Moose and Squirrel

Monsters Incorporated

2009-06-18T12:17:00.000-07:00

By Julian Krasta

“He is known for his zealous oratory and anti-Semitism. He is the chief architect of a 2-state plan, which historians will document was the commencement of Middle East violence, culminating in a second Holocaust with Israel as its victim.

“He earned his Ph.D. from ‘wherever,’ wrote doctoral theses, penned an autobiography, and worked on Wall Street. He came into contact and became friends with known fanatics, crooks, and America haters.

“He was elected a senator in Illinois where he put his propaganda to full use, combating the local conservative party with the help of William (Weather Underground) Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn, Tony Rezko, and Rev. Jeremiah ‘Them Jews’ Wright.

“By 2005 he had risen in his party ranks to become one of its most prominent members.

“In that position he perfected an understanding of the “Big Lie” technique of propaganda, which is based on the principle that a lie, if audacious enough and repeated enough times, will be believed by the masses.”

* * * * *

The previous paragraphs fairly describe Barack Hussein Obama. But I’m admitting immediately, in order to make my point in this commentary, that I borrowed those passages almost verbatim from Wikipedia. They in fact point up a monstrous figure of history. I only changed the names, the locations, the tense, a few words here and there, and the date.

That monster was Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s propaganda minister…and Obama is a carbon copy.

Obama’s propaganda technique is explained best by Victor Davis Hanson in a recent piece entitled “Just Make Stuff Up.” In it, Hanson sets out comprehensively that Obama is prevailing over a system that appears in total order, but because of his nonstop fabrications that system can really only be disorganized and chaotic (e.g., the numerous Cabinet appointees who were vetted then booted on the basis of “mistakes.”)

Disorganization and chaos was Obama’s goal from the start. I watched him channel his hatred and anger into powerful speeches that pumped up his listeners but alienated Republicans, moderates, and clear-thinking Democrats. His uncompromising vocal tone successfully attracted drifters and malcontents who were easily programmed into believing that the time was never better for a revolution.

But there remains that one colossal catastrophe: those same itinerants and k’vetshers signed the contract without reading it. They had no idea what they agreed to revolt against, because their chosen one never once spelled out his true plans or aspirations. He only repeated—ad infinitum, ad nauseum—“hope” and “change” (in the manner in which Hitler incessantly shouted, “Deutschland!”).

Obama cleverly spoke in vague terms and left it to his snarling sycophants to fill in the miles-wide blanks, and they filled them with what they imagined he said or promised them. They see now that they had cast their lots for a bait n’ switch brute who had no intention of effecting the changes they expected (whatever those imaginary changes might’ve been).

When I first witnessed those orgasmic displays of affection for Obama, they appeared eerily similar to the way Germans thrust out their right hands in salute to the lunatic Bavarian paperhanger and his propaganda minister. Those images brought to mind this quote by Euripides: “When love is in excess, it brings a man no honor, nor worthiness.” It is especially significant since the excess love Obama appropriated has gone unrequited, and has been only used to step on heads and purloin the top executive position.

In my previous commentary I wrote that the people in Tehran would judge for themselves as to whether Obama’s proposal of friendship is popcorn propaganda. The millions protesting the (phony) election is the answer, which I believe is their way of saying they want nothing more to do with egocentric and immoral dictators (whether he be an Iranian or an American).

If the Iranian people had faith that Obama and Ahmadinejad could “get it on” they would have accepted the results of the election. But their outright anger against the incumbent’s manufactured victory speaks volumes: If they’ve had it up to there with Mahmoud and the threat of annihilation it would be unthinkable that they would want to cozy up with the guy who hijacked the U.S. presidency, whose only real accomplishment to date is he bagged a house fly.

The protests undoubtedly have thrown a monkey wrench into Obama’s nefarious plans to secure Iran as a nuclear hot zone and remain an ongoing threat to Israel. The Iranian people’s reaction proves, to me at least, that they think his rapier wit is not that rapier after all, particularly since Obama has mimicked Jimmy Carter by stating it would do not good for the U.S. to meddle with the issue. That statement alone brazenly contradicts his monosyllabic twitters of “hope … change … yes … we … can.” And never forget that it was Carter’s psychopathic mind-set that plowed the road for the Taliban to overthrow the Shah, which catapulted the virulent and bloodthirsty Islamic terrorism stampeding rampant today.

There will always be voracious dictators with whom we must contend, whether they wear uniforms of the military, desert robes, or pin-stripe suits. They are responsible for unspeakable destruction and unconscionable carnage. But not one of them has outlasted the peoples’ endurance, nor will any ever undermine the sacrifices human beings are willing to make for the precious gifts of liberty, democracy, and peace.

So let us acknowledge the courage of those Iranians who are saying NO to the “Big Lie,” and honor those who are being beaten and killed for demanding justice, freedom, and the truth. My heart and prayers go out to them and to their families, and to the millions of others in Iran and everywhere who are “holding the line” against the monsters.

Julian Krasta may be contacted at semperfieternal@aol.com.

Barack "Banzai!" Obama

2009-06-17T16:33:00.000-07:00

By Julian Krasta

He would’ve made one heck of a Kamikaze pilot. Just like those disillusioned and desperate souls who, beginning in October 1944, slammed their Model 52c Zeroes into U.S. and Ally naval vessels to cause as much death and destruction as possible, Obama is similarly caught up with the same target fixation. “Target fixation” is when a pilot becomes so fixed on his mark that he flies straight into it.

That underground nation known as his administration, including the MSM pit vipers, claim that the spiky focus and steely stare in Obama’s eyes is radiance and derring-do. Wrong. What emanates from those icy orbs is pathological pride and suicidal condescension.

The target now in his sites is Iran with whom he wants to “open a dialogue.” What he fails to accept is that they are not enchanted with his porous speeches, which are, at all times, top-heavy with artless sincerity. I’m pretty sure that the more he tries to sway Iranians to his bizarre thought processes, the more he is making a meal out of his own tongue.

Just for argument’s sake, let us, for a moment, pretend we’re looking at him from Iran’s point of view:

We see an interloper with no decision-making experience who lied, finagled, and bribed his way into the White House. He is self-possessed and closeted. His sophistication is synthetic. He belittles and badmouths America. He is leeching control of corporations (with union bosses catching the meaty scraps in their buckets). He has all but shredded the U.S. Constitution. He is taxing the American People down to their marrow, and is spending those tax dollars like a drunken yuppie. This gatecrasher is now inviting Muslims to join him in a daisy chain of comradeship.

Should Iranians trust Obama’s overture of friendship after witnessing the wholesale damage he is inflicting on his own country? I doubt it. The proof is that, with Obama in the cockpit at the controls, America’s favorable rating in Iran is five percentage points lower than when President George W. Bush held office.

