Beyond Rhetoric ~

Obama AZ speech - theme from 2008 campaign site

2011-01-14T13:41:00.000-05:00

If those who received a memorial t-shirt will look at the bottom, they will see a "tag" from the DNC: "Rocking America and Rocking the Vote" ..... more evidence that what many suspected to be more like a campaign speech than a memorial and tribute to those who were either heroic, wounded and killed in Tucson last week.

Instead -- we get "Together We Thrive" text and themes from a post at Obama's 2008 Campaign site "Organizing for America" at this 2008 site.

While the site may now be difficult to load (it is occasionally "jumbled" -- which may be intentional), I and others have screen shots.

The first screen shot is HERE.

Here is also the investigative report by CFP's Judi McCleod:

The “Together We Thrive” T-shirts that starred at Wednesday’s Arizona
`Memorial’ originated from Organizing for America (here), a sad fact unearthed by The Drumbeat of Liberty Preservation of Freedom editor and Canada Free Press (CFP) columnist Robert
Rohlfing.

In the controversy of the pep rally/rock concert style Memorial for those
who lost their lives in Saturday’s Arizona tragedy, the mainstream media
reported that the “Together We Thrive: Tucson & America” T-shirt given to
mourners as they entered McKate Center was the idea of University of Arizona
brass, not the Obama administration.

Yet the “Together We Thrive” slogan dates back to a post to Obama’s own
Organizing for America in a Feb. 11, 2008 post by self-described “globalist”
John Berry IV.

More than passing strange that the Obama campaign message of civility was
the same on Feb. 11, 2008 as it was in his Wednesday Memorial speech, and the
same one, too carried by the mainstream media in coverage of the
Memorial. 

“For too long Americans have been set one against the other. It
is a side affect of a free market society,” Berry IV posted. “How can
profits be maximized, how can I get the work down for the lowest possible
costs. This continually sets one group against the other, especially in
the blue collar sectors of America. It has become part of the American
Business model, whether it was indentured servants, slaves picking cotton,
sharecroppers, the industrious people that built the railroads or today’s
migrant workers. As long as we remain divided, fighting for the scraps
that America has to offer it will be one group against the other.

“What I see in Obama is a chance for revolution. (Italics CFP’s). A
chance for every group to be heard; A chance to live the American dream that has
been denied to so many…

“In a previous career, I was the global leader of Diversity for a global
fortune 500 corporation. I have studied the affects of diverse groups
working together and the results can not be denied. Together we
Thrive!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”

University of Arizona brass did not originate the “Together We Thrive”
T-shirt. They merely recycled it for Obama—and recycled it in time for
what should have been a dignified Memorial for the dead.

If you were a mourner who took home a “Together We Thrive” T-shirt have a
look at the bottom of your shirt. “Rocking America and Rocking the Vote”
is a common theme of the DNC, and it’s right there on your Memorial
T-shirt memento.

Welcome to the era of Obama, where cheering and standing ovations, for the
first time in history, became part of the Requiem for the Dead.

Not referenced in the article above were the boos which greeted the current AZ Governor when she spoke or the "WE LOVE YOU, OBAMA" chants that disrupted speakers. Where else BUT a campaign setting would you hear boos and chants???? Certainly not at a memorial service or a tribute to survivors.

Don't froget Obama's old tactics ----

2010-11-06T12:35:00.000-04:00

-- From American Thinker, 2008:

America waits with bated breath while Washington struggles to bring the U.S. economy back from the brink of disaster. But many of those same politicians caused the crisis, and if left to their own devices will do so again.

Despite the mass media news blackout, a series of books, talk radio and the blogosphere have managed to expose Barack Obama's connections to his radical mentors -- Weather Underground bombers William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, Communist Party member Frank Marshall Davis and others. David Horowitz and his Discover the Networks.org have also contributed a wealth of information and have noted Obama's radical connections since the beginning.

Yet, no one to my knowledge has yet connected all the dots between Barack Obama and the Radical Left. When seen together, the influences on Obama's life comprise a who's who of the radical leftist movement, and it becomes painfully apparent that not only is Obama a willing participant in that movement, he has spent most of his adult life deeply immersed in it.

But even this doesn't fully describe the extreme nature of this candidate. He can be tied directly to a malevolent overarching strategy that has motivated many, if not all, of the most destructive radical leftist organizations in the United States since the 1960s.

The Cloward-Piven Strategy of Orchestrated Crisis

In an earlier post, I noted the liberal record of unmitigated legislative disasters, the latest of which is now being played out in the financial markets before our eyes. Before the 1994 Republican takeover, Democrats had sixty years of virtually unbroken power in Congress - with substantial majorities most of the time. Can a group of smart people, studying issue after issue for years on end, with virtually unlimited resources at their command, not come up with a single policy that works? Why are they chronically incapable?

Why?

One of two things must be true. Either the Democrats are unfathomable idiots, who ignorantly pursue ever more destructive policies despite decades of contrary evidence, or they understand the consequences of their actions and relentlessly carry on anyway because they somehow benefit.

I submit to you they understand the consequences. For many it is simply a practical matter of eliciting votes from a targeted constituency at taxpayer expense; we lose a little, they gain a lot, and the politician keeps his job. But for others, the goal is more malevolent - the failure is deliberate. Don't laugh. This method not only has its proponents, it has a name: the Cloward-Piven Strategy. It describes their agenda, tactics, and long-term strategy.

The Strategy was first elucidated in the May 2, 1966 issue of The Nation magazine by a pair of radical socialist Columbia University professors, Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. David Horowitz summarizes it as:

The strategy of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis. The "Cloward-Piven Strategy" seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.

Cloward and Piven were inspired by radical organizer [and Hillary Clinton mentor] Saul Alinsky:

"Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules," Alinsky wrote in his 1989 book Rules for Radicals. When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judeo-Christian moral tenet, and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system's failure to "live up" to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist "rule book" with a socialist one. (Courtesy Discover the Networks.org)

Newsmax rounds out the picture:

Their strategy to create political, financial, and social chaos that would result in revolution blended Alinsky concepts with their more aggressive efforts at bringing about a change in U.S. government. To achieve their revolutionary change, Cloward and Piven sought to use a cadre of aggressive organizers assisted by friendly news media to force a re-distribution of the nation's wealth.

In their Nation article, Cloward and Piven were specific about the kind of "crisis" they were trying to create:

By crisis, we mean a publicly visible disruption in some institutional sphere. Crisis can occur spontaneously (e.g., riots) or as the intended result of tactics of demonstration and protest which either generate institutional disruption or bring unrecognized disruption to public attention.

No matter where the strategy is implemented, it shares the following features:

The offensive organizes previously unorganized groups eligible for government benefits but not currently receiving all they can.
The offensive seeks to identify new beneficiaries and/or create new benefits.
The overarching aim is always to impose new stresses on target systems, with the ultimate goal of forcing their collapse.

Capitalizing on the racial unrest of the 1960s, Cloward and Piven saw the welfare system as their first target. They enlisted radical black activist George Wiley, who created the National Welfare Reform Organization (NWRO) to implement the strategy. Wiley hired militant foot soldiers to storm welfare offices around the country, violently demanding their "rights." According to a City Journal article by Sol Stern, welfare rolls increased from 4.3 million to 10.8 million by the mid-1970s as a result, and in New York City, where the strategy had been particularly successful, "one person was on the welfare rolls... for every two working in the city's private economy."

According to another City Journal article titled "Compassion Gone Mad":

The movement's impact on New York City was jolting: welfare caseloads, already climbing 12 percent a year in the early sixties, rose by 50 percent during Lindsay's first two years; spending doubled... The city had 150,000 welfare cases in 1960; a decade later it had 1.5 million.

The vast expansion of welfare in New York City that came of the NWRO's Cloward-Piven tactics sent the city into bankruptcy in 1975. Rudy Giuliani cited Cloward and Piven by name as being responsible for "an effort at economic sabotage." He also credited Cloward-Piven with changing the cultural attitude toward welfare from that of a temporary expedient to a lifetime entitlement, an attitude which in-and-of-itself has caused perhaps the greatest damage of all.

Cloward and Piven looked at this strategy as a gold mine of opportunity. Within the newly organized groups, each offensive would find an ample pool of foot soldier recruits willing to advance its radical agenda at little or no pay, and expand its base of reliable voters, legal or otherwise. The radicals' threatening tactics also would accrue an intimidating reputation, providing a wealth of opportunities for extorting monetary and other concessions from the target organizations. In the meantime, successful offensives would create an ever increasing drag on society. As they gleefully observed:

Moreover, this kind of mass influence is cumulative because benefits are continuous. Once eligibility for basic food and rent grants is established, the drain on local resources persists indefinitely.

The next time you drive through one of the many blighted neighborhoods in our cities, or read of the astronomical crime, drug addiction, and out-of-wedlock birth rates, or consider the failed schools, strapped police and fire resources of every major city, remember Cloward and Piven's thrill that "...the drain on local resources persists indefinitely."

ACORN, the new tip of the Cloward-Piven spear

In 1970, one of George Wiley's protégés, Wade Rathke -- like Bill Ayers, a member of the radical Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) -- was sent to found the Arkansas Community Organizations for Reform Now. While NWRO had made a good start, it alone couldn't accomplish the Cloward-Piven goals. Rathke's group broadened the offensive to include a wide array of low income "rights." Shortly thereafter they changed "Arkansas" to "Association of" and ACORN went nationwide.

Today ACORN is involved in a wide array of activities, including housing, voting rights, illegal immigration and other issues. According to ACORN's website: "ACORN is the nation's largest grassroots community organization of low-and moderate-income people with over 400,000 member families organized into more than 1,200 neighborhood chapters in 110 cities across the country," It is perhaps the largest radical group in the U.S. and has been cited for widespread criminal activity on many fronts.

Voting

On voting rights, ACORN and its voter mobilization subsidiary, Project Vote, have been involved nationwide in efforts to grant felons the vote and lobbied heavily for the Motor Voter Act of 1993, a law allowing people to register at motor vehicle departments, schools, libraries and other public places. That law had been sought by Cloward and Piven since the early1980s and they were present, standing behind President Clinton at the signing ceremony.

ACORN's voter rights tactics follow the Cloward-Piven Strategy:

1. Register as many Democrat voters as possible, legal or otherwise and help them vote, multiple times if possible.
2. Overwhelm the system with fraudulent registrations using multiple entries of the same name, names of deceased, random names from the phone book, even contrived names.
3. Make the system difficult to police by lobbying for minimal identification standards.

In this effort, ACORN sets up registration sites all over the country and has been frequently cited for turning in fraudulent registrations, as well as destroying republican applications. In the 2004-2006 election cycles alone, ACORN was accused of widespread voter fraud in 12 states. It may have swung the election for one state governor.

ACORN's website brags: "Since 2004, ACORN has helped more than 1.7 million low- and moderate-income and minority citizens apply to register to vote." Project vote boasts 4 million. I wonder how many of them are dead? For the 2008 cycle, ACORN and Project Vote have pulled out all the stops. Given their furious nationwide effort, it is not inconceivable that this presidential race could be decided by fraudulent votes alone.

Barack Obama ran ACORN's Project Vote in Chicago and his highly successful voter registration drive was credited with getting the disgraced former Senator Carol Moseley-Braun elected. Newsmax reiterates Cloward and Piven's aspirations for ACORN's voter registration efforts:

By advocating massive, no-holds-barred voter registration campaigns, they [Cloward & Piven] sought a Democratic administration in Washington, D.C. that would re-distribute the nation's wealth and lead to a totalitarian socialist state.

Illegal Immigration

As I have written elsewhere, the Radical Left's offensive to promote illegal immigration is "Cloward-Piven on steroids." ACORN is at the forefront of this movement as well, and was a leading organization among a broad coalition of radical groups, including Soros' Open Society Institute, the Service Employees International Union (ACORN founder Wade Rathke also runs a SEIU chapter), and others, that became the Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform. CCIR fortunately failed to gain passage for the 2007 illegal immigrant amnesty bill, but its goals have not changed.

The burden of illegal immigration on our already overstressed welfare system has been widely documented. Some towns in California have even been taken over by illegal immigrant drug cartels. The disease, crime and overcrowding brought by illegal immigrants places a heavy burden on every segment of society and every level of government, threatening to split this country apart at the seams. In the meantime, radical leftist efforts to grant illegal immigrants citizenship guarantee a huge pool of new democrat voters. With little border control, terrorists can also filter in.

Obama aided ACORN as their lead attorney in a successful suit he brought against the Illinois state government to implement the Motor Voter law there. The law had been resisted by Republican Governor Jim Edgars, who feared the law was an opening to widespread vote fraud.

His fears were warranted as the Motor Voter law has since been cited as a major opportunity for vote fraud, especially for illegal immigrants, even terrorists. According to the Wall Street Journal: "After 9/11, the Justice Department found that eight of the 19 hijackers were registered to vote..."

ACORN's dual offensives on voting and illegal immigration are handy complements. Both swell the voter rolls with reliable democrats while assaulting the country ACORN seeks to destroy with overwhelming new problems.

Mortgage Crisis

And now we have the mortgage crisis, which has sent a shock wave through Wall Street and panicked world financial markets like no other since the stock market crash of 1929. But this is a problem created in Washington long ago. It originated with the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), signed into law in 1977 by President Jimmy Carter. The CRA was Carter's answer to a grassroots activist movement started in Chicago, and forced banks to make loans to low income, high risk customers. PhD economist and former Texas Senator Phil Gramm has called it: "a vast extortion scheme against the nation's banks."

ACORN aggressively sought to expand loans to low income groups using the CRA as a whip. Economist Stan Leibowitz wrote in the New York Post:

In the 1980s, groups such as the activists at ACORN began pushing charges of "redlining"-claims that banks discriminated against minorities in mortgage lending. In 1989, sympathetic members of Congress got the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act amended to force banks to collect racial data on mortgage applicants; this allowed various studies to be ginned up that seemed to validate the original accusation.

In fact, minority mortgage applications were rejected more frequently than other applications-but the overwhelming reason wasn't racial discrimination, but simply that minorities tend to have weaker finances.

ACORN showed its colors again in 1991, by taking over the House Banking Committee room for two days to protest efforts to scale back the CRA. Obama represented ACORN in the Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 1994 suit against redlining. Most significant of all, ACORN was the driving force behind a 1995 regulatory revision pushed through by the Clinton Administration that greatly expanded the CRA and laid the groundwork for the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac borne financial crisis we now confront. Barack Obama was the attorney representing ACORN in this effort. With this new authority, ACORN used its subsidiary, ACORN Housing, to promote subprime loans more aggressively.

As a New York Post article describes it:

A 1995 strengthening of the Community Reinvestment Act required banks to find ways to provide mortgages to their poorer communities. It also let community activists intervene at yearly bank reviews, shaking the banks down for large pots of money.

Banks that got poor reviews were punished; some saw their merger plans frustrated; others faced direct legal challenges by the Justice Department.

Flexible lending programs expanded even though they had higher default rates than loans with traditional standards. On the Web, you can still find CRA loans available via ACORN with "100 percent financing . . . no credit scores . . . undocumented income . . . even if you don't report it on your tax returns." Credit counseling is required, of course.

Ironically, an enthusiastic Fannie Mae Foundation report singled out one paragon of nondiscriminatory lending, which worked with community activists and followed "the most flexible underwriting criteria permitted." That lender's $1 billion commitment to low-income loans in 1992 had grown to $80 billion by 1999 and $600 billion by early 2003.

The lender they were speaking of was Countrywide, which specialized in subprime lending and had a working relationship with ACORN.

Investor's Business Daily added:

The revisions also allowed for the first time the securitization of CRA-regulated loans containing subprime mortgages. The changes came as radical "housing rights" groups led by ACORN lobbied for such loans. ACORN at the time was represented by a young public-interest lawyer in Chicago by the name of Barack Obama. (Emphasis, mine.)

Since these loans were to be underwritten by the government sponsored Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the implicit government guarantee of those loans absolved lenders, mortgage bundlers and investors of any concern over the obvious risk. As Bloomberg reported: "It is a classic case of socializing the risk while privatizing the profit."

And if you think Washington policy makers cared about ACORN's negative influence, think again. Before this whole mess came down, a Democrat-sponsored bill on the table would have created an "Affordable Housing Trust Fund," granting ACORN access to approximately $500 million in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac revenues with little or no oversight.

Even now, unbelievably -- on the brink of national disaster -- Democrats have insisted ACORN benefit from bailout negotiations! Senator Lindsay Graham reported last night (9/25/08) in an interview with Greta Van Susteren of On the Record that Democrats want 20 percent of the bailout money to go to ACORN!

This entire fiasco represents perhaps the pinnacle of ACORN's efforts to advance the Cloward-Piven Strategy and is a stark demonstration of the power they wield in Washington.

Enter Barack Obama

In attempting to capture the significance of Barack Obama's Radical Left connections and his relation to the Cloward Piven strategy, I constructed following flow chart. It is by no means complete. There are simply too many radical individuals and organizations to include them all here. But these are perhaps the most significant.

(See chart at original site)

The chart puts Barack Obama at the epicenter of an incestuous stew of American radical leftism. Not only are his connections significant, they practically define who he is. Taken together, they constitute a who's who of the American radical left, and guiding all is the Cloward-Piven strategy.

Conspicuous in their absence are any connections at all with any other group, moderate, or even mildly leftist. They are all radicals, firmly bedded in the anti-American, communist, socialist, radical leftist mesh.

Saul Alinsky

Most people are unaware that Barack Obama received his training in "community organizing" from Saul Alinsky's Industrial Areas Foundation. But he did. In and of itself that marks his heritage and training as that of a radical activist. One really needs go no further. But we have.

Bill Ayers

Obama objects to being associated with SDS bomber Bill Ayers, claiming he is being smeared with "guilt by association." But they worked together at the Woods Fund. The Wall Street Journal added substantially to our knowledge by describing in great detail Obama's work over five years with SDS bomber Bill Ayers on the board of a non-profit, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, to push a radical agenda on public school children. As Stanley Kurtz states:

"...the issue here isn't guilt by association; it's guilt by participation. As CAC chairman, Mr. Obama was lending moral and financial support to Mr. Ayers and his radical circle. That is a story even if Mr. Ayers had never planted a single bomb 40 years ago."

Also included in the mix is Theresa Heinz Kerry's favorite charity, the Tides Foundation. A partial list of Tides grants tells you all you need to know: ACLU, ACORN, Center for American Progress, Center for Constitutional Rights (a communist front,) CAIR, Earth Justice, Institute for Policy Studies (KGB spy nest), National Lawyers Guild (oldest communist front in U.S.), People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), and practically every other radical group there is. ACORN's Wade Rathke runs a Tides subsidiary, the Tides Center.

