Kyzylkum

The Death of American Heath Care

2010-03-23T21:39:00.011-06:00

This Sunday American health care as we knew it died. Another chunk of America's freedom died with it. The finest health care system in the world was killed by greedy politicians, who in an astonishing fit of political pique, passed a socialized medicine bill in spite of the overwhelming evidence that the American people didn't want it. They passed it having never read the bill. They passed on the basis of bald-faced lies about how it can be done without raising taxes (Ha), by cutting out waste, fraud and abuse (Ha Ha), and by cutting what doctors and hospitals can earn. (Ha, Ha, Ha) Their principal lie was the whopper about 30 million Americans without any access to health care. That is a lie of stupendous proportions. Just check any emergency room in any hospital in America and you'll see these "uninsured" Americans, including illegal aliens, getting all the health care they want, for free. None can be turned away. It's the law. Nonetheless, Obama and his minions steamrollered this monstrosity on all of us in the name of helping these "uninsured" victims who were already covered.

This was never about providing health care. It won't, except very inefficiently. It was never about covering the uninsured. They were all already covered for all practical purposes. What was it about then? It was, and is, all about power. The more power the leftists can wield, the better they like it. And now they have complete control of one sixth of the American economy. And they would like to control 100% of the American economy. They will continue to jam the next batch of destructive bills such as "cap and trade" down our collective throats unless and until we put a stop to it. How? By making sure they lose control of congress this fall. It is that simple. And it is essential at this point.

Tonight many states held the party political caucuses. Here's hoping the next generation of no-nonsensence politicians were nominated and are on their way to replacing the embarrassing gang that killed health care in this country. Our nation's survival depends on it.

Deja Vu All Over Again?

2010-01-16T09:58:00.006-07:00

As the special election in Massachusetts nears, one can't help getting the sick feeling that we've already seen the outcome which, if the Republican doesn't get at least 10 percent more than the Democrat, is foreordained: The Democrat will win. Oh, it might take a recount and several court interventions, but in a close election, they will "find" the votes to make the Democrat the winner. They always have.

There are many examples of this over the years, the most recent being in Minnesota where the comedian Democrat eked out a controversial "victory" after the votes we all in and "counted" and where he at first had lost, then additional votes were "found." A similar outcome happened in the Washington gubernatorial election just a few years ago. There it looked as though the Republican had won, but hold the phone, after a suspicious recount and court intervention, surprise, surprise, ---the Democrat won. A few cycles ago the same thing happened in South Dakota where the "Indian reservation" vote mysteriously was delayed until democrat election officials knew just how many more votes they needed to elect their man and, shock of all shocks, they found just enough. In state after state, election after election, all the close wins have gone to the Democrats. One would be very hard pressed to find a single senatorial or gubernatorial election where a republican has won by less than five percent. In those cases even the most "progressive" Democrat election officials didn't feel confident enough to "find" that many.

How can this be explained? There have been many articles and books published on this subject. They detail the dead voters, bussed-in voters, ballot box stuffing, ballot spoiling, and many other techniques these enlightened progressives use to impose their will on all of us. They also cite numerous statistical experts to point out the absurdly low probability that all close election would go the the Democrats. They also point out that the Democrats get a great advantage if they can get an election into the court system since they have "owned" most of the judges for years. But this doesn't explain why Republicans continue to accept these tainted results. There really is no good answer to that question other than Republicans tend to be too polite to engage in the barroom brawl tactics needed when you are grappling with election thieves. Somehow the republicans don't have the stomach for such fights and simply step aside, conceding even though they know the election was stolen. This only emboldens the vote stealers for the next cycle. Massachusetts will likely provide the next opportunity to see if the party has grown a spine or if we will simply bend over and take it yet again.

They Must Be Insane

2009-10-12T22:16:00.003-06:00

One definition of insanity is repeating a behavior or practice that has always been unsuccessful in the past with the delusional idea that it will somehow succeed in the future, in spite of all the evidence to the contrary. Such insanity is frequently manifested in government policies that somehow get imposed on us over and over even though they always fail to accomplish what they are intended to accomplish, and frequently result in adverse effect not foreseen at the time they were imposed. A good example of this is price controls. Yes, we all know that these have failed in the past when they were tried by dictators, despots, left-wingers and other assorted politicians down through the ages. If you put an artificial ceiling price on any commodity, the ceiling will immediately become the floor, and pressure will inexorably mount to raise it. And until it is raised, not only will there be a shortage of whatever commodity is thus regulated, there will be corruption, black markets, etc. created. It happened with gasoline in the 70s, with price controlled rental units in large cities for decades, and with countless other items over the centuries. It is really a singularly bad idea. Yet “progressive” politicians resort to it over and over again to placate the ignorant bleating of their benighted constituents who clamor for “fair prices.” Adam Smith, in The Wealth of Nations, clearly spelled out the inevitable failure of price controls and the virtue of free markets way back in 1776,(oh the irony), but he is mostly ignored and dismissed by today’s left-wing professors of economics, who, none-the-less, have failed to come up with a better system. Russia’s colossal failure in their seventy year experiment in “government control” over prices and production should serve as a warning beacon to all but the most thick-headed.

So, in spite of the abundant evidence that it won’t work, surprise, surprise, here comes the Obama administration with price controls. Yes price controls in the form of interest rates banks are allowed to charge on loans. As of October 1, 2009, banks are restricted in the rate they can charge on mortgage loan products. Of course the new rules are supposed to "protect consumers from problem mortgages,” (which, by the way, were caused in large part by the government requirements imposed on banks by Jimmy Carter’s Community Reinvestment Act.), but in reality they will decrease the amount of loans available to borrowers. The new policy limits the rate banks can charge. Therefore, banks will simply stop making loans to all but the most qualified of borrowers, since the government controlled rates will not allow them to recoup their costs on the riskier mortgages. Additionally most banks have already raised their rates to the highest rate the government will allow since that is the “government approved rate” so they no longer have to compete with one another. No more competition, decrease in products offered, higher prices. Inevitably the pressure will mount for the government to increase the “ceiling” rates. Higher rates for everybody will result due to the lack of competition. Without a doubt banks will make fewer loans to fewer borrowers and the very people who jammed these rate controls through will be crying “discrimination” when the banks elect not to make risky loans. Without being able to price these loans to be viable, they will simply stop making them. This has already happened. We’re not talking the “loan shark” rates that some financial institutions were charging. We’re not talking 36% mortgages here. The banks were making these riskier loans at 2% or 3% over the rate available to the best borrowers. But no more. These loans will no longer be available due to the price controls imposed. Classic consequences: Less supply, less of the market served, more demand equals inflation, corruption and higher prices for everybody. It is insanity.

The Law of Unintended Consequences

2009-07-24T22:56:00.009-06:00

As Rush Limbaugh says frequently, "Words mean something." In Barack Obama's lame excuses for besmirching the entire police profession by saying they acted "stupidly", he only exacerbated the situation by claiming his words were mis-calibrated. The words were uttered in plain English. There was no nuance, no obscurity, no doubt about their meaning whatsoever. Obama has now dug a deeper hole by trying to bury the first one he dug. If we had an honest press they would be calling him on it. Don't hold your breath.

The facts are apparently clear in this case: The police officer responded to a call about a possible burglary, investigated and encountered an obviously out-of-control left-winger with a giant chip on his shoulder. The officer apparently did nothing wrong. The professor clearly refused to cooperate with the police officer in any way. The 911 tapes would probably make that abundantly clear if they were allowed to be released. If we had an honest civil administration in the Cambridge police department, they would have already released the tapes. Don't hold your breath.

The tapes will probably not be released precisely because they would exonerate the police officer. They will refuse to release the tapes because it would displease the left-wing power brokers who do not want the professor's outrageous behavior further illuminated. They probably don't dare release the tapes. Don't hold your breath.

One of the most pernicious ways left-wingers wreak damage on our society can be summed up neatly in the Law of Unintended Consequences. In actuality, and in fact, very frequently the opposite result than the left-wingers had intended in their policies and regulations, occurs. For example, John Locke warned over 300 years ago that artificially restricting interest rates lenders could charge resulted in more problems than benefits for most people because the lenders simply stopped lending money at the restricted rates. Therefore, average people could no longer get credit. Instead of helping benighted people to save money on interest, the nanny class prevented them from prospering at all. Many other such examples abound.

Affirmative Action is yet another example of supposed good intentions gone wrong. Professor Gates is a product of the affirmative action generation of the sixties and seventies. No one can ever know what his real merit was when he was accepted to Yale since at the time he was accepted many, many unqualified minorities were being accepted based not on merit, but on the quaint notion that society could correct long-standing injustice against them by just jamming them into Ivy League colleges. Some of them undoubtedly were well-qualified and would have been accepted and would have graduated on their own. However, since they were all lumped together with the unqualified, the smell left behind by affirmative action lingers on and on, permeating each minority college student who attended colleges such as Yale since the sixties. Nobody can know, or ever will know, if any particular student got in, and graduated from the Ivy League educational institutions on their own merit or if the whole thing was as a result of the misguided efforts of do-gooders to right all of the supposed wrongs of prior racial discrimination by reserving slots for less-qualified persons of color, then passing them along because, after all, they couldn't be allowed to fail. The result of this meddling is that many of these "scholars" have a permanent, giant chip on their shoulders, of the variety Professor Gates apparently amply demonstrated. They know the aura of invalidity will follow them the rest of their academic lives no matter what they do. It has to be a heavy burden to bear.

Maybe Professor Gates is the world's greatest scholar on "Black Studies." The news media is convinced he is. The sad reality is that because of the law of unintended consequences as applied to affirmative action, the world can really never know. An honest assessment by commentators would admit this. Don't hold your breath.

Hooray! I no Longer Have to Pay my Mortgage!

2009-02-19T20:47:00.001-07:00

President Obama says so. In an incredible leap of socialism, president Obama will take $75 billion from other people to pay my mortgage for me. I’m only sorry that I didn’t buy a much more expensive house to not pay my mortgage on. I’m sure I would have been much more comfortable in a larger, nicer house than the one I’m currently stuck with. After all, why should those who moved into houses they couldn’t afford, based on fraudulent, phony income, with no down payment, and with mortgage payments based on negative amortization or interest only payments, lose their houses? (THEIR houses? They have nothing invested in these houses. The houses actually belong to the bank and the bank’s shareholders, but that logic totally escapes the Obama thought process!)

But not to fear, Obama will save us all. Many of the very people who are currently not paying their mortgages are in the homes they couldn’t afford because Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and now Obama REQUIRED banks to make loans to people who couldn’t afford those houses under the Community Reinvestment Act.

Free welfare for all…. We have to subsidize people who are not paying their mortgage, for the good of all you understand. Hey, this could really catch on! Why pay for anything? Obama will pay for your food, your car, your clothing, your house and everything! Why pay anything? Why work? Incredible!

No Veto-Proof Congress

2008-12-04T19:11:00.006-07:00

The Georgia senate election results have become final and happily, the left-wing Daily Kos crowd will not be having a Merry Christmas this year because they were deprived of one of their most longed-for wishes: a 60 seat Democrat senate. Of course the really despicable Democrat comedian from Minnesota is still trying to "steal" that state but it won't matter in the final analysis. They won't have the super majority they craved. (It always boggles the mind to see how the left-wing gang doesn't ever wonder how it is that every recount in a close election goes their way eventually. How does that happen? Logic would dictate that a truly honest, random recount would spread the "found" votes more or less equally among both candidates, but not if one of the candidates is a Democrat. This has been shown over and over, in state after state. If the race is close, the Democrats will steal it. It's almost a matter of pride with them.)

After securing the presidential election win, Barack, much to his credit, has disappointed his wild-eyed cohorts by naming several actual moderates to his cabinet. He has given us "Clinton Three" for the most part with a couple of "holdovers" to a least give the illusion of leading from the center. The Kos Kids are livid. No doubt the current economic conditions have tempered his real long-range intentions and even a committed socialist realizes that a crippling tax increase immediately after his election wouldn't sit well with the otherwise deluded American people. The tax increases will have to wait for a little while at least, but they, no doubt will be coming.

Conservatives are starting to come out of the hills to try and reorganize a comeback. It will be a long, hard slog but must be done. No doubt, when Obama's tax increases and wrong-headed policies start to show their negative effects, the American people will be ready again for a swing back to sanity. This time we must assure that "genuine" conservatives of the Reagan ilk are elected and not the country-club Republicans who fumbled away the last opportunity they were given. The nation's survival may well depend on it.

Truth and Consequences

2008-10-31T20:42:00.008-06:00

For the past year many Americans have been ignoring many simple truths. Barack Obama is not what he appears to be and many self-deluded Americans, plagued with "white guilt" don't seem willing or able to admit to themselves that truth. Obama is an inexperienced political novice, without any qualifications, accomplishments, or relevant experience to be president of the United States. Obama has many troubling prior associations with radicals, terrorist supporters, communists and other assorted socialists that would prevent him from getting any kind of employment that required a security clearance or background check. And perhaps the most difficult of all truths for many people to admit to themselves: Obama is where he is for one reason, and one reason only -- because he is black. The truth hurts, but if anybody is willing to be honest at all with themselves, they have to admit that if Obama had the same background and experience he would not be the nominee of his party if he were white. I'm sorry if the truth is hard to hear.

Barack Obama is entirely a creation of a coalition of white, moneyed liberals, left-leaning mainstream media outlets who are in love with the concept of the "first black president" and who are deluded by power hungry Democrat politicians who share a pathological hatred for George W. Bush, and radical left-wing activists who really do want to destroy the America most of us know and cherish. Without the concerted efforts of this group, we would have never heard of Barack Obama since he himself has done nothing to merit any notoriety. This truth is undeniable.

If Obama wins the election on November 4Th, America may well survive, but will undoubtedly suffer severe damage from the appointment of assorted left-wing judges and the left-wing legislation he will support. The effect of this will be to further destroy the proven capitalist system that has provided us with unprecedented prosperity for over 200 years and replace it with socialist, grey bureaucracy dominated by the lunacy that people will work hard to provide tax revenue for leftists to redistribute to their favored clients. Nevertheless, America will probably survive, albeit at a great cost in lost prosperity and wasted time. However, if Obama wins and gets a veto-proof congress, America may well not survive the onslaught of left-wing political idiocy which would no doubt destroy most of the basic institutions we all hold sacred. "Spreading the wealth" will destroy us just as certain as that concept has destroyed every other socialist/communist experiment nations have previously tried.

The polls are tightening up. There is still hope that enough Americans will wake up in time to save us, if not from an Obama presidency, then at least from the dreaded veto-proof congress. Here's hoping we will not perish in that conflagration. We must remain steadfast in our resolve to not allow that to happen and to work tirelessly to overturn the Obama phenomenon as soon as possible after it bears the bitter fruit it inevitably will produce.

Leave the Taxpayers Out of It!

2008-09-25T21:57:00.001-06:00

So some large Wall Street investment banks find themselves in serious trouble these days. Through a combination government mandated poor business decisions caused, in no small measure, by the Community Reinvestment Act, unrealistic economic assumptions, greed and foolishness, they wound up with a ruinous portfolio of non-performing real estate loans. The consequences? They should all now go out of business!! That’s the way it works in the real world. You make too many poor choices, the consequences are — you lose your business. It has always been that way. That’s the way it should work now and forever. That’s capitalism.

However, in an incredible collapse of good common sense, otherwise conservative-leaning politicians are leaping blindly into a new socialism to rescue these banks with taxpayer money! Uncle Sam will give the very banks that made the mess enough money to paper over their problems. Of course anytime you create the nation’s biggest federal bureaucracy in one fell swoop, and put billions of dollars into it, you have set the stage for years of taxpayer hardship to pay the freight. Our children’s children will be paying for this boondoggle for many years to come. You also create the inevitable feeding grounds for every special interest, government money grabbing, lobbyist known to mankind all lining up to get their “share” of the pie. This money will be spent on every liberal special interest program imaginable, earmarked to bring pork to every greedy congress person who can extend their hand, and will expand from a mere $700 billion, to who knows how much in the blink of an eye. It’s a bad idea! It should go away! It really could be the downfall of this nation!

But what can we do to help out the economy you ask? These large bank failures really have put the nation’s economy at risk. The threat of recession or worse is real. The economy really is in danger due to the lack of capital in the banks to fund loans to businesses and home purchases! This is true — and something really does need to be done. But what?

First, congress should immediately repeal the capital gains tax effective 1/1/08. This would cause multiple millions of dollars to pour into the economy immediately. The incentive to invest would increase greatly. Next, the president should announce that the non-performing assets held by these failing banks are for sale at thier current market value. He should stress that the patriotic thing for persons with means to do is to purchase these assets, which are backed with real estate after all, in the rational expectation that they will inevitably increase in value over the years, making them a good investment in the long run – and the fact that the investors will not have to pay capital gains tax on the gains from these investments will only make them all the more attractive. This is the private enterprise solution to this problem. There is money out there looking for investment opportunities. These assets are not worthless and will attract potential investors if packaged and marketed correctly. The above steps along with some additional penalties and sanctions against the senior management of the profligate banks involved, plus some modest banking regulation reforms would solve this problem quickly. This approach will leave the bloated government bureaucracy out of it in large part. This plan will help, rather than hurt, the future of our nation. We should insist that our elected representatives take the proven capitalist pathway and leave the failed socialist theories alone. If not, we’ll all regret it — sooner, rather than later.

CAVEAT ELECTOR

2008-09-14T20:44:00.008-06:00

One of the most aggravating aspects of this, or any political campaign season, is the nearly constant lying perpetrated by politicians and their minions. While it happens on both sides, any objective analysis would reveal that recently the lying is much more likely a tactic of the Democratic Party. This is exactly what is currently going on in the Obama camp. It is an old story. Democrats seem to think they can just get away with it. A few examples: Kerry told the whoppers about "Chirstmas in Cambodia" and numerous other "Vietnam war hero" fibs. Clinton shook his finger at us and point blank lied about Monica Lewinski. Hillary repeatedly said she had no idea where the Rose Law firm billing records were. There are many, many more examples.

While is has been a long held political fact of life that you can't go after any democrat politician for lying --it's what they do-- Obama is taking it to a new low. One blatant example is his nearly constant claim that the economy is "... the worst since the Great Depression". In fact it isn't but that doesn't stop the Obama machine from spouting that whopper almost daily. In fact the economy is not even in a recession. A recession requires three consecutive quarters of negative economic growth. That hasn't happened. Not even close. The housing market, while under some stress, has very recently been worse, most recently in 1999 during the Clinton administration. The unemployment rate has ticked up a few points by it too has been much worse recently. The fact the the major news media is in the tank for him explains part of the reason Obama feels perfectly free to spout lie after lie after lie. Nobody will ever call him on it, and since he refuses to debate John McCain, he will likely never have to defend his lies.

Why can we sue and jail businesses who deceive us, and yet we have almost no recourse against democrat politicians who continually do the same or worse? The businessmen have the power the deprive us of a few dollars, but the lying democrat politicians have the power to literally control and ruin our lives through onerous taxes and regulations. Our only recourse is to vote against these liars and hope against hope that enough other Americans are astute enough to see through them. We don't have to just take it. Just like you wouldn't buy a car from a salesman who you knew to be an outright liar, why would you consider electing a presidential candidate who routinely lies. Why indeed?

It Was Just About Sex!

2008-09-08T17:54:00.002-06:00

Kwame Kilpatrick, the Democrat mayor of Detroit must be spending a lot of time these days talking to himself. He was convicted violating terms of his parole in a case about lying under oath. He is accused of lying about sex. He has to be asking himself: "Why do I have to go to jail for doing the same thing that Bill Clinton did?"

Bill Clinton is jetting around the world raking in millions in speaker fees. Kwame sits in jail. Ain't no justice is this world!

Maxi-Me

2008-08-23T22:39:00.012-06:00

Barack Obama's Top Ten Reasons for Selecting Biden:

1. If the tele-prompter breaks, he can plaigerize some really good lines for me to use.

2. If we have any more trouble with Georgia, I can send him to Atlanta. (He's got the foreign policy thing down pat!)

3. He has great mental ~~akumen~~ ~~acqumin~~ .... He's really smart!

4. No problem with four hundred dollar haircuts! (Maybe wind, but not haircuts)

5. He has 35 years senate experience, I have three. That makes the average between us 19 years each!

6. He, like me, never really worked in the private sector. (We'll hire advisors to run the economy. Not to worry!)

7. He supported the Iraq war. I opposed it. (Good balance there!)

8. He has the ~~experience~~ ~~gravitas~~ .... um, nuance I lack to be really attractive to potential voters.

9. He has great teeth, just like me.

10. He can help me win in Delaware! (I have the other 56 states in the bag already!)

(Hat tip to my brother-in-law Doug!)

