.

If Kerry ever wanted to name Bill Clinton his running mate, a liberal judge would turn that amendment to nothing, saying, "Clinton is not being elected president, and he meets all the other criteria (i.e over 35, natural born citizen, etc.)

Look at this picture. I saw this sign on TV last night and laughed my ass off. I had forgotten about it until Erick at Confessions Of A Political Junkie had it on his blog this morning. I'd love to know the story behind this.

Take a few minutes to listen to the audio clip of the Rush Limbaugh program on this page. Absolutely priceless. Katie Couric goes on and on about this new liberal radio guy "shaking up the industry" as the "liberals answer to Rush Limbaugh." This liberal talker "shaking up the industry" hopes to be on 40 stations by the end of the year. Rush is on 660 of them.

What liberal media? Oh, that liberal media.

Is there a bigger stooge on television? He sounds like he calls Terry McAullife before the show to ask him to fax over some talking points. Everytime I see Drudge list the cable talk show ratings, O' Reilly is always #1, and Hannity and Colmes is always #2. But, there is a huge dropoff in numbers. I attribute that wholly to Colmes, because I rarely watch the show because I can't stand him and his predictability. (I can't wait to see his "I just ate a shit sandwich look the night of the election, when Bush beats Kerry. And Bush will.)

One more thing to consider in all of this: Hannity and Colmes on the Fox News Channel. Sean Hannity is the conservative voice. He has had a huge best seller and followed that up with another best-seller that debuted at #1 on the New York Times bestseller list, and is the #2 radio talk show host in the country, broadcasting on over 400 stations, trailing only Rush. Alan Colmes, who has been with Hannity since Day 1 on TV, has equal time on the show, and is promoted just as much as Hannity, is nothing. His book, Red, White, and Liberal, BOMBED!! I just saw it for $4.99 in the remainder bin at a Barnes and Noble. On the radio, Colmes has a whopping 10 stations!! Colmes is a non-entity because while kissing Bill and Hillary Clinton's ass might get him invited to tea parties in Manhattan, it doesn't sell anywhere else. Liberal ideology is bankrupt, and the visible difference in success that Hannity has enjoyed compared with Colmes tells you all you need to know. (Note to Colmes: O.J. did it, Jesus was not a liberal, and Clinton was not one of our greatest Presidents. Then again, it depends on what the meaning of the word "great" is. If you mean that he left us in great peril due to his lack of backbone, you may have a point.)

John Kerry will be the nominee. You can just see that he is feeling good about himself right now. He'd better enjoy it as long as he can. All of the free publicity he is getting, the daily "Kerry blasts Bush" on this, and "Kerry rips Bush" on that, is just about over. Now, Bush will unleash his war chest to expose Kerry to the voters who really don't know him.

As much as the liberal media will want it, Kerry will not beat Bush. They will play up Kerry just like they did Gore, and the result will be same. Like-minded Democrats will buy all that "everyone is broke and unemployed" and "terrorism is a law enforcement issue" crap, but in the end, the general voting public will see it for what it really is: bunk.

This just in: According to Bob Graham, Kerry is "not a liberal according to my definition." Ha!

From Jon Stewart, about the increasing number of people keeping up with news on the internet:

"As you're trying to find porn, it's kind of hard to avoid news."

Four peace-loving Palestinians were coerced into raping and murdering a 16 year old girl. Whose fault was it? Of course, it was Israel's. Just ask Reuters:

GAZA (Reuters) - Palestinians Monday demanded the execution of four men for the rape and murder of a Gaza girl of 16, a rare sex crime that has deepened fears of a slide into lawlessness accelerated by the conflict with Israel.

and there's this:

Palestinians are grappling with a breakdown in law and order they say has been accelerated by Israeli army raids. Israel says the raids are to pre-empt Palestinian militant attacks, but Palestinians say they have also crippled their security services.

Pathetic journalism. However, you will see that Islam isn't all bad:

"We are asking the Palestinian Authority to implement the law of Allah -- let the killers' hands and legs be cut off and let the killers be hung in public!" they shouted.

A great idea, one I would love to implement myself (along with castration) on this vile inhuman scumbag animal.

Finally, someone has the guts to enforce the law:

Mayor faces charges for marrying gays

Four days after presiding over a slew of same sex marriages in his quaint Hudson Valley village, the mayor of New Paltz today was charged with 19 violations of New York's domestic relations law, injecting the debate over gay marriages in the state with increasing drama and urgency.

Jason West, 26-year-old Green Party mayor, was ordered to appear in court Wednesday to answer charges that he broke state law by solomizing about two dozen weddings without a marriage license, according to New Paltz police and West's lawyer.

I didn't know that this attention-whore mayor was from the Green Party until I read this. I am not surprised at all. Surely though, this guy is highly proud of himself right now. A martyr for the cause, he thinks he is. I'd love to see him spend sit in jail for a while, but we all know it will not happen.

This picture of that French dope just seems most appropriate, doesn't it?

...you must read Matthew Hoy's recommendations on each proposition on the ballot.