Carl Davidson and the New Party

We have heard about Bomber Bill, but we hear little about fellow SDS member Carl Davidson. According to Discover the Networks, Davidson was an early supporter of Barack Obama and a prominent member of Chicago's New Party, a synthesis of CPUSA members, Socialists, ACORN veterans and other radicals. Obama sought and received the New Party's endorsement, and they assisted with his campaign. The New Party also developed a strong relationship with ACORN. As an excellent article on the New Party observes: "Barack Obama knew what he was getting into and remains an ideal New Party candidate."

George Soros

The chart also suggests the reason for George Soros' fervent support of Obama. The President of his Open Society Institute is Aryeh Neier, founder of the radical Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). As mentioned above, three other former SDS members had extensive contact with Obama: Bill Ayers, Carl Davidson and Wade Rathke. Surely Aryeh Neier would have heard from his former colleagues of the promising new politician. More to the point, Neier is firmly committed to supporting the hugely successful radical organization, ACORN, and would be certain back their favored candidate, Barack Obama.

ACORN

Obama has spent a large portion of his professional life working for ACORN or its subsidiaries, representing ACORN as a lawyer on some of its most critical issues, and training ACORN leaders. Stanley Kurtz's excellent National Review article, "Inside Obama's Acorn." also describes Obama's ACORN connection in detail. But I can't improve on Obama's own words:

I've been fighting alongside ACORN on issues you care about my entire career (emphasis added). Even before I was an elected official, when I ran Project Vote voter registration drive in Illinois, ACORN was smack dab in the middle of it, and we appreciate your work. - Barack Obama, Speech to ACORN, November 2007 (Courtesy Newsmax.)

In another excellent article on Obama's ACORN connections, Newsmax asks a nagging question:

It would be telling to know if Obama, during his years at Columbia, had occasion to meet Cloward and study the Cloward-Piven Strategy.

I ask you, is it possible ACORN would train Obama to take leadership positions within ACORN without telling him what he was training for? Is it possible ACORN would put Obama in leadership positions without clueing him into what his purpose was?? Is it possible that this most radical of organizations would put someone in charge of training its trainers, without him knowing what it was he was training them for?

As a community activist for ACORN; as a leadership trainer for ACORN; as a lead organizer for ACORN's Project Vote; as an attorney representing ACORN's successful efforts to impose Motor Voter regulations in Illinois; as ACORN's representative in lobbying for the expansion of high risk housing loans through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that led to the current crisis; as a recipient of their assistance in his political campaigns -- both with money and campaign workers; it is doubtful that he was unaware of ACORN's true goals. It is doubtful he was unaware of the Cloward-Piven Strategy.

Fast-forward to 2005 when an obsequious, servile and scraping Daniel Mudd, CEO of Fannie Mae spoke at the Congressional Black Caucus swearing in ceremony for newly-elected Illinois Senator, Barack Obama. Mudd called, the Congressional Black Caucus "our family" and "the conscience of Fannie Mae."

In 2005, Republicans sought to rein in Fannie and Freddie. Senator John McCain was at the forefront of that effort. But it failed due to an intense lobbying effort put forward by Fannie and Freddie.

In his few years as a U.S. senator, Obama has received campaign contributions of $126,349, from Fannie and Freddie, second only to the $165,400 received by Senator Chris Dodd, who has been getting donations from them since 1988. What makes Obama so special?

His closest advisers are a dirty laundry list of individuals at the heart of the financial crisis: former Fannie Mae CEO Jim Johnson; Former Fannie Mae CEO and former Clinton Budget Director Frank Raines; and billionaire failed Superior Bank of Chicago Board Chair Penny Pritzker.

Johnson had to step down as adviser on Obama's V.P. search after this gem came out:

An Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) report^[1] from September 2004 found that, during Johnson's tenure as CEO, Fannie Mae had improperly deferred $200 million in expenses. This enabled top executives, including Johnson and his successor, Franklin Raines, to receive substantial bonuses in 1998.^[2] A 2006 OFHEO report^[3] found that Fannie Mae had substantially under-reported Johnson's compensation. Originally reported as $6-7 million, Johnson actually received approximately $21 million.

Obama denies ties to Raines but the Washington Post calls him a member of "Obama's political circle." Raines and Johnson were fined $3 million by the Office of Federal Housing Oversight for their manipulation of Fannie books. The fine is small change however, compared to the $50 million Raines was able to obtain in improper bonuses as a result of juggling the books.

Most significantly, Penny Pritzker, the current Finance Chairperson of Obama's presidential campaign helped develop the complicated investment bundling of subprime securities at the heart of the meltdown. She did so in her position as shareholder and board chair of Superior Bank. The Bank failed in 2001, one of the largest in recent history, wiping out $50 million in uninsured life savings of approximately 1,400 customers. She was named in a RICO class action law suit but doesn't seem to have come out of it too badly.

As a young attorney in the 1990s, Barack Obama represented ACORN in Washington in their successful efforts to expand Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) authority. In addition to making it easier for ACORN groups to force banks into making risky loans, this also paved the way for banks like Superior to package mortgages as investments, and for the Government Sponsored Enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to underwrite them. These changes created the conditions that ultimately lead to the current financial crisis.

Did they not know this would occur? Were these smart people, led by a Harvard graduate, unaware of the Econ 101 concept of moral hazard that would result from the government making implicit guarantees to underwrite private sector financial risk? They should have known that freeing the high-risk mortgage market of risk, calamity was sure to ensue. I think they did.

Barack Obama, the Cloward-Piven candidate, no matter how he describes himself, has been a radical activist for most of his political career. That activism has been in support of organizations and initiatives that at their heart seek to tear the pillars of this nation asunder in order to replace them with their demented socialist vision. Their influence has spread so far and so wide that despite their blatant culpability in the current financial crisis, they are able to manipulate Capital Hill politicians to cut them into $140 billion of the bailout pie!

God grant those few responsible yet remaining in Washington, DC the strength to prevent this massive fraud from occurring. God grant them the courage to stand up in the face of this Marxist tidal wave.

STAND UP, AMERICA!!!!!

2009-03-18T21:39:00.000-04:00

Stand up. NOW.

National and state-wide tea party rallies are being held across the nation. Main stream media is NOT covering these rallies --- but they ARE occurring with thousands of Americans participating.

This is the site for rallies being scheduled nationwide, including a national tea party on April 15. Click and find your state.

Other communities are meeting at their local post offices on the 15th ..... Find out what is going on in your area!!!! Take pictures. Talk to families and friends!!!

Participate as if your country depended upon it. Participate as if yours and your children's future depended upon it.

Do it now. Now.

NOW.

.

Feds to control Internet speech?

2009-02-17T10:19:00.001-05:00

You knew it would come to this, didn't you?

Within the threat of imposing a "fairness doctrine" to the airways, Henry Waxman -- Democrat watchdog of all things conservative -- has censuring the Internet in his sights.

We've been warned .... The Prower has more insight:

Waxman is also interested, say sources, in looking at how the Internet is being used for content and free speech purposes. "It's all about diversity in media," says a House Energy staffer, familiar with the meetings. "Does one radio station or one station group control four of the five most powerful outlets in one community? Do four stations in one region carry Rush Limbaugh, and nothing else during the same time slot? Does one heavily trafficked Internet site present one side of an issue and not link to sites that present alternative views? These are some of the questions the chairman is thinking about right now, and we are going to have an FCC that will finally have the people in place to answer them."

As for the "Fairness Doctrine," a name change isn't going to change the goal of controlling speech.

The House Energy and Commerce Committee is also looking at how it can put in place policies that would allow it greater oversight of the Internet. "Internet radio is becoming a big deal, and we're seeing that some web sites are able to control traffic and information, while other sites that may be of interest or use to citizens get limited traffic because of the way the people search and look for information," says on committee staffer. "We're at very early stages on this, but the chairman has made it clear that oversight of the Internet is one of his top priorities."

"This isn't just about Limbaugh or a local radio host most of us haven't heard about," says Democrat committee member. "The FCC and state and local governments also have oversight over the Internet lines and the cable and telecom companies that operate them. We want to get alternative views on radio and TV, but we also want to makes sure those alternative views are read, heard and seen online, which is becoming increasingly video and audio driven. Thanks to the stimulus package, we've established that broadband networks -- the Internet -- are critical, national infrastructure. We think that gives us an opening to look at what runs over that critical infrastructure."

Also involved in "brainstorming" on "Fairness Doctrine and online monitoring has been the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank, which has published studies pressing for the Fairness Doctrine, as well as the radical MoveOn.org, which has been speaking to committee staff about policies that would allow them to use their five to six million person database to mobilize complaints against radio, TV or online entities they perceive to be limiting free speech or limiting opinion.

Plans now are "hush hush" until Obama's new FCC nominee, Julius Genachowski is confirmed.

Let's hope that proponents of free speech on both sides of the aisle stand up and put Julius Genachowski through serious hearings before another Obamatron is rubber-stamped.

Or maybe Obama and his minions need to see what a TRUE bipartisan campaign looks like.

From Over the Hill Oracles.
.

ACORN to do census? Out of Afghanistan??

2009-02-08T14:31:00.000-05:00

from Over the Hill Oracles:

The answer to the census question may be decided by the Supreme Court, but watch Obama’s clandestine maneuvers to assign “responsibility” for the census from the Secretary of Commerce to the White House.

Here’s the law:

The Congress, by law directed that:

“The Secretary [of Commerce] shall perform the functions and duties imposed upon him by this title, may issue such rules and regulations as he deems necessary to carry out such functions and duties, and may delegate the performance of such functions and duties and the authority to issue such rules and regulations to such officers and employees of the Department of Commerce as he may designate.”

Credit those folks over at Samizdata ….

As I read it, the Director of the Census must, by law, be within the Department of Commerce and under the direction of the (Senate approved) Secretary of Commerce who then reports to the president. Am I missing something?
Correction: From reading through Title 13, Chapter 1 it appears obvious to me that the POTUS has no role in the census whatsoever beyond, with Senate approval, selecting the Secretary of Commerce and, also with Senate approval, selecting the Director of the Census who ” shall perform such duties as may be imposed upon him by law, regulations, or orders of the Secretary.” Hhmmm… No president mentioned.

The Secretary of Commerce is the only authority the law recognizes. Since as commenter Laird points out, the Constitution did not place the census function in Article II - the Executive branch but in Article I - the Legislative branch, it is not at all within the President’s reach unless the legislature places it there.

And watch for Obama to still try and put ACORN in charge of the census ….

Any question about WHY there are so many Obama-watch sites on the web???

More blurbs from the blogs:

– Stimulus Plan (Porkarama) updates are here ….

Biden: Ignore the voters

HERE’S a good question: why doesn’t Obama tell us specifically HOW this money will resolve his “now or never” crisis? We won’t see any jobs outta this political payback package for years.

– Obama has again voted “present” on this bogus stimulus plan. How to hype a crisis in two steps …. So where exactly is the change we (?) hoped for??? Forget it. It’s the same ole way with a Chicago twist ….

– BREAKING: Obama tells Gates to “stand down” on the troop surge in Afghanistan …..

Is he looking for ‘out‘ in Afghanistan???

– World opinion on Obama is fading ….

From London to America: What have you done?

Pakistan to the US: Show us the money!!!

Russia forms Alliance with six central Asian nations: Take THAT, America.

Ecuador expels US Embassy official: South America rejects the “Chicago way” …

– USS Cole mom is disgusted with Obama …. article and video

Pending: More and more parents and (retired) naval personnel are speaking out about the way the killers of their loved ones are being released ….

more pending …..

ACORN to do census? Out in Afghanistan?

2009-02-08T13:18:00.001-05:00

From Over the Hill Oracles:

Here’s the law:

The Congress, by law directed that:

“The Secretary [of Commerce] shall perform the functions and duties imposed upon him by this title, may issue such rules and regulations as he deems necessary to carry out such functions and duties, and may delegate the performance of such functions and duties and the authority to issue such rules and regulations to such officers and employees of the Department of Commerce as he may designate.”

Credit those folks over at Samizdata ….

As I read it, the Director of the Census must, by law, be within the Department of Commerce and under the direction of the (Senate approved) Secretary of Commerce who then reports to the president. Am I missing something?

Correction: From reading through Title 13, Chapter 1 it appears obvious to me that the POTUS has no role in the census whatsoever beyond, with Senate approval, selecting the Secretary of Commerce and, also with Senate approval, selecting the Director of the Census who ” shall perform such duties as may be imposed upon him by law, regulations, or orders of the Secretary.” Hhmmm… No president mentioned.

The Secretary of Commerce is the only authority the law recognizes. Since as commenter Laird points out, the Constitution did not place the census function in Article II - the Executive branch but in Article I - the Legislative branch, it is not at all within the President’s reach unless the legislature places it there.

And watch for Obama to still try and put ACORN in charge of the census ….

Any question about WHY there are so many Obama-watch sites on the web???

More blurbs from the blogs:

– Stimulus Plan (Porkarama) updates are here ….

Biden: Ignore the voters

– BREAKING: Obama tells Gates to “stand down” on the troop surge in Afghanistan …..

Is he looking for ‘out‘ in Afghanistan???

– World opinion on Obama is fading ….

From London to America: What have you done?

Pakistan to the US: Show us the money!!!

Russia forms Alliance with six central Asian nations: Take THAT, America.

Ecuador expels US Embassy official: South America rejects the “Chicago way” …

– USS Cole mom is disgusted with Obama …. article and video

Pending: More and more parents and (retired) naval personnel are speaking out about the way the killers of their loved ones are being released ….

more pending …..

Joe knows Obama ---

2008-10-16T12:39:00.001-04:00

And so do the rest of us!!

Obama: 9/11 was a "failure of empathy"

2008-09-11T00:52:00.000-04:00

Eight days after the tragedy of September 11, 2001, Obama -- the man who would be Commander in Chief -- blamed the terrorist attacks on "a failure of empathy."

The July 20 issue of the New Yorker magazine got a lot of attention for its cover, which carried a "satirical" cartoon depicting Michelle and Barack Obama that Obama supporters found tasteless and offensive. Buried inside that issue's feature story, however, was a reaction by Obama to 9/11 that all voters should find even more tasteless and offensive.

The article reprised a piece published in Chicago's Hyde Park Herald on Sept. 19, 2001, and written by a then-unknown and otherwise undistinguished state senator from Illinois. The senator, a former community organizer, wrote that after tightening security at our airports and repairing our intelligence networks, we "must also engage . . . in the more difficult task of understanding the sources of such madness."

According to Barack Obama, the madness that drove terrorists to turn passenger jets into manned cruise missiles aimed at our centers of finance, government and military power "grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair."

As if the answer to the attacks should have been food stamps for al-Qaida.

Sen. Obama advised caution and warned of overreacting. "We will have to make sure, despite our rage, that any U.S. military action takes into account the lives of innocent civilians abroad," he wrote. "We will have to be unwavering in opposing bigotry or discrimination directed against neighbors and friends of Middle Eastern descent."

We should also be just as concerned, he felt, with American anger and bigotry as we were about al-Qaida.

In an opinion piece in Commentary magazine, writer Abe Greenwald commented on Obama's belief that the 9/11 attacks were rooted in poverty and despair. "Strange," he called it, "considering our attackers were wealthy and educated, connected and ecstatic."

As Greenwald put it, Obama "could have asked (terrorist and colleague) Bill Ayers, 'Bill, did your 'failure of empathy' stem from your impoverished upbringing as the son of the CEO of Commonwealth Edison?" Did poverty and despair also cause the Weather Underground member and host of Obama's first fundraiser to bomb government buildings?

Fact is, the roster of terrorists and their handlers reads like a list of of Ivy Leaguers:

Osama bin Laden, the son of a Saudi billionaire, studied engineering. Khalid Sheik Mohammed, architect of 9/11 and other major attacks, has a degree in mechanical engineering. Mohammed Atta, who flew a jet into the World Trade Center, is the son of a lawyer and earned a master's degree in urban planning at Hamburg University. Ayman al-Zawahri is an eye surgeon. Seven doctors were involved in the London-Glasgow bomb plots.

You get the idea, even if Barack Obama doesn't.

In a speech before a joint session of Congress on Sept. 20, 2001, President Bush pointed out the real reasons Islamofascists hate us: "They hate what they see right here in this chamber — a democratically elected government. Their leaders are self-appointed. They hate our freedoms: our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other."

Bush aptly called the 9/11 terrorists and their ilk "the heirs of all the murderous ideologies of the 20th century."

"By sacrificing human life to serve their radical visions, by abandoning every value except the will to power, they follow in the path of fascism, Nazism and totalitarianism," he said.

Knowing the nature of your enemy is the key to victory. On the seventh anniversary of 9/11, we should all thank President Bush for keeping America safe. Along the way, he brought freedom and democracy to the Middle East, draining the terrorist swamp.

Bush gets it. So does John McCain. This is one thing we shouldn't want to change.

I have no idea how Obama's comments have failed to resonate with the American people. Hopefully, those words will resonate before it's too late.

SpinSpotter Spots "Spin" in the MSM

2008-09-09T18:51:00.002-04:00

Why not give it a spin?

It can't be any loopier than some of the "spin" we've been getting from the msm!

Romney and Leadership

2008-01-07T18:38:00.000-05:00

Support proven leadership.

Mitt Romney. The plan. The man. The ideas. The solutions.

Pretenders vs Mitt

2008-01-05T21:59:00.000-05:00

It was what everyone expected. Attack Mitt. And he did more than survive. He excelled in pushing back the assaults on his character and the misrepresentations on his policies.

Stay with us, Mitt. We believe in you. Currently, you're having to withstand the onslaught of McCain, Rudy, Huckabee and Fred. They're standing together because that's the only way they can confront you. And behind them is the MSM --- including FoxNews.

Read a supporting perspective at Perish the Thought:

Fair and Balanced? We know what to expect from MSM, but is FoxNews now slanting their reporting?

Hannity helped raise funds for Rudy .... Dick Morris, a regular analyst for The
Factor and Hannity, is an adviser to Huckabee .... former-Speaker Newt Gingrich, another regular guest on Fox, is also being touted as a Huckabee adviser (see the joint health care article linked previously and the fact that Newt's top staffer has joined Huckabee's staff) .... Why must the wife of a Romney advisor who is also a frequent analyst routinely state her husband's status? Is there any correlation to Fox News current slanting of reporting showing it's disfavor of Mitt's candidacy? If not --- how do they explain the obvious bias of it's "fair and balanced" coverage by Carl Cameron -- or in particular, the rude shouting match between Greta (the
legal analyst) and Shep (hyperventilating cute guy) last Tuesday night during a guest-spot with a Senator representing Romney?

