Tomfoolery of the Highest Order

Thousands dead, and many more who can be saved with decent medical attention. But Sri Lanka's government would rather more people die that have those Jews help.

Sri Lanka rejects Israel relief delegation

A 150-member Israeli aid delegation canceled its mission to Sri Lanka on Tuesday, after the country - one of the hardest hit in the Asian tsunami disaster - refused to accept the Israeli team, Israel military officials said.

However, Israel is dispatching supplies at Sri Lanka's request, including 10,000 blankets contributed by the Israeli army, tents, nylon sheeting and water containers. The Israeli army's Home Front Command is organizing aid preparations...

The delegation was planning to assemble a medical facility comprised of specialist doctors, and to set up emergency, internal medicine and pediatric departments, as well as laboratory and X-ray facilities in the southern part of Sri Lanka.

Right now, a doctor in Israel is treating some asshole crying about having a 99-degree temperature instead of saving people that are needlessly dying, all because of misguided hatred. I hope this turns your stomach as much as it has mine.

Read this thread from Glenn Reynolds.

The tragedy in Asia, where the death toll keeps rising, has saddened me beyond words. You know what is really sad? Over the past few days, I have wondered how this would get blamed on Bush. Well, our friends at the Washington Post have found a way to put it on his shoulders.

Aid Grows Amid Remarks About President's Absence

The Bush administration more than doubled its financial commitment yesterday to provide relief to nations suffering from the Indian Ocean tsunami, amid complaints that the vacationing President Bush has been insensitive to a humanitarian catastrophe of epic proportions.

Insensitive? They must be joking. What do they want, Bush to be just like that phony Clinton? Because, if Clinton were President, he'd have found a way to make a story about 60,000 people (and certainly more before it is all said and done) all about him. Give me a break. Between that, and some U.N. jerkoff calling the U.S. stingy, I cannot begin to tell you how angry I am. In the coming weeks, Americans will send millions upon millions of aid, without the government being involved at all. How do I know this? Because we ALWAYS do. If it wasn't for America, Bangladesh would still be cleaning up from their tragic flood in 1991, and Turkey would still be digging out from that masive earthqauke they had a few years ago.

I am beyond tired of Bush being blamed for everything, and tired of America not being appreciated. Yet, I have sent my check, and I urge you to as well. Because, whether some people are grateful or not, the people who have suffered deserve our help. And they are going to get it.

In closing, get this slick piece of alleged reporting:

Rep. Frank R. Wolf (R-Va.), who is frequently outspoken in favor of U.S. humanitarian ventures, said he believes the initial U.S. response has been appropriate, even without a public role for Bush. "I think the world knows we're a very generous people," he said.

Still, the United Nations' Egeland complained on Monday that each of the richest nations gives less than 1 percent of its gross national product for foreign assistance, and many give 0.1 percent. "It is beyond me why we are so stingy, really," he told reporters.

Among the world's two dozen wealthiest countries, the United States often is among the lowest in donors per capita for official development assistance worldwide, even though the totals are larger. According to the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development of 30 wealthy nations, the United States gives the least -- at 0.14 percent of its gross national product, compared with Norway, which gives the most at 0.92 percent.

I don't know for sure, but I think you would rather have .0001% of Bill Gates wealth rather than 25% of mine. We give more than all the others combined, on our own, without government confiscation. It is time we get credit for it.

I wanted to wish all of you a very Merry Christmas and share with you a few pictures of Emily, taken, oh, about 3 minutes ago.





May God Bless each of you this Christmas, and thank you for your kind e-mails, comments, and for all the laughs I've had this year. I'll be back strong in 2005.

The ACLU is out pushing a story that the "torture" in Guantanamo Bay was authorized by an executive order. Of course, the Los Angeles Times runs right with the story:

FBI Agents Complained of Prisoner Abuse, Records Say

WASHINGTON — FBI agents have lodged repeated complaints of physical and mental mistreatment of prisoners held in Iraq and Cuba, saying in reports that military officials have placed lighted cigarettes in detainees' ears and humiliated Arab captives by wrapping Israeli flags around them, according to new documents released Monday.

The FBI records, which are among the latest set of documents obtained by the ACLU in its lawsuit against the federal government, also include instances in which bureau officials said they were disgusted by military interrogators who pretended to be FBI agents as a "ruse" to glean intelligence from prisoners.

Now, here' the kicker:

The FBI agents referred to what they described as a new executive order on prisoner treatment by President Bush. They described the order as allowing interrogation tactics that were forbidden for FBI agents.

There it is crux of the story. To make you think that there is some Executive Order by Bush authorizing some kind of "torture." But then the article says this:

The records did not include a copy of the Bush order, or make clear exactly when it was signed. Pentagon officials would not comment on whether there was any new order.

That's right. Some FBI memo says it exists, and the Pentagon didn't comment. There is proof according to ACLU's standards. But, even if it exists, this is what it supposedly says:

According to FBI officials, the Bush order approved interrogation tactics that included "sleep deprivation and stress positions," as well as "loud music, interrogators yelling at subjects and prisoners with hoods on their heads."

Wow, how evil!!! I am stunned that these scum aren't getting satellite TV with al-Jazeera in HDTV.