Islamic Extremist Rope-a-Dope?

2008-07-10T20:24:00.007-06:00

Some few mainstream media sources have grudgingly reported the major decline in US military deaths in Iraq. While that seems to be good news for conservatives, there is still much room for caution and concern. The terrorists watch CNN and they are not stupid. It seems more than likely that they are laying low during the current US presidential campaign because they know that any major offensive in Iraq, or anywhere else for that matter, would greatly help John McCain's chances to become president. The extremists don't want John McCain to be the president. He is much less likely than Obama to cut and run in Iraq. They know that if they wait until Obama wins, they can then step up the violence in Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama, under extreme pressure from American leftists, would almost certainly withdraw from both countries and thus the terrorists will win the war. It is really their only chance. They know it and they are willing to stop the attacks for now, and wait for Obama to win.

That's one of the major reasons all conservatives need to support McCain in spite of his liberal tendencies. While he might not be our first choice, he is the only person at the moment who can prevent a potentially disastrous Islamic terrorist victory in the Middle East. Freedom loving conservatives must hold our noses and support him. He's our only hope.

Plame Case -- History Revised

2008-06-21T10:37:00.019-06:00

Two recent headlines regarding the self-serving testimony by Scott McClellan before John Conyer's congressional committee makes it very clear how low, shallow and mean-spirited the anti-Bush crowd can be. McClellan recently wrote a sensationalist book speculating about all sorts of things he really didn't know anything about and wasn't directly involved in. He wrote the book for one reason only: to make a pile of cash. He knew that writing scurrilous screeds against Bush is always very lucrative, even if nothing in them is true. Bush haters seem to have plenty of money. The headlines, both about the same event, illustrate succinctly how an author can twist and spin facts to match his own point of view.

The first: "McClellan: White House Hiding CIA Leak Info" plainly states as a fact that the "White House" (which most any average person would take to mean President Bush and Vice President Cheney) was "Hiding" the fact that they leaked Plame's name to Robert Novak in a vicious effort to punish Joe Wilson for his opposition to the war against Islamic Terrorism. The second: "Bush didn't know about CIA leak, McClellan says" makes no such assertion. It in fact says quite the opposite.

Both articles go on to say pretty much the same things however in their body. McClellan, who really was in no position to know what Rove or Cheney told Libby since he wasn't there and didn't ever ask, or bring his misgivings up with any senior White House official, nevertheless makes inflammatory assertions that Libby, Rove and Cheney leaked Plame's name to the press for nefarious reasons. Anybody, who doesn't have an axe to grind, has to now admit that Richard Armitage from the State Department was the leaker and the only leaker and that he did it deliberately for political, anti-Bush reasons. Libby was shamefully persecuted for purely political reasons even after that fact became known to the Special Prosecutor . The prosecutor was trying to poke a finger in Bush's eye and he didn't care how he did it. No leaks about Plame were ever given by Cheney, Libby, Rove or Bush! It didn't happen, but the leftists really wanted it to have happened so they just keep asserting that it did happen in a truly "Goebbelian" fashion.

Scooter was convicted of not remembering when he told, or what he told the late Tim Russert about the matter. He was never accused by the prosecutor of actually leaking anything because he didn't leak anything, nor did Cheney, nor did Rove. If they had, they would have been charged in a heartbeat. This whole political witch hunt is a giant embarrassment for all patriotic, clear-thinking Americans. Bush hating congressmen, news reporters and headline writers can make gratuitous assertions all they want that is was really Cheney, Rove or Bush who leaked Plame's name, but it still won't be true. However, the fact that it's not true doesn't seem to matter. They are all about revising history so the perception that it is true is at the forefront. And the saddest thing is that they seem to be able to get away with it.

Let me try my hand at yellow journalism headline writing: Russert Asserts Libby Was Involved in Plame Affair -- Now Dead!

It's Not the End of the World

2008-06-01T21:43:00.006-06:00

To listen to the MSM yammer on and on about the state of the economy, one would think we are immeshed in the biggest economic depression in history. What we really have now is an economic downturn. Last quarter's .6% growth came as a great disappointment to those who are counting on a real recession to get Obama in office in November. They, of course, are embarked on all this recession talk to bolster the chances of their chosen candidate Barack Obama who has made talk of a recession a part of his campaign. Of course if these doom sayers can convince enough squishy voters that we are truly in recession, they might just vote for Obama and his tax raising economics. That would really send our economy into a tailspin and result in the very recession they are trying to scare us about. Most certainly they would then blame it all on Bush and Cheney. It's a convenient paradigm: if anything bad happens, blame it on Bush. So far it has worked for them.

Of course, the classic deffinition of recession is two consecutive quarters of decline in the Gross Domestic Product. This hasn't happened since 1990/1991. That was the Bill Clinton recession. Now the left-wingers are trying to claim that a recession doesn't have to have two quarters of negative growth. It seems that a recession is whenever they say there is one and we'd just better trust them. Essentially, a recession is whenever there is a Republican in the White House.

While nobody likes higher gas prices and other economics woes, we need to reign in our fears somewhat. One aspect of the current slow- down in the economy that impacts every consumer is the price of gasoline. There are reports of people canceling their vacations due the high prices. However just a little math can help people keep things in proper perspective. The average price of gasoline in May of 2007 was $3.20. In May of 2008 it rose to $3.90. The $.70 rise seems like a lot, but if you are an average driver getting 25 miles per gallon and driving 15,000 miles per year, your actual out of pocket cost has gone up by about $35 per month, or roughly $1.15 per day. Would an extra dollar and fifteen cents a day dissuade any self-respecting vacationer? Doubtful if they understand the reality, but the insistent, unremitting, negative drum beat from the mainstream media who are trying to elect their guy by scaring everybody, don't care about facts. And that's a shame. because it not only hurts the families who don't get to make memories while vacationing. It also hurts all the businesses who rely on those travelers. Think about that the next time Obama tells you how bad things are.

I Just Want to Maintain A High Degree of Honor -- And Lose!

2008-05-11T21:22:00.007-06:00

At some point in this year's presidential campaign, the somewhat timid John McCain is going to be faced with a serious dilemma: He won't be able to disagree with Barack Obama (Or Hilary Clinton should the unexpected happen) at all, ever. As soon as he says anything the least bit confrontational, the mainstream media will immediately pounce on him for being racist. (Or sexist if it's Hilary.) So far, they have been biting their tongue in this regard during the primaries because they can hardly oppose either Obama or Hilary on any such frivolous grounds, but they won't hesitate to attack John McCain. Even though he thinks of himself as a media darling, he won't get any favors once the electoral battle ensues in earnest.

Barack's lack of experience, totally socialist policies, or left wing foreign policy won't likely ever even be brought up. McCain won't dare for fear of being branded racist. He will inevitably try to be the nice guy and that's frightening. The last "nice guy" to run for president on the Republican ticket was Bob Dole -- and he lost big time to a feckless, inexperienced Bill Clinton.

Unless McCain is able to get past this natural reticence to disagree with his opponents, he is doomed to follow Bob Dole and that will presage a bleak eight year for the GOP. John McCain has always gone out of his way to reach "across this aisle" to the Democrats. He has thrown his Republican colleagues under the bus to side with Democrat senators, sided with Tim Russert and George Stephanopolis, allied himself with Ted Kennedy. If he thinks he will get any mileage from any of these, he is most sadly mistaken.

Here's hoping his advisors will make him see that he needs to start disagreeing loudly and often with Obama and Hilary, and he needs to couch each and every point in the fact that their race or sex has nothing at all to do with his disagreement. He needs to disarm the race baiters of this world up front, take away their case that he is somehow racist for daring to disagree with his opponent's left-wing agenda. The future of our country depends on it.

The Parable of the Wagon

2007-07-17T11:09:00.000-06:00

Years ago there was a very large wagon full of big, important, necessary burdens. The wagon needed to be moved from one side of the mountain to the other. The survival of everyone depended on it. It had to be done for the good of all.

Some wise people said: “If we all cooperate, some of us pushing, some of us pulling, we can certainly get this wagon to where it needs to be.” A very few said: “Oh, I can’t push or pull the wagon because I’m sick, I’ve a bad back, or heart, or whatever – won’t you please just let me ride on the wagon.” Since they were relatively few in number compared to the pushers and pullers, these agreed to let the few riders get on the wagon where they could be taken care of. They were very charitable.

Everyone agreed that a job this big required leadership to make sure it was being done in the most efficient way possible. Elections were held among the pushers and pullers and bosses were chosen. The riders didn’t really think it necessary to be involved in the election of bosses since they weren’t doing any of the work. They were content just to ride.

Everything was going well until some of the more selfish workers started to complain that they felt they were doing too much of the work, and the rich bosses were just living off the efforts of the workers. The workers were being exploited! So they promised several of the lazier workers that if they voted for them to be the boss, they could stop pushing and pulling and start riding on the wagon. They soon discovered that the more people they promised a free ride, the more people would vote for them. They also convinced those already riding on the wagon that it wasn’t fair that they couldn’t vote for bosses. The lazy workers and riders now made up a majority. The productive bosses and unselfish workers were voted out of power and made to push and pull the wagon all alone. They had to contribute even more – for the children you understand.

Very soon however, there were far more people riding on the wagon than there were pushing or pulling it. Little by little, the wagon went out of control, eventually careening at a very high rate of speed down the mountain, crushing and killing those productive workers in front and stranding those who were left behind to perish in the wilderness.

The riders were OK for a while. They were very happy to have the wagon and all of the valuables to themselves. However, as the wagon went out of control, faster and faster, it soon was smashed against the boulders and destroyed, killing all. The shortsighted riders didn’t realize that there were no more productive people left to protect and take care of them. They hadn’t noticed that things were out of control. And they had forgotten how to care for themselves.

In the end, all was lost.

The moral: When you have more people riding on the wagon than pushing or pulling it, you are bound for destruction.

Old Dog, Old Tricks

2007-04-23T14:23:00.000-06:00

Literally within minutes of the breaking news that a nut case was shooting people at Virginia Tech University, the usual suspects were cranking up their usual propaganda talking points about how more gun control would make us all safer. Pavlov would have been impressed.

This crowd doesn't seem able to grasp the concept that the shooter was violating V Tech's gun control rule when he entered the campus heavily armed. In fact he proved conclusively that he was willing to violate any gun law they might pass and was willing to die to carry out his mania to violate gun control.

When will rational people in this country wake up to the fact that disarming people by creating "gun free" zones only serves to point nut cases at locations where they are very unlikely to encounter resistance. The recent shooting at Trolley Square shopping mall in Salt Lake City is perfect example: There a nut case shooter was intent on killing as many as possible and would have most certainly succeeded in killing more that he did but for an armed citizen who chose to ignore the "Gun Free" sign posted on the entrance to the mall. The off-duty policeman did have his weapon and was able to engage the killer before he could kill again, thus ending the threat with undoubtedly fewer casualties that would have otherwise occurred.

The only way to protect yourself against these killers it to arm yourself. The police can't be everywhere, and more gun control laws will only make the next case worse than V Tech.

Well is Anybody Surprised?

2007-03-06T22:56:00.000-07:00

Scooter Libby couldn't remember which reporter he didn't tell about Joe Wilson's wife. May go to jail for 20 years. No real crime was ever committed involving the CIA, or leaking anything. Impossible to believe. The jury went in with blinding Bush hatred which allowed them to ignore the lack of criminal intent on the part of Libby. They "got" Bush through Scooter and to heck with justice!

Sandy Berger admits stealing top secret intelligence documents and destroying them. An actual crime was committed. A small fine and he'll get his top security clearance back soon. No jail time for him. That's justice DC left-wing, democrat style. If you want a jury of your peers in DC you better be a very left-wing, liberal, Democrat.

Sometimes it's very hard to live in this country.

What should happen now? Since there is almost a zero chance that there will be any justice done by the appeals courts, (Are you kidding? This is Washington D.C.) all appeals should be dropped.
President Bush should immediately pardon Libby. The underlying principle here is clear: Even if Libby didn't accurately recall the sequence of events surrounding who he told, or who told him where Joe Wilson's wife worked, so what? The telling of that information was not a crime. So he misremembered to protect nobody who committed a crime. This is very evident. The prosecutor knew right from the beginning that no crime had been committed in the leaking of Plame's name, and that Libby, Rove, and the vice president didn't do it anyway. Why did he continue the investigation once he new no crime had been committed? Where is the venality on the part of Libby here? Nobody got hurt in this case except Libby, and he didn't deserve it. Perjury laws are in place to prevent people from obstructing the prosecution of those who have committed a crime. In this case, there was no crime committed!

The only way this political meanness and chicanery can now be brought to a close is for Bush to pardon Libby and put an end to the madness. Justice demands it. This person has done nothing to merit the prosecution he has already endured. Pardon Libby now!

Should We All be Forced to Worship at the Church of Global Warming?

2007-01-30T13:05:00.000-07:00

News Item: Weather Channel maven favors pulling certification from any TV meteorologist who doesn’t adhere to the "approved" global warming dogma.

No doubt about it. The “global warming” true believers have begun to take draconian steps to enforce their notion of climate orthodoxy: If you don’t adhere strictly to their rigid set of dicta sanctorum, you risk excommunication. Weather reporters of America – take note!

They long have been successful in fostering their “we will brook no disagreement” attitude in academia, and in the judicial system. They have owned both for many years and you will find precious few in those arenas who dare to be contrary to the favored “global catastrophe” doctrine. In spite of virtually no real evidence, and almost entirely as a result of extreme political coercion and peer pressure, the majority of scientists today seem ready to check their objectivity at the door, put on their green robes, stand in a nice orderly, straight line and parrot the approved canonical verses: “Global warming is bad. Global warming is caused by evil humans. Humans are bad. Global warming is caused by America. America is bad. Global warming is caused by evil, greedy big oil corporations. Corporations are bad. Global warming is caused by George W Bush, Dick Cheney, Haliburton, Scooter Libby and all other evil neocons. Neocons are bad. We must destroy them… destroy them… destroy them”.

The global warming zealots are now taking their crusade deeper and deeper into all institutions we hold dear in America. They have invaded to a degree unprecedented the halls of congress including seemingly forcing President Bush to at least pay lip service homage to them in his state of the union address. They have long since had the left-leaning foundations on their side. These are the source of most of the grants the scientists are groveling to get. Naturally, many of them are eager to bend over, grab their ankles, and just go along with all of the "Chicken Little" alarmist fiction . Follow the money. The "global warming" vickars are now moving in to strong-arm some major corporations who must have sensed that, in the face of such irrational fanaticism, resistance is futile – resistance is futile – resistance is futile – resistance is futile!

To be sure, there are a still a few intrepid skeptics in the scientific and business community who dare to raise their hands and ask inconvenient questions, such as what about the warming and cooling cycles that have taken place for millennia before human activity became a factor? What caused them? They are usually just ignored or dismissed by the global warming pontiffs as pawns of big oil: “Pity them. Their faith is not strong enough to accept the gospel we know to be correct. They have been corrupted by the evil demon Exxon! They shouldn’t worry about the facts. We have told them that man is the cause of all global warming. That is sufficient.”

The fact is, according to these brave few, nobody knows if the current small global average temperature increase, if it is happening at all, is a good thing or a bad thing for humans. It seems logical that warmer winters in Minnesota is preferable to a mile thick glacier covering most of North America. The fact is, if warming is happening, nobody knows exactly what may be the cause, or the result, or how, or if, there is anything humans can do to enhance or stop it, of if, indeed, they should do anything to stop it. The weather is cyclical. Always has been. We will get warming, then cooling, and then warming again – over and over again. We just need to deal with it like we always have. This irrational fear and trembling about the weather serves no purpose – other than to enhance the political power and standing of the elders of The Church of Global Warming.

Climate science is poorly understood and in continual dispute. What is not in dispute, however, is that this fervent, wild-eyed religious anti-civilization movement already has much of the power they seek to destroy us. The laws and sanctions they advocate will have a real impact on our nation’s economy and future viability. We could wind up on the ash heap of history as the only civilization that chose to commit massive economic suicide for no other reason than an irrational devotion to the false religion of the Great Green Church of Global Warming. And that would be a pity.

Freedom of Speech for All?

2006-10-07T10:07:00.000-06:00

Left-wing Fascist thugs attacked Jim Gilchrist, the founder of the Minutemen, as he attempted to deliver a speech in New York City on Thursday. (Watch the video) He was the invited guest of Columbia University Republicans. The criminals rushed the stage and knocked over tables and chairs, punching and kicking Gilchrist and unfurling banners in English and Arabic. The victim of this violent attack was finally rescued by security and escorted out of auditorium. Neither the police nor security guards made any effort whatsoever to arrest the attackers who assaulted Mr. Gilchrist. This is the latest example in a long list of compelling evidence that the left-wing along with radical Muslims do not believe in free speech unless you agree with them. They feel perfectly free to deny by violence the rights of anyone with an opposing point of view.

This alarming trend is being allowed to happen all over: In Germany, a Mozart opera was canceled for fear of Muslim riots because the opera contains some material which might be offensive to Muslims. An art exhibit in London was scotched for the same reason. Salman Rushdie is forced to hide in fear of his life because he wrote a book critical of Muslim fanatics. Political cartoons were said to be the cause of weeks of riots because they depicted the Muslim founder’s image. The Pope was forced to apologize because he quoted a 14th century author’s opinion that radical Muslims attempted to spread their “faith” at the point of the sword. Everything the Pope said was true.

How long will we continue to endure anti-free speech violence on the part the left-wing Fascists and their counterpart in the radical Muslim community? Do we want to live in a world where only one point of view is allowed?

We must be prepared to enforce freedom of speech. Those who rush the stage during a speech should be arrested and sent to prison. They have no right to assault a person merely because they disagree with what is being said. Muslim radicals who riot because of books or cartoons should be ordered to disperse, and if they fail to do so, they should be shot.

Until we get the resolve to take action to guarantee our freedoms, we most certainly will lose them.

Moderate Islam Defined

2006-09-14T16:46:00.000-06:00

In our search for moderate Islam, we are frequently disappointed. Every time there is a terrorist attack, we wait and hope in vain for influential, moderate, rational Muslims to stand up, speak up, denounce and cast out those who pervert the “peaceful religion of Islam.” But it never happens. Oh to be sure, we hear some token efforts, limited and frankly, quite ineffectual. Most of these go something like this: “We condemn the deaths of innocent civilians…, BUT!…” Unfortunately the “but” is the important thing. It always contains a condemnation of Israel and its efforts to defend itself against terrorism, or of the US efforts in Iraq, etc. This poisoned “but” kills any effect of the challenge to radical Islam by the so-called moderates. It cancels out any good results their disapprobation may have had. And that seems to be the desired effect, sad to say. Even the most moderate Muslim seems to be unwilling, or unable to frankly condemn and reject the terrorists without qualification. And that is a shame because unless, and until “moderates” learn to expel these killers from their midst, the war against terrorism will never end. Maybe they are just deathly afraid for their own lives if they were to really speak out. The Islamofacists would come to their home in the middle of the night and kill them and their whole family for slandering "Islam."

In her excellent piece on Moderate Muslims, Yashiko Sagamori points out that trying to find a “Moderate Muslim” is harder than finding a cure for cancer: "The moderate Muslim, along with the Big Foot, the unicorn, the Loch Ness monster, remains more elusive than a cure for cancer: there is at least a theoretical possibility that a cure for cancer can be found one day, unless of course Islam takes over and drags us all down into its own endless Dark Ages."

Why should this be important to us? The most frightening aspect of our current unconventional war against Islamofacists, is the seemingly impossible task of defining and finding our enemy. America has always been good at defeating any “organized army” we have ever come up against. We can lick ‘em every time in a flat out traditional fight. Our army is better trained and equipped. The enemy doesn't stand a chance in a regular battle. Where we get into trouble is when our foes don’t have the normal goals and asperations of a traditional enemy. Even the most hardened Nazi wanted to preserve his own life and that of his family and comrades. Once defeated in battle, they were willing to negociate. The Islamic Terrorists are different. They are motivated by an irrational belief in paradise and are willing and anxious to go there. And they don’t care a fig if it costs the life of their family either. They care nothing for life and do not fear death. After defeat, they will fight on, --albeit from behind the skirts of their women and children. Glenn Beck made that clear on his radio program today when he interviewed the producer of the movie Obsession, Radical Islam’s War Against the West. According to Glenn, this movie should be required viewing by all Americans who wish to preserve our way of life.