Be strong, Mitt. We need you.

The Hidden John McCain

2007-12-31T21:04:00.000-05:00

From Gull at PtT ---

I've always held the Vietnam vet in high esteem. I was with them -- literally and figuratively -- and experienced first-hand the harassment and spite they have endured. That being said -- I have historically distrusted John McCain for how he has used his military service (particularly as a POW) as a crutch to further his political career.

His political career always has that subliminal disclaimer: "...yeah, but he was a military hero ..." As if he's "entitled" to forgiveness when straying from his conservative roots.

My contention is that, had his father not been an admiral, his lack-luster record (including the loss of at least 2 airplanes) would have gotten him thrown out of the military or notably demoted. For whatever he didn't accomplish -- it was not until his POW status that he gained any esteem.

Is this relevant to his run for an office to which he has always aspired?

I think so. There are too many correlations and incidents of self-service, entitlements and compromise in his background to qualify him as a reliable conservative candidate for POTUS. Much less as commander-in-chief in a volatile time.

If you choose to disagree -- fine. But when you do, keep in mind his voting record, his defense of amnesty, his history of sanctions by his peers, his emotional instability, his flip-flops and inconsistencies in promoting basic conservative tenets.

----------------

From Pat Murphy:

Those who've known John McCain since he began his Arizona political career two decades ago made two mistakes. First, we underestimated the Washington media's gullibility for a political schmooze job. Second, we underestimated McCain's mastery in reincarnating himself as a lovable maverick glowing with political virtue and amiable charm while camouflaging his bullyboy and deceitful ways.

If McCain were to become president, Americans would wake up to more than a commander-in-chief with a prickly temperament and a low boiling point. McCain is a man who carries get-even grudges. He cannot endure criticism. He threatens. He controls by fear. He's consumed with self-importance. He shifts blame. McCain's thin skin and demand to have it his way have been obvious since infancy, when he held his breath until he was unconscious, and later in Washington, where he has resorted to pushing and shoving colleagues when irritated.

McCain is a man obsessed with political ambitions but plagued by self-destructive petty impulses. It was vintage McCain who exploded when the Arizona Republic questioned whether the man dubbed "Senator Hothead" in Washington is fit to be entrusted with presidential powers. Instead of conceding what's common knowledge about his volcanic personality, McCain exploded in denial, blaming a newspaper vendetta and George W. Bush for "orchestrating" the criticism. When his claims drew snickers, McCain shifted to another explanation: He explodes when he sees "injustice."

But this sort of blame-fixing works where it counts--with reporters who've come to blindly lionize McCain as a high-minded champion of political virtue fighting demons of political corruption. Perhaps McCain's master stroke in inoculating himself from serious media
scrutiny was his early fusillade of confessions--his adultery ruined his first marriage, the Keating Five scandal was a blemish on his reputation, he indulged in wild and reckless misbehavior as an Annapolis midshipman. He finally endeared himself to the media with
his Quixotic promise to reform campaign financing and by holding court with reporters aboard his "Straight Talk Express" bus.

The new journalism of dwelling on personalities rather than tedious investigative digging gives McCain a free ride from the national media. Swooning media ensure McCain special treatment in the right places: 60 Minutes correspondent Mike Wallace cooed on the air that he likes McCain so much, he might leave TV to become his press secretary. Salon's Jake Tapper dubbed him "basically just a cool dude." Newsmen of another generation note that reporters covering McCain also are reluctant to seem tough on a man with McCain's painful experience as a prisoner of war.

One who hasn't been so quick to fall in line is Washington Post columnist David Broder, who warned on NBC's Meet the Press that "after the experience we all had with President Clinton [ignoring Arkansas reports of his misdeeds], I'm not inclined to discount the view of home-state reporters and journalists who have covered a candidate over the years." A few enterprising non-Arizona journalists have peeled back the McCain veneer. Boston Globe reporter Walter Robinson spent several weeks digging into McCain's Arizona behavior and reporting his dark side. Ditto Ted Rose of Brill's Content. And the acknowledged Arizona media expert on
McCain, reporter Amy Silverman of the Phoenix New Times (more on her later), gave readers of Playboy a McCain portrait not found elsewhere. ABC's Sam Donaldson came close to giving millions of viewers a clearer picture in a taped interview with Silverman for 20/20. But
the segment was canceled the night before airing, fueling speculation that McCain's oversight of broadcasters as Senate Commerce Committee chairman makes the networks wary of offending him. Several years ago, when NBC refused to support his TV-rating system, McCain wrote a letter to NBC President Robert Wright, threatening to ask the FCC to review licenses of the network's locally owned stations.

I'm among the swelling ranks of onetime McCain acquaintances ostracized for not being slavishly loyal. After McCain settled in Arizona with his young second wife, a millionaire, he asked me at dinner for help with a political career. As editorial page editor (and later publisher) of the Arizona Republic, I declined to be his political coach. However, we socialized, including dinners at his home. We even discussed writing a book. The relationship ended, however, when our newspaper exposed McCain as a liar who used an underhanded political trick.

Here is what happened: McCain boasted to my wife and me over lunch in Washington that he had planted complex questions with the Senate Interior Committee chairman to sabotage the testimony of Arizona Gov. Rose Mofford, a Democrat, about the Central Arizona Project, the multibillion-dollar Colorado River water delivery system for Arizona urban areas. When I protested to McCain that the project had enjoyed bipartisan support for nearly 50 years, from conservative Barry Goldwater to liberal Morris Udall, McCain retorted: "I'm duty bound to embarrass a Democrat whenever I can."

When reporters later asked McCain about planted questions, he feigned insult and injury and denied any such ploy. Editors in Phoenix were informed of McCain's deceit. After a news story and editorial appeared, McCain went into meltdown, shrieking on the phone: "I know you're out to get me!" (Several years later, McCain admitted the dirty trick and apologized to Mofford, who was then out of office.)

When Barbara Barrett, wife of Intel CEO Craig Barrett, ran against McCain's protégé, Gov. Fife Symington, McCain offered to buy her out of the 1994 GOP primary. She refused. Furious, McCain threatened revenge. Barrett lost, but Symington later was forced out of office after being convicted of seven counts of fraud (his conviction was overturned and is under appeal). McCain's wife was a front-row regular at Symington's criminal trial in Phoenix. McCain still calls Symington "my friend."

While Barrett, a successful attorney, emerged mostly unscathed, others weren't so lucky. Maricopa County (Phoenix) schools superintendent Sandra Dowling, a Republican, refused McCain's demand to abandon support of Barrett. Dowling told Morley Safer during a 60 Minutes interview about Arizona politics (which never aired) that McCain exploded and threatened to "destroy" her. Thereafter, her son lost his appointment to the U.S. Naval Academy, where McCain sits as an ex officio member of the Board of Visitors. McCain denied any connection. Even former Arizona Attorney General Grant Woods, McCain's onetime senior aide who considered succeeding him in Congress, was purged from the senator's circle for investigating Symington and refusing to seek McCain's advice as a loyal understudy.

More of McCain's style:

McCain indulges in hypocrisy with a flair. He attacks tobacco but ignores alcohol. Why? His wife's millions flow from the family beer and wine distributorship, Arizona's largest.

The affable, candid, gregarious candidate, who mingles with reporters and yuks it up in the back of the bus, is no friend of free speech, and merely tolerates and uses the press as part of his political strategy. In Arizona, McCain tries to subdue reporters by threatening to have them fired when he's displeased with their pieces. Upset about critical reporting in the Phoenix New Times by Amy Silverman, McCain complained to her father, Richard, general manager of the Salt River Project, an Arizona hydroelectric utility. McCain's intent seemed clear: muscling the federally chartered SRP in hopes Silverman would pressure his daughter to back off.

One of my Arizona neighbors, Dianne Smith, wrote McCain protesting his criticism of Anita Hill in confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas. A widow then in her sixties, Smith was flabbergasted when McCain telephoned her, shouting at her for "questioning my integrity."

McCain promised Arizona voters, "I've never tried to exploit my Vietnam service to my country because it would be totally inappropriate." But his presidential campaign is festooned with reminders of his POW years, from campaign videos to speeches to best-selling books, trying to capture the veterans vote.

Even as he moralizes about corrupt corporate money, McCain rakes in hundreds of thousands of dollars from Washington lobbyists and asks corporations for use of their jets for campaigning. Last year, the Washington Post documented thousands of dollars of donations to McCain's political war chest from K Street lobbyists who do business before the Senate Commerce Committee.

McCain himself has acknowledged that he intervenes before regulatory agencies with letters on behalf of campaign donors, but claims he's merely performing a "constituent service"--the same explanation he used when initially defending himself in the Keating Five scandal. As a peevish lobbyist told Newsweek: "He sees no connection between twisting our arms for money and then talking about how corrupt the system is."

The John McCain glamorized by the national media is a total stranger to Arizonans who are painfully familiar with a far coarser and more foreboding man. His victory in the New Hampshire primary may bring greater scrutiny. Instead of treating him as a lovable maverick and quotable long shot, the national media that have been fawning over him are certain to begin digging seriously into the McCain background that has turned so many of his home-state Republicans against him.

I was there, too

2007-12-22T07:57:00.000-05:00

... with Romney and MLK and Gull.

Where were you?

.

Hirrary Finds Fortune in Crookies!

2007-10-27T12:24:00.000-04:00

Funny topic at the poker table this morning ....

Where's the beef, Hirrary?

Hillary Clinton's (re)new(ed) donor list from the poverty rolls of inner-city migrants (legal and illegal) --------- delivered by the likes of hubby Bill's China-connection cohorts!

H'su sez family ties don't matter, eh?

Never mind that Hillary couldn't locate some of the donors. She donated (a portion) of the illegal funds to charity ....

Not sure which charity, of course.

Hat tip: Gull

.

Bill Clinton as America's New Image????

2007-10-05T09:32:00.001-04:00

Uhhhh. No, thanks.

Unless, that is --- America wants to rekindle the character of a perjurer, a rapist, a womanizer, a sleeze-ball who sold U.S. security secrets to China, and the same scum-bag who was getting a blow-job under the Oval Office desk while terrorists carried out the first attack in New York.

Gull has the Clinton interview link AND a few suggestions which may come in handy if the Clintoons are allowed to re-install their version of Camelot.

God Help Us. Indeed.

The Protest Message

2007-09-16T10:59:00.000-04:00

THIS is the message that protesters wanted to convey this weekend in Washington.

Message received.

Now, take your Soros-funded anti-America protest-for-hire money and return to the rock you crawled out from under.

God bless our troops and their families.

Thanks to the thousands of Eagles and GOE III participants who confronted the cowards in Washington this weekend.

hat tip to Gull.

A Presidential View of America

2007-08-12T12:55:00.000-04:00

Mitt Romney.

If video does not load -- view here.

Mitt Romney: Winner of the Iowa Straw Vote -- August 2007.
.

Insight into NAFTA and NAU

2007-08-11T10:08:00.000-04:00

Excellent report and reactions over at Perish the Thought.

So who we gonna believe, the facts or our lying ears?

Mitt Unleashed

2007-08-05T14:23:00.000-04:00

And still respectful.

This host should stick to weather and local grange reports. Reading a book does NOT an authority make ....

Harvesting Grapes from the Wrath of Illegal Immigrants

2007-07-22T10:26:00.000-04:00

But not so fast, there, Broad -- I mean, Braud.

"Oregonians for Immigration Reform" have found true love -- in the form of a fancy, expensive grape harvesting machine that goes by the sexy name of New Holland Braud.

According to the Oregonian the anti-immigration group is
touting "the European machine as a beacon of a future without illegal labor."

Jim Ludwick, president of Oregonians for Immigration Reform, learned that a New Holland Braud grape harvester had been sold to a vineyard in McMinnville, Ore., last year.

It picked 3.5 tons of pinot noir grapes in 20 minutes with three workers,
the Capital Press article said. Usually that would have taken 34 workers an
hour.

Finally, Ludwick had an Oregon example to make his case. He began to tout the New Holland harvester in speeches, as well as to state legislators, members of Congress and radio talk-show hosts.

"This is what modern societies do," he said. "They mechanize and wean
themselves off cheap stoop labor."

That may well be true, but let's ponder the implications. The adoption of
mechanized agriculture as a tactic for combating illegal immigration
simultaneously accepts the theory that the jobs being done by illegal immigrants are jobs "Americans don't want to do" and abandons the hoary anti-immigration plank that demands secure borders to "protect American jobs." Mechanized harvesting means fewer jobs, period. And of course, even as it reduces the number of available jobs, it does absolutely nothing to alleviate the pressure that pushes immigrants across borders, legally or illegally, in search of a better life. In fact, if more mechanized harvesting of crops that have hitherto been out-of-bounds for robots leads to greater efficiencies for American farmers, allowing them to compete even more effectively with farmers in developing nations, it could conceivably make those farmers even worse off, and contribute even more to their motivation to pick up and move.

Your basic neoclassical economist will tell you that anything that makes a
sector of an economy more efficient will generate capital that can then be
plowed into other sectors of the economy, creating more jobs and prosperity for all. From this perspective, the prospect of a future in which robots do all the hard manual labor is nothing to worry about. But a growing body of research, spearheaded by Harvard economist Lawrence Katz, suggests that technological progress may be a bigger villain, in terms of contributing to growing income inequality in the world today, than everybody's favorite boogeyman, globalization (in which category we will include outsourcing, offshoring and worker migration). At best (or worst) globalization plus technology are together putting the squeeze on
everyone who doesn't have the skills or education to thrive in our increasingly technologically mediated world.

Reducing the number of available "stoop labor" jobs without simultaneously beefing up investments in education and job training and social safety net protections -- not just in the United States, but everywhere -- seems a bit short-sighted. If technological change really is contributing significantly to growing income inequality then the world is facing much bigger threats than anything posed by "illegal labor."
.
.

Celebrating America

2007-07-04T11:37:00.000-04:00

From sea to shining sea!

Happy Birthday, America --

An "Over-the-Hill" Coalition Tribute -- July 4, 2007

Immigration Issue Remains

2007-06-10T17:48:00.000-04:00

No matter what dems (and especially Harry Reid) want us to believe -- the immigration reform issue is not dead. This current bill was hatched behind closed doors; look for more under-handed deals to be in the works.

Meanwhile, here's Mitt Romney's stance on Immigration reform.

Don't let the Senate or the House dems try to slip another bill through on this critical issue.

Jack Murtha Eats All Fat --

2007-06-03T17:41:00.000-04:00

-- from the pork barrel, that is. He's both a boor and a hypocrite.

Democrat and ethics are like water and oil. There is no mix.

Why Not Drop Back-Taxes for EVERYONE?

2007-05-20T17:51:00.001-04:00

Something is rotten in ~~Denmark~~ Washington right now. It must have happened on the way to the backroom to negotiate the Immigration Reform Bill with Ted Kennedy and John McCain.

At first the President says he wants illegal immigrants to pay back taxes.

I believe that illegal immigrants who have roots in our country and want to stay should have to pay a meaningful penalty for breaking the law, to pay their taxes, to learn English, and to work in a job for a number of years. People who meet these conditions should be able to apply for citizenship ...

Then the figure of "the last three years' taxes" came up.

Now it's NO back taxes to be paid.

Why not just drop back-taxes for "regular" citizens, too, Mr. President?

New O-T-H member Humbug and Gull weigh in ....

Politicizing America's Tragedies Must STOP!!!

2007-05-13T12:45:00.000-04:00

I stand with the Over-the-Hill coalition in declaring my anger and dismay at the allegations discussed below.

Did Howard Dean and democrat leaders instruct the governor of Kansas to deliberately lie about the availibility of National Guardsmen and equipment to bring relief to the victims of a recent tornado?

If she lied to perpetrate discredit to the President, to the Iraqi War, to the National Guard and attempted to misrepresent the federal government's ability to assist it's citizens in a national disaster, she should be removed from office.

From Perish the Thought.

Did DNC Tell Kansas Gov. to Lie?

FLASHBACK to Katrina and claims that federal authorities failed
to respond appropriately .....

This is a radio interview of the breaking story from Hannity
Radio.

Check out the ONLINE trail of posts, letter from a DNC attorney
to FreePress and the radio station, and comments from PowerLine blog.

From a FreePress post:

I was listening to the Quinn & Rose show this morning on XM radio when
Host, Jim Quinn told his audience that Howard Dean called Kansas Gov. Kathleen
Sebelius early, around 5 am, one morning after the tornado had destroyed the
town of Greensburg, Kansas and discussed with her what to say about the tornado
and how to blame the war in Iraq and the Bush administration on a slow response
to the aftermath. He also said that she, Gov. Sebelius, called Senator Sam
Brownback's office only to learn he wasn't there but then called him on his cell
phone and reached him while he was in his car were she confessed to him that she
had been instructed by her party leadership, (more specifically, Howard Dean) on
how to politicize the tornado's destruction of Greensburg and attack the White
House and the Iraq war for a seemingly slow response. She reassured the Senator
that her allegations didn't blame him or Pat Roberts, also a Kansas Senator, for
the lack of immediate response. That would explain her public statements to the
press that proved later to be untrue. She made statements to the effect that the
Iraq war and the deployment of the national guard units to Iraq from her state
has left Kansas without the equipment and man power needed to respond more
quickly to the tornado's aftermath. This all turns out to be false and the
governor herself has back tracked on her own claims. Mr. Quinn also revealed
that she confessed to Brownback that she couldn't pass up such an opportunity
like this to attack the President whose approval ratings, in this hostile
political climate, is so low. These revelations are startling and if true should
call into question the governors competence and her judgment. Quinn adamantly
stressed that his source, who he didn't name because he was sure it would
jeopardize his job, was extremely reliable and in a position that would give him
direct knowledge of these revelations.

From the DNC letter to FreePress:

The statements quoted above are false and defamatory, are libelous and
slanderous, and clearly threaten to interfere with the DNC's operations and
ability to solicit support and raise funds by prejudicing the organization in
the the eyes of Democratic Party supporters and the public. For these reasons,
we demand that FreeRepublic.com (i) immediately cease and desist from further
dissemination of the above-quoted statements or any statements similar in
substance and (ii) immediately post a retraction of these statements in a
location on its web page at least as prominent as that on which the original
story appeared.Please let us know by noon tomorrow (May 11, 2007) whether you
intend to comply with these requests.