Read the whole thing. The story relies on hearsay and unsubstantiated allegations. This is pathetic journalism, and I am being charitable in calling it that. It ends with this "tearjerker":

"Most times they had urinated or defecated on themselves, and had been left for 18 to 24 hours or more," the agent wrote.

Sometimes, he reported, the room was chilled to where a "barefooted detainee was shaking with cold."

Other times, he said, the air-conditioning was turned off and the temperature in the unventilated room rose to well over 100 degrees.

He said one detainee "was almost unconscious on the floor, with a pile of hair next to him. He had apparently been literally pulling his own hair out throughout the night."

The FBI documents also included a report of a prisoner in Cuba whose legs were injured and who said he had lied about being a terrorist out of fear that the U.S. military would otherwise have his legs amputated.

"He indicated he was injured severely and in a lot of pain," the FBI documents said, yet the prisoner constantly was being asked whether he had attended a terrorist camp in Afghanistan. The agent wrote that the prisoner "stated he wanted to receive decent medical treatment, and felt the only way to get it was to tell the Americans what they wanted to hear."

Am I supposed to be upset? At least their heads are still attached, and they weren't forced to choose between burning to death or jumping out of the 101st floor. These scumbags that the ACLU cries over were celebrating on September 11th. They aren't celebrating now. F them. If these stories ae true, then we need to stop coddling them and really get down to business.

I just got an e-mail from Jamie. He was 60 meters from the blast and is only shaken up. He lost 2 men that he worked with on a daily basis and is quite down about that, as are we all. Thank God he is OK. You have no idea how relieved I am.

I am quite concerned right now for my cousin Jamie. While I believe that if he were one of the troops killed today, I would have heard by now, I will not rest easy until I hear from him.

I haven't talked to him in about 2 weeks. He is a member of the Virginia National Guard, and has been stationed in Mosul since February. He is scheduled to come home in about 6 weeks or so, and the last time we talked he told me that he was leaving Mosul for Kuwait soon. I am sitting here hoping he left already. Imagine how I felt when I read this today:

Rocket Hits U.S. Base in Iraq, Killing 22

BAGHDAD, Iraq - A 122 mm rocket slammed into a mess tent Tuesday at a military base near the northern city of Mosul, ripping through the ceiling and spraying shrapnel as U.S. soldiers sat down to lunch. Officials said 22 people were killed in the deadliest single attack against Americans in Iraq since the start of the war.

The dead included 20 Americans — 15 servicemembers and five civilian contractors — and two Iraqi soldiers. Sixty-six people were wounded, including 42 U.S. troops, Capt. Brian Lucas, a military spokesman in Baghdad, said early Wednesday.

Redmon said the dead included two soldiers from the Richmond-based 276th Engineer Battalion, which had just sat down to eat. The force knocked soldiers off their feet and out of their seats as a fireball enveloped the top of the tent and shrapnel sprayed into the area, Redmon said.

I think that this is Jamie's unit. I hope he is OK. I will update you as soon as I can confirm it. In the meantime, pray for our troops. Here is a recent picture of Jamie, one he sent after he received the care package I sent him.

The liberal wacko Palm Beach Post has this scathing editorial titled "The ACLU vs. the ACLU."

For the most part, it is a terrific (and unexpected) editorial. But, of course, they have to get ridiculous lines like this in:

ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero says he's confident that the data searches don't compromise individual privacy and will withstand Mr. Spitzer's scrutiny. Many members aren't so sure and wonder how it is that their organization did a better job standing up for Mr. Limbaugh's interests than their own. If Mr. Romero can explain that one, he deserves a lifetime appointment.

Perhaps they should have mentioned how the ACLU does a better job of standing up for NAMBLA's interests rather than their own.

I have on several occasions opined about how much I despise Judge Steven Reinhardt of the 9th Circuit, because he is a ridiculous liberal who thinks the law is what he says it is. (And don't forget, he is married to the executive director of the Southern California ACLU. Birds of a feather...) Reinhardt is the most overturned judge in the country. There is a reason for that. He thinks this is Canada or Sweden, and "interprets" the Constitution accordingly. Today, I came across this article about him in Pomona College Magazine. Just look at the header:

It’s not an easy time to be a liberal judge, but criticisms from the right and reversals from the Supreme Court only strengthen the resolve of Judge Stephen R. Reinhardt ’51 to do what he believes to be the right thing for America.

Yep, that's right. He'd get away with it too, if it wasn't for those meddling right-wingers. And, the wrong wrong he is, the more right he thinks he is. He is a disgraceful judge.

Reinhardt is a one-man argument for term limits for federal judges. If he wasn't making a nuisance out of himself on the 9th Circuit, he'd be nothing more than a worthless ACLU attorney. It is a damn shame there is no Constitutional limit to his term.

For his pains, the unabashedly liberal judge has drawn a barrage of criticism from the right. Rush Limbaugh has harangued him as a “left-leaning commie socialist,” and the conservative Weekly Standard has labeled him “the liberal bad boy of the federal judiciary.” Many of Reinhardt’s rulings have been overturned by the largely Republican-appointed Supreme Court, sometimes without any discussion beforehand.

Well, when you are wrong as he is, it just isn't worth the effort.