If we fail to take this threat seriously, we will all have to learn to live under Radical Islam. There is no choice… no room to negociate… no getting out of it... The fact is, any Radical Muslim who refuses to dennounce terrorism and mayhem will have to be killed. It is that stark. It is that simple. It is that important.

Edited, but Still a Powerful Clinton Indictment

2006-09-11T11:25:00.000-06:00

The Path to 9/11 should be viewed by all Americans. There has been a lot of nonsense by assorted leftists about “historical liberties” taken and some minor edits were done, but the central message of the mini-series remained very clear: The Clinton Administration had ample opportunity to eliminate Osama Bin Laden but failed do so! Clinton was so dissolute in his political philosophy and personal life that he was literally rendered impotent. His administration lacked the will, purpose and ability to protect us from Islamic terrorism. This failure had tremendous consequences. Clinton could not, or would not act and the nation paid the ultimate price for his weakness on 9/11/2001. ABC deserves enormous gratitude and kudos for having what Clinton so obviously lacks: the courage to tell the truth!

Perhaps the most telling line of the mini-series, so far, was delivered by the Northern Alliance leader who was working with a CIA field agent to eliminate Bin Laden: “Are there no men in Washington? Or are they all cowards?” That leader had it right. The fact that the Clinton administration were all cowards became crystal clear when they began to squirm and squeal at the mere notion that the light of day was going to be shed on their dereliction of duty. It is evident to everyone that they failed us terribly, and no amount of cover up can hide that fact. They know it, we know it and everybody with any sense knows it. As Shakespeare made clear, sometimes those who “protest too much” are merely attempting to hide the evident truth.

Perhaps just a bad as their failure to act to get Bin Laden, is the ominous actions of Bill Clinton, his lawyers, and assorted members of his former administration to scotch the whole project. They didn’t want it edited, they wanted it canceled. No amount of editing could erase the basic truth underlying this slice of history: Clinton failed. That sitting Democratic office holders would sink so low as to threaten the broadcast license of a major network because they didn’t want the truth to be told about their failures, speaks volumes as to the character of that party. In a fair and just world, they would be punished for their attempts to censor at the polls. They would lose the upcoming elections. Here’s hoping that’s just what happens. In the meanwhile, we should thank ABC profusely for their courage in the face of incredible pressure.

What About Scooter.....?

2006-08-30T15:00:00.000-06:00

Now that we have confirmation that it was Richard Armitage, and NOBODY inside the Bush White House, who gave Robert Novak the name of Joseph Wilson's wife, I wonder how Lewis Libby can get his good name, career and reputation back? Since he is guilty of nothing other than possibly not remembering details of conversations he had several years ago with reporters, it is now hard to see why the charges against him haven't yet been dismissed. These conversations, as it turns out were not about any kind of criminal activity whatsoever! That's very important in this case, because all the principals involved, the state department, the reporters and almost certainly the prosecutors knew that Libby had not committed any crime involving disclosure of classified information, which was the purported justification for starting the investigation in the first place. Why then did they allow the investigation to go on -- and on -- and on -- and on!? Why did they spend millions of taxpayers dollars and years, and years to investigate a non-crime?

It would be like a prosecutor suspecting you of embezzling bank funds. Early on they find out you didn't do it. The bank was mistaken, no crime took place. But instead of dropping the investigation, they discover during the course of their three years of interviews, that your neighbors say you planted yellow roses in your back yard, and you told them they were white roses. Bango! They have you for lying to a federal investigator! It is too silly to even contemplate, but it's exactly what happened to Libby.

The truth is that Armitage, like most of the career bureaucrats in the State Department, HATES George Bush. It goes without saying that democrats and their allies in the major media hate him. They are willing to go to any length to damage his presidency, including fostering a ridiculous, wasteful, years-long investigation about a non-crime.

Lewis Libby should have all charges against him immediately dismissed. He didn't do anything wrong and doesn't deserve having his life ruined any more that it already has been. This is nothing but politics of the meanest, lowest sort, and shouldn't be tolerated. Even the leftists should be ashamed of themselves and should be first in line, right behind Fitzgerald, to apologize to Libby.

Sometimes There Will Be Civilian Casualties

2006-07-31T12:13:00.000-06:00

In the current war with Islamic Terrorists, civilian casualties will be a fact of life. The sooner we accept this inevitable truth, the better able to defeat global Islamic Terrorism we will be. And we won’t be able to defeat them at all if we remain squeamish at the thought of civilian casualties. There is no two ways about it. It is the way things are in today’s world.

The reason there will be civilian casualties is because the Islamic Radicals think nothing of losing a life, or for that matter taking a life – either their own, or yours, or the guy down the block. All life is expendable in their world-view if the loss of that life, in any small way, enhances the cause of radical Islam. In their estimation, there is no such thing as an innocent civilian. That’s why they are all too happy send homicide bombers into crowded market places to blow up shoppers. The mere fact of killing them, in their view, furthers the cause of Allah. That’s why they set up their bases in the midst of populated areas. That’s why they don’t wear uniforms, or any identifying regalia, and instead, hide like the cowards they are behind the skirts of women and children in civilian homes, churches and UN outposts.

Consider this hypothetical scenario: Mexican Santeria believers, or ultra nationalists, or whatever radical cause, declare war on all non-believers in the USA. They start lobbing missiles from Tijuana at San Diego and kill and injure scores of Americans. They set up their missile launchers next to homes, hotels, churches in the hope that America will not retaliate for fear of killing “innocent civilians.” They cross our borders and kidnap and kill policemen and servicemen. How long would we wait before taking action? How many American deaths would it take before we said, we’re taking them out no matter what the cost in civilian life?

People need to grow up! This is a global war for the very survival of Western civilization. We are today deciding if liberty, our way of life, will survive on the earth. Rest assured that if the Islamic Terrorists prevail, liberty will be eradicated. Either we will submit to Islamic radical Law, or we will perish. The choice is clear, stark and unmistakable. It really is either them – or us!

Israel is now clearly in the position of being attacked by Global Radical Islam. Much of the world outside of the USA and Britain is supporting the terrorists against Israel!?! Does Israel have the right to defend themselves? -- to survive? -- to exist? Yet we see crocodile tears over sporadic civilian casualties caused accidentally by the IDF, while at the same time we never hear anything negative about the Islamic terrorists who really are targeting civilians with their rockets!? It boggles the mind. We must stop this childish gnashing of teeth over the loss of life that is the inevitable unintended consequence of Israel’s efforts to defeat this great evil of Islamic Terror. The fault for these "civilian" deaths lies squarely at the door of Radical Islam. Israel, in fact, has made heroic efforts to avoid civilian casualties. They only target known military installations or gun emplacements. They have dropped leaflets in all of southern Lebanon warning anybody, including innocent civilians, to get out of harms way. Those who have chosen to stay are either terrorist supporters, or captives of the Islamic Terrorists. Either way, their occasional death, while regrettable, is entirely justifiable and clearly the fault of the terrorists.

We don’t have any choice at this point. Either we stand behind Israel in their struggle for survival, or we fight these same Islamic radicals at some later date, after they have gained considerable additional strength, at some future place, on their terms not ours. Wake up America! Support Israel now or risk the loss of considerable life later! The life at risk in the very near future could well be yours!

The Intractable Illegal Alien Problem

2006-05-19T09:21:00.000-06:00

The fact is, there are about twelve million illegal aliens in this country now. The fact is, they're not going anywhere, --they're not going home. What to do about them is the question. And the solution is not easy.

Some have proposed just rounding them all up and sending them back. Simple. Or is it? The logistical nightmares alone would boggle the mind. How would you house them pending deportation hearings? How would you prove they are here illegally? How would you keep them from just jumping the border again?

The time has come for us to admit that the vast majority of those who are here, are going to stay. Unless we can prove that they have committed a felony crime, or that they are engaging in terrorist activities, a way must be found for them to be absorbed. There really is no way around it. Those who are already here, and well established to any degree, will have to stay.

What we do about this problem in the future is far more important. We thought we solved the problem when president Reagan was in office, but we really didn't. It's now time for us to do it again. It is the most important national issue the country faces at the moment. A solution must be found.

In my view, the solution is comprised of two distinct parts: First, we must recognize that the we live in an age where we no longer can tolerate open borders. That's what we now have. Both the Canadian and the Mexican borders are wide open for anybody, including terrorists, who want to cross. That must be changed. Second, we must grow up enough to institute an effective national ID. In this world, where millions out there wish us ill, we can no longer be naive enough to hold on to the idea that some vague "right to personal liberty" trumps the need for authorities to be able to ascertain who we are should the need arise. And that goes for anybody who wants to enter this country. If they can't produce the proper ID, they can't come in. If they are subsequently found in this country, and they don't have the proper ID, they go to jail. If you hire somebody who doesn't have the proper ID, you go to jail.

Of course the implementation of these measures is complicated, --but not impossible. The problems are mostly in the mind of the elected official we currently have in Washington. Once they realize that we will replace them unless they solve this ongoing problem, it will be solved. Our nation's survival could well depend on it.

Islamic Terrorist Uses Rented SUV to Attack America

2006-03-08T22:08:00.000-07:00

That’s the headline that should be appearing in all newspapers across the country. Instead this terrorist act is being downplayed as merely the odd act of a deranged person. This Muslim activist planned the event for a long time, and even went to a car rental agency to get a larger vehicle so he could kill as many Americans as possible. He proudly admits he did it to avenge all of the so-called "crimes" we supposedly have been committing against peaceful Islam world-wide. This admission would seem to scream to any rational, sane person that this man is a terrorist. Yet the media are covering it only as a traffic accident. Why? It appears some of us are so afraid of being politically incorrect we have ceased to be rational. ACLU lawyers sure don’t seem to fit in the mold of "sane or rational." Nor does the antique media.

The longer we are willing to keep our heads in the sand, the more likely it is that this type of terrorist attack will continue to happen. The fact is we are dealing with an enemy who has no desire or proclivity to understand us, or negociate with us. They want to KILL us! They will kill us every time they are given the chance. Why do we keep giving them the chance? Why do we continue to welcome Muslim activists on our college campuses? All Muslims who are not willing to absolutely and unequivocally denounce the murder and mayhem committed by their fellow Muslims in Iraq, Pakistan or wherever, should immediately be deported. Including students and professors. Why do we allow activist radical Muslim students and professors here anyway? You have to ask yourself: "How many American students and professors were allowed to remain studying in Germany and Japan during World War Two? Answer? None! What’s the difference now? Our national security and even our very survival depends on taking this threat seriously. It’s maddening to see how lightly it is being taken by some people. "Moderate Muslims," if in fact they exist, must denounce Muslim violence such as that perpetrated by this activist and must be willing to back up their words with actions. American Muslims should be volunteering to join the American army and go to Iraq to root out the Islamic terrorists who are still killing Americans and peaceful Iraqis. If they are truly patriotic Americans, they should be helping this country establish democracy in Iraq. That they are not doing so, makes one wonder how sincere their condemnations of Muslim terrorist acts really are.

We will loose this war unless we are willing to get serious about it. Civilization itself is at stake.

Diminishing Democrats

2006-01-24T19:12:00.000-07:00

The spectacle of the recent Judge Alito hearings has cemented more than anything else the notion that the party of FDR has painted itself into a corner from which it will be very hard for them to escape. As one after another of the committee members parroted the moveon.org line that somehow this well-spoken, avuncular, middle-of-the-road scholarly judge was way out of the mainstream of the American public, it became crystal clear how far out of the mainstream the Democrats really have strayed. The fact is, the American people simply are not buying it. The more Kennedy and his ilk try to paint Judge Alito with the “extremist” brush, the sillier they look. Contrast this braying with the reasoned, logical points president Bush made in his speech in Kansas yesterday. It can’t be happy to be a Democrat these days.

Republicans need to keep hammering home the point that Democrats simply can’t be trusted with the security of the nation. Schumer, Biden, Kennedy, Hilary, et. al. are simply not up to it. Thank goodness!

The Democrat Nay Sayers Just Can’t Help It – Pity Them

2005-12-15T20:17:00.000-07:00

On this historic day, when several thousand years of anti-democratic tradition in Iraq has been dealt yet another blow, our leftist friends must feel as though they have been punched right in the nose! After all the experts they trotted out to explain to us that the Iraqi people are incapable of living under a democratic system, and how the “freedom fighters” or “insurgents” or whatever the left is calling terrorists these days would never permit free, fair, elections to take place. That we have failed in Iraq. That our efforts have all been in vain. That America is responsible for nothing but increased violence and destruction in Iraq. We are broken, and must pull out immediately.

Yet there in Iraq of all places –in spite of all the negative drum beating– we see millions of people who have literally risked their very lives to vote. The vast majority of people in Iraq have freely chosen democracy. They defied the terrorists. They defied the news media. They defied all of the leftist experts. And not only did they go and vote, they marked themselves defiantly, –with a purple finger– as if to tell the thugs who would intimidate them, both in Iraq and in the USA, to shove it! How many smug, self-important Americans would go and vote, then dip their finger in ink to prove they have voted, if there was even the possibility that harm would come to them as a result? Very few I’d wager! We usually don’t even have a majority of those who are eligible even show up when there is no danger whatsoever attached! How many less would vote if there were any danger at all involved, however remote? How loud would the leftist democrats scream if somebody proposed we ink our fingers to prevent voter fraud? To prove that we voted, and only voted once, –what a concept? They’d never permit it, discrimination don’t you know!?!

Today’s images of democracy succeeding in Iraq makes the defeatist ranting of Murtha, Kennedy, Reid, and Dean sound particularly hollow, silly and pathetic. They deserve nothing but scorn and derision, –and maybe pity.

As we rejoice with the Iraqi people, we need to stop and remember what a blessing and privilege it is to live in a free, democratic country, where every citizen has the right and duty to vote. We need to remember how many millions would literally die to enjoy this freedom. We need to remember how many millions are living in daily despair of ever enjoying the freedom the Iraqis tasted today. We need to remember how many great people have died to procure it for us. Then we need to humbly give thanks!

Mainstream Media – Still the Five Hundred Pound Gorilla

2005-12-01T22:14:00.000-07:00

President Bush gave a very well thought out, very persuasive speech at the US Naval Academy yesterday. It was chock full of excellent points laying out the rationale, strategy, ample evidence and very good reasons why the United States went into Iraq to fight international terrorism. It also contained numerous examples of success in our campaign, and the tremendous progress our effort has achieved to date, detailing the miraculous transformation that has already taken place in a nation and culture which was totally subjected by a brutal dictatorship for 30 plus years and is now an emerging democracy. That is truly a stupendous achievement which virtually no so-called expert on the Middle East was willing to predict. Yet there it is in Islamic Iraq of all places, for all the world to see! And in Islamic Afghanistan as well!

The speech also was accompanied by a 35 page, detailed plan, which has been in place since 2003, which lays out very clearly our strategy for victory in Iraq. This was made available for all to see. The democrat demagogues had been clamoring for just such a speech and plan for many months. They wanted to know what the president’s plan for success was. Democratic Rep. John Murtha insisted that our military is broken and worn out and unable to win a victory. This assertion by Murtha is one of the most outrageous examples of providing aid and comfort to the enemy in all of American history! His words will be used by Islamic terrorist leaders to encourage more terrorist murders. He now has the blood of every additional coalition casualty directly on his own hands! Our military is not broken or worn out. They are doing heroic work and should be getting nothing but praise and admiration from everyone, including democrat hacks like Murtha. He should be ashamed of himself!

President Bush, in his speech, put the lie to all of this nonsense for any fair-minded person to see.

The MSM response? Silence! It was as though President Bush had said nothing at all. Instead of reporting his speech point by point, they went immediately to the nay sayers. The only thing we saw connected to the president’s efforts was a gaggle of silly democrat responses by Pelosi, Kerry, Kennedy, Murtha and the other usual suspects each of whom mouthed outrageous lies about what Bush had said. Kerry, who just a few weeks ago was insisting that we needed many more troops in Iraq, now denied supporting Murtha’s clear call for an immediate pull-out, (which he clearly had done) instead insisting that he was only looking for a "plan for success," which plan Kerry was apparently too dim to understand Bush had just delivered. What a liar! What an idiot! Nancy Pelosi blurted out some unintelligible blather about warmed-over stew, Kennedy accused our troops of failure in Iraq and of causing the insurgency (read terrorism), and yet these and other democrat mouthpieces were allowed to say what they said almost totally uncontested.

Fred Barnes has pointed out that bloggers, conservative talk shows, and to some extent Fox News has countered this trend, but as anyone can see by the polls, Joe Average American still believes the lies he hears every day and night on the MSM. It’s shocking. In Iraq, the Iraqis and US soldiers who are dealing with these terrorists on a daily basis and who are risking their lives, uniformly favor continued US presence by a healthy margin (70%). Why is it then that many Americans do not according to the polls? Could it be the daily, persistent, unrelenting negative drum beat by the leftists and their allies in the MSM? It almost certainly is! Our military and our alies in Iraq have enemies both in Iraq, and maybe even more dangerously, in the Democrat party and leftist press in is this country.

What can be done to stem this tide? The president and all of his spokesmen need to continually make loud noises about all the successes in Iraq, in the economy, in foreign policy world-wide that their policies has produced. Conservative talk shows must continue to point out the hypocrisy of the left wing press and politicians. Bloggers need to redouble their efforts to point out the truth, and expose the lies the democrats are speaking. This is far more important than mere politics, a fact that seems to be lost on all democrats except maybe Joe Lieberman. (Who gets the same treatment from the MSM as President Bush – Silence or contempt!) This fight is all about our eventual survival as a society – make no mistake about it. It is that serious. Blog on!

Nothing to See Here Folks, Move Along

2005-11-23T21:04:00.000-07:00

Bob Woodword, the notorious reporter of Watergate fame, has pretty much blown up the case of “junk yard” prosecutor Fitzgerald against Scooter Libby. Woodward belatedly came forward with the revelation that he knew all about Valerie’s job at the CIA weeks before Libby was supposed to be the “first” person to have leaked it. Fitzgerald asserted that as a fact at his press conference indicting Libby for failure to remember all the details of his informal conversations from over two years ago. What else did Fitzgerald get wrong?

Libby’s lawyer now only has to ask the jury: “How many others knew about Wilson and Plame?” The details of her employment seem to have been part of the Washington gossip circuit for quite a while before the alleged “leak” by Libby. Woodward’s revelation has made it that easy. One is left to wonder why the public spirited Woodward didn’t come forward with this information two years ago. He might have saved Fitzgerald considerable time and the taxpayers considerable money!

Additionally, the CIA hardly has clean handsin this whole matter. It is highly doubtful that they will want their officials to testify about how and why they employed Wilson for this mission in the first place since he has no experience or expertise in inteligence. Highly placed, politically connected CIA officials will likely get this whole matter quashed before it ever goes to trial. It will all fade away.

In the final analysis, there was no attempt to “out” anybody. There was no nefarious activity by Libby, Rove, Vice President Cheney or anyone else – excepting maybe Wilson, his wife and the left wing political hacks who employed them to cast doubt on Bush’s truthful statement that British intelligence had reported that Saddam was trying to get nuclear material in Africa, a fact they still stand behind today.

Nice try lefties – Better luck next time.

How Gullible Are We?

2005-09-20T16:38:00.000-06:00

Yesterday North Korea announced that they would give up their nuclear arms program – sort of. Today they are not so sure. Why do we continue to negotiate with these goons? They are obviously incapable of telling the truth – ever. Lying is their stock in trade.

A very good source of reality ensconced in irony can be found here. (This is a very funny take on a very serious topic and a good source for humorous sanity for lots of political issues).

We have been fooled once, twice, thrice, etc. by this despicable regime that has only one goal: the total destruction of the West, starting with the United States of America. We shouldn’t talk one more minute with them. What’s the point?

The only rational policy for this lot is: Destroy all of you nuclear capacity within 48 hours or face thermo-nuclear annihilation! It sounds harsh, but nothing else will work. And we must mean it and act on it while we still can, and before we lose Japan or South Korea to this lot. And we can’t rely on the UN or France or any other nation to go along with us. We must have the courage to go it alone if necessary. We are the only nation with the power to stop international terrorism. If we don’t stop them now, we will most assuredly be facing them later – after they have grown stronger.