I would add this speculation: Iran’s dwindling opinion of the U.S. also could be based on the fact that, while Obama is piloting America at full throttle to the left and eventually into a Marxist drop zone, Europe is pulling herself up by her bootstraps and is moving decidedly to the right as a result of overdosing on liberalism. Remember how Europeans were swooning and shouting praises and scrambling to touch Obama during the presidential campaign? They are now running, leaping, in the other direction, because they have accepted that liberal voters aren’t capable of picking a winner in a one-horse race.

Examples like these are not products of my imagination. They are a matter of public record, easily accessible on the Internet. If I can dig up this information, so can anyone in Tehran—and they can, and do, judge for themselves.

While I’m on the subject of digging, here briefly is another liberal lollapalooza: The Obama media have been crowing that Sonia Sotomayor would be “the first ever” Hispanic Supreme Court Justice. Wrong again. He was Justice Benjamin Nathan Cardozo, who served from 1932 to 1938. Justice Cardozo was a Sephardic Jew (Spanish ancestry). His father was New York Supreme Court Justice Albert Cardozo (who also was vice president and trustee of the Spanish-Portuguese synagogue, Congregation Shearith Israel, in New York City).

See what you can learn by seeking the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? The MSM should, once and for all—or even once—, report hard facts instead of always dunking their donuts in the wrong trough. They should state it as it actually is, like Marilyn Monroe was dazzling, or Nancy Pelosi is overdue for her rabies vaccination. It’s easier than they think.

But I digress.

Obama is spearheading a pervasive conspiracy to fly his “Bogey” into and wipe out the foundation upon which this country was conceived and created. And filling his tanks with volatile support are the Democrats in Congress (who proved that the only thing they’re good at is double-parking their limousines) and the media rag pickers (who wink at lowlifes like Cindy Sheehan but snub the TEA parties).

The result of this troika’s conniving conceit is Americans are living in an atmosphere of crisis. Tensions are simmering throughout the nation. So, unless and until Congressional Republicans gain back control in 2010, no part of this country will go untainted by the present regime, which is turning out to be worse than any foreign invasion piercing our borders or our air space.

Obama is comfortable in his prickly flight suit, because it is a patchwork of his lack of love for, or devotion to, the U.S.A. Unfortunately for him, he actually believes he will replace our rights and liberties with a garroting social order. What he has woefully underestimated is the eventual counter-impact by the People on that order.

We, therefore, must take a stand and ensure that the balance of power swings back to us. It is up to the People to disenfranchise that motley few by voting in replacements who will help reestablish conservative values. Once balance is reinstated we can work on rebuilding what Obama has been trying to smash to dust. It’ll be a slow recovery, but it’s better than no recovery.

Begin today. Support the right men and women who are determined to fight for our rights, who will recharge our Constitutional protections, and who will say “NO” to higher taxes and the dismantling of our military strength.

Finally, send the message to those presently in power that, despite his efforts to blow this country sky high, Obama’s obsessive target fixation will, in the end, result with him slamming into and making an ash of himself.

Julian Krasta may be contacted at semperfieternal@aol.com.

Obama's Cult of Personality

2009-06-05T10:14:00.001-07:00

By Julian Krasta

Cult of personality is “…when a country’s leader uses mass media to create a heroic public image through unquestioning flattery and praise. Cults of personality are often found in dictatorships. A cult of personality is similar to general hero worship, except that it is created specifically for political leaders.”

In early 2008, the worldwide liberal media went on a blowout selling-binge hawking Barack Hussein Obama as a “heroic public image.”

The fragments of what remain of that media (more confined here in the states rather than planet-wide, anymore) are still attempting to plug that image (“The 55-minute speech was remarkable and historic not so much for the delivery or even the words, but for the context, the orator, the moment”), which was posted immediately after Obama’s 6,000-words speech in Cairo.

The article, written by Mike Allen at Politico.com, also describes a moment when Obama drew hushed gasps from the audience for a comment they perceived as audacious. But, all in all, it is portly with praise, despite discrepancies and to-be-expected contradictions, such as when he said, “The U.S. should not impose its values on the world…”—yet he is demanding that Israel concede on preposterous points. Isn’t that an imposition? And then in his Cairo speech: “America is not the crude stereotype of a self-interested empire.”

Dizzy yet? But wait, there’s more. According to Obama: We were…we are…we shouldn’t be…you’re okay, but we’re not…we’re crude…we’re not crude…we’re bad, bad, bad…we’re not that bad…the U.S. is “one of the largest Muslim countries in the world.”

Which is it? What are we? I suppose it depends upon which lavish magical mystery tour Obama happens to be on.

The article by Allen is a classic representation of how Josef Stalin, for example, charily chiseled himself a heroic public image using pernicious propaganda to fabricate that hallucination. And the gulags and unmarked graves are crammed with those who dared to disagree.

Americans numbering in the millions swallowed whole the propagandists’ genetically produced persona of Obama, because those millions couldn’t tell the difference between a bagel and a brick.

Today they are suffering from a severe case of “What have I done?” acid reflux, the result of which is their arrogance has shriveled dramatically. They are realizing—too little, too late—that they were meshugeh ahf toit (that’s Yiddish for crazy as a loon) for betting the ranch, SUV, family jewels and college tuition on the MSM’s falsities, and that it is they, the loons, who perforce maneuvered us dangerously close to the deathtrap called totalitarianism.

And now for the bad news:

In his speech, Obama said, “The Holy Koran teaches that whoever kills an innocent is as – it is as if he has killed all mankind.”

Sounds harmless, but…

Muslims who inure to the Koran—that it contains the final, unalterable and immutable words of Allah—would know he only paraphrased the actual passage, which is: “To murder a single human being is as evil as to murder all mankind, unless he be causing trouble (mischief) in the land.”

Islamic scholars know the meaning of “causing trouble in the land,” which is to “not live in accordance with the tenets of Islam.” Therefore, the passage Obama chose translates to “the murder of any non-Muslim is not evil.” (Thank you, C.H.)

The arresting difference between Islam and other religions is that all references in the Koran regarding human kindness (love, charity, mercy) count only when it is Muslim to Muslim. The religion unequivocally calls for the death of all infidels, and the enslavement of Christians and Jews.

The purpose of his Cairo speech was (supposedly) predicated on generating a new beginning between America and Muslims—and to build a heroic public image of himself.

Did he goof when he delivered an incomplete and misleading extract from the Koran? Or was he communicating a coded message to our enemies that it’s OK if all non-Muslims are eradicated?