The opposition, if anything, merely strengthens Reinhardt’s resolve.

“I don’t feel any pressure. I suppose I should be pleased that those who have what I believe to be an erroneous view of the Constitution react strongly to rulings that I think protect people’s rights.”

Sounds like a MoveOn.org or ACLU member. Were I a terrorist or a Christian-hater, I'd love Reinhardt, because he would be my best friend. It will be a happy day when he isn't pissing all over the Constitution anymore.

...how much of a scumbag I think Kofi Annan is? First read this terrific column about why Annan has to go:

The Real Reason Kofi Annan Must Go
Genocide, not oil money, is the proof of his failed leadership.

Now, get this latest crap to eminate from Kofi's pie hole.

UN's Annan says Iraq bloodshed will affect elections

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan insisted only Iraq can decide whether to go ahead with elections next month, but he warned that the ongoing bloodshed would have an effect on the polls.

Speaking as the United States insisted that the violence would not derail Iraq's first post-Saddam Hussein election due at the end of January, Annan said the UN's work in helping to ready the vote was on schedule.

"The technical preparations are on track and I hope that all Iraqis will exercise their right to vote," he told a press conference at UN headquarters in New York.

"The decision (to) go ahead or not is the Iraqis' decision, not ours," he said. "But the violence, if it continues, will have an impact on the elections. Elections don't take place in a vacuum."

Why doesn't Kofi just tell the scumbag terrorists straight out to keep it up? Don't kid yourself. Kofi Annan is as anti-American as it gets, and he wants us to fail in Iraq. Don't act like I am saying that for effect. Just look at Annan's career. He has consistently been pro-dictator/terrorist/thug, both through act and omission.

I challenge any Kofi Annan or U.N. supporter to tell me what exactly Annan has done that is worthy of respect and/or praise. Kofi Annan belongs in jail, in a cell right next to his son Kojo.

Nothing pisses off the ACLU more than when judges are overruled by the people. Get this article:

Isle ballot measures shake up legal arena - Civil rights advocates voice concern at the Hawaii amendments

Voters in heavily Democratic Hawaii have supported toughening the state's criminal justice system by overturning three specific state Supreme Court rulings that favored accused sex offenders -- a move civil rights advocates say is a troubling sign of things to come.

Debate continues more than a month after voters approved four constitutional amendments dramatically altering the state's criminal justice system. Prosecutors, in effect, went to the people when they could not get what they wanted in the courtroom.

And exactly what is wrong with that? Our country isn't run by judicial fiat. But, since the ACLU and their liberal soulmates can't win a thing at the ballot box, they are forced to making it seem like the voters having their say over unaccountable judges is somehow wrong.

"People will not realize what they have lost until they are falsely accused of something," said Kat Brady, legislative liaison for the American Civil Liberties Union of Hawaii. (that sentence is what we reasonable people call a non-sequiter)

Supporters led by the state attorney general say the amendments will better protect the public, help crime victims and improve the judicial process.

The ACLU and defense attorneys contend the measures erode civil rights and are a tool for prosecutors to overturn unpopular high court decisions, shifting the balance of power from the courts to a flurry of ballot initiatives.

Jesselyn McCurdy, an ACLU attorney in Washington, said most states adjust their criminal justice system with statutes, rather than taking it to voters.

That is because most states don't have the referendum/initiative process written into their constitutions. There is NOTHING wrong with the people themselves deciding what laws they will live under. In fact, this is the basis of our entire system. But, the sex offender-loving ACLU can't have it.

One of the amendments allows prosecutors to bring charges directly without presenting evidence to a judge or grand jury. The other three make it easier to punish sex offenders.

There are legitimate arguments against allowing prosecutors to bring charges without presenting evidence to a judge or a grand jury, allowing the accused to confront his accuser, and the requirements that a jury need not be unanimous. But bring the arguments to the voters, and not to the courts.

I cannot stand when judges legislate from the bench, and I always favor ways to force them to only interpret laws, not to make them. Here is how you know that the ACLU's stance is weak:

The ACLU said the amendments were not needed in a state that has one of the nation's lowest violent crime rates per capita.

"It was not really about victims; it's about their agenda to get us to cede our rights and to get us to kind of conform to the Patriot Act," Brady said.

And what exactly does any of this have to do with the Patriot Act? I can't figure it out.

The ACLU cannot openly admit their true agenda: The unquestioned defense of sex offenders and child molesters.

Back on June 30th, I told you this:

The saddest part is that he is close to the truth. The media will use Saddam's trial to indict Bush. Every last thing that comes from Saddam's mouth will be treated as the gospel, and Bush will be put on the defensive every single day. This will turn out to be the biggest circus in history, you watch.

By the way, coming to the United States District Court for the District of Northern California: Saddam's habeas petition. Remember I said that.

And today, we get this from Saddam's attorney:

Saddam bids to challenge case in US

SADDAM HUSSEIN is preparing a legal challenge in America to his trial for war crimes, according to leaked papers prepared by his defence team.

Advice to take the case to the US courts is contained in a 50-page brief prepared by Clive Stafford Smith, the leading British human rights lawyer, which has been seen by The Sunday Times.

The action is to ensure that Saddam receives the basic legal rights given to those tried in America, such as full access to his defence team and an independent judge and jury.