It’s a tough world out there. We must also be tough.

No Shari'a Law For Iraq

2005-08-16T16:34:00.000-06:00

If the new Iraqi assembly passes a constitution which establishes this barbaric form of Islamic radicalism as the law of the land, George Bush should announce that he will immediately take one of two actions: 1. Invade with really massive force and destroy all vestiges of Islamic radicalism or 2. Immediately withdraw all America troops and all American financial support. And he should make it abundantly clear that we will actively support any faction in Iraq who opposes this tyrannical law and who instead supports freedom for all Iraqi citizens. In short, we should foment revolution if necessary to prevent another Iran from being formed. We have paid far too high a price to now allow the terrorists to prevail.

This has been our stand from the first day we said Saddam's horrible regime had to go and we shouldn't be shy about holding out civilization and democracy as the only outcome we will support now. When we defeated the imperial Japanese, and forced their "Devine" emperor to tell his people their future depended on adopting a secular constitution, they didn't like it much. In fact many, many of the Japanese fundamentalists were very offended that the Americans were dictating the form of government they had to adopt. American leaders at the time knew that our safety depended on reforming Japan completely. They could no longer allow the religion of "ultra nationalism" to linger in Tokyo or we most certainly would have to fight them again and again. We couldn't tolerate that kind of "freedom." We had to be tough.

This generation of American leaders would do well to adopt a similar attitude. Muslim extremism, as embodied in Shari'a law, cannot be allowed to exist anywhere. One of the side effects of this law, besides allowing the brutal domination and deprivation of rights for women, is the fomenting of anti-American, anti-Jewish hatred and the resultant terrorist activities associated with it. If we allow Iraq to become a fundamentalist Islamic state, it will most certainly devolve into a haven for terrorists who will attack and kill Americans. We should wake up to the stark reality that we can't leave the fate of civilization up to people who saw other people's heads off in the name of religion. Too much is at stake, including all of our lives. It's either got to be true democracy, where all people including women have full rights, or scorched earth. Their choice. We must have the resolve to make it so.

Too Little, Too Late

2005-07-08T16:51:00.000-06:00

Muslim leaders in London are speaking out in an effort to convince the world that they don’t support the kind of Islamic terrorism that was likely behind yesterday’s bombings. It’s hard to take them seriously. Why are they doing this now? Where were they when their own Islamic Clergy routinely supported terrorism and denounced western civilization? Why do they expect us to believe that they don’t support terrorism when they support financially the very groups that foment it? Why did they allow the very terrorists who committed this crime to live hidden among them? Why didn’t they denounce these murderers to the authorities before they struck? Their attempt to show indignation now smacks of grandstanding – for sure a case of too little, too late.

It is very hard for any reasonable person to believe that these people didn’t know who at least some of the cell members were; --or where they lived, --or what they were up to. This is a very tight community. They know pretty much everything that goes on in it. When somebody new moves in, or out, they know it. They have representatives on all the major municipal councils in the city of London. They are not isolated from the people and trends that are sweeping through their conclaves. Muslim leaders, more than anyone else, are in a unique position to know who did this.

An attack of this magnitude required many hours of planning. It required many, many people to provide the intelligence, logistics and financial support needed to carry it off. Do the leaders who are protesting really expect us to believe they had no clue anything was up? It is much easier to believe that their demonstrations and protestations against these attacks are more about fostering Islam by currying political favor and cover in the mainstream media. Is it all about fooling us? Is it all lip service? After all, subterfuge is an accepted tactic in the cause of Islam.

Until they start ferreting out and turning in Islamic Terrorists who live in their midst, it will be very hard to put much credence in their demonstrations against the attacks and in their protestations that "true" Muslims don't support this kind of thing. It looks more like a PR ploy than a genuine denunciation. Action speaks louder than words. Until they are willing to take affirmative action to clean out the terrorist cells, heretofore hidden by them or at the very least given a pass by them, their words will have little meaning. A true religion of peace would not tolerate murderers in its ranks. The civilized world will believe them when they act against the terrorists --not just talk against them.

Live 8 Futility

2005-07-05T16:31:00.000-06:00

Over the weekend many thousands witnessed a prime example of wrong-headed leftist thinking in action: Millionaire American and European rockers decided the best way to help Africa is to force governments of successful countries to increase taxes on ordinary citizens and give the money to the benighted African peasants. You know, those unfortunate Africans who, through no fault of their own, are poor. At least that’s how they see it, in their drug-dulled thinking. Sir Paul McCarthy and Sir Bob Geldof seem painfully unaware that the vast majority of monetary aid given to Africa does no good at all. This is not to say there aren’t many very reputable charitable organizations who try their level best to do good there. Most of the nation-to-nation aid doesn’t go to these charities because they are religious (read Christian) in nature and we can’t have governments helping any people like that. The money Sir Paul and Sir Bob want to extort would not go to poor people at all. The rockers want to waste it; or more accurately they want to take money from you and me to give to corrupt dictators like Robert Mugabe. Of course, none of the rockers ever give very much to charity themselves. In fact they each were given $12,000 in luxury gift items for their participation in this charity event. Some sacrifice! The hypocrisy of this aside, the worst thing is that they are so painfully wrong about what would really help in Africa. They don’t seem to have a clue about the role of charity. While it’s all well and good to donate money to true charities, to help out human beings who really are incapable of helping themselves, doing that will never help a nation into prosperity. It doesn’t work that way. It never has in the whole history of human kind. Can anyone give an example of a successful civilization built on the charity of another? No! It doesn’t happen. It can’t happen!! That’s not how nations are built. It’s a fine thing to do, to give money to the churches to help Aids orphans, but that’s not what Sir Paul and Sir Elton want. No, the sirs aren’t interested in encouraging people to give money to charity. That’s not really what they’re about. Instead, they are only interested in forcing higher taxes on you and me. An article of faith for leftists world-wide: taxes can never be too high. After all, this isn’t really about helping Africans. This is about punishing Western nations, most especially the United States.

The problem in Africa is not monetary. The problem is cultural. Africa will never overcome its poverty problem until it eradicates its corruption problem. This really has been demonstrated over and over and is no longer subject to dispute. Billions and billions of dollars have been thrown at Africa by earnest government do-gooders year after year after year and what is the result? Africa is worse-off now. Welfare as an institution, as has been demonstrated over and over again, will never solve poverty. Only the genuine, self-serving efforts of the African people to help themselves will ever begin to solve their problems. Self interest is the most powerful anti-poverty tool ever devised. That’s how all western countries achieved the wealth and prosperity they enjoy. Unfortunately Mugabe and all other modern African leaders have not followed that path. Instead they have followed the pattern of dozens of their predecessors and contemporaries: start the revolution, overthrow the existing government, and then become even more corrupt and oppressive. This is the continent-wide fate of nation after nation in Africa. The truth about Africa is plain to see for anybody willing to look: Measured in terms of nutrition, health, education, gross national product and general well-being, Africa was far better under the colonial rule of Britain and France than it is now. Painful to say, but nonetheless true. Until Africa realizes that it will have to build itself up, they are doomed to poverty, corruption and failure. And no amount of ageing rockers can make one bit of difference about it.

Some Thoughts on the War Against Terrorism

2005-06-24T12:00:00.000-06:00

My brother-in-law, a Vietnam veteran, just left for Iraq. He can’t tell us exactly where he is going, but we know it will be somewhere in the infamous Sunni Triangle. We know it will be very dangerous for him there. We realize that lots of Islamic terrorists are operating in that area. They set up roadside bombs designed to kill soldiers traveling in convoys. They pack cars with explosives and detonate them in places where soldiers are likely to be. They wrap young women in explosives and send them into crowded places to be homicide bombers by killing themselves and as many others who happen to be standing nearby as possible. They employ lots of cowardly tactics such as these. The one thing they won’t do is put on a uniform and face the coalition forces straight up like real warriors would. They really are despicable wretches who have no courage or moral integrity. But, even so, they can, and do kill American soldiers –like my brother-in-law, albeit in a cowardly fashion.

We’re very proud of his patriotism and his dedication to the military which he has chosen to make his career and his life. But we’re afraid for him at the same time. We don’t want anything bad to happen to him. He has a wife, five children and several grandchildren who need him desperately. He is a good man and doesn’t deserve to be killed by some faceless Muslim terrorist in a far off country. We want to be sure that, if the unthinkable should happen, his sacrifice wouldn’t have been in vain. We are desperate to believe that his sacrifice, should it happen, as well as the demise of the other 1,700 Americans who have died in Iraq won’t have been for nothing.

Some people don’t think any cause is worth dying for. The committed anti-war zealots would have us just lie down and let the Muslim terrorists take over. They would have done the same for Hitler. I dismiss them out of hand. They are kooks. Always have been. Far more dangerous are the leftists in this country. They hate Bush and therefore are against this war. All of the reasons they are against this war have to do with hating Bush and his political philosophy. It really is that simple. Ted Kennedy, George Soros, Dick Durbin, the mainstream media and all the rest of them hate the Iraq war against terrorism because they hate George W. Bush and all that he represents. They hate patriotism. They hate true religion. They hate capitalism. They hate freedom. Karl Rove had it exactly right. Conservatives saw the 9/11 attack as an act of war by enemies of freedom and prepared to defend our country. Liberals saw it as a call to be more understanding and tolerant of those who think differently and jumped in to defend the terrorists.

They hate the fact that Bush was president when 9/11 happened. They hate it that George Bush rallied the country in the wake of that attack. They hate the unity and patriotism that swept the country after we were attacked. And they immediately set to work to diminish and destroy the feelings of unity and patriotism the nation was experiencing after the twin towers and 3,000 Americans were destroyed. They started calling 9/11 a “tragedy” instead of what it really was: a craven attack on the United States of America by a foreign power. They refused to show the attack on TV after just a few days. They refused to show people jumping to their death from the towers in desperate attempts to escape the terrorist’s flames. They refused to denounce the street celebrations staged by the radical Muslim community, even in this country, after the attack. They began to second guess the motives behind Bush’s decision to fight terrorism in Afghanistan and Iraq. They predicted tens of thousands of deaths if we attacked the terrorist regime in Iraq. They trotted out every nay-sayer they could find to belittle Bush and his team. They are, to this very day, doing everything they possibly can to cause the American people to loose faith in our efforts against terrorism in Iraq and elsewhere. From the very beginning, Kennedy and his ilk, have been against any effort to destroy Islamic terrorism, –and they are still today. They feel this way because they hate Bush, they hate freedom, they hate liberty, and, sad to say, they hate America.

Right after the 9/11 attack, George Bush made it very clear to all Americans that this war against Islamic terrorism would not be easy. He was resolute and made it very clear that it was going be a long hard slog. He also made it clear that any nation or group who isn’t for America and its fight against radical Islamic terrorism, is against America and the fight against terrorism. Anybody who isn’t for the defeat of evil, embodied in Islamic terrorism, is thus supporting evil –including the left in this country, no matter how much they deny that fact. It has been, and will continue to be difficult. Good men and women have died. Other good men and women unfortunately will yet die. It will take a long, long time and we will suffer many setbacks along the way. Nothing worth accomplishing is ever very easy.

My brother-in-law knows it will be hard and dangerous. But because he loves freedom, liberty and democracy, he is willing to make the ultimate sacrifice. And while that concept seems to be totally lost on committed leftists like Kennedy, Michael Moore, and the rest, hopefully most Americans still believe in it. We will win this war against Islamic terrorism if we can defeat the efforts of the global Islamic terrorists, and their leftist allies in this country. We can only hope that in spite of the massive efforts by the left in this country to discourage us, true Americans will retain the will to win this war against terrorism. If not, the deaths of all the Americans who have died so far in Iraq, in the World Trade Center, in Afghanistan and elsewhere will truly have been in vain. And that would be a great tragedy.

Base Closure Hurts Thune (at least we sure hope so.)

2005-06-12T11:37:00.000-06:00

Just in case there is anyone out there who still doubts the existence of bias in the mainstream media, here’s another recent example:

On my commute home, I happened to catch NPR’s “All things Considered” and heard a story about Senator John Thune’s supposed struggle with the announced closure of a military base in his home state of South Dakota. The gist of the story was that Thune failed to keep a campaign promise by “allowing” the base to appear on the closure list.

Of course, the fact that neither Thune, nor any other senator has any say in which bases are targeted by the commission which makes the selections wasn’t mentioned. The commission is, and properly should be, totally independent. The strong inference was given that if Daschle had been reelected, the base would have been spared and now Thune is reeling because he didn’t “have the ear of President Bush.” Of course this is nonsense. Daschle wouldn’t have had any more influence with the Base Closure Commission than Thune and President Bush doesn’t have anything to do with it. For NPR to suggest otherwise shows pure political bias. Their attitude is that the “rubes” in South Dakota are too stupid to understand that a senator can do precious little to avoid the consequences of an independent commission. The independent commission looks only at numbers, facts, and efficiencies in making their selections for base closures, and not at the political consequences. The fact that NPR assumes their listeners wouldn’t already know that shows the utter contempt they have for their audience.

The only real nugget of truth which the story inadvertently brought out, but which was not emphasized at all by NPR, is that, unlike Clinton during the last round of base closures, President Bush had the honesty, and integrity to stay out of the selection process and not pressure the commission to spare bases even in states represented by powerful allies like Thune. Bush let them just do their job. That is something we all should be celebrating. The people in South Dakota should be celebrating it too. They will survive the base closure. It will be good for the country in the long run and the good people of South Dakota know it. If Thune continues to do a good job representing South Dakota, he need not worry about the base closure. Any negative consequences for Thune relating to this event exist only in the minds of Democrat political operatives who hope to exploit the base closure in the next election and their fellow Democrats at NPR.

Less Than a Week

2005-05-30T09:27:00.000-06:00

So, how long did it take Democrats to break their promise of no filibusters in exchange for the capitulation of seven weak-kneed Republicans? Less than a week! In fact they filibustered the first nominee they had the chance to vote on. They filibustered John Bolton. And their reaction when this is pointed out? What else? They simply lied about it. Harry Reid, the shameless Democrat minority leader said: "We're not here to filibuster Bolton..." What? When you prevent an up or down vote on one of the president’s nominees by requiring a 60 senator majority to allow a vote, it’s a filibuster! Then he had the gall to add: "It is not the fault of the Democratic Senators..." Oh no? Let’s see: 40 votes to filibuster were cast by Democrats. That's all it takes to make a filibuster stick. Sure seems to me that it is the fault of the Democrat senators. The Democrat MINORITY stopped Bolton from being confirmed. No other way to look at it.

If that doesn’t let all Republicans, and everyone else in America, know the true nature of Democrats, nothing will. Simply put, they can’t be trusted. They will lie about this and every other political thing. They can only be defeated and it looks we’re going to need to replace any weak-sister Republican who insists on playing nicey-nice with them. It appears to be the only solution. Toss them out!

Making a Deal With the Devil

2005-05-24T22:35:00.000-06:00

The gang of seven did it. Seven liberal Republican Senators thwarted the will of the Senate majority. Since this bunch is totally convinced that they know better than the other 48 Republican senators, they went behind closed doors, and without the consent of the president, or Senator Frist, they cut a deal with the devil. Oh, to be sure the devil promised that he would behave, and only would make mischief if extraordinary circumstances exist. (Read that to mean they will filibuster anybody they damn well please.) News Flash! Democrats don’t keep their promises. Especially their political promises given to Republicans. Just ask George Bush Sr.

Most conservatives are rightly outraged by this treason. Some are looking for a silver lining in the deal. At best it is a disgusting example of political chicanery. It is also a further example of how Republicans don’t know how to be the majority.

The big loser in this deal, besides the American people, is Bill Frist. He had the rug pulled out from under him in a big way. I can’t see how he can recover even a sliver of his chances of being the GOP nominee in 2008. Politically, he looks to be finished.

We now wait with bated breath to see if the Republican leadership, from the president on down, will demonstrate the courage to make sure these mavericks get some consequences. They deserve to be spanked for their temerity. I, for one, will not be holding my bated breath until punishment is administered.. I have been disappointed far too many times in the past.

What a revolting development this turned out to be.

Republican Senators Have no Spine.

2005-04-20T16:37:00.000-06:00

Watching the spectacle of milquetoast Republican senators like Voinovich ineffectively dithering, cowering, quailing and quaking, in the face of the partisan rantings of ideologue Democratic senators like senator Biden reminds me of why Republicans are never likely to get anything accomplished in this term, or ever. These guys have no guts. They allow themselves to be swayed by these Democrat lawyers. They turn into Jell-O and melt down in the face of any attack by the opposition. And they are the majority!? They simply don’t how to be the majority and they cede all power to the Democrats as soon as things heat up to any degree at all. They have no courage, they have no pluck, they have no self-respect. What good are they?

You must ask yourself, why? The answer: no consequences. Voinovich, Snowe, Chafee, Hagel, and McCain repeatedly defect, chicken out, run for the hills, and otherwise fail to support the party that elected them to their precious senatorial seats and they do it because they can get away with it!! Every time!! As a party, Republicans are very poor enforcers. They don’t punish these mavericks at all. McCain stabs the president in the back on Meet the Press, --no problem, no repercussions. He still is treated like royalty by the very Republicans he betrays. This happens over and over again. It’s very frustrating!

Another factor: These wavering Republicans seem to have an insatiable desire to be liked, --by their Democrat colleagues, by the leftist press, by all the inside-Washington swells. They measure their self esteem by which "A" list soirees they are invited to. They don’t seem to understand that all of these Democrats and “beautiful people” don’t really like them! They are just stringing them along as “useful idiots.” As long as they play ball with the Democrats, the Dems will pretend to like them. So they cozy up to the Democrats, and vote with them, and against their own party, again and again. Yet inexplicably the Republican leadership continues to welcome them back to the fold time after time after time.

Contrast that with how the Democrats treated retiring senator Zell Miller when his conscience wouldn't allow him to remain silent about the leftist capture of the Democratic party. As soon as he let it be known that he was going off the reservation, he was shunned, cut out, excluded, ridiculed, and written off by the Democrats. Now any Democratic senator who may want to vote against his party is afraid to do so because they don’t want similar treatment as Miller. The Democrats always vote in lock-step. Republicans, on the other hand, are always all-too-willing to side with the democrats and their leadership is all-too-willing to forgive and forget. No outrage is too great to be ignored. They let bygones be bygones. While they may win the “nice guy of the year" award, this benign attitude towards Republicans who stray will not allow them to win any political battles. The Democrats will eat their lunch. The American people elected these Republicans to get things done. If they continue to be conciliatory to a fault, they deserve to be turned out, --quick! They need to be fearless in their efforts.

We can’t stand any more do-nothing congresses; no matter how well they get along with the Democrats.

The Heights of Hypocrisy

2005-04-17T18:54:00.000-06:00

The Democrats have descended to a new low, even for them, in their witch hunt against Tom DeLay. They accuse him of "ethical" impropriety for doing the same thing they have been doing for years. Harry Reid is one of the worst abusers in the practice of feathering his own nest (registration required) and that of his family members by using his influence as a powerful politician to place his sons in cushy jobs. There are dozens of other Democrats who are doing the same thing,– while at the same time wagging their finger at Tom DeLay. Why? They have no shame that’s why! It has become increasingly clear that they, with the cover provided by a compliant leftist press, can make any charge and smear anybody they get in their sights and seemingly suffer no consequences for their words and actions. At least that’s the way it used to be. Maybe things are starting to change with the advent of the blogger’s army.

Is favoring your family members by getting them into jobs an unseemly thing to do? Yes, without question. Is it a widespread practice among politicians? Of course, and it has been for a very long time. But the fact remains that it is much more common on the part of the Democrats than the Republicans. The fact that the mainstream media has been forced to point that fact out is a very important portrayal of the new power of the bloggoshpere.

Why the hypocrisy? The Democrats are shamelessly trying to bring down DeLay because he is a powerful and effective opponent. It’s dirty politics at its worst and Democrats are very good at dirty politics. Fair-minded Americans need to shed the light of day on this tawdry smearing at every opportunity. Now that the Democrats don’t have a strangle hold on all press outlets, the truth has at least a chance of getting out.

Tom DeLay is not as pure as the driven snow when it comes to using his influence to help family members. But he is a piker when compared to many to those who are accusing him the most vociferously. We can’t let them get away with it.