Sgt. Stryker has a terrific thread about how Hollywood is embarrassingly inept when it comes to realistically portraying the military. The comments are top-notch, and are a fun read.

I am watching ESPN SportsCenter running a segment questioning whether sports outlets such as themselves, television networks (i.e. good looking sideline reporters) or Sports Illustrated are doing a disservice to women by using sexy women to sell themselves. They have the requisite ugly broad complaining about the exploitation of women, etc, etc. They even found sensitive men to say that they might be hurting themselves by showing off women. Oh please. This is yet another example why, in my view, why ESPN jumped the shark a long time ago. These days, instead of just being about sports, they are full of self-importance. I liked their network a lot better when they were about nothing more than appealing to sports fans. If I wanted to hear about the "plights" of women and minorities half the time, I'd watch CNN a lot more.

And, by the way, who are they kidding? They are promoting themselves and the fact they show off great looking woman on their website, all under the ruse of sensitivity.

Live on Direct TV, this Saturday night, PETA vs. Greenpeace!!! These two seemingly compatible ideological groups battle to the death with ecologically friendly weaponry, to determine if thousands of Koalas live or die!! Call your local provider today!!!

ADELAIDE, Australia - Cute, cuddly and fast breeding, thousands of koalas are eating themselves out of a home on an Australian island. But authorities are refusing to heed conservationists' pleas to reduce the population, fearing a backlash from tourists and animal rights activists.

Who are they kidding? The only backlash they care about are from tourists, because the koalas are all about the 77% Benjamins baby. Get this part:

South Australia state Environment Minister John Hill said tourism would drop dramatically if koalas were killed on Kangaroo Island. "We rely a lot on the international market for our tourists," Hill told Australian Broadcasting Corp. radio, adding the issue was particularly sensitive in Japan.

Sometimes, the stereotype fits. The Japanese surely drop some serious yen sightseeing. For example, in college at Arizona State University, there was this very nice Japanese girl who lived in the same apartment building as I did. She was there for one semester of study. While she was here, she travelled on weekends and breaks to New Orleans, Miami, Seattle, San Diego, Los Angeles, the Grand Canyon, Salt Lake City (to see the Mormon Temple because she saw a picture of it from someone else), and New York City. All of this is one semester!!

One other thing: When I visited Europe by myself years ago, I always looked for a Japanese person to take a picture of me, for several reasons: 1 - They're honest, and would never steal your camera like that guy who stole the Griswold's. Besides, their camera is ALWAYS five years ahead of your crap. 2 - They take the best pictures. Never crooked, and they never cut off the top of your head.

This is an embarrassing admission, but I did not know much about Mark Steyn until very recently. The blogosphere seems to already understand the wit and savvy of this Canadian living in New Hampshire. Last night, I sat for over two hours after Emily went to bed and read through Steyn's archives in the U.K. Guardian. I learned what many others already seem to know: the man is as sharp as can be. His latest column touches on one of my pet peeves, the use of the word "nuance" when it comes to policy. I f'n hate it when this word is used to describe a policy approach, usually by a Democrat, which always seems to mean that "you [or Republicans] are too dumb to understand how complex this issue is." (The New York Times uses the word "nuance" a lot. They did about Howard Dean's foreign policy, and now they use it to describe John Kerry's)

This part of Steyn's latest column is, in a nutshell, why his abilities as a writer have won my eternal respect:

Senator Joe Biden - a man so rhetorically insecure that he's the only presidential candidate ever to plagiarise Neil Kinnock - was bending Bush's ear about the need to take a more "nuanced" approach to Afghanistan, and Bush replied: "I don't do nuance." Beautiful, and pithy, and a lot funnier than anything in the Bush parodies.

In a small paragraph, he captures my disdain for the term "nuance" better than I ever could. His conclusion sums up Kerry brilliantly:

I'm sure there are millions of Kerry supporters who'd like to take a tough Kerry-like stand this November. The best way to do that, in the spirit of his war votes, is to vote for Bush and then spend the next 10 years solemnly explaining that that was your bold courageous way of expressing your opposition to Bush.

Top-notch work. No wonder his writings are published all over the world. And, read this from his latest in the U.K. Spectator: [registration required]

The stump speech of pretty-boy Senator John Edwards, which I’ve heard often enough to be able to mouth along with him, has room for everything, including vivid, wrenching portraits of despair: ‘Tonight somewhere in America a ten-year-old little girl will go to bed hungry, hoping and praying that tomorrow will not be as cold as today because she doesn’t have the coat to keep her warm.’ You’d have to have a heart of stone not to be doubled up in laughter at that line. Thanks to the cheap textile imports Edwards and Kerry have pledged to crack down on, girls’ coats have never been cheaper. At JC Penney, Edwards’ shivering ten-year-old can get a brand-new quilted winter coat with faux-fur collar and cuffs for $9.99. At my local thrift shop, you can get a nice second-hand girl’s coat for three bucks. If John Edwards can produce, anywhere in the United States, a ten-year-old coatless girl I will personally send her a brand-new one with the Spectator logo attractively stitched on the left-hand side in return for one substantive passage on foreign policy in his stump speech.

Sheer genius.