Frankly, I hope Saddam's attorney files ever legal motion imaginable. This way, Saddam will die in jail and we will be spared the circus of a trial.

I laughed my ass off when I read this:

A.C.L.U.'s Search for Data on Donors Stirs Privacy Fears

The American Civil Liberties Union is using sophisticated technology to collect a wide variety of information about its members and donors in a fund-raising effort that has ignited a bitter debate over its leaders' commitment to privacy rights.

Some board members say the extensive data collection makes a mockery of the organization's frequent criticism of banks, corporations and government agencies for their practice of accumulating data on people for marketing and other purposes.

Daniel S. Lowman, vice president for analytical services at Grenzebach Glier & Associates, the data firm hired by the A.C.L.U., said the software the organization is using, Prospect Explorer, combs a broad range of publicly available data to compile a file with information like an individual's wealth, holdings in public corporations, other assets and philanthropic interests.

The issue has attracted the attention of the New York attorney general, who is looking into whether the group violated its promises to protect the privacy of its donors and members.

"It is part of the A.C.L.U.'s mandate, part of its mission, to protect consumer privacy," said Wendy Kaminer, a writer and A.C.L.U. board member. "It goes against A.C.L.U. values to engage in data-mining on people without informing them. It's not illegal, but it is a violation of our values. It is hypocrisy."

They saved me the trouble of saying it. Basically, it comes down to this: If you are a potential terrorist who wants to kill thousands, the ACLU will do everything possible to make sure no one can find out a thing about you. But, if you got a dollar in your pocket that may someday find it's way into the ACLU coffers, the ACLU will mine every last bit of inofrmation about you to suck that dollar out, your privacy be damned.

Don't kid yourselves. The ACLU is a for-profit business, a vast con job. Their racket should be shut down under RICO. If you are a member of this vile organization, why? (And GFY if you are)

Funny how these "important" groups had little to say when Saddam and his henchmen were throwing people out of windows and outting people through shredders, but have a ton to say when these same scum are being put on trial.

Iraq's Regime Crimes Tribunal Flawed - Rights Group

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq's plan to push ahead with early trials of Saddam Hussein's deputies risks launching an unfair process that is flawed and discredited in the eyes of the world, a leading human rights group said on Friday.

New York-based Human Rights Watch described the Iraqi Special Tribunal, set up to gather evidence against and try Saddam and his top lieutenants, as having "serious human rights shortcomings" and lacking "fair-trial protections."

"Trying former Iraqi officials under the current rules could mean a wasted opportunity to put Saddam and his henchmen on trial in a manner that has credibility in the eyes of the world," Richard Dicker, director of the International Justice Program at Human Rights Watch, said in a statement.

One of the best things I have ever heard is that when liberals can't argue on substance, they argue about process. How true it is here. After all, they can't really say we hate The United States more than murderous scum, which any honest person will tell you is the truth about HRW.

I have a few problems here. First, HRW is full of crap. Second, who cares what they say? Third, why does the media continually report what they have to say as if it is important? I don't. Take a gander at this part of the article:

Human Rights Watch urged that changes be made to the tribunal's statutes before the process goes any further.

"The Iraqi Special Tribunal has serious human rights shortcomings," Dicker said. "The Iraqi government will need to change the process and make sure that trials are fair."

If the tribunals have "human rights shortcomings," then what did Iraq under Saddam have?

Read some of the crap on their site. They mention the Congo but don't say a word about how U.N. peacekeepers are raping women all over the place. And, they complain about some law in Zimbabawe without a word about that murderous scumbag Robert Mugabe. There is very little on the Sudan and what the French troops did in the Ivory Coast. They are a joke, and should be ignored as such.

Last Saturday, we had Emily's 1st Birthday Party. I cannot believe my little angel is a year old already. I hate it. I wish the first year took two, if you know what I mean. Anyway, she has really taken to Dora the Explorer, so we gave her a real nice Dora birthday party. This is my favorite picture of the day, and I wanted to show it off to you.

I am sure most of you have seen this story by now:

One Charged With Killing Mom, Taking Baby

MARYVILLE, Mo. - Authorities Friday arrested a woman they allege came to the home of an eight-months-pregnant woman — purportedly to buy a dog — then strangled her and cut the baby from her womb. Authorities found the abducted infant in good health, ending a day of frantic searching.

I can hardly imagine anything more vile and disgusting. The liberal media and their primary concern about abortion over anything, ANYTHING, even the life of a baby, acted to only increase my outrage. Just click here and read the headlines from today, all over the media. (Most of the headlines have been changed, so I am referring you to a search string) Here are some of the egregious examples:

Amber Alert issued for stolen fetus Stolen fetus? No, a kidnapped baby!!!

Amber Alert Out for Fetus Cut From Womb - Maybe I am real dumb, but once out of the womb, isn't the baby no longer a fetus? (Then again, we considered Emily a baby from the day we found out she was on the way. I must be one of those evil "Religious Right" people)

And, even after the killer was caught, our liberals friends continued the charade.