A PowerLine attorney responds:The attorney who sent the letter
on behalf of the DNC is attorney Joseph Sandler, representing the Democratic
National Committee. In my view, Sandler is a thug representing a bunch of
reprobates and bullies. Here's why. Under the First Amendment, as construed by
the Supreme Court in New York Times v. Sullivan, citizens are protected from defamation claim by public figures so long as the statements in issue are lacking in "actual malice," i.e, knowledge of their falsehood or reckless disregard as to whether they are false or not. Accordingly, our reader's Free Republic post based on the statements of Jim Quinn is constitutionally immune from a defamation claim. Whether Quinn and those who broadcast his program have such immunity is a different question, but the same constitutional protection applies to them. Professor and First Amendment expert Eugene Volokh coincidentally makes a closely related point based on the Sullivan case today. "Actual malice" is a tough standard for public figures to overcome. That's why defamation claims by public figures have essentially disappeared since the Sullivan case. Under the Sullivan case, the First Amendment affords wide latitude for the discussion of public figures as well as issues of public
concern.Sandler's letter to Free Republic incorporates no element of "actual
malice." It is couched in the traditional common law of defamation that the
Supreme Court killed for public figures in the Sullivan case. Sandler's letter
carries Governor Dean's denial of Quinn's assertions, but it does not even
allege that Jim Quinn had knowledge of the statements' falsity or made them with
reckless disregard of their truth or falsity.We therefore associate ourselves
with our reader's statements regarding Governor Dean and invite Mr. Sandler to
sue us for defamation as he threatens to sue Free Republic. This is to put him
and his client on notice, however, that we intend to seek our attorney's fees
under federal law for the assertion of a frivolous claim if he does so.

If any of the above is accurate, all parties involved in this lie should be immediately removed from office.

Run, Fred, Run -- This Way Out, Fred!!

2007-05-05T18:52:00.000-04:00

Susan Estrich is right on this point:

The press is famous for goading people into the race and then turning on
them once they get in. It's not a conscious strategy; it's just that the press
always has an interest in a new face in the race, especially a colorful one; but once he's in, "fairness" requires the press to be equally savage to him as it is to the other shrunken heroes in the contest.

What idealistic conservative doesn't want Fred Thompson? Many more than the realistic conservatives, I'd guess.

Call me a realistic conservative. A moderate realistic conservative. Mitt Romney is my candidate of choice. He declared his candidacy up-close and early. So did most of the other candidates. Serious candidates, that is.

I'm bored by hearing "Fred will declare later ...." Later? What the heck does that mean? What's he waiting for?

Either he's running or he isn't.

If he isn't, he's baited a few conservatives and collected sufficient speaking fees to promote his movie career. And idealistic conservative don't like being baited. And they have only one movie hero. (Make that two, if you've read Gull's blog.)

Yep, idealistic conservatives (and most all of us) like folks who stand tall and speak plain English while looking your straight in the eye. But don't bait them. Especially don't bait them after they've built up this mythocal image of some Reaganesque figure who's gonna swoop back into the political arena and carry them to victory.

Better let people know what you're gonna do, Fred. Fast. If you wait 'til summer to declare or declare not to declare, tempers will likely flare a bit more in the heat of the season. Campaign season, that is.

And no matter what you decide, mainstream media and every cable news channel will wonder aloud: why did it take him so long? What IS he afraid of? What was he waiting for? And the seeds of doubt will be planted .....

Come on in, Fred. Don't delay the inevitable. That is, if you're actually gonna come on in.

al Qaeda - Saddam Connection

2007-04-28T00:56:00.000-04:00

The proof is in the capture of a former-Iraqi officer who was and is a senior al Qaeda leader. Those of us who believed there was a connection between Saddam's Iraq and al Qaeda await even more evidence.

Why haven't we known of this connection or this capture before now? The guy has been providing information -- information which authorities wisely chose not to leak, obviously.

Credit: Perish the Thought

Message to Joe Lieberman:

2007-04-25T22:42:00.000-04:00

What Gull said, Joe.

Switch to the Republican caucus and save the credibility of Congress, the Senate and the U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Please, Joe.

The troops need you.

Remembering the Victims

2007-04-22T12:41:00.000-04:00

We are the Hokie Nation!

RIGHT ON!

2007-04-08T00:54:00.000-04:00

Thanks for sharing, Gull --

Watch the video.

Yes, I'm going to DC on May 26.

The Romney Surge

2007-04-05T00:04:00.000-04:00

It is more than his ability to raise funds. It is his unique style of confidence and intellect.

America needs Mitt Romney.

ht: Perish the Thought

Feingold-Reid Bill Anticipates Veto

2007-04-02T12:14:00.000-04:00

Here come the pigs again .... Here come the pigs!!!

Why do these dems waste their time, the President's time and taxpayers' money trying to legislate the war against terror? They knew the President would veto their pork-laden bill to fund troops (with withdrawal deadlines).

So now we have the Feingold-Reid Troop Redeployment Bill:

(a) Transition of Mission - The President shall promptly transition the mission of United States forces in Iraq to the limited purposes set forth in subsection (d).
(b) Commencement of Safe, Phased Redeployment from Iraq - The President shall commence the safe, phased redeployment of United States forces from Iraq that are not essential to the purposes set forth in subsection (d). Such redeployment shall begin not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(c) Prohibition on Use of Funds - No funds appropriated or otherwise made available under any provision of law may be obligated or expended to continue the deployment in Iraq of members of the United States Armed Forces after March 31, 2008.
(d) Exception for Limited Purposes - The prohibition under subsection (c) shall not apply to the obligation or expenditure of funds for the limited purposes as follows:
(1) To conduct targeted operations, limited in duration and scope, against members of al Qaeda and other international terrorist organizations.
(2) To provide security for United States infrastructure and personnel.
(3) To train and equip Iraqi security services.

It's time for a caucus to defeat the defeatists. It's time for a VICTORY CAUCUS. Let your representatives know that there is only one Commander-in-Chief!

Pelosi's Spring Fling: Bling Blanket Bingo!

2007-03-31T10:06:00.000-04:00

From Perish the Thought ......... indeed, Perish the Thought!

Most of us head to the beach on spring break. Not Nancy Pelosi and a delegation of congress-critters. They're off to the Middle East to engage in goodwill and fact-finding.

Oh, dear. Are we about to witness a Pelosi "deer in the headlights" scenario?

It will prove interesting to learn how she will balance (flip-flop?) her opinion(s) on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

In prior times, Pelosi told the AIPAC: "There are those who contend that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is all about Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza," Pelosi said as she rallied AIPAC loyalists. "This is absolute nonsense. In truth, the history of the conflict is not over occupation, and never has been: it is over the fundamental right of Israel to exist."

In that speech to the American-Israeli lobby group -- the second largest in Washington -- Pelosi declared: "The greatest threat to Israel's right to exist, with the prospect of devastating violence, now comes from Iran. For too long, leaders of both political parties in the United States have not done nearly enough to confront the Russians and the Chinese, who have supplied Iran as it has plowed ahead with its nuclear and missile technology."

Will Pelosi flip-flop her position on Israel's plight to accommodate a revised view of the Palestine issue?

It will be interesting to see ....

After all --- she (like many others) has changed her opinions on Iraq and Saddam:

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee [December 1998], I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."

Today, however, she recants: "There was never anything in the intelligence that said Iraq posed an imminent threat to the United States, never."

It's likely no coincidence that Pelosi will be speaking to the Israeli Parliament on April 1.

They do recognize April Fools Day in Israel, don't they?

Pelosi's Great Adventure

2007-03-31T08:44:00.000-04:00

Will Pelosi's Ploy be a spring break bonanza for the moonbat brigade?

Give us a break, prancy-Nancy. Your tactics are a bit too obvious to the O-T-H oracles. Plus you're costing taxpayers millions in jet fuel.

If rumors are correct, Pelosi has her sights on reshaping U.S. foreign policy, including but not limited to peace in the Middle East! Wow. Finally. Going where no man has gone before.

And while you're at it, Madame Speakah, find a cure for jet-lag. You're going to need it!!!

credit: Perish the Thought

Senate Swine Slop Themselves

2007-03-27T18:33:00.000-04:00

I'm already sick of them. The swine in the senate have slopped additional pork in with the war funding.

Harry Reid et al can make all the excuses they want, but the bleeding of our military will be on the hands of every Senator who votes for this bill.

Porky Pelosi Gets Her Wish ....BUT --

2007-03-23T17:21:00.000-04:00

President Bush speaks about today's vote in the House:

"...The purpose of the emergency war spending bill I requested was to provide our troops with vital funding. Instead, Democrats in the House, in an act of political theater, voted to substitute their judgment for that of our military commanders on the ground in Iraq. They set rigid restrictions that will require an army of lawyers to interpret. They set an arbitrary date for withdrawal without regard for conditions on the ground. And they tacked on billions for pet projects that have nothing to do with winning the war on terror. This bill has too much pork, too many conditions and an artificial timetable for withdrawal.
As I have made clear for weeks, I will veto it if it comes to my desk. And because the vote in the House was so close, it is clear that my veto would be sustained. Today's action in the House does only one thing: it delays the delivering of vital resources for our troops. A narrow majority has decided to take this course, just as General Petraeus and his troops are carrying out a new strategy to help the Iraqis secure their capital city...."

What "pork" was attached?

Check out these for starters:

$500 million for emergency wildfires suppression; the Forest Service currently has $831 million for this purpose;
$400 million for rural schools;
$283 million for the Milk Income Loss Contract program;
$120 million to compensate for the effects of Hurricane Katrina on the shrimp and menhaden fishing industries;
$100 million for citrus assistance;
$74 million for peanut storage costs;
$60.4 million for salmon fisheries in the Klamath River region in California and Oregon;
$50 million for asbestos mitigation at the U.S. Capitol Plant;
$48 million in salaries and expenses for the Farm Service Agency;
$35 million for NASA risk mitigation projects in Gulf Coast;
$25 million for spinach growers;
$25 million for livestock;
$20 million for Emergency Conservation Program for farmland damaged by freezing temperatures;
$16 million for security upgrades to House of Representatives office buildings;
$10 million for the International Boundary and Water Commission for the Rio Grande Flood Control System Rehabilitation project;
$6.4 million for House of Representative’s Salaries and Expenses Account for business continuity and disaster recovery expenses;
$5 million for losses suffered by aquaculture businesses including breeding, rearing, or transporting live fish as a result of viral hemorrhagic septicemia;
$4 million for the Office of Women’s Health at the Food and Drug Administration; and
A minimum wage increase, which is the subject of separate legislation.

In the Senate, these are the anticipated pork attachments:

$1.5 billion to the Army Corps of Engineers for recovery along the coast, including funding for Hawaii for an April 2006 flood;
$850 million for Department of Homeland Security grants ($625M for rail/transit grants, $190M for port security grants, and $35M for urban area security grants);
$660 million for the procurement of an explosives detection system for the Transportation Security Administration;
$640 million for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program;
$425 million for education grants for rural areas;
$388.9 million for a backlog of Department of Transportation projects;
$165.9 million (including $60.4 million for salmon fisheries in the Klamath Basin region) for fisheries disaster relief;
$75 million for salaries and expenses for the Farm Service Agency;
$48 million in disaster construction money for NASA;
$25 million for grants through the Safe and Drug Free Schools program;
$25 million for asbestos abatement at the Capitol Power Plant;
$24 million to sugar beet producers;
$22.8 million for geothermal research and development;
$20 million for reimbursements to Nevada for “insect damage;”
$12 million for Forest Service money requested by the president in the non-emergency FY2008 budget
$3.5 million for guided tours of the Capitol;
$3 million for sugar cane; and
Allows the transfer of funds from holiday ornament sales in the Senate gift shop.

Updates later .....

LONG OVER-DUE --

2007-03-21T22:14:00.000-04:00

The Victory Caucus -- a consortium of bloggers working to defeat Congressional defeatists. Visit the site. Check it out. If you agree with the premises of the Victory Caucus --- join.

If we are to restore respect and support for our troops and their mission in Iraq -- as well as the war against terrorism, we must be willing to work together to replace the Defeatists in Congress.

The Eagles Have Landed

2007-03-20T22:59:00.000-04:00

First Gull caws a live blog of the anti-war rally.

Then Reveller beefs up a look at the protest mooooooovement.

No matter how you slice it -- last weekend's protest organizers may soon be put out to pasture.

THANKS, EAGLES!!

Reving Up for Romney

2007-03-10T13:20:00.000-05:00

Mitt Romney is moving up in polls and in endorsements --- Check out his progress at

Romney in the News

GATHERING OF EAGLES

2007-02-25T00:17:00.000-05:00

Join a GATHERING OF EAGLES in Washington, DC on March 17, 2007 ..... Participants will be gathering at The Wall and other memorials to protect them from anti-war vandals.

MSM Tourniquet for the Slow Bleeding Dems

2007-02-17T17:02:00.000-05:00

From the (gasp!) Washington Post:

Not the 'Real Vote'
Or so Rep. John Murtha says of the House's Iraq resolution.

Saturday, February 17, 2007; Page A30

REP. JOHN MURTHA (D-Pa.) has a message for anyone who spent the week following the House of Representatives' marathon debate on Iraq: You've been distracted by a sideshow. "We have to be careful that people don't think this is the vote," the 74-year-old congressman said of the House's 246-182 decision in favor of a resolution disapproving of President Bush's troop surge. "The real vote will come on the legislation we're putting together." That would be Mr. Murtha's plan to "stop the surge" and "force a redeployment" of U.S. forces from Iraq while ducking the responsibility that should come with such a radical step.

We'll return to Mr. Murtha's plan, but first it's worth considering the five days of debate that he so breezily dismissed. It's true that nonbinding resolutions won't stop the troop surge, which is already underway. But after years of minimal debate and oversight of the war, the House Democratic leadership was right to allow scores of representatives to speak at some length on Iraq. Some of the speeches were little more than partisan rhetoric, but there were also intelligent and heartfelt interventions, especially from veterans of Iraq and Vietnam.

The House vote does matter: It ought to increase the pressure on Mr. Bush and the Iraqi government to follow through on their pledges to accompany the military campaign with tangible steps toward political accords and economic reconstruction. Senate leaders would be wise to reach an agreement today allowing a similar debate. And both chambers should aggressively conduct oversight hearings aimed at holding the administration to its promise to link continued U.S. troop deployments to Iraqi performance.

Mr. Murtha has a different idea. He would stop the surge by crudely hamstringing the ability of military commanders to deploy troops. In an interview carried Thursday by the Web site MoveCongress.org, Mr. Murtha said he would attach language to a war funding bill that would prohibit the redeployment of units that have been at home for less than a year, stop the extension of tours beyond 12 months, and prohibit units from shipping out if they do not train with all of their equipment. His aim, he made clear, is not to improve readiness but to "stop the surge." So why not straightforwardly strip the money out of the appropriations bill -- an action Congress is clearly empowered to take -- rather than try to micromanage the Army in a way that may be unconstitutional? Because, Mr. Murtha said, it will deflect accusations that he is trying to do what he is trying to do. "What we are saying will be very hard to find fault with," he said.

Mr. Murtha's cynicism is matched by an alarming ignorance about conditions in Iraq. He continues to insist that Iraq "would be more stable with us out of there," in spite of the consensus of U.S. intelligence agencies that early withdrawal would produce "massive civilian casualties." He says he wants to force the administration to "bulldoze" the Abu Ghraib prison, even though it was emptied of prisoners and turned over to the Iraqi government last year. He wants to "get our troops out of the Green Zone" because "they are living in Saddam Hussein's palace"; could he be unaware that the zone's primary occupants are the Iraqi government and the U.S. Embassy?

It would be nice to believe that Mr. Murtha does not represent the mainstream of the Democratic Party or the thinking of its leadership. Yet when asked about Mr. Murtha's remarks Thursday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) offered her support. Does Ms. Pelosi really believe that the debate she orchestrated this week was not "the real vote"? If the answer is yes, she is maneuvering her party in a way that can only do it harm.

Thank you, WP. It's about time MSM woke up and told the world what is REALLY happening.

Hillary's Health Care Plan

2007-02-04T13:25:00.000-05:00

All we need. Socialized medicine. Quick fixes. Long lines. Just check out this secret plan in Hillary's universal health care package ...

1. Stare into the cat's eyes.

2. Now watch these puppies.

3. Take the elevator down to the medical assessment area, please.

'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'

4. Come back in six months. Your cat scan and lab work will require FURRther assessment!

hee hee hee hee hee.

Beyond THE PLEDGE

2007-01-26T00:11:00.000-05:00

I stand with Perish the Thought and our troops.

If democrats want to place politics and personal ambition above supporting our military mission in Iraq, let them be bound by their defeatist "un-binding" resolution.

I signed THE PLEDGE.

Happy Holidays!

2006-12-22T11:50:00.000-05:00

Learning that Iraqi militia leaders are discussing the possibility of halting their assaults on one another may be the gift of a life-time for Iraqis, for the Middle East and for our troops in harm's way .... It is a long-overdue step in the right direction. Iraqis SHOULD soon be assuming responsibility for their own security, economic welfare and progress. While I'm not one to believe that our troops will ever literally be "brought home enmass," i.e., without some in-country support system to aid the Iraqis -- I pray that my positive feelings about the region are a sign of the future.

Moving to the middle, after all -- should be the goal of most societies and religions and politicians .... with respect for all .... May there be peace throughout the region of the birthplace of Christ ....

Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays and especially warm wishes for a more peaceful New Year!

Al-Qaeda Congratulates Democrats --

2006-11-11T02:09:00.000-05:00

.... then reaffirms their intent to bomb the White House.

That sure caught everyone by surprise. I refer to the threat, of course. Here's what the AFP reports:

Another alpha-bet chief in Iraq threatened (in an audio message posted on the Internet) that the Al-Qaeda et al terror network will "blow up the White House" among other rants and warnings.

"We announce today the end of a phase of the jihad (holy war) and the start of a new one... to usher in the project of an Islamic caliphate and restore Islam's glory," Abu Hamza al-Muhajer said in the message.

"We swear we will not rest from our jihad... before blowing up the filthiest house, dubbed the White House," in the course of establishing the caliphate which began with the proclamation of an Islamic state in Iraq, he said.