Upon microscopic examination of all he has said and done in these past four months, particularly his choice of words for his Cairo speech, it is not inconceivable that Barack Hussein Obama could be generating the beginning of the end of the United States of America.

Do we want a punk in the White House?

2008-10-08T09:44:00.000-07:00

By a Redeemed Democrat

This election has me very worried. So many things to consider.

About a year ago I would have voted for Obama. I have changed my mind three times since then. I watch all the news channels, jumping from one to another. I must say this drives my family crazy. But, I feel if you view MSNBC, CNN, and Fox News, you might get some middle ground to work with.

About six months ago, I started thinking 'where did the money come from for Obama'. I have four daughters who went to College, and we were middle class, and money was tight. We (including my girls) worked hard and there were lots of student loans.

I started looking into Obama's life.

Around 1979 Obama started college at Occidental College in California. He is very open about his two years at Occidental: he tried all kinds of drugs and was wasting his time but, even though he had a brilliant mind, did not apply himself to his studies.

'Barry' (that was the name he used all his life) during this time had two roommates, Muhammad Hasan Chandoo and Wahid Hamid, both from Pakistan. During the summer of 1981, after his second year in college, he made a 'round the world' trip. Stopping to see his mother in Indonesia, next Hyderabad in India, three weeks in Karachi, Pakistan where he stayed with his roommate's family, then off to Africa to visit his father's family.

My question - Where did he get the money for this trip? Nether I, nor any one of my children would have had money for a trip like this when they were in college. When he came back he started school at Columbia University in New York.

It is at this time he wants everyone to call him Barack - not Barry. Do you know what the tuition is at Columbia? It's not cheap to say the least! Where did he get money for tuition? Student Loans? Maybe.

After Columbia, he went to Chicago to work as a Community Organizer for $12,000 a year. Why Chicago? Why not New York? He was already living in New York.

By 'chance' he met Antoine 'Tony' Rezko, born in Aleppo Syria, and a real estate developer in Chicago. Rezko has been convicted of fraud and bribery this year. Rezko, was named 'Entrepreneur of the Decade' by the Arab-American Business and Professional Association'.

About two years later, Obama entered Harvard Law School. Do you have any idea what tuition is for Harvard Law School? Where did he get the money for Law School? More student loans?

After Law school, he went back to Chicago. Rezko offered him a job, which he turned down. But, he did take a job with Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland. Guess what? They represented 'Rezar' which is Rezko's firm. Rezko was one of Obama's first major financial contributors when he ran for office in Chicago.

In 2003, Rezko threw an early fundraiser for Obama which Chicago Tribune reporter David Mendelland claims was instrumental in providing Obama with 'seed money' for his U.S. Senate race. In 2005, Obama purchased a new home in Kenwood District of Chicago for $1.65 million (less than asking price).

With ALL those Student Loans - Where did he get the money for the property? On the same day Rezko's wife, Rita, purchased the adjoining empty lot for full price. The London Times reported that Nadhmi Auchi, an Iraqi-born Billionaire loaned Rezko $3.5 million three weeks before Obama's new home was purchased. Obama met Nadhmi Auchi many times with Rezko.

Now, we have Obama running for President. Valerie Jarrett was Michele Obama's boss. She is now Obama's chief advisor and he does not make any major decisions without talking to her first. Where was Jarrett born? Ready for this? Shiraz, Iran! Do we see a pattern here, or am I going crazy?

On May 10, 2008 The Times reported that Robert Malley, advisor to Obama, was 'sacked' after the press found out he was having regular contacts with 'Hamas', which controls Gaza and is connected with Iran. This past week, buried in the back part of the papers, Iraqi newspapers reported that during Obama's visit to Iraq, he asked their leaders to do nothing about the war until after he is elected, and he will 'Take care of things'.

Oh, and by the way, remember the college roommates that where born in Pakistan? They are in charge of all those 'small' Internet campaign contributions for Obama. Where is that money coming from? The poor and middle-class in this country? Or could it be from the Middle East?

And the final bit of news. On September 7, 2008, The Washington Times posted a verbal slip that was made on 'This Week' with George Stephanapoulos. Obama on talking about his religion said, 'My Muslim faith'. When questioned, 'he made a mistake'. Some mistake!

All of the above information I got on line. If you would like to check it - Wikipedia, encyclopedia, Barack Obama; Tony Rezko; Valerie Jarrett: Daily Times - Obama visited Pakistan in 1981; The Washington Times - September 7, 2008; The Times May 10, 2008.

Now the BIG question - If I found out all this information on my own, why haven't all of our 'intelligent' members of the press been reporting this?

A phrase that keeps ringing in my ear:

“Beware of the enemy from within”

Do You Know the Real Barack Obama?

2008-10-07T10:00:00.000-07:00

Carol Platt Liebau
Monday, October 06, 2008

As the 2008 presidential campaign hurtles into its final days, John McCain confronts a choice: He can either start telling the public about the real Barack Obama, or he can lose.

For much of his career, McCain has been a media darling. He could count on the press to carry his water as long as he was a “maverick” Republican, driving more conservative members of his party crazy. But as he surely knows by now, when it comes to Barack Obama and the press, all bets are off. In covering Obama, the press has adopted a “don’t ask/don’t tell” policy designed to boost the least-vetted, least-known candidate ever to seek the presidency. It isn’t by accident that the media has denied all less-than-glowing stories about Obama the kind of consistent, sustained coverage that allows them to penetrate public consciousness.

If McCain is going to have a chance at winning, he must make sure that the public becomes thoroughly acquainted with the real Barack Obama – the most radical presidential nominee ever. And because the press evidently intends to abdicate its responsibility to acquaint voters with the less-popular parts of Obama’s record, he’ll have to rely on paid adver tising to do it.

For starters, McCain should consider running a series of “Did You Know” ads about Barack Obama. He should ask voters, “Did you know that:

Barack Obama has multiple ties to those responsible for the present economic crisis?:

Franklin Raines, the immediate past CEO of Fannie Mae – who has collected a $90 million golden parachute while driving Fannie into the ground – has advised Obama on housing issues.
Jim Johnson, yet another former Fannie Mae CEO, resigned from Obama’s vice presidential search team when it was revealed he had received a sweetheart home mortgage deal.
Despite serving in the Senate for only four years, Obama himself has been the second-largest recipient of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac largesse in the entire Congress, ahead even of former presidential candidate John Kerry, who’s spent two decades in the Senate?
Obama’s long-time political ally, radical group ACORN, played a key role in pressuring banks to offer loans to those who were unlikely to be able to pay them back. ACORN has taken credit for pressuring banks to accept undocumented income as a basis for offering loans, for offering loans without using credit scores, and for making 100% financed loans available to low-income people.