Woman Charged In Mo. Fetus Case

A group called the National Incident Notification Network, however, headlined the situation perfectly:

Baby Missing After Being Cut From Slain Pregnant Woman's Body Amber Alert Issued For Missing Female Baby

I saw a sheriff on TV doing a press conference, and he was explaining that there was a delay in issung an Amber Alert because of the "status" of the baby and the initial hesitancy to issue an alert for a "fetus." I don't blame him at all, but I could not believe my ears. Think about it. An 8-month pregnant woman was murdered, the baby was cut out of her and missing, and there are some scumbag bureaucrats whose primary concern was not upsetting the pro-abortion people. Out-f'n-rageous.

One more headline for you. They make it sound like some sort of property crime.

Two in custody in Missouri fetus theft

My friends, this is the state of our media today. The obsession with abortion rights has gotten beyond ridiculous. That is OK though. Liberals are aborting themselves into extinction anyway.

Some dope finished a book, right before he died, that claims that Abraham Lincoln was a homosexual. Of course, the New York Times has given it a long write-up. As I read it, I wondered why anyone, even a paper with such low standards as the New York Times, would bother with this crap. Then I read this, and it all came clear:

Larry Kramer, the author and AIDS activist, said that Mr. Tripp's book "will change history."

"It's a revolutionary book because the most important president in the history of the United States was gay," he said. "Now maybe they'll leave us alone, all those people in the party he founded."

Republican-bashing always has a place in the NY Times. I would not be surprised if they ran this piece just so they could get this sentence in print. I found two other parts laughable:

...Mr. Tripp has won support from other scholars. Jean H. Baker, a former student of Mr. Donald's and the author of "Mary Todd Lincoln: a Biography" (W. W Norton, 1987), wrote the introduction to the book. She said that Lincoln's homosexuality would explain his tempestuous relationship with Mary Todd, and "some of her agonies and anxieties over their relationship."

He fought with his wife. He must be gay. What other explanation is there? Oh, please. This my friends is what passes for scholarship these days. And:

Finding the truth is a sacred principal for historians, Mr. Chesson said, adding, "It's incumbent on us as scholars to present to readers material if historians have ignored it or swept it under the rug because they don't agree with it."

Still, if Lincoln was gay, how did it affect his presidency? Ms. Baker said that his outsider status would explain his independence and his ability to take anti-Establishment positions like the issuing of the Emancipation Proclamation. As a homosexual, she said, "he would be on the margins of tradition."

Oh, get real. His "outsider status" had nothing to do with him issuing The Emancipation Proclomation. It is beyond ridiculous how these "scholars" are trying to omply that Lincoln was a bleeding-heart gay liberal. They must have never read the Emancipation Proclamation, or, at best, don't understand it. The reason Lincoln issued it was for pure political reasons. He feared the British would enter the war on the side of the Confederacy (the Brits supplied them quite a bit, and there was incident on the seas between the Union and the Brits). And, if you read the document honestly, you will realize that NOT ONE SLAVE was made free. Here's an excerpt of the Emancipation Proclamation. Pay attention to the highlighted parts especially:

Now, therefore I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, by virtue of the power in me vested as Commander-in-Chief, of the Army and Navy of the United States in time of actual armed rebellion against the authority and government of the United States, and as a fit and necessary war measure for suppressing said rebellion, do, on this first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, and in accordance with my purpose so to do publicly proclaimed for the full period of one hundred days, from the day first above mentioned, order and designate as the States and parts of States wherein the people thereof respectively, are this day in rebellion against the United States, the following, to wit:

Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana, (except the Parishes of St. Bernard, Plaquemines, Jefferson, St. John, St. Charles, St. James Ascension, Assumption, Terrebonne, Lafourche, St. Mary, St. Martin, and Orleans, including the City of New Orleans) Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia, (except the forty-eight counties designated as West Virginia, and also the counties of Berkley, Accomac, Northampton, Elizabeth City, York, Princess Ann, and Norfolk, including the cities of Norfolk and Portsmouth[)], and which excepted parts, are for the present, left precisely as if this proclamation were not issued.

The order "freed" all of the slaves in all of the places that the Union DID NOT CONTROL. All of the excepted places, where slavery was not "abolished" by Lincoln were at that point in the full control of the Union.

I will always know that Lincoln was a great man and probably our greatest President, but I will not gloss over the truth of what he really did. The Emancipation Proclamation was nothing more than a propaganda document, done out of pragmatism, not out of pure decency.

Only Jesus Christ has had more books written about him than Linclon, and there about 7000 books on ol' Honest Abe. I guess to get attention on a new Lincoln book, one needs to claim he was gay. It is disgraceful, and I hope it sells as many copies as Jayson Blair's book. In fact, I am sure it will. No one smells bullshit better than the American buying public.

I thought Iraq was a war for oil? Get this BBC article:

US 'failed to control' Iraq oil

A United Nations panel has found that the US-led occupation authority failed to exercise proper controls over Iraq's oil industry and could not say how much oil had gone missing since the fall of Saddam Hussein.

The International Advisory and Monitoring Board report also said there were "important weaknesses" in the management by occupation officials of up to $20bn in Iraqi funds, mostly from oil sales.

20 billion? Isn't that about the same amount in the Oil-for-Food scandal? The next paragraph reveals the true agenda at work here.