"The location chosen by your mujahedeen brethren to set up their state... is but a stepping stone for the leap," Muhajer said, referring to the "Islamic state of Iraq" proclaimed last month.
An alliance of Sunni insurgents headed by the Iraq branch of Al-Qaeda announced the creation of an independent Islamic emirate in Iraq in a video posted on the Internet on October 15, after parliament in Baghdad approved a federal constitution for the war-ravaged country.

In Friday's message, Muhajer said he had mobilized 12,000 fighters for the Islamic state and was grooming 10,000 more.

"I tell the commander of the faithful, the honorable Sheikh Abu Omar al-Baghdadi: I have put 12,000 Al-Qaeda fighters at the disposal of the Islamic state of Iraq," Muhajer said, pledging allegiance to the state's emir.

The Al-Qaeda chief appealed to major Iraqi Sunni insurgent groups, notably the Army of Ansar al-Sunna, the Islamic Army of Iraq and the Mujahedeen's Army, to endorse the self-styled state and pledge allegiance to its emir.

Muhajer slammed US President George W. Bush, gloated over his Republican party's defeat in mid-term elections widely attributed to US involvement in Iraq, and said US forces occupying the country were preparing to cut and run.

"The enemy is now teetering under the blows of the mujahedeen... and preparing to pack up and flee," he said.

"I thank the most stupid and worst president America -- the country of slaves and drugs -- has ever had for giving us this great historic opportunity," said the voice.

"The American people have taken the first step on the right path in order to get out of their impasse and have started to realize the treachery of their president and his subordination to Israel, voting for a measure of reason in the latest elections," Muhajer said.

"I tell (Bush): don't hurry to flee like your defense minister (Donald Rumsfeld, who resigned Wednesday). We have still not quenched our thirst for your blood."

Muhajer also charged that Bush's policies had enabled Shiite Iran to spread its influence in Afghanistan, Iraq and other countries.

Alphabet-man's rhetoric has a familiar ring ....... Many of his observations appear to have been lifted right out of recent campaign speeches .... You don't think ..... nahhhhhh .... no way.

No way.

Ya think?

Armistice (Post-Election) Time

2006-11-09T07:17:00.000-05:00

With rumors that Allen will concede the VA election (though Burns is still holding out), what we need is to call for an election armistice and get back to the business of politics -- I mean, governing.

Saturday is the real Armistice Day, by the way. It's now called Veterans Day.

Here, let Garrison Keillor explain it for you. He's a liberal, but he at least surrounds himself with what appears to be a down-homesy staff that edits politics from his newsletter (can't say the same for his live shows).

November 11 was originally called Armistice Day because it was on this day in 1918 that the First World War came to an end. After four years of brutal trench fighting, 9 million soldiers had died and 21 million were wounded. It was called "The War to End All Wars," because it was the bloodiest war in history up to that point, and it made many people so sick of war that they hoped no war would ever break out again.

Many intellectuals and artists were disillusioned by the war. The philosopher Bertrand Russell said, "All this madness, all this rage, all this flaming death of our civilization and our hopes, has been brought about because a set of official gentlemen, living luxurious lives, mostly stupid, and all without imagination or heart, have chosen that it should occur rather than that any one of them should suffer some infinitesimal rebuff to his country's pride."

Fly a flag on Saturday. If there is a Veterans parade or commemorative service in your area, take the kids ..... Appreciation, honor, respect, etc., begin at home.

Please Vote -- Here's Why

2006-11-04T11:04:00.000-05:00

Bush Derangement Syndrome

2006-10-26T23:43:00.000-04:00

It doesn't take much to entertain me, so I thought I'd play along with this BDS alert icon. Problem is, if I used it everytime it was relevant --- I'd overload my free bandwidth!
I'll make it simple ......

Everytime you see or hear one of the following politicos:

Evan Bayh (1955), U.S. senator from Indiana
Joseph Biden (1942), U.S. senator from Delaware, candidate for the Democratic nomination for president
Kathleen Blanco (1942), Governor of Louisiana
Barbara Boxer (1940), U.S. senator from California
Phil Bredesen (1943), Governor of Tennessee
Jerry Brown (1938), mayor of Oakland, California, former governor of California, candidate for Democratic nomination for president
Robert Byrd (1917), U.S. senator from West Virginia, former Senate Majority Leader, candidate for the Democratic nomination for president
Wesley Clark (1944), former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, candidate for Democratic nomination for president
Bill Clinton (1946), Attorney General of Arkansas 1976-1978, Governor of Arkansas 1978-1980, 1982-1992, President of the United States of America, 1993-2001
Hillary Clinton (1947), U.S. senator from New York, former First Lady
Jimmy Carter (1924), State Senator, Georgia 1962-1966, Governor of Georgia 1971-1975, Chairman, Democratic National Committee Congressional and Gubernatorial Elections 1974, President of the United States, 1977-1981, Founder, Carter Center, 1982- ,Recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, 2002
Richard Codey (1946), Governor of New Jersey, 2004-2006
John Conyers (1929), U.S. congressman from Michigan
Jon S. Corzine (1947), Governor of New Jersey and former U.S. Senator from New Jersey
Richard M. Daley (1942), mayor of Chicago, Illinois
Tom Daschle (1947), former U.S. senator from South Dakota, former Senate Minority Leader
Howard Dean (1948), former governor of Vermont, candidate for Democratic nomination for president, current chair of the Democratic National Committee
Richard Durbin, (1944), U.S. senator from Illinois, Senate Minority Whip
Mike Easley, (1950), Governor of North Carolina
John Edwards (1953), former U.S. senator from North Carolina, candidate for Democratic nomination for President, Democratic Vice Presidential nominee 2004
Russ Feingold (1953), U.S. senator from Wisconsin
Albert Gore Jr. (1948), Former U.S. senator and congressman from Tennessee, former Vice President of the United States, 1993-2001, Democratic Presidential Candiate, 2000, filmmaker
Tom Harkin (1939), U.S. senator from Iowa, candidate for Democratic nomination for president
Jesse Jackson (1941), civil rights activist, candidate for Democratic nomination for president
Tim Kaine (1958), former Lieutenant Governor and current Governor of Virginia
Ted Kennedy (1932), U.S. senator from Massachusetts, candidate for Democratic nomination for president
John F. Kerry (1943), U.S. senator from Massachusetts, 2004 Democratic nomminee for president, possible 2008 candidate
Dennis Kucinich (1946), U.S. congressman from Ohio, candidate for Democratic nomination for president
Frank R. Lautenberg (1924), U.S. senator from New Jersey
Patrick Leahy (1940), U.S. senator from Vermont
Zell Miller (1932), former Governor and former U.S. senator from Georgia
Norman Mineta (1931), Secretary of Transportation, only Democrat in the Bush cabinet.
James E. McGreevey (1957), Governor of New Jersey, 2002-2004
Cynthia McKinney (1955), U.S. congresswoman from Georgia
Barack Obama (1961), U.S. senator from Illinois
Martin O'Malley, mayor of Baltimore, candidate for governor of Maryland
Nancy Pelosi (1940), House Minority Leader from California
Harry Reid (1939), Senate Minority Leader from Nevada
Bill Richardson (1947), governor of New Mexico, former Energy Secretary
Charles Schumer (1950), U.S. senator from New York, chairman of Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee
Al Sharpton (1954), civil rights activist, candidate for Democratic nomination for president
Louise Slaughter (1929), U.S. congresswoman from New York, Ranking Member of the House Rules Committee
Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General of New York, candidate for governor of New York
Antonio Villaraigosa, mayor of Los Angeles, California
James Hahn, Los Angeles City Controller 1981-1985, Los Angeles City Attorney 1985-2001, Mayor of Los Angeles 2001-2005
Tom Vilsack (1950), governor of Iowa, chairman of the Democratic Leadership Council
Mark Warner (1954), former governor of Virginia
Anthony A. Williams (1951) , mayor of Washington, D.C.

and their lips are moving ---- consider yourself on

Remembering Sept. 11, 2001

2006-10-26T20:52:00.000-04:00

I intended to volunteer to write a tribute to one fallen victim, but my life was topsy-turvey during the original sign-up. I did end up reading the tributes, however, and finally decided that what I might do was compile links to articles written by the survivors of 9-11. They, too, are part of the remembrance .....

* Attack on America: Eleven personal stories by people who escaped the Pentagon or the World Trade Center with links to many other accounts and from people who share their stories and thoughts.

* Voices of 9/11: Video testimonies by survivors and victims' family members.

* My Story: Stories, essays and images from around the world.

* Images and Headlines: From news reports around the world.

* Flight 93: The story of their lives and their destiny.

* New York City: After the fall.

* Where Were You?: 2000 stories by individuals from around the world.

* Missing Pieces: Witness Testimonies and Reflections

I plan to continue to add sites. It's the least I can do to honor the memory of those lost and affected by 9/11 .....

Also see Honoring 9/11 Victims.

Honoring 9-11 Victims

2006-09-09T11:14:00.000-04:00

What an amazing event.

2,996 bloggers contributing tributes to victims of the 9-11 tragedy. I'm actually amazed that bloggers from all walks of life are/have been able to do this a-politically.

Some have walked a thin line, but altogether, the overwhelming majority of posted tributes are focused on an assigned victim.

The target date for all posts to be online is Tuesday, September 11.

Here's some music Gullspirit found online and has posted with her tribute to Lynn Goodchild at Perish the Thought. It's an original composition by Lynn Skinner.

VOICES FROM THE SKY download

Flocks of paper flying
Faces bent from crying
Traces of a skyline
On a morning that will never die

Smoky silence burning
Broken sky returning
Echoes in a stairwell

On a morning that will never die
Missing voices whisper through the broken sky
Live your lifeand we will never die...

Let it play as you read the tribute to Lynn Goodchild. It will definitely put you in a reflective mood.

Hezbollah Bunker at UNIFIL Post

2006-08-27T23:25:00.000-04:00

If there had been any doubt that UNIFIL "peacekeeping" forces were objective in their duties to monitor the Israel-Lebanon border -- fugeddaboutit.

There is something rotten in Lebanon and in the United Nations .....

This is a digital animation of the expansive Hezbollah bunker system being destroyed near the Israeli border by IDF troops. It's located within yards of a UNIFIL outpost:

Credits and links to videos of these bunkers being destroyed by IDF are at Perish the Thought .....

Perish the Thought ...

2006-08-27T12:47:00.000-04:00

Rhet invited me to post here while PtT and Blogdrive are down ..... bummer. Bummer that blogdrive is down, I mean. Blogspot rules -- regardless of where I officially hang my blogging hat!

Thanks, Rhet. And thanks, Blogspot for your reliability!

Israel a Mistake???

2006-07-19T18:54:00.000-04:00

Reprinted with permission of editors at Perish the Thought:

For two days I've read various op-eds and blogs RE: the title above. The most succinct response I've read to date is Don Singleton's one-word summation: Sickening.

One of my life-long goals has been to return to the land of my heritage.

As a child, I would sit at my grandfather's knee for hours, listening to stories told to him by his grandfather .... about two brothers who were driven from (what is now) Israel to Germany, and subsequently traveled to America in the mid-1700's.

From Pennsylvania, they migrated with a Moravian delegation to what would become Salem Colony in North Carolina ....

My grandfather always believed that the brothers hid their Jewish heritage and claimed the Moravian (or Luthuran) faith to avoid continuous persecution. It did not matter, he would say.
What mattered, he espoused, was that many years later, the last surviving brother disowned his children and grandchildren because they refused to honor the language (Yiddish) and traditions of their heritage. The family argued and split into two factions: one remained in the southern mountains and the other moved to the higher mountains -- one claiming their ethnic background as German; the other as English -- both denying their Jewish heritage.

(The surviving brother subsequently died a lonely man -- alienated from family and friends -- to have his land and wealth scattered among survivors ... his only legacy being his name on the road that still traverses his once-prosperous estate.)
------
The young brothers were stone masons by trade (albeit womanizers by night) and earned their keep by laying the foundations and walls of buildings which still stand in historic Old Salem.

In the most socially acceptable of terms, my grandfather would explain how at least one female acquaintance became with-child, precipitating the brothers' expulsion (with two women) from Salem settlement -- highlighted by head-shavings and (for the brothers, at least) a ferried rail-ride across the (once) mighty Yadkin River.

The disgraced four-some traveled westward toward the Blue Ridge Mountains, likely stopping in settlements developing in (once the Great State of) Wilkes ....

My grandfather always insisted (for the sake of propriety, I'm sure) that the brothers and their trail-mates were properly married (in the old Boone region) long before they settled in the northwest section of Surry County to raise their families.

As evidence of these stories (sans my grandfather's embellishments), I have letters written by my grandfather's grandfather to his cousins and brothers .... in Yiddish ... pleading with them to honor and cherish the traditions of their heritage.

Possibly I or my children will one day be able to honor the traditions of our heritage. To deny anyone that right -- much less to denigrate that right -- bespeaks a disrespect more base, more despicable than sickening, however.

Godspeed, Israel. May you find peace and security in the Land and Traditions you honor.

Alaichem sholom ...

Repubs NEED Gregory

2006-03-05T12:42:00.000-05:00

Gull referred to NBC's David Gregory as an MSM poster boy yesterday at Perish the Thought.

We agree.

But we don't want him fired, as folks at http://www.firedavidgregory.com/ are requesting.

Voters need to see unhinged moonbattery up close and personally!

Keep those outta control sound bytes and Imus calls coming, David!

What Went Right

2006-03-04T15:55:00.000-05:00

For those who still question main stream media's reporting of the aftermath of Katrina -- this is a must-read:

What Went Right

Naginizing the Future of New Orleans

2006-03-04T13:14:00.000-05:00

To Naginize or Naginizing: the ability to be held unaccountable for negative calamity; the failure to act proactively in the face of pending disaster; to shirk responsibility for what may happen within an elected official's jurisdiction, unless it involves taking credit or blaming others; alternately wringing hands or sitting on them. Alternate definition: to draw a Blanco.
------------------------

''The next season may be worse than the past two, which resulted in an increase in the number and intensity of hurricanes that hit U.S. shores.''

Max Mayfield, Director of the National Hurricane Center, has spoken. Again.

Does Governor Blanco watch cable? How about the Weather Channel? What happened to those federal funds for communications systems, by the way? Nothing like a hand-tooled exotic leather briefcase and gold-plated faucets when you need to stay informed, eh?

And Nagin?

Somebody tie a string around Nagin's -- uhhhh ...... finger and remind him dry out that evacuation plan and line up a few bus drivers.

They're still sitting WHERE?

Oh, yeah. That's right. The mayor has been toooo busy planning mardi gras (yes, it rained on that parade as well) and poor-mouthing the New Orleans plight (bad-bad feds won't set up those doublewides in a flood plain).

But, hey -- It's time to set priorities!! Crunch time in the Big Easy! Just a few weeks or so before -- not hurricane season -- but elections!

This week Nagin is over in Texas campaigning amongst evacuees in a bid for re-election as mayor of New Orleans.

He'll probably be resourceful enuff to crank up those buses and transport ballot boxes over to Texas to collect the votes!

Whatta guy.

-- gull (http://journals.aol.com/gullspirit/PerishTheThought)

The Get-Bush Conspiracy

2006-03-04T13:04:00.000-05:00

"I don't fear Big Brother; I fear Big Smother."
-----------------------------------------------
[a scenario] MSM mogul to publishers: Things are looking brighter on the Bush front despite that CBS poll ... We need a new distraction .... If you can't find a controversy, create one ... Bush is over in India and Pakistan doing things that might strengthen his work against terrorism .... Let's revisit Katrina again -- run that news release from the hurricane center and get our editors busy on those video tapes -- see what they can muster ..... whatever you find, leak it to Shep over at Fox .... back off the Bill and Hillary port dispute .... Ask Laura what she thinks, see what the twins are doing or better yet, find a reporter embedded with the President and have him call a few radio talk shows ....

--------------------------

We pay good money to be entertained by twisted minds on the screen and in print. Now we learn similarly twisted and obsessed minds are promoting major news releases.

Recent headlines (see AOL, CBS and AP wires) show the full impact of the * Bush Derangement Syndrome.

AP may not have actually faked the recently "edited" video to support their claim that "Bush knew" about the New Orleans levy breach before it happened, etc., but nonetheless, AP found reason to apologize for editing omissions.

Omissions?
What about the misleading inclusions????

Why would an allegedly reputable news service need to apologize for reporting "news?"

Why would a responsible news agency promote a false survey (such as the recent CBS poll reported by AOL) to indicate Bush's decline in popularity, etc.?

What a crock.

Someone had to decide which pieces of the video to cut and which to paste. Someone had to approve it post-editing. You don't just randomly edit items in or out without purpose any more than you randomly select "news" to feature or headlines that mislead -- or any more than randomly [accidentally?] orchestrate a slanted survey .... Do you?

Seems the person involved with the video editing was none other than a producer for the infamous CBS "discovery" of a [faked] memo about George Bush's military service. You remember that one, don't you? It was conveniently "discovered" right before the elections. Dan Rather lost his job because of that one.

Will an editor lose his/her job at AP over the "edited" video? Ohhhhh, some editor might be buried in the editing lab for a while or sent to the Food Gazette for a few months. The Associated Press, a mainstay in the Fourth Estate (the guardians of government) will probably slide by with its milk-toast apology. News outlets are too dependent upon the AP to jeopardize headlining their bias!

What is it with mainstream media's need to defame George Bush? Why do major networks and agencies risk professional reputations to defame a sitting president?

Thanks to the blogosphere, the answer becomes fairly obvious.

The press as an institution -- the Fourth Estate, the guardian of government -- is no longer "free." It is owned by private enterprises. It's manipulated by agendas.

The press (i.e., main stream media) is controlled by corporate boards and billionaires who "agenda-dize" the slant of news to project their own political, economic, global and social perspectives.

(It's like a privately-owned non-state-controlled press, if you think in terms of the intended Constitutional protection. Except the MSM has somehow distended its purpose not to simply monitor government and inform the public, but to manipulate public opinion against the government -- unless, of course, the non-state-controlled press happens to support the current government .... At which point, the non-state-controlled press freely exercises its version of free speech to either support, criticize, feature, slant, bury or inform the public of what they perceive as newsworthy -- even it means altering facts ....)

But I digress.

Ever wonder why we don't hear or read about more "good" news? (Pick a topic. Any topic.)

Justcheck the who's-who on media conglomerate boards. Cross-reference the owners/members with lists of political donors and "philanthropic" foundations which these board members support or own. Check their contributions to Political Action Committees and "store front" 157 sub-groups (exempt form political contribution regulations) that silently fund political agendas, ad campaigns, news feeds and, yes -- protests, marches and riots on the national and global front.