There is more, of course. Do voters know:

That, in apparent defiance of federal election law, the Obama campaign refuses to identify individual donors who have provided almost half the funds for his campaign, including obvious fakes like “Mr. Good Will” and “Mr. Doodad Pro”? And that 11,500 donations to his campaign – totaling almost $34 million – may have come from overseas? Or that two Palestinians living in a Hamas-controlled refugee camp spent $31,300 in Obama’s online store? Who are all these people, and why won’t the Obama campaign obey the law and identify them?
That Jeremiah Wright wasn’t Obama’s first radical mentor? As a young man in Hawaii, Obama had a quasi-filial relationship with radical Frank Marshall Davis – an avowed member of the Communist Party of the USA. In fact, in his memoirs, Obama concedes that he attended “socialist conferences” and encountered Marxist literature. (Now imagine the outcry if a Republican presidential candidate had such ties to a Nazi).
That the People's Weekly World – the official newspaper of the Communist Party of the USA – has rhapsodized about Obama’s presidential campaign, calling it a "transformative candidacy that would advance progressive politics for the long term"? (Think about how the press would react if a fascist newspaper heaped such praise on McCain.)
That Obama has routinely tried to intimidate his critics into silence? His political organization spearheaded a massive campaign against a Chicago radio show that invited one of his critics to appear – even after being asked (and refusing) to send a representative to balance the program, hosted by a non-partisan University of Chicago psychology professor. Worse, his campaign sought to chill free speech by establishing a “truth squad” of Missouri prosecutors and sheriffs, which threatened a “vigorous response” to any ad presenting information about Obama that they deemed to be “inaccurate.” And there are other examples.
That even as America struggles to “bail out” our own struggling economy, Obama backs a global bailout? His Global Poverty Initiative would assess $2500 per taxpayer, according to Investor’s Business Daily, to fund a global war on poverty administered by the UN and its agencies.
That despite touting his academic credentials as a rationale for initiating a campaign for president just two years after leaving the Illinois state legislature, Obama refuses to release either his college or his law school transcripts – just as he sought to keep records of his working relationship with former terrorist Bill Ayers on The Annenberg Challenge (a left-wing educational foundation) safely under wraps? What is it that he doesn’t want voters to know?

Repeatedly, we’ve heard the media denounce the “rumors” about Barack Obama that are, supposedly, circulated on the internet exclusively by the bigoted and the ignorant. But Americans sense that=2 0there is more to Barack Obama than they’ve been told. Having witnessed the media’s own bias and favoritism, they’ve come to suspect – reasonably – that even if any of the rumors were true, the press might choose to conceal them until the election is safely over. What’s more, they wonder: What else is the press not telling us?

Certainly, it would be terribly wrong for John McCain to traffic in rumors. But he doesn’t need to. The truth is more than enough. There are facts that the American people deserve to know – and which the press isn’t telling them. By filling in the gaps that the media has left unmentioned, John McCain isn’t just doing himself a service. He’s doing journalists’ job for them, and allowing Americans to make an informed decision when they head to the polls next month.

Of Mice and Moose

2008-09-26T11:16:00.001-07:00

By Julian Krasta

Glass ceilings notwithstanding, Gov. Sarah Palin is being accepted by America and other progressive nations as the new high-spirited Republican melody maker. Her in-tune communications, slowly but surely, are drowning out Obama’s bizarre ventriloquism, Joe Biden’s howlers (although I now must thank Sen. Biden for his public criticism of Obama), and the mainstream media’s pops and pings of their low-register gothic operas.

I admit I knew nothing about the lady, so when Sen. John McCain torpedoed the long-awaiting GOP with his announcement that he’d chosen Mrs. Palin as his running mate, I blurted (literally), “Who? But-but… what about Romney? Where’s Pawlenty?”

Once the conservative world had caught its breath, we scrambled like ants with road rage to bring ourselves up to speed and be informed about her as much as possible. What we learned was surprisingly uplifting, and encouraging. But encouraging and uplifting would not be enough for wary and weary Republicans. Our faith – our votes for John McCain – quite suddenly depended enormously on Mrs. Palin’s presentation of herself at the Republican convention, her message and delivery.

To put it plainly, when she finished speaking I had to find my socks. They were on the other side of the room, having been blown off by what I’d seen and heard.

As the balloons rained down on our nominees and ecstatic supporters, I concluded, with refreshed hopefulness, that Sen. McCain appeared to have done right with his choice.

In the weeks that have followed, and on the basis of hardnosed scrutiny, I came to recognize that Mrs. Palin not only has the head but the heart and constitution to assume the responsibilities of Vice President of the United States, to name a few: the hurdles, the sinkholes, and the sway of President of the Senate; the polluted power of Washington politics; and all that the second-in-command to the leader of what might be the last frontier of the free world must endure or may enjoy.

In addition, and with all due respect (I have to say this), it is my opinion that Mrs. Palin could easily be considered a candidate for U.S. Army Ranger: superincumbent point of convergence, fine sinew tone, her marksmanship with a hunting rifle, razor-sharp receptors, and she’s a flawless communicator. It’s probably why she is balls-out fearless in the face of twits wielding their toothless pitchforks and burned-out torches. Not too shabby for a mother of five.

As expected, from the moment she was named the Republicans’ vice presidential candidate, the cheese-eaters on the left went whacko, like a duck hit on the head. They didn’t just cross but leaped the line of civility and began – and continue – to snarl, spit and squawk some of the most reprehensible idioms against Sarah Palin.

They have squealed over and gnawed on everything from her pro-life position to her accession to the post of a city mayor and then governor of our largest state – even her husband and children.

They also have gone so far as to censure Mrs. Palin’s rightful choice not to abort her baby son, Trig, who had been diagnosed with Down syndrome prior to birth. (It’s one thing to push the envelope of criticism; it’s quite another, in this instance, to hammer nails in so deeply that they can never be retracted – and their contemptuous mockery of Mr. & Mrs. Palin’s faith-based decision not to terminate the life of their son, I assure you, will be neither forgotten nor forgiven.)

The liberal media (Obama’s Love Bombers: “You’re perfect just the way you are, Barack”), from top to bottom, and from the start, consciously and deliberately ignored the tenets of fairness and decency towards John McCain, and now Sarah Palin.

The most disturbing aspect is their shameless revelry in the destruction they are attempting to wreak on the Palin Family, particularly celebrities. I’m confident enough to say that they will never achieve their objective, and their words and actions will backfire in due course.