Sobering Thoughts

2005-03-31T22:20:00.000-07:00

I am in favor of the right to die with dignity. I think living wills are a great idea. I think people should have the absolute right to refuse extraordinary medical intervention. I support all of these ideas, –for terminally ill people. When it is abundantly clear that you are approaching death, and you are in great discomfort, and there is no hope for recovery, you should have the right to die. No problem. But it must, unambiguously, in writing, no questions asked, be your true will. Not someone else’s hearsay opinion. If there is any doubt, you must be allowed to live.

Terri Schiavo was not terminally ill. She was handicapped, and on a feeding tube. She couldn’t walk. She couldn't Talk. She could only waive her arms about and make unintelligible noises, –just like the Pope. And since her true will regarding her medical care was not known, a civil court granted her ex-husband the right to kill her by starvation and dehydration. Her ex-husband, who had essentially abandoned her some time before, and had been in a relationship which produced two children with another woman, and clearly would benefit from Terri’s death, was granted a license to kill her via Florida Law. The law not only allowed him to kill her, it provided deputies to prevent others from committing the great crime of giving her a sip of water. The law, as Mr. Bumble famously said: "is a ass, a idiot." Terri’s ex-husband is a murderer.

Judge Greer followed the law scrupulously –as he saw it. And he saw it very narrowly. His jurisprudence also killed Terri Schiavo. Judge Greer, like the law he punctiliously upheld, is likewise an "ass, a idiot." He is judicial tyranny embodied. He cannot escape the blood of this poor handicapped woman any more that her ex-husband can. What happened may have been "lawful", but it was not right. And it can never be justified.

The cult of death, Hemlock Society, crowd is exemplified in the lawyer Felos, who gave political contributions to Judge Greer, and served on the board of directors at the hospice where Terri was sent to be killed. He is the lawyer who "won" the right for Terri's ex-husband to kill her. He is the very definition of evil. He will do or say anything to promote his view that all "inconvenient" people should be allowed to be killed, –oh for their own good, you understand. Starvation and dying of thirst, after all, is a peaceful and gentle way to go. Here’s hoping he "goes" that way very soon.

Of course, none of this will ultimately mean anything. America is already letting this horrific event slip into the ethers of the past. We’ll soon stop talking about it altogether, and go back to the really important things, – like the Michael Jackson circus trial. Baseball season is about to start. The NBA playoffs will soon be here. How about the "Final Four"! ... Terri who?

Untold Tax Outrages

2005-03-27T10:08:00.000-07:00

Many of us are busily crunching numbers at this time of year, feverishly trying to get our taxes done. Most of us only become aware of the large amount of federal income taxes we pay if we're required to dig deep into our pockets and write out a check for an amount on top of all the thousands of dollars already withheld by our employer and send it in with our tax returns. Ouch! That really hurts a lot! Withholding doesn't seem to hurt as much. It's a great scheme they've got. The politicians have lulled us to sleep by requiring our employers to withhold taxes from each paycheck. That way, we tend to focus only on our net pay, an we don't even notice how much we are actually paying. In fact, many of us are euphoric when we find out that we are getting a small "refund." We are blissfully unaware that this "refund" is only a result of an over-payment of taxes in the first place! It's not free money from heaven. If each of us had to sit down each payday and write out four checks, –one for federal income tax, one for federal social security tax, one for federal medicare tax and one for state income tax we would probably be outraged enough to take action to get this confiscatory system reformed! But since we don't have to write such checks, we're all too happy to pay through the nose. We hardly even notice it.

The "payroll withholding" system which FDR slipped into the IRS code in the 1940s has served as the biggest single "opiate" which deadens the pain of taxes and blinds us to the real tax burden we all pay. That, along with the fiction of corporate taxes, which each of us as consumers really pay in the form of higher prices, hides the onerous cost of our bloated federal bureaucracy. It keeps us from noticing how much government really costs us. We go blissfully along, ignorant of the true cost. In reality our tax burden, in all of its forms, takes every penny we earn clear up to late April or May! It's an outrage!

Another outrage most of us do not even know about: The Earned Income Credit (EIC). This is a welfare program set up by the leftists which really has nothing to do with taxes. It has one purpose: –to take money from those who produce it and give it to those who don't. Under EIC, people who have qualifying children can get up to $4,300 in gratis, free, bonus cash from their fellow Americans. Yippee! This really is like free money from heaven! Only it isn't from heaven. It's paid by you and me. If you had a federal tax obligation last year of more than $4,300, likely a neighbor down the block got your money in the form of an EIC check. How would you react if that same neighbor had showed up at your house and pilfered the $4,300 out of your piggy bank? You'd call the police! You'd scream bloody murder! You wouldn’t stand for it! Oh really?. Well, you are standing for it, –every year, year after year, after year, after year. Many, many of these welfare takers are hardly poor. You needn't pity them. Let me explain: If Bill Gates' mother lived with him in his billion dollar mansion, and earned $14,000 per year, she could get a $4,300 check from the poor sucker taxpayers by claiming 2 of his children for the EIC benefit. And he could still claim the same two kids on his own tax returns as dependents! It sounds hard to believe, but it's true. The law allows a direct relative to claim children for EIC benefits regardless of the total family income!! It’s true! Millionaire families all over America are getting EIC credits year, after year, after year! It's an outrage!!

Yet another outrage. The EIC is a potent disincentive to marriage. You do much better tax-wise in many cases as two single people than you would as a married couple. Let me Illustrate:

Ronald and Mary Jones are a married couple with a couple of kids. Ron makes $75,000 per year. Mary makes $14,000 per year. At normal withholding rates, and by filing a joint return with two dependents deductions, they get a tax refund of $1,794, –a pretty typical American taxpayer story. Now, let’s look at the same family in a different way. Ron and Mary are not married. Everything else is the same. They live in the same house, and have the same kids, jobs, withholding, but they’re not married. Ron would file as head of household, taking both children as dependent deductions, but now his tax situation has changed considerably. Instead of getting a refund of $1,794 he only gets $256. “No fair” he cries, “married people get all the breaks.” But wait. Now Mary can file her taxes as a single person and claim both children for an EIC. As a result, she gets, –are you ready, a whopping $5,192 refund check from Uncle Sam which is to say from you and me. That’s right!! By not being married, this couple benefitted to the tune of $3,654!!! The marriage penalty is $3,654!! And this goes on, perfectly legally, all over America, year after year, after year, after year. It’s an outrage!!!

It is time for America to wake up to these and other outrages in our tax system. It’s time to enact a fair tax system for all. It’s time to enact The Fair Tax. It would eliminate these outrages, and many others. Check it out. The time has come to write your senators and congressmen. Let’s pass the Fair Tax!

Politically Correct Equals Four Dead People

2005-03-12T22:46:00.000-07:00

The mainstream media is blithely skirting the real issues regarding the murders in Atlanta committed by the violent criminal who was escorted to court yesterday by a single, elderly, female deputy. This large, athletic criminal was not handcuffed or shackled. He was allowed to be right next to the lady, enabling him to overpower her, take her gun, kill three people including the judge, and escape into the streets of Atlanta, where today he killed another person. How could have this happened!? It sounds too bizarre to be real.

The liberal press, of course, is getting it all wrong. (Now there’s a shocker!) They are blaming the deaths on the fact that the courtroom was not fitted with bullet proof shields due to lack of funds. They are trying, indirectly, to lay it on the Bush administration! They are claiming it is a result of budget cuts. Bunk! That’s not the reason at all! They are also claiming that it was because police officers had guns in the courthouse!! Now that’s really absurd.

None of this needed to happen. This violent criminal should have been accompanied to his court appearance by two beefy male deputies. He should have been in his orange jump suit, shackled with leg irons and handcuffed to a chain around his waist. If he had been, none of the four people would have been dead today. Think of that! The families wracked today by horrible wrenching grief because of the death of their loved ones could have, and should have, been spending an ordinary Saturday enjoying life. If this creep had been properly restrained, he would have been prevented from overpowering the little old lady, and getting her gun in the first place. He would have been hustled into and out of court in a totally routine fashion.

Why was he not properly restrained? Why was grandma sent to guard him? Political correctness!! Oh yes, to be sure, it was all about political correctness. Here are two false assertions by leftist liberal, politically correct idiots which costs these four people their lives:

1. Men and women are equal and should be given the same jobs.

Police departments, fire departments, and the military have been forced by liberal politicians to give physically demanding jobs to girls who just aren’t able to do them. It sounds rash to say it, but it is nonetheless true. In the sacred name of equal opportunity, these agencies have sacrificed the safety of the public and that's a fact. Ask yourself; if you were trapped on the 2nd floor of a burning building, you were unconscious, and you weighed 240 lbs, would you want a 110 lb firelady sent up to get you out? The question answers itself! Men and women, –newsflash– are different! That’s not a bad thing. Each can do certain things better that the other. Among the many skills women possess in rich abundance, great upper body strength is NOT one of them. Duh! Yet we are forced by politically correct idiots to allows girls to pretend to be equal in ability for jobs where this upper body strength is absolutely vital. How absurd!!!!

2. Having accused prisoners, especially minorities, appear in court handcuffed and shackled prevents them from getting a fair trial.

How? If every person who has been accused of a violent felony is required to appear in court, handcuffed and manacled how it that unfair to any of them? It’s very hard to believe any jury would say: “well the state didn’t present any evidence, and the witnesses weren’t believable but boy that orange jump suit and those handcuffs sure made him look guilty. So we voted guilty!” Again, how absurd! How ridiculous! And how sad for the four people killed and for their families!

Some politician or government bureaucrat is responsible for the fact that this killer was permitted to commit multiple murders. They approved the policy that criminals need not be restrained when going to court. They condoned and mandated the idea that an elderly female deputy is capable of controlling an athletic, young male criminal. Some political hack or hacks unknown has the blood of these four people on his or her hands. Shame on them! Here’s hoping they lie awake at night and ponder endlessly the horrible wrongs their politically correct decisions have caused. Here’s hoping these needless deaths haunt them a lot.

But it won't happen. Unfortunately this kind of scum won’t take the responsibility that is rightfully theirs. Instead they will hide behind the liberal leftist press –who is blaming the Bush administration of all things! Again, how absurd!

Don’t Be Fooled by the Hillary Chameleon

2005-03-11T16:20:00.000-07:00

Hillary Clinton wants to be president of the United States. Hillary Clinton is a committed, life-long, left-wing, socialist ideologue and always will be. Hillary Clinton knows she must deceive a sizeable portion of the US population regarding her true nature or she will never be elected president of the United States. Hillary Clinton, of late, has become a chameleon.

Just like the little animal which possesses the ability to change colors in order to blend into whatever background it finds itself, Hillary, only very recently, has begun to mouth conservative sounding platitudes. Of course she really doesn’t believe any of the things she as been saying. She has NO intentions of doing anything that would result in the actual implementation of any of these conservative ideas. She is just pretending to be finding sudden interest in preventing abortion, cleaning up music and literature, and supporting President Bush’s Iraq policy. She didn’t even mean it when she voted to confirm Condoleezza Rice. It’s all just a cynical ploy on her part. It’s part of her long-term strategy to gain power.

Make no mistake! This is all a fraud. Hillary Clinton, if elected, will make government bigger and more intrusive. She will raise taxes. She will gut the military and do everything in her power to turn over our national security to the United Nations and The World Court. She will sign fraudulent international environmental treaties that will sap further the strength of our nation’s economy. She will do all in her power to increase welfare, and every other wasteful government program. She will resume her crusade to nationalize the health care industry. She will appoint extremely liberal judges who will further their goals of dismantling the constitution of the United States, by taking away basic guaranteed rights such as the right to bear arms and practice religion.

Hillary Clinton must be opposed vigorously by every clear-thinking U.S. Citizen. She is, by far, the biggest threat to this nation and to the American way of life we have seen in many years. The fact that she has the ability and inclination to change her spots, --to hide her true nature, only makes her all the more dangerous. Hillary Clinton wants, with every fiber of her being, to be president of the United States. By fooling some of the gullible, she might just achieve her goal! Heaven help us if she succeeds.

Silver Lining for the Bush Bashers?

2005-03-08T22:24:00.000-07:00

The recent incident involving the Italian journalist who was allegedly injured by allied gunfire while escaping her terrorist captors reveals more about the leftist western press than it does about American foreign policy. The anti Bush press has been having a very bad time of late. What with the successful Iraqi election and the outbreak of democracy fever that has broken out all over the Middle East, and all this following hard on the heels of the Kerry/press coalition election defeat in November was almost too much for them to endure. They were looking for something, anything, to bash Bush about. Just about when they were about to get totally desperate, here comes Ms. Guiliana Sgrena to the rescue. Yes, the same America hating communist reporter who was in Iraq trying to get material to bash American with. What luck! The wicked American soldiers attack a peaceful Italian motorist. Of course, we all know the American love nothing better than killing innocent Italians tourists in Iraq! But that's what the world believes. They're quite prepared to believe virtually anything. Of course facts don't matter to them. The whole story doesn't pass the smell test.

It’s really hard to conceive of any so-called intelligence officer, Italian or not, who wouldn’t know that it is a very bad idea to go speeding up to a check point on the road to the airport in Iraq. Since one of the most favored tactics of the terrorists is to race a car full of explosives and homicide bombers near enough to our soldiers to do damage, it boggles the mind that this reporter and intelligence officer wouldn’t know that. So our guys fired on the speeding car and the rest is history. Presto! The press got what they wanted. A new political club to use against Bush.

How did it really happen? Nobody really knows yet. One thing you can bet the house on though. It didn’t happen the way CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and NBC are saying it happened. In fact, as with most things on those networks, if you believe just the opposite of what they’re saying, you’d be closer to the truth. Another thing to bet the house on is when all the facts come out, and it turns out the checkpoint troops did fire warning shots, –and were ignored, the lefties will drop the story like a hot potato.

Ever was it thus in today’s topsy-turvy world of so-called journalism.

The Looming Battle

2005-02-25T16:45:00.000-07:00

Harry Reid and his leftwing cohorts are girding themselves up for single combat against all of president Bush’s major judge nominations. They plan non-stop filibusters against them all. In an effort to see if the GOP is up to the fight, Hugh Hewitt has posed the following question: Does the Senate GOP Go McClellan or Grant if Harry Reid "Goes Gingrich?"

Some might have preferred a different analogy. Something like does the senate GOP go Neville Chamberlain or Winston Churchill? Given the general lack of knowledge about US history, I’m not too sure that many people know who McClellan and Grant are, but more importantly, just as with the rise of Hitler and the appeasement proposed by Chamberlain, the fate of the whole world could very well rest on the actions of our senate re the confirmation of these important federal judges. Getting these judges confirmed is perhaps the most important thing president Bush could ever do during his remaining four years.

Arlen Specter and his ilk, in a totally misguided effort to appease the hard-core Democratic senators, will make it much more likely that strict-constructionist judges will never get confirmed. What does that mean to all of us? The leftist collection of judges who currently populate the federal bench are much more likely to be soft on terrorists. They are much more likely to make it difficult for our intelligence agencies and law enforcement departments to do their jobs. They are much more likely to allow Islamic terrorists to range freely among us, plotting their next devastating, economy-crippling, morale sapping attack. Such an attack would make us much less able to fend off the Islamic terrorists and their proclaimed ambition of world dominance. And these leftists judges know it, --and don’t care.

The most troubling aspect of Specter’s actions and the milquetoast Republican senators who agree with him is that all their efforts to curry favor with the Democrats, and with the leftist press will fail. The leftists are hard-core ideologues. They will never, never, ever compromise their anti-American pro-terrorists stance on all these issues. They may invite Specter to their cocktail parties, and they may have him on their news programs, but he will never be truly accepted by them. He is merely a “useful idiot” for them. Why he can’t see this, when everybody else can clearly see it, is hard to understand.

It’s clearly time for Senator Frist to engage. He must present a resolution that all federal judges who have been voted out of committee must be voted on by the whole senate immediately. They must be presented for confirmation as a group if necessary. Let the filibuster go on for a day or so, then pass a new rule that cloture of a filibuster can be achieved with a simple majority. The American people want this done. The senators must get the courage to make it so or face their wrath in the next election. The sooner they realize this, the better.

Harry Reid Sets the Obstructionist Tone

2005-02-18T17:31:00.000-07:00

Harry Reid, true to form, has set the stage for yet another protracted Democrat led filibuster over the appointment of federal judges. President Bush has re-nominated each of the candidates who were prevented by the Democrats from getting an “up or down” vote by the senate last term. Shamelessly, Reid says they have been “rejected” by the sena te. Of course, he knows they have not been rejected by the senate, but instead, never have been considered for approval by the full senate due to Democrat led political chicanery. He also knows that if they are given the chance, each will be confirmed by a majority of the senate.

Senator Reid appears to be unaware that one of the reasons Tom Daschle is no longer a senator is because he led the obstruction of President Bush’s nominations, -and the people of South Dakota held it against him. The people of Nevada will do the same, and Senator Reid will hopefully become former Senator Reid.

One thing needs to happen right away. The senate needs to pass a rule that cloture of a filibuster can be achieved by a simple majority vote of the senate. There really is no reason to allow 40 misguided senators to hold up the people’s business. Senator Frist needs to get it done – now.

Kennedy Shows the Democrat's True Colors

2005-02-06T15:39:00.000-07:00

On Tim Russert today we saw a very revealing picture of what leftists always propose as a solution to every issue and as remedy to every national problem --tax increases! When pressed by Russert for the Democrat's solution to the Social Security problem Kennedy demanded Bush raise taxes. He specifically said:

MR. RUSSERT: So you would roll back the president's tax cuts.

SEN. KENNEDY: That's a possible--for one-third, he wants to make it permanent. You can roll back just one-third of it and solve the Social Security problem. ...

No other way to paint what he said. He proposed raising taxes. Russert even acknowledged it. And anyone who thinks he only wants back one third of the Bush tax cuts doesn’t know Senator Kennedy very well. He wants continuous, huge tax increases to fund the laundry list of socialist programs he has promised his left-wing core constituency ranging from socialized medicine to government guaranteed so-called “living” wages. It's the only solution to every problem in the democrat play book. It's the first thing they think of. It's what they suggest every time. They go right to it, --raising taxes almost is a Pavlovian response. You sound a whistle, they scream "raise taxes." Of course, raising taxes never works. Throwing more money at a social problem never works as a solution. They threw billions at poverty during LBJ's War on Poverty. The result: more poverty. Throwing more money at problems by raising taxes only accomplishes one thing: It provides more money for Democrats to spend on their pet programs. They buy votes with this tax revenue. That's why they always oppose tax cuts and always support tax increases. Higher taxes is their life blood. It’s how they survive.

Fortunately, the American people are no longer buying it. The "raising taxes" solution has largely fallen out of favor with the majority of Americans. The past two presidential election cycles demonstrates that fact. Bush campaigned on cutting taxes twice, and was elected --twice. He therefore has a clear mandate to cut taxes, not raise them. Kennedy can urge higher taxes all he wants. He’s unlikely to get them.

Raising taxes won's solve the Social Security problem any more than it solved the war on poverty problem, or the horrible inner city schools problem. The more taxes and spending are increased, the worse these problems get. Throwing more taxpayer money something accomplishes only one thing: --It wastes a lot of taxpayer money. The only solution that will work to "fix" Social Security is to abolish it. Bush has proposed doing exactly that --incrementally. Hopefully, within this century, Social Security will consist of what it should –each individual taking care of himself and his own family, and donating funds through charity to take care of those who truly can’t take care of themselves. Having government dipping its fingers into the administration of charity is always a bad idea. Expecting people to care for themselves and their families is always a good idea. Bravo Mr. Bush!

The Supremes Got it Right

2005-01-25T16:25:00.000-07:00

The recent Supreme Court decision allowing drug sniffing dogs to be used for finding illegal drugs during routine traffic stops is a refreshing breath of fresh air in an era of “soft”, criminal-friendly decisions by the same court. One is almost tempted to hope that they have had a sea-change in their philosophy in the wake of the recent presidential election. The “red state” tidal wave makes it clear that most Americans are in no mood for nonsense when it come to crime and criminals. The court couldn’t have avoided noticing that.

The decision basically says Americans have no “right” of privacy to violate the law. If you buy a dime bag, you have already committed a crime by that very act. The crime occurred when you got the drugs, not when the police caught you during a traffic stop. And law enforcement is not engaging in an unreasonable search when they let their dogs sniff your car. Police dogs, as law enforcement officers, have the right to “observe” you. They do that by sniffing.