Go ahead. Check them out. Check the lists of political donors across party lines. You might discern that a few donors frequently "hide" political support/contributions through their wives or children or their own foundation(s). If you are aware of (even among Internet moguls) who supports which political party or candidate or cause, you'll gain some insight into why featured MSM news reports carry certain "slants" among the most "independent" carriers!

It's intentional, by the way. And it didn't just happen during the last two presidential elections.

Why is this relevant?

It's relevant because it has become so blatant, flagrant and alarmingly obsessive. It's unhealthy for everyone, including our institutions.

Our guardians of government (the Fourth Estate turned agenda-operatives) have lost it -- lost it somewhere between responsible journalism and op-ed agenda-based news.

Reporters and editors have "bought in" to promoting agenda-perspectives and have sacrificed all standards of professionalism to destroy one man and discredit a national sentiment that elected him.

Note to the MSM: it wasn't JUST conservatives who voted for GWB, by the way.

They (the MSM -- the bastions of thoughts and controllers of how-America-should-be) cannot accept that the average American has the capacity to think, assess, identify or understand their own needs, interests AND preferences.

MSM has, without question -- lost a prevailing sense of mission and integrity -- has become so fixatedon one man that they go so far as to fabricate scenarios to discredit him. Furthermore, they portend to demean those who dare to express support for any program under his administration.

What's the future of MSM?

I hope bleak.

I don't fear Big Brother; I fear Big Smother. I don't fear an elected government official; I fear a manipulative media that insolates my view of government and the world.

Need a prime-time example?

Meet the new MSM poster boy (a member of the White House Press Corps who finally stepped over the edge) -- NBC's David Gregory who tops his press-conference temper-tantrums by calling a talk radio show in a drunken giggle-fit while traveling with the President. What was he trying to say? Do? The guy needs help beyond a weekend anger-management retreat or an AA sponsor. I wonder if his days in the WH corps might be numbered ....

Of course, you won't read any of this as headlines in the MSM. They're much too focused on editing videos, orchestrating new polls or monitoring potential riots in the streets of where-ever-bush-might-go-next.

* Bush Derangement Syndrome: "The acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency -- nay -- the very existence of George W. Bush."

-- Gull (http://journals.aol.com/gullspirit/PerishTheThought)

update: The AP did not "apologize" for the misleading video. The moonbats simply issued a "correction." My error, with apology for giving those slimeballs credit.

Yodeling Frenchman Returns!

2006-01-28T14:50:00.000-05:00

Commemorating the week (1915) US President Wilson refused to prohibit immigration of illiterates, John Kerry takes advantage and returns to Washington to call for filiblustering (uh huh) Alito's nomination to the Supreme Court.

Oh, well.

credit: Rhetoricia and Perish the Thought!

[Exactly.]

The Alito Hearings

2006-01-11T22:41:00.000-05:00

If the conduct of Kennedy, Biden and Chuckie S, et al, does not have you shaking your head in

A) disgust,
B) bewilderment, or
3) embarrassment --

I suggest you turn off Comedy Central re-runs and take a gander at the Judicial ~~Sayings~~ Hearings .... that is, the Alito Hearings.

And if you are still debating options A), B) or C) -- try this bare facts assessment of folks who loveeeeee the sound of their own voices : http://blogs.pajamasmedia.com/mondo_alito/

Pathetic. Boring.

What a disgrace for an obviously qualified man to be subjected to these self-serving baffoons.

HAPPY HOLIDAYS!

2005-12-27T00:56:00.000-05:00

A pause to reflect on the importance of family, friends and the spirit of this wondrous season ...

Seasons Greetings

and

We're spending most of our time at our (team) blogs, but return here occasionally.

Please drop by our other sites

http://journals.aol.com/gullspirit/PerishTheThought/

http://perishthethought.blogdrive.com/

http://www.perishthethought.com/

http://javajunction.blogspot.com/

http://goatgazette.blogspot.com/

http://www.thecreativewoman.com/

Our Sister Site!

2005-11-29T10:22:00.000-05:00

Nope. We're not mooooooving ....

We'll be duplicating and/or placing related posts over at blogdrive for a while -- just to check out all their features ...

You can sign up for notifications/alerts on the blog over there, if you're inclined to do so!

http://perishthethought.blogdrive.com

Join us!

Polling Poll-Cats

2005-11-21T07:44:00.000-05:00

A recent CBS poll showing that the President's approval ratings had slipped to 35% was investigated by Dartblog with not-so-surprising revelations:

"259 Republicans were surveyed. 326 Democrats. (Already unacceptably
inconsistent with the national makeup.) And then an astonishing 351
“Independents”. That, of course, isn’t all. Savvy surveyors need to weight
their data in order to make the results more accurate. In CBS’ case,
this is done by cutting 36 of the Republican responses off the top, and
leaving the Democrat responses intact. This isn’t the regularly shifty
‘party self-identification’ factor. The data comes from a table which, presumably,
reflects party registration. And even if the numbers are PSI, they are still far removed from reality. The net result: a political poll consisting of 34.8% Democrats,
23.8% Republicans, and 41.4% Independents. And President Bush’s “lowest”
approval rating ever."

Doesn't do much to validate the reliability of polling. CBS, notwithstanding.

'Pubs Call Dems Hand

2005-11-20T08:21:00.000-05:00

Call it cutting to the chase.

Call it putting your money where your mouth is.

Call it smart politics.

Call it sending House demmies home to face constituents after voting 403-3 NOT to pull US troops from Iraq immediately.

Just call it smart.

eh eh eh.

AOL Banner Ad Poll

2005-11-17T16:38:00.000-05:00

You're welcome to vote as an AOL member or AIM user .....

Not to vote IS to vote .... PERISH THE THOUGHT!

PlameGate with a French Twist ....

2005-10-16T14:16:00.000-04:00

From the Goat Gazette -- Edible Editorial Section .........

I'm almost ready to write my report.

You know, a summation of the 2-year investigation on PlameGate by that brilliantly aggressive young Special Counsel, Patrick Fitzgerald.

Fitzgerald's report will be out in a couple of weeks (or less) -- unless he extends (or someone persuades him to extend) our boredom (and keep the political grapevine buzzing or to torment the Bush Administration) another year or so.

I don't think it takes a genius to figure out what is going on OR what the options are .....

1. Fitzgerald's role is to find out if laws were broken by WH staffers (or anyone) who allegedly leaked the name of a CIA operative -- in retaliation for her hubby's politicizing (for John Kerry et al) a report (he had complied for the CIA) discrediting the President's "claim" that [British sources had learned that] Iraq had tried to buy nuke material in Africa.

Got it?

Want a little inside info on what went on?

a. VP Chaney's office (and other State Dept. officials) wanted to verify the British claim about Iraq trying to buy nuke material in Africa. They contacted the CIA. A CIA employee named Valerie Plame heard about the request and suggested her former-ambassador husband for writing the report. End of one search; beginning of another.

But not so fast.

b. [side note and possibly significant to Fitzgerald's investigation] Valerie Plame does not appear to meet the standards of CIA "covert field operative" (assigned out of country within 5-years) under existing laws. She may be something akin to a "storefront" secretary, but not a field operative, according to insiders [borrowing CIA lingo].

c. Another insider note: Her hubby, Joe Wilson, is a former ambassador whom she "introduced" to her bosses as a possible person to send to Niger to talk with folks he knew there, to gather info on whether any of his old friends were aware of Iraq trying to buy nuke material .... Old friends not in power when the nuke talks allegedly took place. Why is this relevant? Who knows. Maybe he needed a job. Maybe he wanted to get back into government work; maybe he didn't like the way the Bush administration was doing things -- he and wifey had donated to Kerry's campaign.

Plame's testimony: "My husband has good relations with the PM [prime minister of Niger] and the former Minister of Mines (not to mention lots of French contacts), both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity." Mrs. Wilson would later say she asked her husband, on behalf of the CIA, if he would investigate "this crazy report" on a uranium deal between Iraq and Niger.

More observations: On February 18, 2002, the U.S. embassy in Niger sent a cable describing a new account of the alleged deal. The account, it said, "provides sufficient detail to warrant another hard look at Niger's uranium sales." The cable further warned against dismissing the allegations prematurely. The following day, back at Langley, representatives of several U.S. intelligence agencies met with Ambassador Wilson to discuss the trip. Contemporaneous notes from an analyst at the State Department's INR suggest that Mrs. Wilson "apparently convened" the meeting. She introduced her husband to the group and left a short time later. Several of the attendees would later recall questioning the value of the proposed trip, noting that the Nigeriens were unlikely to admit dealing with the Iraqis. Still, the CIA approved the trip.

d. Wilson took the trip and filed his report (indications are that it was a verbal report), stating that none of his associates were aware of any nuke deals in Niger. Concurrently, there were also additional intelligence reports (other than the British report) coming from covert sources that dug a little deeper than Wilson's "sweet tea sipping" party with old acquaintances. French Intelligence sources, however, called documents alleging Niger's sale of nuke materials to Iraq bogus ....

e. The rub: Wilson appears to have taken offense that his report was notdeemed sufficient in discrediting British intelligence or in stopping the President from speaking those famous "sixteen words" in his State of the Union address.

f. Meanwhile, back on the political front: Other "unnamed sources," aspiring to discredit the President's reelection bid and State of the Union address, were slowly but deliberately leaking to the press the possibility that "the President had indeed lied."
Proof of the lie was a report filed by an "independent" CIA investigator (Wilson -- who first hawked his story to MSM outlets as a 3rd party story -- before aligning himself with a French Intelligence report that documents alleging Iraq's nuke buying efforts in Africa were forged) which he/they alleged that the government had chosen to hide ....
In fairness to the CIA, there actually were SEVERAL reports buzzing through offices in the CIA .... Top of the buzz list was the still-under-investigation report from (questionable) French intelligence leaks that documents evidencing an Iraqi-Niger connection were forgeries .... [French + Intelligence??? Uh, never mind.]
Still with me on this?

g. The reality: In testimony before a Senate Committee Hearing, Wilson back-tracked on his criticism of contents of the President's SoU address AND other statements he had subsequently made against the President:

SENATE INTELLIGENCE REPORT (page 45): The former ambassador said that he may have “misspoken” to the reporter when he said he concluded the [British] documents were “forged.” He also said he may have become confused about his own recollection .... but admitted that he had NEVER seen the documents. Wilson had made another adjustment by telling CNN that he had been wrong in his frequently-voiced assumption about Cheney [and staff] and whether they even knew about his report on Niger ....
Now we come to the famous 16 words:

BUSH: The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.

WILSON: I never claimed to have “debunked” the allegation that Iraq was seeking uranium from Africa.

WILSON (page 334): The path to writing the op-ed piece [which he hawked to MSM outlets] had always been clear in my mind. My government had refused to address the fundamental question of how the lie regarding Saddam’s supposed attempt to purchase African uranium had found its way into the State of the Union address... I had to raise it, publicly and in my own words. I realized that my credibility would be called into question, and I was steeled for that. But whatever one might say about me—and there is a lot—the truth remained: There was never any evidence of Iraqi uranium purchases from Niger. [Wilson’s emphasis]

Actually, Mr. Wilson's credibility on Niger was revealed to be not so accurate either. So much for steeling.

2. A Special Investigation was requested by the CIA (a bastion of career-officers of moderately left-leaning political persuasions -- for those who didn't know that tidbit). Of course, career officers within the federal government never act on political persuasion. Also see point 1.f referencing in-house CIA disagreements .....

3. And here we are.
Did someone willfully leak the name of a CIA operative?

a. If so, can we distinguish among those who leaked what to whom and when, and, if we can't, who can we nab for behaviors that are as common as "unidentified sources" in "high government positions" in a city whose mode of communication is founded in unidentified sources?

b. What? Espionage laws may not have beeen broken?

Well, how are we going to justify spending millions of taxpayer's dollars????

Let's see .... hummmmm .... surely someone lied or obstructed justice .... Judy Miller? Joe Wilson? Scooter Libby? Kovack? Carl Rove? The CIA? The New York Times? French intelligence? Can we blame Bush for all of this?

hummmmm .... Writing for the New York Times (speaking of far left MSM), Miller is an "insider" journalist (not a good position to begin with when MSM is fundamentally anti-Bush); she wrote positive articles on the search for WMD's ..... maybe she got Plame's name from a "source" within the CIA (after all, she had top security clearance when working as an embedded reporter searching for WMD's in Iraq AND there WAS a riff between CIA offices .... Stranger things have happened. Was or or does she remain a CIA operative??? How many reporters are given top security clearance???? ) .... Strange scenario there.

Libby (admits communicating with Miller, though doesn't remember giving her Plame's name) is a likely target --

And everyone to the left of middle hates Rove. The mastermind of the 2004 Republican landslide victory needs to be taken down ..... He admists talking with someone -- He's always talking with reporters. Talk. Talk. Talk. Nail the buzzard.

The New York Times? (What did THEY know??? What was their editors hiding? Why were they protecting Judy Miller? Huh? )Others in the MSM? Tim Russert? CNN? Who was Kovack's snitch? Rove?

It's bound to be Rove .... Mastermind THIS, Mr. kick-our-butt!

And now Miller says she is not certain that Libby is the one who actually gave her Plame's name (it was written in "another" section of her notes -- and not with his interview notes) .... but Kovack is the one who associated Miller with Plame's name .... and that other reporter -- who did he say his source was? And then there was the speech that Wilson gave about the time of the leak -- where in his credits, his wife's name is listed .... anyone could have "googled" her to learn that she was associated with a business that was later revealed to be a CIA storefront ....
Of course, Rove has been called to testify again and again -- something must be up (or down) for him ....

c. So if we namesomeone -- anyone -- THEN someone else will have to take them to court? How long will that take? Another 2-3 years? Phew ....we're off the hook.

d. Huh? There's another option?

e. We can just file a report, turn it over to the politicians, pundits and MSM and let the chips fall where THEY want them to fall them?

f. Sounds plausible. Looks like we've got ourselves one of those ready-made win-win situations just for the choosing.

Now to choose which option will leave the least amount of egg on our faces and splash it on someone else's.

Lemme chew on this.
I'll get back with you.

There're No Secrets in Washington ....

2005-10-10T23:26:00.000-04:00

Joe Wilson's Speech
June 14, 2003
Education for Peace in Iraq Center (EPIC)

Credit: The American Thinker

A month before Robert Novak wrote his column supposedly outing Valerie Plame, Joseph Wilson gave a speech in which he talks in the third person about a person who is obviously himself, allows Valerie Plame to be identified as his wife, and discloses his intense opposition to the war in Iraq, as well as his anti-Israel sentiments. He makes clear that he is the source of the Kristoff/Pincus leaks about his mission. He even says that “this thing has legs,” that it will take two or three months, but it has legs – implying, perhaps, that he had already been working with the Kerry campaign to make this issue big – attacking the President's credibility on the war.

From the EPIC web site: Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson, IV served as a member of the U.S. Diplomatic Service from 1976 until 1998. From 1988 to 1991, Ambassador Wilson served in Baghdad as Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy. As acting Ambassador during "Desert Shield," he was responsible for the negotiations that resulted in the release of several hundred American hostages. He was the last official American to meet with Saddam Hussein before the launching of "Desert Storm." Ambassador Wilson graduated from the University of California at Santa Barbara in 1972. He has been decorated as a Commander in the Order of the Equatorial Star by the Government of Gabon and as an Admiral in the El Paso Navy by the El Paso County Commissioners. He is married to the former Valerie Plame and has four children.

Speech transcript/audio link: http://www.americanthinker.com/comments.php?comments_id=3345

Deliver Freeh from Evil ...

2005-10-09T23:36:00.000-04:00

CBS (Clinton's personal MSM outlet) gave Bill "i-feel-yo-painh" Clinton "rebuttal time" to counter a 60-Minute interview with Louis Freeh tonight.

Rebuttal time? To a former President? For whaaaat?

Rebuttal time to deny that he illegally hit foreign countries for money for his "double-wide in the sky" presidential library in lieu of chasing terrorists? And the rebuttal was supposedly done by WHO? Sandy Berger? Clinton's former Security Advisor who stole classified documents (coughcoughAble Dangercoughcough) from the National Archives? The SAME guy who violated his probation last week? Sandy "stuffmyshorts" Berger????

I was expecting Dan "Rathergate" Rather to introduce Sandy Berger in his ummm ... rebuttal.
We remember Dan. The guy who "retired" from CBS for his infamous "break" of those faked memos on Bush's military service.

I anticipated Michael Moore would be producing the segment. And one of those Cindy Sheehan commercials. Unless Howard Dean and the DNC bought up all the commercial time.

Louis Freeh doesn't stand a chance. Maybe his book will.

The Goat Gazette

2005-10-02T16:06:00.000-04:00

Our resident cyber-goat chews the news, views and spews from the world of politics .....

* The rumors are running faster than kudzu up a pine tree that Rudi is the person to defeat Hilliary in her rerun for the NY Senate seat .... but hold on to your hyperbole, Hilda! These speculations are being promoted on behalf of "other" Republicans who want to run for President in 2008 ....

* Condi Rice (denying she is interested) is gaining grassroots support as a possible candidate for the Presidency .... Never happen, Nannies -- not in 2008, at least.

* Cyber-goat has the chomp on the chill, Bill.

Rudi will be on the 2008 Republican Presidential ticket with Condi as his VP .... wait and see, cyber-munchkins -- wait and see ... (They will win, but he won't run for a second term ....)

McCain? Too old and ornery ....
Frist? Too southern ....

Nobody else has the national clout to carry the GOP....

* Dems will select Hilliary as their candidate. Which is why the GOP will retain the White House in 2008 ....

Her running mate will be some no-name (that whiz kid from Chicago will decline and play his cards later -- but watch for a MAJOR scandal to unfold for him ....) The Dems may regain control of the Senate, however -- by a few seats .... but the GOP will keep the House .... (I could have the chambers reversed --)

* 2006 Elections? Hummmmm .... None -- absolutely none of the current media feeding frenzies will affect the ballot box -- except in Louisiana and maybe Mississippi ..... Too much national attention has been given to corruption in these disaster impacted states ....

* And New Orlean's idiot un-mayor better plan on moving his family again (from Texas) .... Nagin will be leading a mardi gras OUT of Louisiana --- likely 3/4's of evacuees from his city won't return .... which will also impact the ballot box ....

* Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu's legacy: "You can bus us to the ballot box, but you can't bus us out of Katrina's path."

* That Austin, TX District Attorney oughta have a good legal practice to fall back on (unless by some application of law he's disbarred after investigations into his wheelings and dealings) .... Win, lose or draw in his indictment against DeLay -- he's history.