As an aside: On the topic of backfires, an example is what occurred during the Clinton administration. They bullied the banking industries into granting loans to unqualified purchasers. Approximately 30 years earlier, Edward M. “Ted” Kennedy browbeat a bill through the Senate to allow into our country a greater percentage of “the less fortunate” (i.e., from south of our borders and elsewhere), who comprise a significant (if not largest) amount of today’s unqualified purchasers. Both plans spearheaded by those two Democrats served as chief elements of the incubator in which was hatched this $700 billion T-Rex. Ironically, those screaming loudest “Save us!” are – you guessed it – liberal Democrats. End aside.

Nevertheless, the limousine liberals, who are enamored with the sound of their own voice (you listenin’ up their in your private jet, which is paid for by the People, Madam Speaker?), persist with their shrill insults at John McCain and Sarah Palin, and Mrs. Palin’s executive credentials and character, at every MSM opportunity and with serial ignorance.

At one point recently, I sat through the first twenty minutes of Saving Private Ryan just for a respite. Thankfully, at about minute 18, I was able to turn down the volume on my TV because of the across-the-board news that two of the more vicious rodents (Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann) had both fallen victim to their own rat poison. Wait--didn’t I just say: “[…] their words and actions will backfire in due course”?

The catalog of gross offenders now also includes a certain David Kernell, a student who thought he was enrolling at Clown College (Harry Reid’s alma mater), but because Kernell, like Reid, probably failed basic comprehension instead scrawled his “X” on the University of Tennessee-Knoxville admission form. (Kernell is under investigation by the FBI and Secret Service for allegedly hacking into Sarah Palin’s electronic mail accounts.) Ditto my “backfire” comment (emphasis added).

William Shakespeare wrote: “Nothing is so common as the wish to be remarkable.”

For Sarah Palin, she needn’t wish it – she simply is. I believe in Mrs. Palin, because she exemplifies decency and morality. True, she has a tough field to plow if she succeeds Dick Cheney, but she is clearly at least ten times smarter, stronger, and on the ball than today’s passel of Washington mutts.

Ever see moose stomp mice? Me neither. But I have a hunch we’re going to see just that, come November.

Critics of McCain's Critics Want Leftward Tilt

2008-02-08T10:32:00.000-08:00

By David Limbaugh, for Newsmax

Friday, February 8, 2008 8:10 AM

Isn't it ironic that GOP moderates are harshly criticizing GOP conservatives for being harshly critical of GOP presidential front-runner John McCain?

What mortal sins have conservative McCain critics committed? Oh, they've stuck to their conservative principles, fighting for the values they believe in and refusing, prematurely, to surrender. What good would they be if they so readily threw in the towel of defeat?

"Enlightened" moderates are shocked at conservatives, tagging them as uncompromising extremists who represent the very fringe of the Republican Party.

John Dilulio, a principal architect of President Bush's arguably non-conservative, faith-based initiative, is among those making these arguments.

Writing for the Weekly Standard, Dilulio says that only 3.6 percent of Republicans identify themselves as "very conservative." Is Dilulio making the unwarranted leap of implying that McCain's critics come from this 3.6 percent fringe and that mainstream conservatives have no problem with McCain?

If so, and with due respect to Mr. Dilulio, I emphatically reject that only 3.6 percent of Republicans have great difficulty swallowing McCain — ideologically and personally. McCain isn't winning a majority of Republicans, much less conservative ones, and is relying heavily on Democrat crossovers and independents, not to mention a little help from his friends Mike Huckabee and the mainstream media.

It's easy for moderates to argue that critics of moderates are extreme. That's what moderates always say. They have been complaining about conservatism since I was wearing a "Goldwater for President" T-shirt.

They've said for years that the only way Republicans can win elections is to move to the center. Their opinion is not based on convincing data but wishful thinking. History is not their friend. Republicans win big with conservative ideas, provided they have inspiring candidates. Moderate ideas dilute the message and deflate the movement, zapping it of its verve and enthusiasm.
I have read the reasonable arguments of my friend Bill Bennett and others disputing that John McCain is a liberal. They argue he is a conservative with some liberal positions and that, in any event, he's far more conservative than Hillary or Barack.

Fair enough, though the McCain critics grossly underemphasize the differences and McCain's untrustworthiness. For the record, I can't see myself as ever voting for either Hillary or Barack, two unreconstructed socialists who are soft on defense and enemies of the unborn. But hold your horses. We're not there yet.

We're in the primary season, and there's nothing wrong with all sides advocating their respective positions. If conservatives can't hold John McCain accountable now for all his apostasies, apostasies he committed with utter delight amid mainstream-media adulation, what chance will we have of doing so later?

The idea that our party can't recover from vigorous debate during the primaries is unserious, to wit: Reagan versus Ford. In the meantime, rumors of the death of mainstream conservatism are greatly exaggerated.

McCain's relative success is not a sign of the end of Reagan conservatism as a dominant political force. It's just temporarily dormant, the victim of a confluence of factors, waiting to be re-ignited.

One factor is that we have had a weak GOP presidential field, though I think some of the candidates ultimately proved themselves to be quite inspiring. McCain has slipped in largely by default, like John Kerry in 2004.

Another factor is that Republicans have been in control of the executive branch for seven years. Though Democrats have recaptured Congress, they still haven't been able to accomplish many of their legislative initiatives, including obstructing funding for the Iraq War. Even their reprehensible character assassination of President Bush has lost steam since the surge began yielding fruit.

Nothing unites conservatives like Democrats in power and working their mischief, or out of power and maliciously but effectively obstructing good government — excuse the liberal-sounding oxymoron.

And then there's the war, which originally united conservatives but admittedly has led to the ascendancy of the neoconservative influence with its willingness to accept all kinds of economic and social liberalism. I believe that's unnecessary. All three stools — and more — of mainstream conservatism can thrive simultaneously. Nevertheless, these factors and others have coalesced to dampen, temporarily, the fires and energy of conservatism.

Sometimes conservatives become more unified out of power. Of course that doesn't mean we should allow Democrats to regain the White House, either because we would unite while out of power or because we are seriously disappointed about the prospect of John McCain as our candidate.

But would the critics of McCain's critics please quit trying to marginalize mainstream conservatives and redefine mainstream conservatism? Just admit your guy is not that conservative and let us hold his feet to the fire, especially since his success to this point will give him all the more temptation to pander to liberals. You're the ones who need to chill out.
David Limbaugh is a writer, author, and attorney. His book "Bankrupt: The Intellectual and Moral Bankruptcy of Today's Democratic Party" (Regnery) was recently released in paperback. To find out more about David Limbaugh, please visit his Web site at www.davidlimbaugh.com.

[Source]

© 2008 Creator's Syndicate Inc.