US politicians have often accused the UN of incompetence and, perhaps, corruption in its handling of the oil-for-food programme, a scheme to alleviate Iraqi suffering under sanctions before the war. Now the boot is on the other foot.

Don't you just love the shit that the worthless BBC is trying to pass off here? And, in trying to shift the attention and blame on the U.S., the expected boogeyman is pulled out:

The panel, which also includes representatives from the IMF and the World Bank, expressed particular concern about how large contracts paid out of Iraqi funds were given to US firms, such as the oil services group Halliburton, without competitive bidding.

I expect to see this or something similar in the New York Times any day.

This AP headline and story is beyond ridiculous.

Ohio Recount Resembles Florida in 2000

CINCINNATI - In a scene reminiscent of Florida circa 2000, two teams of Republican and Democratic election workers held punch-card ballots up to the light Wednesday and whispered back and forth as they tried to divine the voters' intent from a few hanging chads.

Really, does anyone care except for the far-left wackos?

This is like me calling for the end of Kobe Tai's career:

Abbas Calls for End of Armed Uprising

JERUSALEM - Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian leader campaigning to succeed Yasser Arafat in elections next month, said in an interview published Tuesday that the 4-year-old armed uprising against Israel was a mistake and must end.

His strong statement, which could cost him some electoral support, sent a challenge to militants who have been waging war with suicide attacks and ambushes; it also set the stage for a resumption of peace efforts if he wins.

Is it me, or does this seem like an election that only Jimmy Carter could see as legitimate? Plus, just look at how easy the AP can talk about Palestinian elections as if they were occuring in some long-successful democracy. Yet, they couldn't bring themselves to say much of anything, let alone good, about the Afghanistan elections and they can only keep talking about the possible postponement of Iraqi elections.

Bottom line: When I see Abbas saying this in Arabic, in front of a huge crowd somewhere in the Gaza Strip, and then actually lives to see the "election," I'll believe it. Until then....

This reminds me of when Bush snuck off to Baghdad for Thanksgiving, and some editors complained that by keeping it secret, saying "that they found aspects of the White House strategy to be deceptive, excessively secretive and disruptive of the relationship between writer and editor." Get this:

Pentagon Weighs Use of Deception in a Broad Arena

The Pentagon is engaged in bitter, high-level debate over how far it can and should go in managing or manipulating information to influence opinion abroad, senior Defense Department civilians and military officers say.

Such missions, if approved, could take the deceptive techniques endorsed for use on the battlefield to confuse an adversary and adopt them for covert propaganda campaigns aimed at neutral and even allied nations.

Critics of the proposals say such deceptive missions could shatter the Pentagon's credibility, leaving the American public and a world audience skeptical of anything the Defense Department and military say - a repeat of the credibility gap that roiled America during the Vietnam War.

What a bunch of self-important bullshit. Since when is the New York Times anything other than skeptical of what comes out of the Pentagon? And, the Vietnam analogy, that old gray rag's favortie standby, fails on its face. Then, the deceptions were aimed at the American people. Today, they are aimed at the scum our fine men and women are fighting in order for our people to have a tactical advantage. This is no small difference.

Interestingly, no where in the article do they deem to mention the deception they are upset about. The Pentagon let it out that the offensive in Fallujah was about to begin, which was not true. The purpose of that falsehood was for our military to track the scum and see what they do, so that when we did go in, we had more of an advantage. They fail to mention that because any reader that cares about our people first, like me, would see no problem in what the Pentagon did.

An editorial on the circus that we know more formally as the 9th Circuit.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, "serving" the western United States, is dysfunctional. It hears 17.4 percent of the federal appellate caseload. But it accounts for 31.5 percent of the federal cases that the U.S. Supreme Court hears on appeal.

The most telling statistic: The 9th Circuit was reversed unanimously 26 times during the last four terms, more than twice its nearest rival. That means it is so out of touch with the law that it couldn't get even one of nine justices -- liberal or conservative -- to agree with it.

Time to chop the place up into 3 or 4 parts.

Read the whole thing.

...you are the embarrassment, not Justice Thomas.

Some people are just going to get what they deserve, no matter what.

Lawyer Backed in Conceding Client's Guilt

The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that faced with overwhelming evidence that a client is guilty of capital murder, a defense lawyer can make a reasonable strategic decision to concede guilt in open court, even if the client has not authorized such a strategy, in order to preserve some credibility with the jury that will soon decide whether to impose a death sentence.

The 8-to-0 decision, with an opinion by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and with Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist not participating, overturned a ruling by the Florida Supreme Court that a lawyer who concedes a defendant's guilt, for whatever reason, in the absence of explicit authorization, has deprived the client of the effective assistance of counsel.

Applying that rule, the Florida Supreme Court last year ordered a new trial for Joe Elton Nixon, who was convicted and sentenced to death in 1984 for kidnapping a woman, tying her to a tree, and setting her on fire while she was still alive. He then confessed the killing to his brother, took two of his victim's rings to a pawnshop and tried to sell the sports car he stole from her.

Justice Ginsburg said that Mr. Nixon's lawyer, Michael Corin, who was experienced in defending murder cases, calculated that a denial of guilt in the face of "overwhelming evidence" of the gruesome crime would have appeared incredible to the jurors before whom he would soon be asking for leniency in the sentencing phase. The lawyer's strategy was aimed at "preserving his credibility," she said, adding, "In a capital case, counsel must consider in conjunction both the guilt and penalty phases in determining how best to proceed."