Of course, not every action of law enforcement is reasonable. Nobody would approve of letting law enforcement officers wrestle you to the ground, strap a rubber hose around your arm, and draw a syringe of blood while you are strolling peacefully through the public park, even though that activity might catch a few drug users. That would be an invasion of your privacy –to say the least. However, this decision was limited to traffic stops only. It should have been taken further. For example, if while walking their dog through the parking lot at Wal-Mart, the dog signals you have illegal drugs, --you’re busted! Why couldn’t that be justified as follows: An “officer” of the law, using his specialized powers of observation, had reasonable cause to suspect a crime had been committed? In other words, the dog smelled your drugs. Wouldn’t the same officer be within his rights as a law enforcement agent if he visually observed something illegal in your car? Why not if his dog, -also a law enforcement officer, “observed” the same thing.

If you don’t want to be subject to such, don’t buy illegal drugs, --and if you do, don’t take them to Wal-Mart or anywhere else with you. You might get stopped for a broken tail light. If you do, you have nobody to blame except yourself when you get caught with the drugs.
The Supreme Court has said so.

Freedom of Speech? And Equality for All?

2005-01-14T16:04:00.000-07:00

Leftist liberals are all frothing at the mouth about George W. Bush’s inauguration. They claim he is spending too much money on it; that it is unseemly during a time of war, that using the Bible and saying “so help me God” violates the first amendment. Of course this is all just a part of the newest leftist craze –bashing religious people like Bush. It’s now OK to bash Christians apparently. It is even OK for some so-called Christians to bash other Christians, as long as the other Christians being bashed are not the darlings of the left. In fact there is a blatant double standard which is very well illustrated by two similar events in the past couple of years.

In December of last year, four so-called Christian preachers were bound over for trial in Philadelphia for “preaching” at a gay-pride event. Most Christians wouldn’t call the confrontational style the “preaches” were utilizing a very prudent or effective method of evangelizing. They are not likely to win many converts among the homosexual community by calling them sinners with huge signs while yelling at them through bullhorns. In fact, they were disrupting the event. They were certainly not expressing the Golden Rule Jesus preached. They were obnoxious, loud, disruptive, and confrontational. But so what? In this country, don’t they have the right to be obnoxious and disruptive on the public square? It’s called free speech. The “gay pride” people were equally loud, vulgar, boisterous and obnoxious. So –we have a standoff of jerks yelling at each other. But that’s not the way the leftist activist judges saw it. They had the obnoxious “preachers” arrested and bound over for trial for exercising their free speech. They face up to 47 years in prison for exercising their free speech! The gays got off Scott free! The obnoxious homosexuals were allowed to escape without consequences! Double standard anyone? Where is the ACLU? Don’t they come to the aid of groups who get into trouble for free speech? That’s what they claim. Why aren’t they supporting the “preachers” this case?

Not that the so-called “street preachers” always get prosecuted for their hateful, obnoxious behavior. It seems to depend on which group they are attacking. If they are going after left-wing icons like the homosexuals or abortionists, they’re in big trouble. They effectively have no first amendment rights. However, if they go after Mormons, well that’s another story. When that happens, the Mormons get arrested and the “street preachers” get off. Their free speech rights are assiduously protected by the left.

Each April and October, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints ( Mormons) hold their General Conference in Salt Lake City. Tens of thousands of the faithful flock to Salt Lake to attend these conferences. Conference also attracts the “street preachers”, who exhibit obnoxious, loud, rude, hateful and despicable behavior with the huge signs, bullhorns, etc. For example, they openly mock the religious, sacred religious vestments Mormons use in their private worship services by wearing them in public to hold them up to ridicule. They frequently accost young Mormon brides who are exiting the Temple on their wedding day to take pictures and greet well-wishers. They call these newlyweds harlots, whores, and other vulgar names. No matter how confrontational, hateful and disruptive their behavior, the leftist judges in Salt Lake City exonerate them totally, saying they are only exercising their constitutionally guaranteed freedom of speech. But when an outraged member of the Mormon church was moved to snatch away an article of sacred clothing a “street preacher” was waiving about and mocking, he was arrested and jailed. Nobody claimed the “preacher” had incited him to riot. No judge would ascribe any wrong to the “preacher” at all.

If this isn’t an example of a double standard, it’s hard to know what would be. The same obnoxious “street preachers” who are arrested for exercising free speech in Philadelphia, get off without so much as a reprimand while harassing Mormons in Salt Lake City. And the ACLU remains silent. Go figure.

The CBS Forged Memo Report

2005-01-10T11:52:00.000-07:00

CBS still doesn’t get it. The much anticipated Forged Memo report has been released, finally, by Viacom’s internal investigators. The report is a whitewash. While they did throw a couple of executive producers to the wolves, they totally ignored the real kernel, nub, heart and soul of what happened. Instead, they twisted and spun the report to avoid the most important thing that caused Dan Rather, Mary Mapes and all the others to air forged memos in the first place. This report covered up the real story, --hushed it up, --and papered it over.

The events that occurred are quite simple: Rather, Mapes and 90% of all CBS News associates are left-wing, Bush-hating liberals. They are continually looking for anything which may tend to discredit the President. They were fed a very inflammatory, damning set of memos which purported to be authentic but were, in fact, crude forgeries. Rather and Mapes wanted to believe the content of these memos so much they were willing ignore mountains of evidence which told them the memos were fake, including the opinions of several of the document experts they hired to look at them. They had such an active animus against George W Bush, they were willing to totally set aside any hint of journalistic ethics they may once have had, and they simply ran with a story that they knew, or they should have known was a fraud.

The report goes to great lengths to lead us in every direction and to every conclusion, in its search for an explanation for this lapse in journalism, except to the real and obvious one: Rather hates Bush. That is what blinded him and allowed him to ignore all the red flags, ranging from the experts’ opinions, to the checkered background of the source of these memos. He just threw caution to the wind. No other explanation makes any sense at all.

One other factor is also very important. CBS, Rather and all of his main-stream media colleagues, in all of their arrogance, have most certainly misunderestimated the power of the blogosphere. They have been accustomed to being the only source of mass information for many years. They simply weren’t prepared for the possibility that Web sites such as Little Green Footballs, and others would uncover these forgeries within minutes of their publication. They didn’t understand the reach and power these Blogs have at all. This episode, more than any other in recent history, shows the decline of the main stream media and the rise of the blogosphere. Hugh Hewitt’s new book, Blog, points this out in great detail. Dan Rather and his ilk can no longer rely on the power of their “one source, one-way” media empires. There will always be a hoard of independent media critics in the blogosphere checking and re-checking everything they say. They just can no longer get away with false and biased reporting. No wonder so many of them have retired. It’s no longer fun for them.

Will this change the fundamental nature of the establishment press? No, they will remain virulently left wing, and anti-Bush. But maybe they will be at least a little more circumspect about letting us all see their true colors. We can all hope so.

More Roadside Bombings?

2005-01-07T11:46:00.000-07:00

The US has the best trained, best equipped military in the history of the world. Yet, inexplicably, they continue to be the victims of so-called roadside bombings on an almost daily basis. This, more than anything else, continues to sap the will of the American public. It is becoming increasingly difficult for many to support the concept of staying the course in Iraq. This military failure (there is no other way to put it) also leads to a very frank and unblinking question: Why!? Why on earth do we continue to lose troops to this relatively crude form of attack? Why, after almost two years, haven’t we figured out a way to stop them!? This stuff is not rocket science. What gives?

Roadside bombs, which are really land mines, are often detonated by wireless remote control. Hasn’t anyone been able to come up with a way to jam the signals? Roadside bombs are put in place by people, presumably at night. Don’t we have patrols with night vision equipment sweeping the supply corridors in Iraq? Somebody knows who is building and placing these bombs. Don’t we have any intelligence sources who can tell us who? when? where? Roadside bombs have to be placed near enough to our convoys to cause a direct blast effect. Don’t we have “secure” supply routes which are off limits to anyone other than our own people? Don’t we patrol these corridors with helicopters and other aircraft? Don’t we make it perfectly clear to all Iraqis that for the duration of our stay there, these corridors are “off limits” to anyone, and anybody who goes there will be presumed to be a terrorist and shot? Since our supplies pretty much go to the same places over and over again, why can’t we secure the supply routes? It’s a very basic requirement of warfare and has been for centuries.

When we have to deviate from our supply corridors are we in the habit of taking the same route over and over? It seems we are. That the roadside bombers would be able to know in advance where we are likely to travel suggests we are stupidly being predictable! Why? We have equipped our army with combat vehicles which are capable of going anywhere. If you travel off road, you’ll never be hit with a roadside bomb! Why would we make it easy for our enemy by taking the same route everyday? It’s hard to explain.

Drive-by suicide bombers are another problem. Why haven’t we made it perfectly clear to everybody in Iraq that any vehicle which approaches within 200 yards of any US Military vehicle will be presumed to be hostile and will be destroyed? We should put out the word that if you see a US military vehicle, you should turn around and drive the other way—or you’ll be shot at. It seems to be easy enough to understand that if the bad guys can’t get close to you, they can’t harm you. Why don’t our forces understand it?

Most Americans are still in favor of staying the course in Iraq. Most Americans understand that unless we stay the course and prevail against these terrorists, the consequences will be intolerable. What most Americans don’t understand is why, it seems, we are making it too easy for our enemies in Iraq to pick off our troops. Our leaders had better figure out a way to mitigate this situation, and quickly, or they may very well have to face the very thing they fear the most: A collapse in the will of the American people resulting in an embarrassing withdrawal from Iraq. The left around in this country and the world would dance in the streets at that outcome. We must take steps, now, to see that it doesn't happen.

We're From the UN -And We're Here to Help?

2004-12-29T10:49:00.000-07:00

What has the UN done for you lately? The tsunami victims in Asia might well be asking themselves that questions these days. In the intervening days since the disaster, there appears to be very little in the way of aid from the bloated agencies of the UN. Maybe they haven’t figured out a way they can skim funds from this tragedy like they did from the “Oil for Food” program in Iraq. The UN is irrelevant. The UN is impotent. The UN is corrupt. Why don’t they just go away?

UN officials have commented on the situation however. UN Undersecretary Jan Egeland has called the US “stingy” even though we are, by far, the biggest contributor of aid in this disaster. In fact, we have contributed more to the victims of this calamity than all other nations of the world combined. Much of the aid we contribute is raised from private religious (Christian) sources which is astounding since virtually none of the victims are Christians. When was the last time you heard of Muslims sending aid to Christian disaster victims? I guess it's pretty much a one-way street. Americans -Christians- are NOT stingy!

But Egeland just couldn’t resist the opportunity to bash America. The UN apparently has it, as part of their standard operating procedures, to bash America. Maybe we should withhold next year’s UN dues, -and donate the money to the victims of the tsunami?

It's hard enough to raise private funds from US religious organizations for disaster aid in remote parts of the earth without the bad-mouthing from the UN. If we strip away all the veneer of civility and human compassion, most people outside of the affected area don't really care what happened to the far-off people of Sumatra or Sri Lanka. It sounds cruel, but it is nonetheless true. If the situation were reversed and we had suffered a catastrophic natural disaster in America, they wouldn't care much about us either. In fact, after 9/11, many of them were dancing in the streets. Many of the victims are Muslim. Where is the aid from Saudi Arabia and the other oil-rich Muslim countries?

Egeland's stupid statement doesn't help ameliorate the problem at all. The USA has always been generous to a fault even if most of the aid is ultimately purloined by greedy local government officials for their own personal use. We've always been far more generous than any other nation in history. Unfortunately, in reality there is little that can be done in the wake of such overwhelming natural force. Whatever aid we throw at this enormous disaster will be like spitting into the ocean. But help, we will. We always do.

And the world will remain ungrateful. They always do.

Some Thoughts On the Mosul Mess Hall Attack

2004-12-21T16:13:00.000-07:00

The terrorists we are fighting in Iraq are not stupid. There is evidence the insurgency was pre-planned before we ever invaded. They are self-sustaining, well-funded and motivated. Their goal? To keep the old order in place- to prevent democracy- to destroy freedom. They are not, however, Iraqi patriots any more than the Nazis were German patriots. They are thugs and murderers who want to restore the previous regime. It is their only reason for being. It is the only way they will survive and they know it.

We can expect intensified effort by the terrorists in the leadup to the elections next month. Their only hope at this point is to cause the US to decide the cost is too high and to withdraw. This is a dangerous business. We must be prepared to take increasing casualties in this effort. Just how "resolved" we really are remains to be seen.

What can be done to change the situation? How can we protect our troops?

The US military doesn't know where the enemy goes at night, or how they move from one place to another, or who is giving them shelter, aid and comfort. The US military may not know, -but Iraqis do. There are Iraqis who could stop this killing. There are Iraqis who want freedom and democracy for their nation. We can do much, but we can't do it all. It is all really up to them at the end of the day.

Somebody in Iraq knew this attack was about to be stagged. Somebody could have informed the US forces who could have prevented the attack. The fact that they didn't, unfortunately, shows they aren't really convinced yet that they can have a better future without the terrorists. They are scared. Who could blame them? Scared that the coalition forces will pull out and leave them to the tender mercies of these same terrorists. Will we stay the course?

We must demonstrate over and over that we are not going to run away. Only when the overwhelming majority of Iraqis truly believe this, will the terrorists finally be defeated and eliminated. And they will be defeated and eliminated by other Iraqis. True Iraqi patriots.

Another Attack on Christians -Yawn!

2004-12-15T16:00:00.000-07:00

Hugh Hewitt has once again called upon bloggers to assess the Newsweek hit piece on Christianity. My opinion of Newsweek Magazine as an example of the MSM in general and Jon Meacham in particular can be summed up succinctly: “Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!” (Isaiah 5:21)

Hugh points out that the author of this article doesn’t have any credentials or background, education, or any other virtue that would qualify him to attack a two thousand year old institution. Christianity can’t be so easily explained or dismissed. It is the world’s largest religion. Its tenets have shaped the world’s culture more keenly than any other religion in history. Western civilization is founded, to a large degree, on Christianity –like it or not.

Many secular writers greater than Meacham have tried over the centuries to destroy Christianity. They all have failed. Jon Meacham has likewise failed. His “smirking” tone, as he blithely dismisses Jesus’ annunciation and immaculate conception as “cover” for an “unfortunate” carnal reality, is utterly offensive to all Christians. He goes to inane lengths to dispute even relatively insignificant issues such as where Jesus was born. He is clearly hostile to all things Christian. Since it is politically correct these days to bash Christians with impunity, nobody can be too surprised by this. One wonders if Newsweek would publish a similarly skeptical and dismissive piece on the founding and dissemination of Islam. –I doubt it.

The fact that Newsweek has done this before, and that they totally failed even to make a half-hearted attempt to balance the article by consulting conservative scholars, but instead relied entirely on left-wing sources, reveals the utter depth of their anti-Christian animus. It’s as if they don’t understand that Christians make up the vast majority of the audience they are trying to reach. I wonder how they can sell advertising?

The bible aptly describes people like Meacham: “Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,…” (Romans 1: 21,22)

God help him! God help us!

The Fair Tax –an Idea Who’s Time Has Come

2004-12-14T11:53:00.000-07:00

When the federal income tax lurched onto to the scene in 1913, nobody could have foreseen the obscene creature it would grow into. By 1954, the monster was well understood, but remedies and solutions were mostly confined to gnashing of the teeth and complaining a lot. These days, at last, there is a viable alternative.

There are twin dragons to slay in this arena. First, the unfairness of the income tax, then the excessive amount of taxation we endure. The Fair Tax (HR 25/S 1493) would address the unfairness issue head on. It would replace the onerous, compulsory, confiscatory federal income tax system with an essentially “voluntary” system. You would only pay the tax when you choose to purchase something. It would also be voluntarily “progressive” since those who have more money would spend more money and pay more taxes. Since it has a provision for the universal rebate of the entire amount of tax up to the poverty level, the truly poor would pay no tax at all, for the first time ever. Today, the very poorest worker pays payroll taxes on every penny they earn. The Fair Tax would abolish that.

The essential nature of the government tax dragon is in its voracious appetite. Government will always demand more and more money and politicians will always be looking for ways to pile more taxes on us. The fact is, it’s too late. Big government is a fact of life. It must be fed, -for now. The Fair Tax could raise enough to cover the current expenditures, and do it without unfairly bludgeoning any segment of society. Since the underground economy (drug dealers, undocumented aliens, etc.) would now also be contributing, it would, in fact lower the burden on many of us.

The best way to satiate this omnipresent taxation monster therefore resides in spreading the burden out among as many citizens as possible. Under the current unfair income tax law, the burden falls almost exclusively on the wealthy. The old story of the ten men splitting a tab for a $100 meal in the same way we split up the tax burden is an instructive example of how this works: The first four pay nothing, the 5th pays $1, the 6th pays $3, the 7th pays $7, the 8th $12, 9th $18 and the tenth, the richest, pays a whopping $59. Yes, our current system is that ridiculous!

The Fair Tax solution sounds surprisingly simple: A national consumption tax on the first purchase of new goods for personal use –a national sales tax. The national sales tax would replace all current income, payroll, FICA, corporate and other taxes on the production of income, AND would accomplish the complete abolition of the IRS and repeal of the 16th amendment. It almost sounds too good to be true, yet the more you delve into it, the better it gets. For example, the current system causes all products sold in this country to be priced at about 22% higher than they need be, simply to cover the built in income taxes imposed at every level of production. Since these hidden taxes would be abolished, you would see a corresponding decrease in prices. This is not just “pie-in-the-sky” thinking. Researchers at Harvard have confirmed it. America would become a haven for manufactures the world over who are looking to avoid their own onerous tax schemes.

This is the bill currently pending before congress that would go a long way to solving this nation’s tax morass. It deserves careful consideration.

Summary of HR 25/S 1493:

Imposes a 23% (tax-inclusive) sales tax on the purchase of new goods and services in the U.S.

Lets workers keep their entire paycheck and retirees keep their entire pension.

Abolishes the IRS and ends all audits of individual taxpayers.

Replaces the federal income tax. Frees individuals from ever filing a tax return again.

Replaces all payroll taxes including Social Security and Medicare taxes. Current Social Security and Medicare benefits would not change.

Replaces corporate and self-employment taxes.

Eliminates all hidden federal taxes.

Provides a universal rebate equal to the sales taxes paid on essential goods and services to ensure that no American pays taxes on necessities.

Replaces all estate, gift, and capital gains taxes.

Dramatically lowers tax rates for low- and middle-income Americans.

Closes all tax loopholes.

Brings accountability to tax policy.

Lets American-made products compete fairly.

Postponed Iraqi Elections = More American Deaths

2004-12-05T09:01:00.000-07:00

Tim Russert just had Iraqi president Ghazi al-Yawar on his show for fifteen minutes. He spent the whole time badgering him to delay or cancel the Iraqi elections scheduled for January 30, 2005. You must ask yourself, why would an American left-of-center news reporter want the elections in Iraq to be postponed or cancelled? Why do they all oppose these elections -in lock-step?

The only obvious answer is that the leftist mainstream media share the same values, goals and aspirations as the terrorists in Iraq. Think about that! The only logical reason anyone would have for not wanting to have free, democratic elections in Iraq is because they do not favor freedom for Iraq. They favor the return of the repressive former regime.

Why would the leftist press want the murderous, monstrous, repressive terrorists to prevail in Iraq? Only one reason: –they hate George W. Bush. Think again about that again! They are all perfectly willing to throw away the future of millions of Iraqi people just to cause President Bush an embarrassing failure. In order to gain political advantage over George W. Bush, and out of shear illogical, rabid hatred, they willingly support the terrorists.

Make no mistake about it. Each time Russert or any other spokesman for the left suggests a delay of the scheduled elections in Iraq, more American soldiers, more Iraqi civilians, more Iraqi police and national security forces will be killed by the thugs. The terrorists in Iraq, many of whom are not even Iraqi, take great hope and comfort from this opposition to free and fair elections. It gives them a very good reason to go on killing. It gives them a plausible expectation that they will eventually prevail. If you think there is a lot of killing going on in Iraq now, just wait until the terrorists are handed the significant victory of causing the scheduled elections to be postponed or cancelled. That can’t be allowed to happen. Mere political animosity between the two political parties in this country, is not sufficient justification for this ill-conceived opposition on the part of the left to free and fair elections. Iraq can be a free and democratic nation. They deserve our support.

Steve Gardner -An American Hero

2004-12-01T23:22:00.000-07:00

I don’t know Steve Gardner. I do know that he did this country a great service –twice.