A Timely Parable

2008-02-07T10:58:00.000-08:00

While walking down the street one day, a U.S. senator is tragically hit by a truck and dies. His soul arrives in Heaven and is met by St. Peter at the entrance.

"Welcome to Heaven," says St. Peter. "Before you settle in, it seems there is a problem. We seldom see a high official around these parts, you see, so we're not sure what to do with you."

"No problem, just let me in," said the senator.

"Well, I'd like to, but I have orders from higher up. What we'll do is have you spend one day in Hell and one in Heaven. Then you can choose where to spend eternity."

"Really, I've made up my mind. I want to be in Heaven," says the senator. "I'm sorry, but we have our rules."

And with that, St. Peter escorts him to the elevator and he goes down. The doors open and he finds himself in the middle of a green golf course. In the distance is a clubhouse and standing in front of it are all his friends and other politicians who had worked with him. Everyone is very happy and in evening dress. They run to greet him, shake his hand and reminisce about the good times they had while getting rich at the expense of the people. They play a friendly game of golf and then dine on lobster, caviar and champagne. Also present is the devil, who really is a very friendly guy. He has a good time dancing and telling jokes. They are having such a good time that before he realizes it, it is time to go. Everyone gives him a hearty farewell and waves while the elevator rises.

The elevator goes up, up, up and the door reopens on Heaven where St. Peter is waiting for him.

"Now it's time to visit Heaven."

So, 24 hours pass with the senator joining a group of contented souls moving from cloud to cloud, playing the harp and singing. They have a good time and before he realizes it, the 24 hours have gone by and St. Peter returns.

"Well, then, you've spent a day in Hell and another in Heaven. Now, choose your eternity."

The senator reflects for a minute, then he answers. "Well, I would never have said it before. I mean Heaven has been delightful, but I think I would be better off in Hell."

So, St. Peter escorts him to the elevator and he goes down, down, down to Hell.

The doors of the elevator open and he's in the middle of a barren land covered with waste and garbage. He sees all his friends, dressed in rags, picking up the trash and putting it in black bags, as more trash falls from above. The devil comes over to him and puts his arm around his shoulder.

"I don't understand," stammers the senator. "Yesterday, I was here and there was a golf course and a clubhouse and we ate lobster and caviar, drank champagne, danced and had a great time. Now, it's just a wasteland full of garbage and my friends look miserable. What happened"?

The devil looks at him, smiles and says, "Yesterday, we were campaigning. Today, you voted."

AND A BONUS ...

Three Things to Ponder:

1. Cows
2. The Constitution
3. The Ten Commandments

C O W S - Is it just me, or does anyone else find it amazing that during the mad cow epidemic our government could track a single cow, born in Canada almost three years ago, right to the stall where she slept in the state of Washington? And, they tracked her calves to their stalls. But they are unable to locate 11 million illegal aliens wandering around our country. Maybe we should give each of them a cow.

T H E C O N S T I T U T I O N - They keep talking about drafting a Constitution for Iraq. Why don't we just give them ours? It was written by a lot of really smart guys, it has worked for over 200 years, and we're not using it anymore.

T H E 1 0 C O M M A N D M E N T S - The real reason that we can't have the Ten Commandments posted in a courthouse is this:

You cannot post "Thou Shalt Not Steal," "Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery," and "Thou Shall Not Lie" in a building full of lawyers, judges and politicians...It creates a hostile work environment.

Jackie Mason asks: "Camelot - or a Cesspool?"

2008-02-05T10:22:00.000-08:00

To view the entire article, visit http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=60045

Tuesday, February 5, 2008
Camelot - or a cesspool?
By Jackie Mason

Posted: February 5, 2008
1:00 a.m. Eastern

The Kennedys recently endorsed Barack Obama, and Teddy Kennedy drew a parallel with President Kennedy - a vision of a new Camelot rising like a Phoenix from the ashes of the Bush administration. Either he was addressing the largest group of amnesiacs ever gathered in one place in history, or the media and much of America has been eating funny mushrooms and is in the throes of a mass delusion.

Back to reality: The late President Kennedy bears responsibility for the initiation of one of the bleakest episodes in modern American history - the Vietnam War. Only because Khrushchev had more common sense than he did, we avoided an enormous catastrophe. After the fall of the Soviet Union, when the Russian's secret files were opened, we learned, among other bits of knowledge - such as the fact the Rosenbergs were indeed Russian atomic spies - that there were functioning deployed short- and mid-range atomic missiles in Cuba. If we ever, as threatened, tried to land troops directly after the Bay of Pigs debacle on Cuban shores, our troops would have been slaughtered - one missile, thousands of Americans annihilated. This is all not to mention that the fiasco of the Bay of Pigs was authorized by Kennedy himself, and then he left the Cuban patriots out to dry by withholding promised air support.

Many of Kennedy's private and Cabinet sessions were secretly recorded, and many years later, one of these recordings from the time of the Bay of Pigs episode reveals Kennedy musing that for a president to go down in history he has to have a war. "Where would Lincoln be without the Civil War?"

A cynic might therefore suggest that Kennedy's trip to the brink of a nuclear holocaust was not a result of his inexperience but, rather, it had a more selfish origin. On the domestic front, he accomplished little, and his promises had to be delivered by President Johnson. He did, however, inaugurate the White House revolving door policy as far as women were concerned, and even in this area it needed a subsequent president - Clinton - to bring it to a point of perfection.

The other members of the Kennedy bunch are also hardly poster boys for responsible government - or even human beings. The liberals hug Robert Kennedy's memory, but choose not to remember that he personally authorized the wiretaps on Dr. Martin Luther King. He also carried on the president's policies and, as in many families, certain traditions, such as passing down clothing from an older to younger child - only they did this with women. The most well-known of these involved the late Marilyn Monroe. After the president was through with her, he passed her down to Bobby. Ultimately, as we all know, the poor woman eventually killed herself.

There are, of course, the gaggle of Kennedy relatives who have been arrested and charged with everything from drunk driving to rape, and even murder.

This, of course, brings us to the present bloviator-in-chief, Teddy Kennedy. It would be easy to write him off as another senatorial windbag, but he bears a distinction born by no other senator. He has killed someone - and not while serving as a member of the armed forces. After a drunken party, he drove off a bridge and left his passenger, Mary Jo Kopechne, alone to drown to death, trapped in his car.

All of this makes us wonder at the judgment of Mr. Obama and the American public. Camelot, once the fairy tale aspect is put aside, is as attractive as a cesspool - and may even smell a lot worse.