That the strategy failed - the jury decided on a sentence of death after only three hours of deliberation - did not necessarily mean that the representation was ineffective, Justice Ginsburg said. She added that while lawyers ordinarily had a duty to consult with their clients on questions of "overarching defense strategy," that obligation did not extend to "every tactical decision."

Like it not, this was good strategy by the attorney, and the Court did well by upholding it. Jurors are human, and you can't treat them like dopes and then turn around and ask for their sympathy. Besides, if there was any chance for this guy to avoid the needle, some goodwill with the jury had to be obtained. And being honest with them was the only way to obtain it.

Besides, there is one other benefit. Lawyers who knew their client was screwed could just do this without asking, and the appeals who just overload the courts.

Scott Peterson gets the death penalty. Good. I wish that fucker could get the firing squad on pay-per-view.

I haven't really said anything about this guy other than to call him a scumbag. And he is an evil scumbag at that, who should have just left his wife like many men do all the time. That piece of trash Amber Frye would have taken him even knowing that he left a pregnant wife. Trash like her have no self-respect, which is exactly why Peterson targeted her as his side piece. She was an easy score. He could have kept that lifestyle going for years, changing the woman every few weeks or months. Instead, he chose to kill that beatiful wife of his, and their baby. Which is why he deserves the needle in his arm. I am about 70% against the death penalty, but it is people like him that makes me want the death penalty as a option for prosecutors.

Look at this from that media darling, the "maverick" John McCain:

McCain Has 'No Confidence' in Rumsfeld

PHOENIX - U.S. Sen. John McCain said Monday that he has "no confidence" in Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, citing Rumsfeld's handling of the war in Iraq and the failure to send more troops.

McCain, speaking to The Associated Press in an hourlong interview, said his comments were not a call for Rumsfeld's resignation, explaining that President Bush "can have the team that he wants around him."

Just look at McCain trying to kiss the ass of the liberal media, bashing Rumsfeld directly, and Bush indirectly. I wonder if he realizes that all the wonderful press that he gets now would disappear the moment he got the 2008 nomination, if he ever received it. McCain can be a real dope sometimes.

As a side note, look for more Republican presidential hopefuls take their swipes at Bush over the next 4 years in order to get themselves some positive press, to gain the approval of people who will never, ever support them.

From an article in the National Journal discussin possible Bush Supreme Court nominees:

President Clinton's approach to judicial nominations mirrored his policies -- moderate. D.C. Circuit Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg and 1st Circuit Judge Stephen Breyer fit the mold. Both had reputations as being thorough and fair. "President Clinton worked really hard to, on the whole, nominate centrist candidates who really were able to generate broad support in the Senate and in the country," says Clinton White House Counsel Jack Quinn. "He wanted consensus." Adds Clinton Chief of Staff Leon Panetta: "He basically was interested in people like himself."

Ginsburg and Breyer are moderates. Yeah right. They are hard core liberals, especially Ginsburg, a former top ACLU lawyer.

Just to get it on the record, here are my predictions for Bush's nominees, assuming he gets three to replace O'Connor, Rehnquist and Stevens: Janice Rogers Brown, Michael McConnell, and Miguel Estrada, not necessarily in that order.

...while sitting in my rocking chair with my laptop.

Careful, lads, that laptop might burn your genes

BUSINESSMEN and teenage boys could be risking their fertility by using laptop computers, research suggests.
The combination of heat generated by the computers and the posture needed to balance the equipment on the lap leads to raised temperatures around the scrotum, a study has found. Past research shows that higher scrotal temperatures can damage sperm and affect fertility. And the introduction of new technology such as Bluetooth and infrared connections — which provide wireless links to the internet — has resulted in a growing number of men using the machines on their thighs rather than at a desk.

To keep the testicles at an ideal temperature — and for greater comfort — men naturally sit with their legs further apart than women. When working on a laptop, however, they will adopt a less natural position in order to balance it on their laps, which results in a significant rise in body heat between their thighs.

Wonderful. Just wonderful.

Let's review a few things:

Hardee's Monster Burger Creates Uproar

ST. LOUIS - At 1,420 calories and 107 grams of fat, Hardee's Monster Thickburger couldn't escape notice in these diet-conscious times. Or the jabs of late-night talk show hosts.

Yeah, that is funny. If anyone complains, tell them to piss off and don't eat it. If no one eats it, they won't sell it. Anyone willing to bet a lawsuit will result from this someday?

Bush Replaces Outspoken Civil Rights Chair

WASHINGTON - President Bush on Monday moved to replace Mary Frances Berry, the outspoken chairwoman of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission who has argued with every president since Jimmy Carter appointed her to the panel a quarter century ago.

Outspoken? More like a nasty old bitch. Good riddance.

AP: FBI Letter Cites Guantanamo Abuse

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico - FBI agents witnessed "highly aggressive" interrogations and mistreatment of terror suspects at the U.S. prison camp in Cuba starting in 2002 — more than a year before the prison abuse scandal broke in Iraq — according to a letter a senior Justice Department official sent to the Army's top criminal investigator.