* Betcha a tin hat that Jeanine Pirro will give Hilliary all she can handle in a run for the 2006 Senate seat in NY .... With full GOP backing, she might just win (operative word: full) ....

Hilliary's defeat in NY will be the only way to get the Clinton motif out of our headlines and government ...

* You kidlets stay tuned for more news, views and spews from the world of politics.

Questions? Predictions? Post them below and we'll chew on them, too! Sprinkle lightly with humor and focus on the topic, por favor -- our resident cyber-goat will butt ya if you're rude or crude!

um-um-um-mm-mah-mah-mah-mah

Translation: This goat can also eat his own words, when necessary.

(Dis)Abling Danger?

2005-10-01T12:13:00.000-04:00

Out there, somewhere, someone knows exactly what Sandy Berger stole from the National Archives.

What did he feel should be "hidden" from the Clinton presidency?

Doesn't the National Archives maintain a directory of documents/notes kept there?

So when we gonna learn what he REALLY stuffed into his undies?

Has anyone figured out his stuffings might be related to Able Danger?

Hummmm .... we already suspect that the snitched notes were related to the 911 Commission ..... Weren't those involved with Able Danger presenting "unsubstantiated" accounts of destroyed files to the Commission about the same time as Sandy's visit to the NA?

I think I'm on to something ....

The buzzards.

Nagin: The Third Disaster

2005-09-18T12:04:00.000-04:00

Puleeeeeeze. Somebody do something. Fast.

Where is the city council in all of this? The Governor? Parish leaders?

First the Mayor of Nawlins' failed to remove his people from harm's way and now he wants them to return to a cesspool of disease and distruction?

I forgot. His city is bankrupt (or so he announced last week) and the solution is to bring in 180,000 or so residents to revive the tourism trade -- nevermind the health and welfare of tourists (much less his own citizens).

Has anyone thought to ask WHY he moved his family to Houston????

Hopefully, more stable and responsible "minds" will prevail -- one way or the other. Methinks General Honore and Admiral Allen need to take the irresponsible Mayor Nagin on a short walk through the streets of his own city ....

Eye on the Harpie Corps

2005-09-18T11:01:00.000-04:00

Dr. Carl F. Horowitz writes in Townhall.com: .... let's put away the FEMA jokes for just a minute, and give a modest round of applause for the feds. In the week following the main levee's breach, the military and the Coast Guard managed to rescue more than 32,000 stranded civilians, many from rooftops by helicopter. The Army Corps of Engineers all but completely repaired levee breaches, and began pumping large quantities of water. Fact: Federal response time for Hurricane Katrina was faster, not slower, than for hurricanes Hugo (1989) or Andrew (1992), each a brutally destructive Category 5 storm in its own right.

The primary villain in the Hurricane Katrina saga, of course, was Katrina herself. Yet the aftermath of the storm seems to have unleashed a pent-up fury among paint-by-numbers Bush-haters. The entire Democratic Party and its unofficial brain trust, it seems, have gotten in on the action.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi denounced President Bush as "oblivious" to the suffering of others. Her California Democrat colleague, Rep. Barbara Lee, was even more barbed. "If anyone ever doubted that there are two Americas," she huffed, "this disaster and our government's shameful response to it have made the division clear for all to see."
---------
We'll keep an eye on the outspoken Congressional harpie-corps of Bush-bashers to see if they now remain oblivious to the relief efforts the President proposes.

WHY?

2005-09-03T19:21:00.000-04:00

Why did the wealthiest nation in the world watch in helpless disbelief as two natural disasters devastated a region of 90,000 square miles?

What else could we have done?

Three days before the storm, the President declared LA a national disaster area. The LA Governor called in National Guard units and FEMA resources were set up outside New Orleans. The Red Cross set up a distribution center 80 miles away. The Mayor of New Orleans had the total public transit system, city and government vehicles and a fleet of school buses at his disposal ....

And the buses sat in the parking lots.

Two days before the hurricane hit, NOAA announced "Most of the area will be uninhabitable for weeks... maybe longer," it went on to say. "Power outages will last for weeks... as most power poles will be down and transformers destroyed. Water shortages will make human suffering incredible by modern standards."

Those who had the resources to leave, left. Those who didn't, waited -- either because they did not have the resources to leave, chose not to leave for a variety of now defense-less reasons or chose to rely on historic pride in having weathered previous hurricanes.

And the buses sat in the parking lots.

Then Katrina came with savage fury. In her wake, resources and aid stood ready.
Until the flooding.

The levee system which had been in a state of upgrade since 1965 collapsed. It broke, coincidentally, in a section that had already been rebuilt to withstand a category 3 hurricane ....

No matter that funding to determine upgrades to withstand a category 5 hurricane was to begin in 2006 .... The buses that might have carried thousands more lives to safety were now sitting in floodwaters.

And with the second natural disaster, all post-hurricane infrastructures and conduits for basic needs, sanitation, communications, aid, access and delivery systems were rendered useless. Chaos reigned.

Survivors of the hurricane and the rushing floodwaters waded or swam to higher ground.

To stand in lines awaiting other buses.
While their own sat in flooded parking lots.

A single, please -- hold the pickles

2005-04-17T21:34:00.000-04:00

I want so badly to rant about what's happened to one of my favorite fast food stops: Wendy's. But I'll restrain myself and let someone else take up the rant, especially if anyone shares my love of a Single or a Frosty ...

The woman who found the finger in her chili has dropped her law suit because of emotional stress.

Emotional stress? HERS???? What about the owner of the finger? What about MY stress????

Today I tried (really tried) to return to Wendy's for a favorite sammich: a single, hold the pickle. No, if I wanted cheese I would have ordered a single with cheese. No, I don't want anything else. OK, gimme a small Frosty. But I just couldn't force myself to drive thru .... Just couldn't do it. Not yet, anyway.

So I went to KFC and ordered a #3 ... The guy misunderstood me. "NUMBER THREE!!!!" I yelled into the speaker. He apologized and so did I. I really wanted a Single, dang it. Hold the pickle. And the cheese, please.

If the woman actually planted that finger and/or maimed someone in anticipation of a settlement, she should be punished. I could suggest they chain her to the golden arches and force-feed her specials from every drive-thru within 50 miles. Hourly. With pickles. From 11 am until 1 am for the rest of her life.

But I won't.

Long time no blog ....

2005-03-27T23:57:00.000-05:00

Illness has a way of re-focusing your attention ....

I'm working on a progression of posts related to dealing with TIA's and heart disease. Serious stuff. But I'm trying to add a dash of humor to all this bruhaha ..... humor can be a perfect anedote -- I mean, antidote -- for what ails ya!

More later ....

The Courage to Vote

2005-01-30T16:39:00.000-05:00

.... an Iraqi woman ... going to vote .... killed by a terrorist ... images from America that I'm old enough to remember without the aid of a history book ... I'm not sure the tears I shed for her yesterday will completely remove the anger and sorrow I feel about her death ....

I've been channel surfing since the voting began yesterday .... ever mindful of what it takes to stand up to terrorism and bravely walk toward the ballot box, exemplifying the courage to vote.
One compelling scene was that of a journalist who stood over the body of a young Iraqi woman, killed by a terrorist as she walked to vote.

What was her name? Did she wish her family farewell before she began that walk? Was she surrounded by friends? Was she afraid? Was she aware of her fate? How will she be remembered?

Yes, those simple questions and answers matter to me.

Rest in peace.

The Courage to Vote
by Kathleen Parker
January 29, 2005

"No arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women." - Ronald Reagan

Like most Americans, I've never had to be brave to vote. I just show up at the polls, negotiate the ballot, grab an "I voted" sticker and drive home satisfied that the world will continue to turn on its axis in the usual way.

Piece of cake, democracy.

Then again, not really. As I was pondering the Jan. 30 elections in Iraq - and wondering whether I'd have the courage to vote under such circumstances - I was reminded that not so long ago one group of Americans had to be that brave.

It was just 40 years ago in the United States that many African-Americans were prevented from voting and some killed for trying, as were whites who tried to help them. It was only after numerous acts of violence and, yes, terrorism against blacks that the 1965 Voting Rights Act passed.

Imagine that.

In Iraq, terrorists and insurgents loyal to the former Baathist regime try to terrorize men and women who wish only to exercise their right to control their own destiny. In the South of the 1960s, terrorists loyal to segregation and Jim Crow hid behind white sheets while they burned crosses and terrorized blacks who wanted only to control their own destinies. They behead; we lynched.

Imagine that.

It's interesting that when suicide bombers blow up a building and kill innocents in Iraq, we know to call it terrorism. When bombers detonated their evil in a Birmingham, Ala., church, killing four little girls, that, too, was terrorism. It was also terrorism when members of the Ku Klux Klan kidnapped and murdered three voting-rights activists in Philadelphia, Miss.

There is at this historic juncture a certain poetic symmetry as events unfold. On the eve of free elections in Iraq, our own history is circling back on itself. Just a couple of weeks ago, former KKK leader Edgar Ray Killen, 80, the man accused of orchestrating the 1964 murders of civil-rights workers Michael Schwerner, Andrew Goodman and James Chaney, was indicted and faces trial March 28.

Forty years. Justice is not always swift, nor is the march to freedom easy. Democracy, as we seem to relearn each election season, is hard, messy work. So that witnessing the birth of democracy in Iraq, counting the painful contractions from afar, is both breathtaking and awesome.

I imagine that Iraqis walking to the polls Sunday - anticipating the possibility of violence, a car bomb or a stray bullet - must feel what American marchers, black and white, felt on March 7, 1965, as they started across the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Ala., toward the state capitol in Montgomery.

Like today's Iraqis, all they wanted was to vote. They, too, must have felt their stomachs knot, knowing that armed state troopers at any moment might rain violence on their unprotected heads. Which, of course, they did. Insurgents in Iraq; state-sanctioned terror in America. We have seen this before.

We've come a long way.

And so have Iraqis. In less than two years, they've been invaded, liberated, occupied and now face their first election with some 7,000 candidates and 111 political parties. Americans can follow the election through the a team of Iraqi bloggers, who will be reporting real-time from the ground, thanks to Jim Hake and his Spirit of America, a nonprofit, nonpolitical charity that donates money and resources to advance democracy.

Working with Friends of Democracy in Iraq, Hake has recruited some 15 Iraqis - including journalists, a naval officer, students and a psychiatrist - who will be blogging from different cities and provinces at the Friends of Democracy site (http://www.friendsofdemocracy.org/). I, for one, will be riveted.

Whether or not one agrees with the war that brought Iraq to this point, no American can watch these proceedings without wonder and respect. We've been there. We've had our own revolutions and our own demons to pursue. More than anyone else on the planet, we should be cheering them on.

I don't know how those Iraqi men and women, some of whom reportedly have sworn a last will and testament in preparation to vote, will make the trek from their homes to the polls. Just as I don't know how those marchers in Selma made it across the bridge with their heads split and their shirts bloody.

But they did.

Here's hoping Iraqis will, too.

The "L" Word Personified --

2004-11-28T23:41:00.000-05:00

Michael Moore: the supersized man of ego, girth, babble-bash and speculative docu-dramas now wears his own "L" sign for his Loser, Lackluster image and nil contributions to the entertainment world. Moore heads entertainment's Frigid 50 list. Not surprising.

Self-promoted as the poster boy of the Democratic party (and cited as but one reason sKerry lost), he's become a legend in his own you-just-don't-get-it mind.

May his announced fahrenhype sequel be filmed in the deserts of Iraq.

May it take longer than the projected 3 years. Much longer. Decades longer.

May he be caught by huns -- without his Capital One card.

May he lose cell phone service so we can't hear him.

May he be rescued by an Iraqi Girl Scout troop.

May his camera lenses be scratched by grit and rendered inoperable.

May his film crew be kidnapped by a marauding band of Hollywood insurgents.

May he step in doo-doo in Qua Qua.

May he discover a cache of WMDs while scuffing his berks in the sand.

May he experience dysentery. Without toilet paper.

May he have to eat Beanie Weenie K-rations from a can. With his left hand.

May the fleas of a thousand camels nestle in his facial fur.

May his clip-on Foster Grant's melt in the sun.

May his genitals retract in the chill of the night to a position on top of his shoulders, to prove -- once and for all -- that he really is a dick head.

May sand gall his thighs and permeate all crevices of his body folds.

May he learn to speak jackal without a lisp. Brawwwwwwww harrrrrrwwwwwwww.

May he fantasize about Condi Rice.

May his only protection from the sun be a bright red baseball cap, emblazoned with "W 2004" in reflective letters .... (Now that's a bit too cruel. Forgive me. The lettering should be neon pink.)

Basketbrawl --

2004-11-21T13:38:00.000-05:00

Yeah, I got angry. First I was disgusted. Then angry.

It was the image of a small frightened child being comforted by an older child in a supposedly safe venue in the stands above a basketball court that did it for me.

First of all, I don't even like men's pro basketball. Grown men with body tattoos, gold chains and god-that-had-to-hurt-looking body piercings running up and down a court in baggy shorts (playing noooo defense while) swishing a ball through a net for money. B.O.R.I.N.G. Except for maybe a last nano-second of the 7th game in a best-of-seven series with the score tied 200-200. (When I was in retail, we used to be leery of young men in baggy pants -- into which they could stuff merchandise when they thought no one was looking.)

Maybe those over-paid kazillion dollar boyz in baggy shorts who play-for-pay will have to forfeit some of those big bucks in damages while sitting out the season. Or maybe they can hit the pro wrestling circuit. (Forget it -- they wear tight pants in that league ....) Or take the rest of the season off (instead of a few games, as one bozo asked) to promote his music career. At least NOW we know why some brawlball players put their hands into those baggy shorts while standing at the free-throw line (i.e., as baseball players are known for "adjusting" themselves) .... These bozos are SEARCHING for their brains!

Fans (including lots of impressionable kids who probably look at some of those idiots as role models) PAY to sit in designated seats where they have the right to cheer, holler and taunt (not throw things at, btw) players who perform less than professionally. (Remember all those re-runs from the Christians vs Lions series and the original gladiator league? Even then, there were rules of engagement.)

Players don't, however, have the right to leave the court to enter the stands and attack fans. Under any circumstances. (I bet if we really really delved into word history, we'd find that the word "stadium" once meant, sta-di-heck-outta-um-stands.) That's why the court has lines around it. That's why the bench is also designated for players and team personnel ONLY. That's why locker rooms are closed to fans. Fans pay to see you play. Get it?

I hope the NBA commissioner has the guts to bounce a few balls himself. (I doubt it. But I still hope.) I'd hate to see modern-day Rome-dome fall.

Maybe someone will show the commish that image of those kids in the stands.

An Open Letter to Europe

2004-11-14T22:11:00.000-05:00

My side-bar reading list includes several references which, while I may read them regularly, do not necessarily reflect my personal opinion(s). One such reference is The American Thinker. The article reproduced below approximates some of the tenets I have held for most of my adult years ..... Rather than trying to write them now, all I have to do is keep this link close at hand.

Works for me.

An open letter to Europe
November 11th, 2004

Hi. Are you nuts?

Forgive me for being so blunt, but your reaction to our reelection of President Bush has been so outrageous that I’m wondering if you have quite literally lost your minds. One of Britain’s largest newspapers ran a headline asking “How Can 59 Million Americans Be So Dumb?”, and commentators in France all seemed to use the same word – bizarre -- to explain the election’s outcome to their readers. In Germany the editors of Die Tageszeitung responded to our vote by writing that “Bush belongs at a war tribunal – not in the White House.” And on a London radio talk show last week one Jeremy Hardy described our President and those of us who voted for him as “stupid, crazy, ignorant, bellicose Christian fundamentalists.”

Of course, you are entitled to whatever views about us that you care to hold. (And lucky for you we Americans aren’t like so many of the Muslims on your own continent; as the late Dutch film maker Theo van Gogh just discovered, make one nasty crack about them and you’re likely to get six bullets pumped into your head and a knife plunged into your chest.) But before you write us off as just a bunch of sweaty, hairy-chested, Bible-thumping morons who are more likely to break their fast by dipping a Krispy Kreme into a diet cola than a biscotti into an espresso – and who inexplicably have won more Nobel prizes than all other countries combined, host 25 or 30 of the world’s finest universities and five or six of the world’s best symphonies, produce wines that win prizes at your own tasting competitions, have built the world’s most vibrant economy, are the world’s only military superpower and, so to speak in our spare time, have landed on the moon and sent our robots to Mars – may I suggest you stop frothing at the mouth long enough to consider just what are these ideas we hold that you find so silly and repugnant?

We believe that church and state should be separate, but that religion should remain at the center of life. We are a Judeo-Christian culture, which means we consider those ten things on a tablet to be commandments, not suggestions. We believe that individuals are more important than groups, that families are more important than governments, that children should be raised by their parents rather than by the State, and that marriage should take place only between a man and a woman. We believe that rights must be balanced by responsibilities, that personal freedom is a privilege we must be careful not to abuse, and that the rule of law cannot be set aside when it becomes inconvenient. We believe in economic liberty, and in the right of purposeful and industrious entrepreneurs to run their businesses – and thus create jobs – with a minimum of government interference. We recognize that other people see things differently, and we are tolerant of their views. But we believe that our country is worth defending, and if anyone decides that killing us is an okay thing to do we will go after them with everything we’ve got.

If these beliefs seem strange to you, they shouldn’t. For these are precisely the beliefs that powered Western Europe – you -- from the Middle Ages into the Renaissance, on to the Enlightenment, and forward into the modern world. They are the beliefs that made Europe itself the glory of Western civilization and – not coincidentally – ignited the greatest outpouring of art, literature, music and scientific discovery the world has ever known including Michaelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, Shakespeare, Bach, Issac Newton and Descartes.

Europe is Dying

It is your abandonment of these beliefs that has created the gap between Europe and the United States. You have ceased to be a Judeo-Christian culture, and have become instead a secular culture. And a secular culture quickly goes from being “un-religious” to anti-religious. Indeed, your hostility to the basic concepts of Judaism and Christianity has literally been written into your new European Union constitution, despite the Pope’s heroic efforts to the contrary.
Your rate of marriage is at an all-time low, and the number of abortions in Europe is at an all-time high. Indeed, your birth rates are so far below replacement levels that in 30 years or so there will be 70 million fewer Europeans alive than are alive today. Europe is literally dying. And of the children you do manage to produce, all too few will be raised in stable, two-parent households. Your economy is stagnant because your government regulators make it just about impossible for your entrepreneurs to succeed – except by fleeing to the United States, where we welcome them and celebrate their success.