* * * * * * *

An added piece, as exclusively reported on www.lauraingraham.com this morning:

STATEMENT FROM DR. JAMES DOBSON of FOCUS ON THE FAMILY:

I am deeply disappointed the Republican Party seems poised to select a nominee who did not support a Constitutional amendment to protect the institution of marriage, voted for embryonic stem cell research to kill nascent human beings, opposed tax cuts that ended the marriage penalty, has little regard for freedom of speech, organized the Gang of 14 to preserve filibusters in judicial hearings, and has a legendary temper and often uses foul and obscene language.

I am convinced Sen. McCain is not a conservative, and in fact, has gone out of his way to stick his thumb in the eyes of those who are. He has sounded at times more like a member of the other party. McCain actually considered leaving the GOP caucus in 2001, and approached John Kerry about being Kerry's running mate in 2004. McCain also said publicly that Hillary Clinton would make a good president. Given these and many other concerns, a spoonful of sugar does NOT make the medicine go down. I cannot, and will not, vote for Sen. John McCain, as a matter of conscience.

But what a sad and melancholy decision this is for me and many other conservatives. Should Sen. McCain capture the nomination as many assume, I believe this general election will offer the worst choices for president in my lifetime. I certainly can't vote for Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama based on their virulently anti-family policy positions. If these are the nominees in November, I simply will not cast a ballot for president for the first time in my life. These decisions are my personal views and do not represent the organization with which I am affiliated. They do reflect my deeply held convictions about the institution of the family, about moral and spiritual beliefs, and about the welfare of our country.

Tough guy, eh?

2008-02-04T14:52:00.000-08:00

by Kyle Hampton

I just got done listening to a little bit of Michael Medved. I know, I know…I should know better.

Anyway, Medved was talking about how this election is different from others where there was an ideological battle taking place in the primaries. Of course it benefits Medved to say this because it diminishes the key differences between McCain and Romney, making it a contest more of personality than of policy. Of course I could list several key policy decisions that distinguish McCain and Romney, but none is more important than McCain-Kennedy.

Immigration is the core divide in the Republican party right now and Romney and McCain stand on opposite sides of that gulf.

McCain now downplays the significance of his role as leading advocate of amnesty for illegal immigrants. He and some other Republicans, like Trent Lott, famously called conservatives in favor of border enforcement xenophobes. McCain now tries to rewrite history by suggesting that Republicans rejected his bill only because of lost confidence in government, as if it were a purely psychological issue.

That misses the point that Republicans rejected the full idea of his bill for various reasons, but mostly because its whole purpose was to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants. McCain-Kennedy’s failure was not lack of confidence in government, but a lack of confidence in McCain himself and his vision of immigration reform.

However, even granting Medved’s proposition that there is little policy difference between McCain and Romney (which I find lacks any substance), Romney has the better personality and temperament for the office of president.

Medved stated that he liked that McCain was a tough guy, but it seems to me that McCain is a tough guy only on some issues. When was the last time McCain got fiery over judges? When was he a tough guy on tax cuts? When was the last time you remember him worked up over education? Indeed it seems that McCain gets fiery over things he understands, but that is a limited number of issues.

I do admit that McCain is a tough guy on immigration, interrogation, and the First Amendment, but he’s on the wrong side of those issues. To project that McCain is a tough guy on all issues misunderstands who McCain really is.

Romney, on the other hand, has shown a consistency of character. He is affable and engaging publicly and coolly competent behind closed doors. He is never out of his league on any issue and generally is the most capable person in the room. He refrains from making personal attacks and always projects a sense of optimism.

This is the kind of personality that I want in the president’s office. Indeed, it seems much better than someone whose temper is never out of reach. Competence is what I want in a president, not a bully.

******

Posted By Kyle to My Man Mitt at 2/04/2008 04:29:00 PM

Congress Poised to Give Tax Rebates to Illegal Aliens!

2008-01-30T12:13:00.000-08:00

ALERT From FAIR

(Federation for American Immigration Report)

Congress Poised to Give Tax Rebates to Illegal Aliens

Call Your Senators Now!

The economic stimulus package traveling through Congress right now does nothing to stop the IRS from issuing rebate checks to illegal aliens. Please call your Senators now and urge them to take action!

Yesterday, the House of Representatives passed H.R.5140, the economic stimulus package, by a vote of 385-35. As many of you have already learned from news outlets, the economic package includes tax rebates of $600 for individual taxpayers and $1,200 for couples. However, this package—thrown together within days—allows the IRS to send tax rebate checks to illegal aliens!

The issue stems from defining who is eligible for a tax rebate. In drafting H.R.5140, Congress left gaping loopholes. Section 101 excludes "nonresident aliens" from being eligible, but this is essentially meaningless as the IRS does not determine whether an individual is a "nonresident alien" based on his or her immigration status. Moreover, it does not address the eligibility of illegal aliens who send in tax returns using stolen or false social security numbers.

At a minimum, the IRS should be required to screen the numbers (whether individual taxpayer identification numbers (ITINs) or social security numbers (SSNs)) used to issue the checks to ensure they match the name of the taxpayer in question. If a name and number do not match, the IRS should be prohibited from issuing a tax rebate check. Senator John Ensign (R-NV) has filed an amendment to affect this change, but we do not know whether he will even be allowed to offer it.

H.R.5140 is now in the Senate and will go through the Senate Finance Committee this afternoon. From there, Senate staffers indicate it will go quickly to the floor. PLEASE TAKE ACTION NOW!

We urge all FAIR members, activists and friends to call their Senators now and urge them to fix the loopholes in H.R. 5140 that allow illegal aliens to get tax rebate checks. After calling your own Senators, please call the Senators who sit on the Finance Committee and urge them to take action too.

To find the phone numbers for your Senators, click here.

For the membership of the Senate Finance Committee, click here.

WE CAN SLEEP BECAUSE THEY'RE ON WATCH

2008-01-18T14:23:00.000-08:00

Let's be grateful for the protection they give us, 24/7, 365.

Holiday Greetings!

2007-12-18T15:40:00.000-08:00

To All My Democrat Friends:

Please accept with no obligation, implied or implicit, my best wishes for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low-stress, non-addictive, gender-neutral celebration of the winter solstice holiday, practiced within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice, or secular practices of your choice, with respect for the religious/secular persuasion and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all.

I also wish you a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2008, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make America great. Not to imply that America is necessarily greater than any other country nor the only America in the Western Hemisphere.

Also, this wish is made without regard to the race, creed, color, age, physical ability, religious faith or sexual preference of the wished.

To My Republican Friends: Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

A Message from One Angry Mom

2007-12-17T11:50:00.001-08:00

This has been going around, but it's worth repeating.

*****************
By "Anonymous"

"Are we fighting a war on terror or aren't we? Was it or was it not started by Islamic people who brought it to our shores on September 11, 2001?