First, Mr. Gardner served in Vietnam. He served under John F. Kerry’s command for a short period. Not that many sailors really ever served with Mr. Kerry since he was only in Vietnam for four short months. Mr. Gardner did, and he got to know intimately Mr. Kerry’s shortcomings as a leader.

Second, Mr. Gardner spoke out about Mr. Kerry as a member of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. Mr. Gardner had been apolitical. He really hadn’t been involved in national politics at all until that fateful day when he discovered that his old commander, John F. Kerry, was running for president. Mr. Gardner could no longer remain on the sidelines. He had first hand knowledge that Mr. Kerry was unfit to be commander in chief of this country. He spoke out because he knew the truth about Mr. Kerry. He spoke out because he is a true patriot.

This country owes him, and all the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth members, a great debt of gratitude. Mr. Gardner has apparently been down on his luck for a while now. In spite of leftist blathering to the contrary, Mr. Gardner didn’t get any remuneration for his patriotic Swift Boat activities. In fact it cost him money. As his hometown paper puts it:

"Somebody asked me one time what I gained out of this, and I said, 'Not a darn thing,'" Gardner said. "I've been called a liar and ridiculed. I've been cussed up one side and down the other. I'm 56 years old. I'm looking for a job. I did this for one reason. John Kerry is not fit to be president."

John Kerry isn't president. Steve Gardner is broke.

And he's smiling.

The same cannot be said for the six or seven Swifties the Kerry campaign hired to accompany him all around the country. They were living lavishly as hired political stooges for the Kerry campaign. Mr. Gardner is now jobless, broke and about out of savings.

His plight has been exposed on several radio talk shows and on numerous blogs and hopefully, America will not let this patriot down. He deserves better. Men like Mr. Gardner help keep this county free and should be honored. The least America could do in return would be to provide them an opportunity to work and earn a living.

Moderate Moslems -Reality or Fantasy?

2004-11-24T16:08:00.000-07:00

A "moderate Muslim" can be very simply defined as a Muslim who doesn't have a testimony of the actual content in the Koran. Moderate Muslims, if they exist, are a lot like secular Jews -Muslim in tradition only.

I remain hopeful, but at the same time worried, about the number and the influence of these so-called moderates to mitigate the avowed goals and purposes of the extremist Muslims.

Make no mistake about it, extremist Muslims, the world over, want you and me to either convert, or to die. That’s the unvarnished truth. Only such a sober, clear-eyed understanding is reasonable. The utter inaction on the part of the so-called "moderates" to control and/or eliminate the extremists remains a very serious concern. In fact, the mainstream moderate Muslims seem to be either taking a direct role in the terrorism directed against us, or, at best, they are complicit in this terrorism by their lack of action to put a stop to it. Suffice it to say, there is much that could be done by so-called “moderate” Muslims in states such as Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Indonesia, and elsewhere, to round up and eliminate the terrorists. To date, we see precious little being done by "moderate" Muslims to improve things. Much more is being said of course, but there seems to be two versions of every statement by them on the subject: One in English for foreign consumption, and one in Arabic for domestic consumption. Neither version seems ever to contain a really strong, effective repudiation of the Muslim terrorists. There is little doubt that if they really wanted to, the Muslims themselves could eliminate the terrorists in their midst. The almost complete dearth of denunciation of the terrorists by Muslim leaders unfortunately speaks volumes especially when coupled with the complete lack of action on their part. They seem somehow afraid to take on these thugs -or worse- they sympathize with them.

Until and unless actual strong actions are taken by the mainstream Muslims against the terrorists, I'm afraid I will remain unconvinced by their mere words. Talk is cheap -and there has been precious little effective talk by moderates. Deeds are much more important. There has been almost no action by Muslims to put an end to terrorism. And that's scary.

At this point I usually get a spate of “well you’re just an anti-Muslim bigot” reaction. I am not against any religion: Muslim, Christian, Atheist, Shinto, Buddhist, or whatever, as long as they don’t hold, as a tenet of their faith, that it is God’s will for them to kill me and my family. When they begin to profess that particular brand of religion, and worse, begin to put that belief in to action, I must oppose them. Every thinking person in the world should oppose ANY religion who has as an article of faith, the killing of non-believers.

It’s a tough world out there. The sooner we wake up to that fact, the safer we’ll all be.

Mainstream Media -They Report, They Decide

2004-11-21T22:02:00.000-07:00

No news will be shown, it seems, unless it’s bad news for the US. And not only bad news, but news that highlights the mainstream media’s obsession with anti-Bush, anti-America bias. It has become painfully obvious that if it’s good news for the US effort in Iraq, they just won’t run with it. This has been noticed and documented by Power Line:

If the Fallujah campaign had been long and difficult, and had given rise to many casualties, the hysteria in the media would have been unrestrained. Instead, however, the Fallujah campaign was one of the most stunning successes in the history of urban warfare. Consequently, it has dropped off the media radar screen. Newspaper attention immediately turned, not to the important strategic advantages of depriving the terrorists of their home base, or to the horrifying discoveries of torture and murder chambers, the "Iraq al Qaeda" headquarters, or vast quantities of munitions that have been captured in Fallujah, but to: 1) video footage of a Marine shooting a wounded terrorist, and 2) terrorist attacks in other parts of Iraq. The point of the latter coverage is not subtle; the reader is intended to conclude that the battle of Fallujah has been futile.

The goal of the MSM is to subvert the upcoming elections in Iraq. They clearly favor the insurgents/terrorists. It’s painfully obvious to anyone who is willing to apply even a modicum of objectivity. If it is bad news, or even something that could be construed to be bad news for the US or the Iraqi interim government, it gets maximum exposure. It’s disgusting.

At the same time, actual evidence of real atrocities by French soldiers in the Ivory Coast gets no coverage at all except in the bloggosphere. The sooner the has-been media assumes their proper place on the ash heap of history, the better.

Have They no Shame?

2004-11-17T14:37:00.000-07:00

It is entirely shameful for the leftist press and pundits in this country to assist international terrorism by blowing all out of proportion the incident involving the elimination of a single terrorist by a young American soldier. He was only doing his duty. He was killing terrorists. That is what he was trained to do and why he is there. President Bush was just re-elected in part, because he promised the American people he would kill terrorists. And now some want to prosecute a Marine for doing so? It's an outrage!

The rules of engagement in the war against terrorists are not very well defined or understood. The recent neutralizing of an Iraqi terrorist in a Fallujah mosque which was being used as a bunker by the Iraqi terrorists is a prime example of how little is known, even by the American press.

Simply put, Iraqis don’t follow any of the rules of war. They use women and children as shields. They execute innocent hostages, women included. They use religious edifices as armories and pill boxes. They commit suicide attacks against the Allied forces and against Iraqi police forces. It isn’t that easy.

In any war, during the heat of action, wounded soldiers are frequently shot. The reality of war is that it is hardly ever convenient to call off the fighting while stretcher bearers carry off the wounded.

The young marine in question encountered several terrorists who had recently been trying to kill him. He saw one of them playing dead. Playing dead is a ruse used frequently by terrorists to get unsuspecting marines to approach in order to kill them. The marine eliminated the threat and moved on.

The marines in Iraq appear to be fighting two enemies in this action: The terrorists and the leftist press. We must support them against both.

Election Post Mortem

2004-11-14T08:11:00.000-07:00

The fantasy:

Now that the American people have spoken, all sides of the great debate are willing to put aside all differences to make this country as successful as possible. It’s a noble American tradition that sets us apart from strife-torn third world countries where, if elections are held at all, they are often followed by a failure of the losing side to accept the outcome. In fact, these countries are often crippled by endless revolutions. The losing side in any election will almost always take action against the prevailing side. The actions they resort to include claims of election fraud, threats of secession, up to and including armed insurrections. In America we don’t do that–

The reality:

–The failure of much of the left to accept the will expressed by the American people in this most recent election resembles, to a frightening degree, the antics of a third world country.– We seem to be in grave danger of becoming a banana republic.

We hear the silly cries of election fraud. We are assaulted by overblown threats of secession. We are assured by the left that the president’s agenda will be thwarted via the filibuster and the activist judge. All of this seems to be motivated completely by an enormous, irrational animus against the president. And there doesn’t seem to be any rational explanation for it. This president has gone out of his way to placate the left. His education bill, agricultural spending bill, illegal immigrant policy all closely resemble those proposed by the most liberal representatives of the left, yet nonetheless, he gets no credit for huge, –some on the right say too huge– spending on these programs. He is instead showered by the left with ceaseless derision, scorn and ridicule.

How can this rabid, unreasonable, wild-eyed hatred for George W. Bush be explained? How is it that if these same liberal proposals had been enacted by Teddy Kennedy, the left would have found them acceptable, noble and just?

When you strip it all away, Bush hatred appears to all come down to one thing: religion. The fact that George W. Bush openly professes to be a practicing Christian just drives the left blinking, blind, crazy! The fact that he admits to praying to God for guidance in his major decisions causes otherwise rational people to literally foam at the mouth. How dare he believe that God influences the affairs of men! The fact that the majority of Americans share his feelings about God, kindness and good works seems to be the hardest reality of all to swallow for these secular leftists.

Any yet, this country remains overwhelmingly religious. Predominantly Christian, but with a significant portion of Jews, Moslems, Buddhists and other sects who, while they differ wildly in doctrine, all share one belief: They all believe God wants us, as individuals, to live good lives, to do good to our fellow men, to make the world a better place. They also believe in evil– that there is in the world a dark side that is bent on the destruction of all that is good, decent, praiseworthy. These two opposite forces --good and evil– have been debated endlessly by all the world’s religious philosophers for thousands of years.

But the secular left look upon “doing good” as largely a governmental mandate instead of an individual duty. To them compulsory charity is the ideal. The more government can compel you, by force of law, to give your wealth over to them, for redistribution according to their notion of what is just, the better. And of course the left wing elites look upon themselves as best suited to be the ones who make the decisions as to who gets what from the government. After all, they are so much smarter.

The religious among us will allow a “higher authority” (God) to proscribe certain self-destructive behavior which would impede our ability to do good. We will do good and avoid doing evil because we want to follow God. We will avoid “bad” behavior because we don’t want to offend God.

The secular left rejects any “rules” set down by “God” which would prohibit them from doing anything they want to do. They claim the right to do whatever they please. They think allowing God or religion to govern any aspect of their activities takes away their freedom.

Religions speak of the dual nature of mankind. Christians specify the “light of Christ” or our “better nature” to describe our good side. Conversely our “carnal nature” or the “natural man” in us describes the evil tendencies that we all seem to possess. Christians look at religious regulation not as a deprivation of freedom, but rather as a template that allows our better nature to dominate our carnal nature. Therefore, when followed, religious teaching and regulation foment joyous living. “Wickedness never was happiness” said the prophet. Religious people who seriously follow the dictates of their religion find that to be uniformly true. Rebelling against your religious traditions, may bring a temporary feeling of euphoria, but will never result in any long-term happiness.

Secular leftists don’t ever seem to be happy. This is the single most likely cause of their rabid, irrational hatred of George W. Bush, and their hatred of all professing religious people. That these religious people are so obviously happy with life drives the miserable left crazy. They can’t stand it. They think it somehow smug and wrong of president Bush to be smiling and enjoying his life, –while they are miserable! How dare he!

But this frustration and misery is entirely predictable by those who understand the joy and peace religion brings. Since the left is relying on the arm of man for everything, they are frequently disappointed. They engage in a never-ending pursuit of obliging others to support their particular secular notion of what is “good” for mankind. They think nothing of imposing laws to force others to “donate” to the favored leftist causes, yet very often are very unwilling to give generously themselves to any real charities. They are engaged endlessly and fruitlessly in the pursuit of carnal pleasure via drugs and immorality. Yet, in the end, they only find bitterness, despair and unhappiness. You can see it all around you: wickedness will never result in true happiness. Those who seek the freedom of carnal pursuits to find joy are certain to reap only bitterness in the end no matter how much they delude themselves along the way. What’s worse is that even the most dissolute among them retains in them what Christians call the “light of Christ”. They are pricked by the subconscious knowledge that their wicked behavior is wrong. They know in their heart of hearts that they shouldn’t be doing what they are doing, and it plagues and torments them.

Thus, since the left is not by nature and inclination happy, they hate –and envy– anyone who is happy. George W. Bush is happy. He embodies all the things they have failed to be. And they hate him for it.

The immature blathering about secession, and vote fraud in the wake of this election will fade quickly from the scene because of it’s ridiculous nature. The struggle between good and evil however will not fade away. There will always be a mighty battle between these two forces. Those who understand this must remain eternally vigilant lest we be overcome by the leftist secular notion that “evil” doesn’t really exist. That notion is, in and of itself, is a pure manifestation that evil does indeed exist. Evil would be only too happy to have us believe otherwise. We must be willing to fight against evil, and to understand the unhappiness of those who allow themselves to be swept up in it. The future of our nation demands nothing less on our part. It is our patriotic duty.

Kerry’s Hoards –Just can’t take “NO” for an Answer

2004-11-07T10:44:00.000-07:00

John F. Kerry, belatedly and reluctantly, showed some good sense on the day after he was rejected by the American people. He knew he had no choice other than to “concede” if he wished to retain any credibility in his remaining years in the senate. He remains enough of a political animal to sense that evident fact.

While Bush supporters like Hugh Hewitt, Michael Medved are waxing very conciliatory, and gracious in victory, Kerry’s minions are another matter. Some of them, such as those in the MSM are just stunned. Others seem perfectly willing to hang on to the fraudulent notion that somehow, Bush stole the election. “There are none so blind as those who will not see” so the old proverb goes, and this bunch of self-deluded “whackos” are in very great need of a seeing-eye dog named –reality! They somehow seem comfortable with the notion that hundreds of mostly democrat poll workers in dozens of precincts all over Ohio and Florida blithely looked the other way while evil Bush operatives removed, spoiled, discarded and otherwise invalidated thousands of Kerry votes. They even have it that Kerry’s 10,000 lawyers somehow caved under the spell of Karl Rove and backed away from claiming what was rightfully Kerry’s. Of course, this is all nonsense. All the garbage about pregnant chads, hanging chads, disenfranchised African-American voters, uncounted provisional ballots, etc. is pure bunk. And Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and perhaps the blindest of them all, Greg Palast know it very well. Their goal is to keep the “coalition of the wild-eyed” all lathered up. That way they hope to give cover to the Democrats' continued obstruction of Bush-nominated judges, income tax reform, much needed tort reform, Social Security reform, etc. If you believe the Bush victory was “stolen”, well then, it’s OK to sabotage all of his agenda goes their thinking.

The actual unintended consequence of this foolishness however is likely to further weaken the already badly fading Democratic party. Zell Miller tried to spell it all out for them at the RNC convention. Hopefully they will continue to ignore his warning. Then we can have Republicans elected for years into the future. Come to think of it –Go Crazies! (Republicans need the help)

Kerry –Classless to the End.

2004-11-03T09:48:00.000-07:00

John F. Kerry didn’t learn anything from the beating he just took. He still remains the same elitist, effete snob that he has been his entire life. The American people soundly rejected him both in the popular vote and the electoral vote, yet he arrogantly refused to acknowledge his loss like a gentleman, and instead sent out his lap-dog trial lawyer, John Edwards, to defiantly intimate that he intended to “make sure every vote counts.” He threatened illicit legal action against the very American people who just rejected him, in a childish, vain hope of tinkering enough with the election to give himself an edge. Never mind that under any scenario, even remotely feasible, the math would not give him a victory in Ohio, he still chose to deny George Bush and his supporters their well deserved late-night election celebration. He just doesn’t get it! He’s out of touch!

Hugh Hewitt has it absolutely right. Pete Coors has class. John F. Kerry does not. Here’s hoping he will just go away.

Democrat Vote Fraud Expected --Beware!!

2004-10-25T16:06:00.000-06:00

With all polls showing this year’s election a statistical dead heat, many Republicans are worrying a lot about the Democrat tradition of voter fraud. It is a very troublesome problem. It was a big problem last time. It's certain to be a bigger problem this time. There are articles about Democrat fraud in 2000 here, and here.

It is well understood that ballot box stuffing, voting more than once, having dead people vote, manufacturing votes, etc. are long-established election stealing methods which have been employed by Democrats for years. It’s so widespread it reminds us of the old joke: “When I die I want to be buried in Chicago or New Orleans so I can remain politically active!” In fact, it is so common that it has taken on tongue-in-cheek quality. “It’s just those Democrats doing what they always do.” is the attitude. No big deal! Boys will be boys! Wink, wink, nod, nod! In most years and in most races, this “irregularity” doesn’t really make any difference. The margins are large enough to discount the fraud. The deserved candidate is elected comfortably in spite of the fraud.

But is it serious this time around? Yes, it is! This time it could be critical.

In 2000, there were seven states where the margin of victory was 2% or less. Gore won all but two of them. Gore won in all but one close electoral-rich states such as Iowa, Oregon, Minnesota, and Wisconsin where the popular vote was a virtual dead heat. Coincidence? Hardly! It's the result of vote fraud pure and simple!

Oregon’s “mail in ballot” is made for fraud. Nobody has their ID checked. Nobody has to look anybody in the eye and attest that they are voting legally. Nobody knows who is actually sending in the ballot. In Milwaukee there were precincts where more than 100% of registered voters voted; there were also cigarettes handed out in exchange for votes. The only way that could happen would be as a result of fraud. Similar things were reported in Minnesota and Iowa. New Mexico was stolen by manipulating, at the eleventh hour, the Native American vote.

Bush won in Florida. But it was not for a lack of effort by the Democrat fraud machine.
James R. Miller includes some of the evidence in his piece on the subject excerpted below:

Was there anything suspicious about the first recount in Florida? Yes. It produced an improbably large gain for Gore of 1,484 votes. To see how improbable this is, just think about the recount process. In all except some of the smallest counties, where they use paper ballots, the election workers simply ran the same boxes of ballots through the same counting machines. If there were no clerical errors the first time, one would expect almost the same results on the second run. ... You would expect the counts to be almost the same, rather than identical, because people do not always mark their ballots clearly enough to be read the same way each time. With punch card ballots one would expect small gains for each candidate, because running them through the machines tends to clean out loose chad. In most of the counties, this is exactly what happened, and there were trivial changes between the first count and the first recount. (In Washington state, which used a similar process to recount the votes in the Gorton-Cantwell Senate race, there was an insignificant difference between the first and second counts. Washington, like Florida, uses a mix of punch card, optical and paper ballots.)

In several Gore counties, notably Palm Beach, Gadsden, and Volusia, the results of the recount were suspicious. Consider the Palm Beach recount. It produced gains of 787 votes for Gore and 105 votes for Bush, for a net gain of 682 votes for Gore. Remember this result came, supposedly, from running the same punch cards through the same counting machines. By way of comparison, Broward county, which is larger than Palm Beach, found 43 additional votes for Gore and 44 for Bush. Both the size of the changes, and the bias in the Palm Beach recount, are completely implausible, without some human interference. Several researchers have made statistical estimates that these Palm Beach recount results happened by chance; all found more that the odds against it were more than 1,000,000 to 1. (Although the Palm Beach recount was obviously unethical, it may not have been illegal. One would have to know what was done to the ballots and what is allowed by Florida law to decide.)

In Gadsden, the election board went into a room and "reconstructed" some 2000 ballots, secretly, and came out with 170 new votes for Gore and only 17 for Bush. This secret count is illegal under Florida laws. (The board says that people could watch through the windows, which seems obviously insufficient to me.) In Volusia, the seals on the ballot containers were open when they were brought out for the recount, suggesting that some one had tampered with the ballots. A ballot bag was found in the trunk of an election workers car. And, 264 absentee ballots, counted in the first count, disappeared in the second. All three of these counties have histories of electoral fraud, which will not surprise you at this point.

The Democrats really, really wanted to steal the Florida vote last time out, and will stop at nothing this time around!

What can we do about it? First and foremost, we must VOTE!! Every Republican, in RECORD numbers, must vote this time!! Even in states where Bush has a comfortable lead, it is very important to vote if only to take away the “Our guy won the popular vote!” argument. Second; extra vigilance. We must watch and report loudly any irregularity we see. We cannot be cowed by charges of “racism” or “voter intimidation” that were common in 2000. If what they’re doing is illegal, we must report it –regardless of their race, creed or color. The laws apply to all. Third; we must let them know we know about their methods and intentions. We should never sit passively by while Democrat party hacks sequester ballot boxes until they find out how many additional “votes” they need to manufacture such as happened in New Mexico and South Dakota in recent elections. We need to let them know we will no longer tolerate this kind of mischief.