And your armed forces are a joke. With the notable exception of Great Britain, you no longer have the military strength to defend yourselves. Alas, you no longer have the will to defend yourselves.

What worries me even more than all this is your willful blindness. You refuse to see that it is you, not we Americans, who have abandoned Western Civilization. It’s worrisome because, to tell you the truth, we need each other. Western Civilization today is under siege, from radical Islam on the outside and from our own selfish hedonism within. It’s going to take all of our effort, our talent, our creativity and, above all, our will to pull through. So take a good, hard look at yourselves and see what your own future will be if you don’t change course. And please, stop sneering at America long enough to understand it. After all, Western Civilization was your gift to us, and you ought to be proud of what we Americans have made of it.
Herbert E. Meyer served during the Reagan Administration as Special Assistant to the Director of Central Intelligence and Vice Chairman of the CIA’s National Intelligence Council. His DVD on The Siege of Western Civilization is a nationwide best-seller.

Moore Means LESS --

2004-11-07T10:38:00.000-05:00

Moore means less
(Filed: 06/11/2004)
From the Telegraph.co.uk

Not since Moby Dick has a great white whale been so bloodily harpooned. It took a shocked Michael Moore, director of Fahrenheit 9/11, until yesterday to comment on the US election result. When he did, he made a lame joke, offering "reasons not to slit your own throat". But if John Kerry's strategists feel like slitting anyone's throat right now, it is Mr Moore's.

This was supposed to be the victory that the podgy sage of Flint, Michigan, delivered for the Democrats by winding up students into paroxysms of anti-Bush rage and propelling them into the polling booths. In the event, he achieved the first but not the second objective. The proportion of young voters did not increase on Tuesday. In the gleeful words of one anti-Moore website, "pot-smoking slackers are still pot-smoking slackers": they meant to vote Kerry but, like, couldn't get out of bed in time.

In 2000, Mr Moore's support for Ralph Nader helped lose Florida for Al Gore. This time, he boosted President Bush by outraging Middle America. Take a bow, Mike: you've done it again.

Gay Marriage Myth

2004-11-06T16:35:00.000-05:00

The Gay Marriage Myth

Terrorism, not values, drove Bush's re-election.
By Paul Freedman
Posted Friday, Nov. 5, 2004, at 1:16 PM PT

Did "moral values"—in particular, the anti-gay marriage measures on ballots in 11 states this week—drive President Bush's re-election? That's the early conventional wisdom as Democrats begin soul-searching and finger-pointing. These measures are alleged to have drawn Christian conservatives to the polls, many of whom failed to vote last time. The theory is intriguing, but the data don't support it. Gay marriage and values didn't decide this election. Terrorism did.

The morality theory rests on three claims. The first is that gay-marriage bans led to higher turnout, chiefly among Christian conservatives. The second is that Bush performed especially well where gay marriage was on the ballot. The third is that in general, moral issues decided the election.

The evidence that having a gay-marriage ban on the ballot increased voter turnout is spotty. Marriage-ban states did see higher turnout than states without such measures. They also saw higher increases in turnout compared with four years ago. But these differences are relatively small. Based on preliminary turnout estimates, 59.5 percent of the eligible voting population turned out in marriage-ban states, whereas 59.1 percent turned out elsewhere. This is a microscopic gap when compared to other factors. For example, turnout in battleground states was more than 7.5 points higher than it was in less-competitive states, and it increased much more over 2000 as well.

It's true that states with bans on the ballot voted for Bush at higher rates than other states. His vote share averaged 7 points higher in gay-marriage-banning states than in other states (57.9 vs. 50.9). But four years ago, when same-sex marriage was but a twinkle in the eye of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, Bush's vote share was 7.3 points higher in these same states than in other states. In other words, by a statistically insignificant margin, putting gay marriage on the ballot actually reduced the degree to which Bush's vote share in the affected states exceeded his vote share elsewhere.

Why did states with gay-marriage ballot measures vote so heavily for Bush? Because such measures don't appear on state ballots randomly. Opponents of gay marriage concentrate their efforts in states that are most hospitable to a ban and are most likely to vote for Bush even without such a ballot measure. A state's history of voting for Bush is more likely to lead to an anti-gay-marriage measure on that state's ballot than the other way around.Much has been made of the fact that "moral values" topped the list of voters' concerns, mentioned by more than a fifth (22 percent) of all exit-poll respondents as the "most important issue" of the election. It's true that by four percentage points, people in states where gay marriage was on the ballot were more likely than people elsewhere to mention moral issues as a top priority (25.0 vs. 20.9 percent). But again, the causality is unclear. Did people in these states mention moral issues because gay marriage was on the ballot? Or was it on the ballot in places where people were already more likely to be concerned about morality?

More to the point, the morality gap didn't decide the election. Voters who cited moral issues as most important did give their votes overwhelmingly to Bush (80 percent to 18 percent), and states where voters saw moral issues as important were more likely to be red ones. But these differences were no greater in 2004 than in 2000. If you're trying to explain why the president's vote share in 2004 is bigger than his vote share in 2000, values don't help.

If the morality gap doesn't explain Bush's re-election, what does? A good part of the answer lies in the terrorism gap. Nationally, 49 percent of voters said they trusted Bush but not Kerry to handle terrorism; only 31 percent trusted Kerry but not Bush. This 18-point gap is particularly significant in that terrorism is strongly tied to vote choice: 99 percent of those who trusted only Kerry on the issue voted for him, and 97 percent of those who trusted only Bush voted for him. Terrorism was cited by 19 percent of voters as the most important issue, and these citizens gave their votes to the president by an even larger margin than morality voters: 86 percent for Bush, 14 percent for Kerry.

These differences hold up at the state level even when each state's past Bush vote is taken into account. When you control for that variable, a 10-point increase in the percentage of voters citing terrorism as the most important problem translates into a 3-point Bush gain. A 10-point increase in morality voters, on the other hand, has no effect. Nor does putting an anti-gay-marriage measure on the ballot. So, if you want to understand why Bush was re-elected, stop obsessing about the morality gap and start looking at the terrorism gap.

Prayers to Deaf Ears?

2004-11-06T16:28:00.000-05:00

Political Hay
A Party on Its Knees
By George Neumayr
Published 11/5/2004 1:08:09 AM

Normally Democrats urge their candidates to expunge God and morality from politics. Even the word morality grates on them. It is a far too judgment-laden term for their taste. How about the insipid term "ethics"? Okay, if you must -- goes the attitude -- but don't use the loaded term "morality."

Yet what are we now hearing from the Mike Barnicles and Nancy Pelosis? That Kerry didn't talk about God enough. That he failed to satisfy the public's hunger for spirituality and morality. Like children who recently learned a new phrase, liberals are giving Kerry a post-mortem drubbing for not speaking to the "moral values" of America.

Tina Brown, a high-brow vulgarian who has bragged about tarting up the New Yorker, turned prim in Thursday's Washington Post. "Who among us," she wrote, "is not sick and tired of hearing the Cialis ad discuss four-hour erections while we're sitting there trying to watch TV with the kids?" Brown related that she chats with other moms about "how much we worry and strategize and push back against the tsunami of pop culture sleaze that seeps into our kids' psyches." Who knew Democrats had such pious longings? Who knew sexual, let's-not-repress-the-children liberationists had such distaste for Cialis ads? Tina Brown even dropped the pom-poms for Anthony Lewis's wife, Margaret Marshall, the Massachusetts Chief justice who, as Brown put it, "forced her state to authorize gay marriage." Forced? Boy, that's a very right-wing way of putting it. Usually the left says "freed." Karl Rove should give her a "big bouquet," said a piqued Brown. Got that, Marshall? Don't ever turn up the heat so fast that the frogs jump out again. Remember, duping the American people into avant-garde morality takes time and finesse and you lack it. No more invites to Tina Brown's parties for you.

Nancy Pelosi's secularism also took a rare day off after Kerry lost. Now she, too, longs for a little more old-fashioned religion in the public square. She is telling fellow Democrats to be more conspicuous about their faith. "Democrats did not connect well enough with the American people," she told CNN. "Certainly Democrats are faith-filled. Certainly we love our country, and we're very patriotic, but somehow or other that did not come across when 61% of those who are regular churchgoers voted Republican -- voted for President Bush, and when 22% of Americans gave its highest number to what determined their vote to issues relating to morality, more than the economy, more than terrorism."

Act on your faith, Democrats, wear religion on your sleeve -- that's now the message from Democrats who find it very "troubling" that we have a president who…acts on his faith.

"I believe that we have it within us," exhorted Pelosi. "I know that many of the people who are in politics on the Democratic side do so according to the -- the gospel of Matthew and indeed the Bible, but we don't demonstrate it clearly enough and faith is such an important part of the lives of most people in our country. They want to know that we identify with that."

After spending the last few years trying to pry slabs of the Ten Commandments out of public courthouses, remove God from the pledge, deny public money to faith-based charities, and harass the Boy Scouts, it takes a lot of gall for these Democrats to give Kerry a hard time for insufficient religiosity. Has the ACLU been alerted to this new threat yet? Pelosi has given the green light to a new crop of theocratic Democrats.

Actually, Kerry did talk about God quite a bit in the campaign. The third line of his campaign biography stated that "John Kerry was raised in the Catholic faith and continues to be an active member of the Catholic Church." The problem wasn't that he failed to talk about God. The problem was that the American people didn't believe him. When he emerged from church on Ash Wednesday with ash on his head, the American people didn't see faith but phoniness. Picking up a bible on his visit to black churches didn't help him any more than picking up a rifle in Ohio. The American people didn't respond to his religiosity, because they knew it was religiosity without religion.

Democrats can talk and talk about God, but who's going to believe them when their agenda is to nullify the Ten Commandments? Since their rhetoric doesn't match reality, Americans rightly tune them out.

"I have a commitment to faith" sounded from Kerry's mouth as convincing as "I have a commitment to national security." Democrats can't talk about faith, then endorse partial-birth abortion and expect the American people to take them seriously, any more than they should expect the American people to take them seriously when they talk about American sovereignty and endorse "global tests."

In his lunging attacks on Bush's religion, Kerry often said that "faith without deeds is dead." The American people ended up agreeing with him -- about his.

Setting Priorities ....

2004-11-05T20:35:00.000-05:00

The more I think about the tragedy of Elizabeth Edwards' breast cancer diagnosis, the more disappointed I am in a man who-would-be-president NOT insisting that his wife receive medical assessment and treatment IMMEDIATELY.

I wonder why he or she would wait until the day after elections .... I wonder even more about his priorities ....

2004-11-05T18:58:00.000-05:00

Advice for Michael Moore and MoveOn.org .....

2004-11-05T18:56:00.000-05:00

What Skeeries did when election results came in.....

Get thee to a monastery and other thoughts --

2004-11-04T20:23:00.000-05:00

How did a multi-million dollar campaign blitz, hollywood's most outspoken entertainers and mainstream media lose an election to the man everyone (huh?) loved to hate? Analysts continue to work over the statistics and those "gotcha" exit poll results without a satisfactory answer. Missing those dangling chads to blame, they're left to speculate about the influence of special interest groups and hot topics.

[IMO, homeland security and terrorism were the top two issues in the election, with personaBLE qualities third, and Kerry's vulnerabilities fourth.]

Those who project that GWB's election and the next four years will be directed by an evangelical coalition (or any other single special interest group) should reconsider the reliability of polling, pollsters, sour grape slants, wishful thinkers and Monday morning bench-warmers. In case you haven't seen the county-by-county national graphic, not everyone who voted for Bush was Republican, rich, Christian, uneducated, heterosexual, conservative, WASPy or lived in the South.

As for morality being a primary voter issue (based on what 20% of interviewees stated in exit polls), keep in the back of your mind that those exit polls were dead wrong Tuesday. Whatever you may have observed about GWB's morality, you might also remember that Sen. Kerry campaigned from the pulpit on five consecutive Sundays before the election and answered the same "faith" questions that Bush answered during the debates.

And don't be conned or duped into associating the theme of "family values" with anti-gay sentiment. While the majority of American voters may currently oppose gay marriage (for either religious or social or personal reasons), there is strong and growing support for civil unions throughout this nation. While I consider homophobic Biblical and political tenets flies on the fruitcake of life (that's the best analogy I can come up with without being equally offensive), I'm fairly confident that neither God nor GWB are anti-gay.

Using the title of an ineffective anti-Bush website, it really is time to MOVE ON and stop looking for some group -- any group -- to "blame" for Bush winning (or Kerry losing).

But I digress ---

Think the election was stolen? How does 51-52% of the populace "steal" an election? Do you really believe that half of America is Republican and voted a straight ticket? It's about time to stop the labels, stop the alibis and accept the reality that voters voted their CHOICE in leadership and not their party affiliation.

Who really won this election? Give lots of credit to every-day, hard-working Americans who volunteered to walk the streets of their neighborhoods talking to neighbors who listened to them -- and not to the paid profiteers or Hollywoodites who belittled, scorned and humiliated any American who voiced support for GWB or his programs. Contrary to the profilers (and I repeat), not everyone who voted for Bush was Republican, rich, Christian, uneducated, heterosexual, conservative, WASPy or lived in the South. Check out one of those national county-by-county digital maps if you want to see how election results translate in colors. Red is for reality.

Who was the real loser on Nov. 2? Peggy Noonan makes a strong case: "... the biggest loser was the mainstream media, the famous MSM, the initials that became popular in this election cycle. Every time the big networks and big broadsheet national newspapers tried to pull off a bit of pro-liberal mischief -- CBS and the fabricated Bush National Guard documents, the New York Times and bombgate, CBS's "60 Minutes" attempting to coordinate the breaking of bombgate on the Sunday before the election -- [it was] the yeomen of the blogosphere [bloggers].... and the Internet [who] took them down."

The election is over. The campaign hype is over. GWB has been re-elected as our President. Accept it. If you want to join a longggggg list of hollywoodites who threaten to leave this country, be advised that Canada will not welcome you immediately -- you'll have to wait about three years to get citizenship .... George Soros has said if Bush wins, he'll spend the next four years in a monastery. (Surely he can still afford a room at Holiday Inn or Motel 6.) Maybe he'll take Michael Moore with him. Now that's an idea..... They can spend the next four years re-writing the Constitution as a rap duet for the politically challenged.

(Do they have monasteries in Iraq or Afghanistan? How long must you wait for citizenship? They've missed the elections in Afghanistan, but if they hurry, they MIGHT be able to vote in Iraq in January........)

Close only counts ....

2004-11-03T19:10:00.000-05:00

.... well -- finish the definition as you choose, but those who are now saying that almost half the electorate OPPOSED GWB, reminds me of the team that came in second in a two team playoff. What is IS. No matter how you couch it, GWB received a mandate from 51% of the electorate.

Big numbers. And given the context of the hate-base, the media bias and the U.N. conspiracies, the odds of his winning were even greater.

Spin that in your next editorial, media mongruls.

A passing fear ....

2004-11-02T21:24:00.000-05:00

As I drove home this afternoon, my mind wandered to residual halloween nightmares ....

Edwards as Vice President. Edwards returning to Congress after making the insightful decision not to run for reelection .... Edwards being a heart-beat away from the Presidency.

Please, no.

He ran for President for a good reason. OK, two good reasons. First he has the money. Secondly, his political career was over if he had to rely on re-election to the Senate.

Do you think the Democratic party actually expected the John's to do this well? I wonder if they are getting more than they bargained for (such as the potential of 8 years of skerry stuff) .... I suspect they did not think anyone could defeat GW .... I sense that they may have (in the backs of their own conniving minds) been waiting for 2008 to make the big run for the presidency .....

I did arrive home safely, btw, in spite of the nightmares.

Early Returns ....

2004-11-02T20:51:00.000-05:00

I'm enjoying watching the pundits assess the early returns tonight .... there seems to be a telling discrepancy between exit poll surveys and actual precinct returns .... PANIC on the Democrat front -- apologies from the pundits....

Susan blahblah Esteridge (spelling?) has always been an overpowering "know it all" (which the host stated in his intro). He meant something complimentary (or so he said). I find this accurate and not a compliment. She always shouts over anyone who attempts to engage her in any (yes, any -- including legal) discourse .... the know-it-all. I do hope her man Kerry loses. For many reasons ....

I'm proud of my state. Not only did Bush carry my state, but he appears to be doing very well in the popular vote. Electoral votes will come .... My entire staff (9) voted for Bush; my family has voted for Bush. Not an easy feat as several are democrats. Even I am a registered Independent. Several friends, however, are democrats and have voted for sKerry.... They remain friends, of course -- but they will definitely pout if and when Bush is reelected ....

I'm reminded of those who vote for sKerry based on hatred of Bush.... I can't understand this mentality.....

On second thought, I do have some understanding of disliking someone (not quite at the hatred level, however) .... I dislike sKerry for several reasons -- one of which is his military history, including the lies and meeting with the VietCong while Americans were held as POWs. The flip flops notwithstanding, sKerry has no identifiable position that I have yet been able to grasp. There have been many instances in which he states "I have a plan," but there have been little more than goal statements presented --- not plans.

Please don't let the next President of the US have absolutely no discernable plans for anything except raising taxes and asking the U.N. to define terrorism .... tick tick tick.

Kerry Defines Terrorism

2004-11-01T07:55:00.000-05:00

This morning on Fox News, Kerry spokesman Gen. Clark FINALLY specified how Kerry would define terrorism: he would consult with our friends/allies to determine the standards for defining terrorism, per a summit-of-sorts, to determine our reactions --

God help us. Please. Vote. Vote. Vote to put Kerry on permanent windsail status.

How Much Leadership Do Voters Want?

2004-11-01T01:46:00.000-05:00

"A leader's first priorities are peace and prosperity, which in our time mean keeping the U.S. economy competitive amid the emerging challenge from India and China, and of course the battle against terrorism.

A frequent lament among journalists, and often voters, is that politicians always take the easy way out; they never risk their personal popularity or re-election chances for the sake of longer run gains in the national interest. In Iraq and the Middle East, Mr. Bush has done precisely that. We will find out on Tuesday how much Presidential leadership the voters really want in a dangerous world."

(Viewer Password Required to read entire article.)

2004-11-01T01:24:00.000-05:00

Dogs for Bush: K-9's unleashed for Nov. 2 .....

BlogBirth 10-31-04

2004-10-31T19:23:00.000-05:00

I blog because I am..... This is my second blog site (first outside my ISP). I look forward to the experience and the association with others ....