In the letter obtained by The Associated Press, the FBI official suggested the Pentagon didn't act on FBI complaints about the incidents, including a female interrogator grabbing a detainee's genitals and bending back his thumbs, another where a prisoner was gagged with duct tape and a third where a dog was used to intimidate a detainee who later was thrown into isolation and showed signs of "extreme psychological trauma."

One Marine told an FBI observer that some interrogations led to prisoners "curling into a fetal position on the floor and crying in pain," according to the letter dated July 14, 2004.

Oh, boo-f'n-hoo. They should be grateful our fine soldiers didn't send them to Allah on the battlefield in Afghanistan.

If the letter detailed suspicious activity from young Arab males, it would be ignored. But to indirectly bash Bush, this letter is now the gospel.

And...

2 C.I.A. Reports Offer Warnings on Iraq's Path

WASHINGTON, Dec. 6 - A classified cable sent by the Central Intelligence Agency's station chief in Baghdad has warned that the situation in Iraq is deteriorating and may not rebound any time soon, according to government officials.

The cable, sent late last month as the officer ended a yearlong tour, presented a bleak assessment on matters of politics, economics and security, the officials said. They said its basic conclusions had been echoed in briefings presented by a senior C.I.A. official who recently visited Iraq.

The officials described the two assessments as having been "mixed," saying that they did describe Iraq as having made important progress, particularly in terms of its political process, and credited Iraqis with being resilient.

But over all, the officials described the station chief's cable in particular as an unvarnished assessment of the difficulties ahead in Iraq. They said it warned that the security situation was likely to get worse, including more violence and sectarian clashes, unless there were marked improvements soon on the part of the Iraqi government, in terms of its ability to assert authority and to build the economy.

Together, the appraisals, which follow several other such warnings from officials in Washington and in the field, were much more pessimistic than the public picture being offered by the Bush administration before the elections scheduled for Iraq next month, the officials said. The cable was sent to C.I.A. headquarters after American forces completed what military commanders have described as a significant victory, with the retaking of Falluja, a principal base of the Iraqi insurgency, in mid-November.

Some secret cable. Funny how these things always see the light of day when they can be used to bash Bush. Frankly, I don't trust the CIA anymore. (And when exactly did they become buddy-buddy with the left? Hasn't it been the left that has tried to destroy the CIA over the last 30 years?) Why should I trust the CIA when they can't even keep a "secret cable" secret? Yeah, I know they leaked it. Still, it is funny that no one makes a big deal about the pre-Iraq war assessments from the CIA being inaccurate, but now their negative assessments of Iraq today are treated like the word from above.

Since I was born and raised in South Philly, within walking distance of the stadiums, I have been fortunate enough to attend several Army-Navy games. While the quality of football may not always be the best, the quality of the men playing the game has never been in question. If you can in your lifetime attend one of these games, you can't pass it up. The atmosphere is nothing like you have ever seen.

One other thing to consider: Our leader is out flipping the coin in front of about 70,000 people in Lincoln Financial Field, and our enemies' leaders live in caves and rat holes. Remember that.

God Bless America, and thank you to our fine troops for making sure I have the freedom to write this.

It is a strange day in the annals when I agree with Robert Byrd and disagree with Betsy Newmark. Betsy posts:

Steven Taylor blogs about something that Robert Byrd is slipping into the budget resolution to require schools that receive federal money to devote a lesson to the Constitution on September 17, Constitution Day. Even though I fully believe that schools should teach a lot about the Constitution (after all I teach a Government and Politics class as well as American History so I'm teaching about the Constitution almost every day), I agree with Steven that the federal government should not be dictating curriculum. And they definitely should not be doing this in the context of a budget resolution.

I've been teaching the unit on federalism to my AP Government class, and it is really striking how many areas the federal government shouldn't be involved in, yet are. After a while, my students, who tend to be a bit liberal and very idealistic, are questions about why the federal government can pass bills in areas like civil rights, crime, and education. Then they open up their little pocket Constitutions and start rereading the 10th Amendment and Article I and asking some very good questions.

I suspect that I will have to devote a lesson to Senator Byrd.

I am a strong believer in federalism and the 10th Amendment, but in this case, Senator KKK Byrd is absolutely correct. Schools are woefully underteaching our most important document, and someone needs to step up and force them to teach our children about the Constitution. For example, at Arizona State University, I was once told that our Constitution was "based on" an Iriquos (sp?) Indian compact. I am not joking. If a college professor is pushing that crap, imagine what the grade school teachers are doing. Betsy should understand as much as anyone that our teachers are ignoring the Constitution, amongst many other important American documents and historical events, while teaching them the wonders of the religion of peace, how Bill Clinton was a better president than Abraham Lincoln, and acting as if Crispus Attacks won the Revolutionary War by himself.

It pains me to type this, but I applaud the old geezer for this one.

[Cross-posted at Confessions of a Political Junkie]

I have been studying for finals and doing a little guest blogging at Confessions of a Political Junkie. Stop by and take a look.

If you want an example of what I have been suffering with, just read this contracts case that is part of my final, Hamer v. Sidway. It is a fun case and I think you'll get a good laugh from it.