But the single most important thing we can do is to WIN!! Only by winning will we be able to ensure judges are in place who, unlike the Florida Supreme Court, will enforce election law. It’s too important to leave it to chance. We must make a difference this time out!!

Yet Another Big Kerry Lie Exposed

2004-10-24T22:27:00.000-06:00

So Kerry’s story about meeting with all the members of the UN security counsel before voting to authorize Bush to go to war is yet another –big fat lie!? Again!? The Washington Times sure thinks so. RedState has the same story, as does Powerline. Any bets the MSM will ignore it?

Kerry, it seems, just can’t help himself. He lies, he lies, he lies. He frequently lies to beef up his own bona fides, even when he doesn’t have to . His are not innocent, harmless little lies like Al Gore’s about inventing the internet or inspiring Love Story. No, Kerry’s lies involve important foreign policy issues. His lie about going to Cambodia Christmas Eve is one example. His lies about seeing large numbers of war atrocities committed by fellow soldiers in Viet Nam is another.

The result of his lying is that he often has to tell additional lies to try and cover up the lies he told before. For example, when fellow Swift Boat veterans started showing up, Kerry, lied by saying they didn’t serve with him in Vietnam and that they were all lying about him!? What!? You mean those 254 Swift Boat veterans, from all over the country, from all walks of life, from every political persuasion... are all lying about what they saw, heard, experienced? They’re all lying-- except Kerry?

Sounds a little far-fetched to me.

This reminds me of an old story about Mrs. Kelly:

Mrs. Kelly had a neer-do-well son, named Jim. Jim was a little slow, a little uncoordinated, a little short of a full load-- but NOTHING could diminish the admiration and unbounded enthusiasm his mother had for him.

He was always the last pick for playground games-- didn't matter to Mrs. Kelly: "they're just jealous, Jim!" She would tell him.

He always got the lowest marks at school– didn't faze Mrs. Kelly:
"The teachers all hate him" she would pine.

One day, all the students were to march in the St. Patrick day parade. While the band master fretted and worried about what he could do, since the head master wouldn't let him exclude Jim, he finally decided to let him march carrying a banner in between his two finest marchers. He hoped they would inspire him to do well. But it wasn't to be.

Sure enough, when the parade came along... Jim's feet were striding just the opposite of all the rest of the band, even though he wasn't even playing any instrument.

Didn't matter to Mrs. Kelly though. She beamed with pride, loudly exclaiming: "Just look! They're all out of step-- but Jim!"

When will Kerry’s “band” admit he is out of step? What level of lying will cause people to start doubting everything he says. IMHO he passed that level years ago. Here’s hoping the Times’ efforts at setting the record straight will help us send this liar back to be the Jr. Senator from Mass. He can lie all he wants there. They like liars. They must, they keep electing Teddy!?

Why I Blog - Why You Should Blog Too

2004-10-21T10:24:00.000-06:00

John Kerry and his surrogates are in desperation mode at this point. They are dashing about the “swing states” telling one outrageous lie after another. Some examples: Bush will restart the military draft! Bush will take away your social security! It’s Bush’s fault there is a flu shot shortage! I won’t raise your taxes. I will fight a vigorous war against terrorism! The economy is a mess! Iraq is a mess! Our foreign policy is a mess! Mess, mess, mess! I have a plan! Etc.

Of course these are all lies, but even so, Kerry seems to be able to get away with telling them without any consequences. He tells a whopper –and it just seems to lie there, like a pile of dog droppings. Nobody seems to want to notice it. Nobody will touch it.

Kerry supporters, of course, either aren’t smart enough to figure out that he is a serial liar, or, even worse, they do know full well he is a liar, but because of their rabid Bush hatred, they don’t care. Not much anybody can do about those people. They won’t be changed.

The lack of response from Bush supporters is a little harder to explain. It has always been true that Republicans make terrible political street fighters. They want to play the game of politics in a genteel, polite way, using the Marquis of Queensbury rules. Democrats are perfectly willing to bite, scratch, spit, gouge, kick, use knifes and brickbats. Democrats play to win. For that reason, Republicans will never get much mileage out of an actual scandal on the part of a Democrat politician, while Democrats are always able to get tons of mileage out of even a hint of scandal on the part of a Republican politician. Democrats almost always get a total pass from their allies in the main-stream liberal press. Republicans are hounded and castigated mercilessly by the same press for their shortcomings, real or imagined.

What is the effect of this disparate treatment of lies and scandals? When the Illinois republican senate candidate was recently accused by his opponents of visiting a sex club, he had to drop out of the race in disgrace. Conversely, when a Democrat president was caught, red-handed, lying under oath, he didn’t have to resign from anything. In fact he became a hero to the coalition of the wild-eyed. He was given a kind of cult status by the press for sticking it to the GOP. Republicans don’t ever seem to be able to do anything in response to the lies, distortions, and unfair treatment by the Democrats and the press, except wring their hands and complain. They look pathetic. It’s frustrating.

There is another group who is more troublesome than either the Republicans or the Democrats. These are the moderates. They sit back, ill-informed, and wait to be spoon-fed their opinions in some vague way that doesn’t involve using their own gray matter. Where do the get their views? You guessed it; from the partisan press. Like Virginia O’Hanlon, the little girl who wrote the New York Sun newspaper to get information about Santa Clause, these people seem very naïve. Virginia wrote: “Some of my little friends say there is no Santa Claus. Papa says, If you see it in The Sun, it's so.” Like Virginia, they believe that if it’s in the Sun, or on CBS, or on NBS, or ABS, or any of the alphabet stations, it is true. And they vote based on that alone. Sad but true.

What to do? Yes Virginia, there is an alternative press! Our only option at this point is to go around the mainstream press. That’s the point of blogs. That’s the beauty of the internet. My advice? Blog away oh ye intrepid. Only a bloggers army can fight this fight. And it can have an effect --just ask Dan Rather. Oh yes, it's our duty to keep telling the truth --via the Blog!

Should dumb people vote?

2004-10-20T20:17:00.000-06:00

Walter E. Williams, One of my favorite columnists over at Townhall.com wrote an excellent piece today pointing out that demagoguery only works in a populace which contains a sufficient number of ignorant voters. They’re the only ones who would ever fall for the scare tactics Kerry and his minions have resorted to:

Politicians have a field day misleading Americans who, as a result of having been dumbed down by our education system, can't think, reason or analyze. How many times have we heard the political lament "There are 43 million Americans without health insurance"? While that observation might very well be true, what are we to make of it? Does it mean that there are Americans dying on the streets for want of medical treatment? Were that the case, you can bet the rent money that the major TV networks would feature nightly stories of medically indigent Americans in various stages of pain, suffering and death.

I've seen no such stories. So what does the absence of health insurance mean? Among the things that it might mean is that you don't receive medical treatment on the same terms as a person with health insurance. You might spend a day waiting for treatment at a clinic instead of having an appointment at a chosen time at a physician's office. It might also mean that you'll receive a smaller quantity and lower quality of medical care such as hospitalization in a ward instead of a private room, interns rather than specialists, and treatment at voluntary clinics and free hospitals such as Shriners.

Let's face it: People who can buy insurance get benefits that those who cannot afford it don't. Those with lots of money get things that those with little money don't. Whether we like it or not, these are facts of life. By the way, a healthy young person might opt for self-insurance and not purchase health insurance because he believes that the money could be better spent elsewhere.

According to some of the electoral rhetoric, President Bush has been responsible for shipping the best American jobs overseas, thus turning us into a nation of hamburger flippers. But according to a study by Bruce Bartlett, a senior fellow at the Dallas-based National Center for Policy Analysis, "How Outsourcing Creates Jobs for Americans," over the past 15 years, foreign corporations have moved jobs to the United States at a faster rate than jobs have left. "Jobs insourced to the United States increased from 4.9 million in 1991 to 6.4 million in 2001," reports Bartlett. There's been an 82 percent increase in insourced jobs compared to a 23 percent increase in outsourced jobs. Moreover, because of the higher and increasing productivity of American workers, the jobs that move here pay more than the ones that leave. Insourced jobs pay roughly 16.5 percent more than the average domestic job, and one-third of them are in the manufacturing sector, says Bartlett. Americans who lose their jobs due to outsourcing might have to make painful adjustments. But should we listen to political proposals to ease their pain by erecting trade barriers that will make the nation as a whole worse off?

Speaking of jobs, let's look at the numbers. Our unemployment rate, which the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics put at 5.4 percent in September, is one of the lowest in the world and in our history. France's unemployment rate is 9.4 percent, Germany's 9.9 percent and Italy's 8.6 percent. Our Canadian neighbor's is 6.6 percent. The only reason for today's hysteria over jobs is because it is an election year, and one of the ways politicians gain power is to create fear among the electorate. The next time you hear a politician whining about our "awful" job climate, ask him which European country we should look to for guidance in job creation. The fact of business is that our country is the world's leader not only in job creation but in terms of where the world wants to invest its money.

Why I support George W. Bush, the president.

2004-10-18T22:10:00.000-06:00

I’m voting for Bush because he is a proven leader. He has a track record of consistent, strong, steadfast leadership that the nation, and the world for that matter, can count on. We know what to expect from his administration. So do our enemies. Al Qeada and the nations that harbor them don’t have to wonder whether or not Bush will take action against them. He will. He has! And we’re much safer as a nation for that fact!. Kerry would submit us to a “global test” before he would take any action against terrorists. We would have to play “mother may I?” with the UN and Europe before we could defend ourselves. Bush knows that would be intolerable.

I'm voting for Bush because under his administration, we will get judges who follow the law, not try to "correct all of society's evils" by legislating from the bench. We would get activist judges under a Kerry administration. I'm voting for Bush because under his administration we stand a chance of real reform in the role of the government. He may not take us to where government only delivers the mail and protects our shores, but he will get us a lot closer than Kerry would. Under liberal Democrats like Kerry, government only gets bigger and more powerful.

I'm voting for Bush because he enacted a real tax cut. Maybe it's not enough, but at least it's real. Kerry would increase taxes to fund the tons of new programs he has promised the deluded to buy their votes! It's a Democrat tradition.

I'm voting for Bush because he will enable local school boards to hold teachers accountable if they don't do their jobs, and will allow parents to chose a better situation if necessary. Kerry would continue to offer only government schools, run by incompetent teachers, who, with their unions, and federal education bureaucrats, force mediocrity and failure down our throats.

I will vote for Bush because he will restore to some degree the role of personal responsibility in our lives. He will enable us to help ourselves, our families, our communities succeed by cutting back some of the onerous regulation and burden the government has thrust upon us all. He understands that only when a person is free to be as successful as possible are they truly free. Kerry would perpetuate the old liberal model where burdensome and unproven scientific theories, cumbersome safety rules, and draconian business regulation have sapped our national spirit to the point where it is almost a miracle that anyone is successful.

I will vote for Bush because he recognizes that while we all will have medical needs at some point in our lives, it is largely our own responsibility and our own business to pay for them. He will maintain a safety net for the truly needy and indigent, but will not be our nanny, our nursemaid, our provider of first resort. Kerry would foster the slippery slide into socialism by nationalizing all health care. We would then be saddled with a system that is neither efficient nor compassionate, but merely an extension of the gray morass of bureaucracy that envelops and deadens the human spirit everywhere it has been tried.

Most importantly, I will vote for Bush because he has restored integrity to the office of the president-- integrity! He will never lie openly about his past experience, merely to enhance his resume. He will not lie under oath-- or to the American people at all. He knows that character matters-- he lives it. Kerry, on the other hand, has shown an utter lack of character when it comes to honesty. His Cambodia fantasy, for example, should have disqualified him from further serious consideration as a candidate for the nation’s highest office. If he was willing to lie about that, for no other reason that to falsely enhance his status as a “war hero”, what on earth would he be unwilling to lie about? He has been, and remains, willing and able to say and do virtually anything –if he thinks it will benefit him in any way, even if just to get a few more votes. He totally lacks the one thing his mother aspired for him to acquire, as her dying wish: –integrity, integrity, integrity! He is in fact a poseur.

For thinking people, who aren’t blinded by shear, vitriolic hatred of all things Bush, the choice couldn’t be clearer. On the one hand, we have a proven world leader, who has met the intractable Islamic terrorist head-on and has made great progress towards defeating him; who has revved up the US economy and made it the envy of the whole world; who can serve unashamedly as a role model for the nation’s youth as a person who isn’t afraid to admit he is guided by principles, honor and valor. He is a president who understands what is meant by the motto: “One nation, under God.”

On the other hand, we have in Kerry an undistinguished twenty year senator; who doesn’t have a record of any legislative accomplishment; leadership, or any kind of progress towards solving any of the nation’s problems. To the contrary, he has been an obstructionist, willing to set up roadblocks to stymie any truly beneficial action on the part of our government including the appointment of qualified judges who he opposed merely because they didn’t fit the paradigm of the special interest groups to whom he is beholden. He has been frequently absent from his committee duties. He has voted against all major weapon systems, against all tax cuts, for all tax increases. He is the most liberal senator of them all. It could be said being the most liberal senator is his only accomplishment in the senate, --if you could call that an accomplishment!

John F. Kerry is in no way fit to occupy the nation’s highest office. Support the president. Reject the pretender. Vote Bush!

Kerry -on abortion and other duplicities

2004-10-17T09:39:00.000-06:00

John Kerry’s tortured response to the abortion question reveals a disturbing flaw in his personal moral code.

Kerry said: “I believe that I can't legislate or transfer to another American citizen my article of faith. What is an article of faith for me is not something that I can legislate on somebody who doesn't share that article of faith.”

I have a hard time comprehending this kind of thinking. In my view in our core makeup, religious or irreligious, we are virtually defined by our “articles of faith”. They are, indeed, our very essence –they form the root of our personhood-- they literally reflect who we are!

Kerry has no problem enforcing his “secular” articles of faith on everybody. Affirmative action, gun control, so-called civil rights, hiring quotas, hate crime legislation are just a few of the secular beliefs that come to mind which are regularly “imposed” on society by secular politicians like Kerry.

Often these “secular articles of faith” are imposed on us, against our will, and against the wishes of the majority of citizens, by people like John Kerry, who employ the tyranny of unelected judges who take upon themselves the “burden” of requiring everyone to comply with their own particular view of what is “good” for society. They have no other justification for imposing their will on all of us other than the notion that they “know” what is good, just, and noble. They are the enlightened, we are the benighted.

Forced busing is a good example. Left wing politicians like Kerry felt it was just, good and fair to require people of different races to be at the same school based solely on the belief that “being together” would remedy all the ills of disparate educational opportunities between the races. Never mind that it went against the beliefs and will of the majority of citizens, black and white. Never mind that numerous existing studies showed that forced busing would not achieve the “societal good” its backers claimed. They “knew” it was right and the “best thing for society”. They looked down on the benighted masses who weren’t sophisticated enough to understand the moral superiority of their position, and they just imposed their will by order of the court. The reality of forced busing showed that it did not achieve any of the “noble” goals listed. It only served to tear apart established communities, and waste a lot of resources which could have been better spent on real educational goals.

The vast majority of Americans know that “late-term” abortion is an abhorrent, brutal and totally unnecessary practice. Poll after poll confirms this. Yet Kerry supports it and would impose it on all of us! Why? Because in his core beliefs, –in his secular articles of faith– so to speak, he sees allowing late term abortion as right, just and beneficial to society. He has no compunction whatsoever about imposing this secular “article of faith” on others. Since he can’t achieve his “enlightened view” via legislation, he resorts to unelected judges to work his will. And yet, incredibly, he claims to hold “religious” views against it. He claims to “respect” the views of his religious leaders who strongly condemn it. In short, he wants to have it both ways.

Abortion is a troubling issue and many people disagree about rights, choices, and the propriety of the so-called choice. The only clear fact vis a vis abortion is that it is always fatal to the baby. My daughter and a coworker were recently having a political discussion with a patient who was railing against Bush, claiming that he didn’t see how any woman could support Bush, since he was against a woman’s “right to choose”. He fell silent when they pointed out that since they were both adopted, they would both have been dead if their birth-mothers had exercised that Kerry-backed choice. Clear thinking prevailed.

Kerry, and all politicians who feel it is their right to impose secular articles of faith, while refusing to allow societal mores and norms which have evolved from centuries-old religious tradition, need to be utterly rejected. A free society cannot long endure if we allow ourselves to continue to be oppressed by “enlightened” politicians and their activist secular judges. God save us from such!

Kerry Lies

2004-10-16T09:31:00.000-06:00

What is a lie?

The classic definition of telling a lie would have to be saying something even when you know it to be false. For example:

“I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky."

Bill Clinton certainly knew what he said on national television and in front of the whole world was a big fat lie. He knew it from first hand experience. He was one of the participants in the event he was claiming never took place. He knew it was a lie, but said it anyway because he didn’t think he could get caught. After it was disclosed that DNA existed to counter his lie, he was forced to admit he lied.

Another example:

“I remember Christmas of 1968 sitting on a gunboat in Cambodia. I remember what it was like to be shot at by Vietnamese and Khmer Rouge and Cambodians, and have the president of the United States telling the American people that I was not there; the troops were not in Cambodia,"

John F. Kerry certainly knew what he said on the floor of US Senate in 1986, and on numerous other occasions, was a big fat lie. He knew that he had never been in Cambodia at any time during his four month tour of duty in Vietnam. He said it to further enhance and embellish his military record. He said because he didn’t think anyone would ever check it out. Only after it was proven to be false was his campaign staff forced to admit that he lied.

What is being mistaken?

The classic definition of being mistaken is asserting something you and others sincerely believe to be true, which later turns out to false. When the Catholic Church in the time of Galileo asserted that the Earth was at the center of the universe, they could hardly be accused of telling a lie. They, and nearly all of the experts, deeply believed that assertion. There were no widely accepted facts to refute the theory. When Galileo and others proved it not to be so, they had to eventually admit their error.

Likewise, when George W. Bush, Jacques Chirac, Helmut Kohl, John Edwards, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, and nearly all of the other world leaders asserted that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, they could hardly have be accused of lying about it. Nearly all of their intelligence experts firmly believed this to be true. Subsequent facts, so far, have not borne them out. The worst that could be said about them is that they were possibly mistaken. They didn’t purposely put forward facts they knew, with certain personal knowledge, were false.

The question?

Given the above, why would anybody, knowing that Mr. Kerry flat out lied about his venture into Cambodia still insist on supporting him for the highest and most sensitive office in the United States? How can you trust somebody who would repeatedly tell such a lie?

The only answer abides in the notion that since Kerry supporters are so caught up in their rabid, irrational hatred of Bush, they are willing to forgive Kerry anything--solely for that fact that he is not Bush! This is astonishing! Face it. Kerry supporters are getting ready to cast their precious presidential election votes for a man who knowingly lied about his military service, and then shamefully made that military service the centerpiece of his whole political campaign! Incredible! Aren’t they the least bit worried about what else he may have lied about? Or what, indeed, he may lie about in the future?

It boggles the mind.

Kerry - No class

2004-10-15T21:24:00.000-06:00

It's always interesting to view how politicians will reveal their true character, even if unwittingly, through their words and actions. John F. Kerry started revealing his character years ago after a dubious four month tour of duty in Vietnam, when he came home and betrayed his comrades in arms. Additionally, he quickly started a life-long practice of aiding and abetting the enemies of this country by going to France to meet with the enemy, in violation of his oath as an officer in the US Navy. He has consistently reinforced his image as a less-than-honorable person by voting against the interests of the military, against intelligence gathering, against any tax cut or spending cut; in short-- against the true interest of his own country.

Perhaps the most striking example of his lack of character is the made-up tripe about his supposed war record; especially the Cambodia story. It is amazing that he could lie, blatantly, about this on numerous occasions, without a hint of compunction. What is almost equally amazing is that the major news media has given him a complete and total pass when his obvious lie was brought to light! The depths to which our fourth estate has plunged boggles the mind.

Now, he has cinched the deal by stooping to smear the children of his political opponent in an unprecedented way. This new low in the world of political chicanery deserves a special place in the political hall of shame!

Yet, once again, the major media are attempting to "let it pass." This outrage, along with all others this person has perpetrated needs to be brought out over and over again. Since CBS, ABC, NBC and the other alphabet news networks won't do it, it will be up to us--the new media--, to make sure it happens. We can't let it pass. The stakes are too high. Anybody, who isn't blinded by shear, irrational hatred of Bush should be able to see through this fraud. We must help them.