Were people from all over the world, mostly Americans, not brutally murdered that day, in downtown Manhattan, across the Potomac from our nation's capitol and in a field in Pennsylvania?

Did nearly three thousand men, women and children die a horrible, burning or crushing death that day, or didn't they?

And I’m supposed to care that a copy of the Koran was "desecrated" when an overworked American soldier kicked it or got it wet? Well, I don't. I don't care at all.

I'll start caring when Osama bin Laden turns himself in and repents for incinerating all those innocent people on 9/11.

I'll care about the Koran when the fanatics in the Middle East start caring about the holy bible, the mere possession of which is a crime in Saudi Arabia.

I'll care when these thugs tell the world they are sorry for chopping off nick berg's head while berg screamed through his gurgling slashed throat.

I'll care when the cowardly so-called "insurgents" in Iraq come out and fight like men instead of disrespecting their own religion by hiding in mosques.

I'll care when the mindless zealots who blow themselves up in search of nirvana care about the innocent children within range of their suicide.

I'll care when the American media stops pretending that their first amendment liberties are somehow derived from international law instead of the united states constitution's bill of rights.

In the meantime, when I hear a story about a brave marine roughing up an Iraqi terrorist to obtain information, know this: I don't care.

When I see a fuzzy photo of a pile of naked Iraqi prisoners who have been humiliated in what amounts to a college-hazing incident, rest assured: I don't care.

When I see a wounded terrorist get shot in the head when he is told not to move because he might be booby-trapped, you can take it to the bank: I don't care.

When I hear that a prisoner, who was issued a Koran and a prayer mat, and fed "special" food that is paid for by my tax dollars, is complaining that his holy book is being "mishandled," you can absolutely believe in your heart of hearts: I don't care.

And oh, by the way, I’ve noticed that sometimes it's spelled "Koran" and other times "Quran." well, jimmy crack corn and-you guessed it: I don't care!!

If you agree with this viewpoint, pass this on to all your e-mail friends. Sooner or later, it'll get to the people responsible for this ridiculous behavior!

If you don't agree, then by all means hit the delete button. Should you choose the latter, then please don't complain when more atrocities committed by radical Muslims happen here in our great country! And may I add:

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference in the world. But, the marines don't have that problem" -- Ronald Reagan

I have another quote that I would like to add and I hope you forward all this.

"If we ever forget that we're one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under" – Also by Ronald Reagan.

One last thought for the day:

In case we find ourselves starting to believe all the anti-American sentiment and negativity, we should remember England 's Prime Minister Tony Blair's words during a recent interview. When asked by one of his Parliament members why he believes so much in America, he said: "A simple way to take measure of a country is to look at how many want in. And how many want out."

Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you:

1. Jesus Christ.

2. The American G.I.

One died for your soul, the other for your freedom.

You might want to pass this on,
As many seem to forget both of them.

Caught between Iraq and a Hard Place?

2007-09-14T09:48:00.000-07:00

Not according to "Lightwave" on the Wake Up America blog:

"This is now an unassailable fact: The official position of the Democratic Party of the United States of America is that America must surrender in Iraq to the terrorists, that so far these traitors to the country have not yet paid a price.

I do not use the term traitor as exaggeration or hyperbole. It is entirely appropriate. It is defined as “…one who betrays one's country, a cause, or a trust, especially one who commits treason.” The Democrats in Congress meet all four definitions of the word.

They have betrayed the country by attacking our troops and policy publicly, and by meeting with those who directly support our enemy. They have betrayed our cause by portraying our troops as murderers and savages and inciting Americans against our cause during a time of war. They have most certainly betrayed our trust as national elected officials, accusing our sitting President of lying during a time of war. And most of all they have committed treason by showing direct support for the actions and measures our enemy wants us to take, and fomenting surrender during wartime.

The price they will pay -- the price they must pay – should be exacted from them at the polls in 2008. It must be the unambiguous message that what America wants in Iraq is nothing short of victory, and that while a majority of Americans want us to bring the troops home, only a small percentage wish to surrender in Iraq.

The rest of us -- the large, overwhelming majority of Americans -- wish to keep troops in Iraq. We have a duty to fulfill. Part of that duty is to let America's enemies know that we will not capitulate to them -- that we will not give up -- that these colors do not run.

President Bush’s speech last night was great; he said what needed to be said, that no matter what your political party, victory in Iraq in America's best interests and that we must win there.

He also talked about a presence in Iraq lasting past the end of his Presidency. Let's be honest here. We all know that's the truth: Iraq doesn't stop being a problem on January 20, 2009. We will still have troops there. Although I would like to have them home, the mission is going to require years. Our job is to support it.

I'm glad he leveled with the American people on this. We will be in Iraq after President Bush is out of office. That's why the 2008 elections may be the most important ones in America's history.

Unless those elections are used to send a clear message to the world that America is going to get the job done in Iraq, we will be risking a much bloodier war in the future. There isn't a human being on Earth that can successfully argue that our departure from Iraq won't necessitate a much bloodier war down the road with Iran.

If we leave Iraq, we will still have to deal with Iran. The same if we stay in Iraq, but we will be in a much stronger position. Therefore, it is vital to America’s interests. Period.

I believe this country would rally behind President Bush once again. And the price the Democrats will pay -- not all of them, mind you, but most -- will be forgotten by our generation."

Thank you, Lightwave.

"A Time to Reap" by William Rivers Pitt

2007-09-13T10:47:00.000-07:00

Wednesday 20 June 2007 (and today, and everyday).

My friend Dan was on his way home the other day, and found an American flag crumpled in a gutter outside his apartment building. The flag, perhaps as big as the cover of a book, had been used as a decoration for some pre-Fourth of July party, but afterwards was merely thrown aside like litter for the street-sweepers to collect.

Dan gathered it up, smoothed the creases, and hung it from a nearby railing. The motivation for his actions was hard for him to explain, but it came down to this: Everything else in America is so screwed up, but this American thing before him would not be defiled within reach of his arm. My friend, surrounded by the chaos of a flailing nation and filled with the need to act, found some solace in the rescue of that flag.

He is not alone in his sentiments, not alone in his desire to make things right again within reach of his arm.

There is something happening today in America. With the right kind of ears, you can hear it in the sound of millions of brows slowly furrowing in anger and disgust. It feels like those tense moments just before the eruption of a summer thunderstorm, those moments when the air is electric, the ozone reek of spent lightning fills the world, and you know something very loud is about to happen.

What is happening, what can be heard and smelled and sensed all across the land, is the cresting wave of rage, betrayal and fury that is, finally, roaring across the shores of our collective American heart. After more than six years of lies, theft, graft, corruption, manipulation and misconduct, just about every living person within these borders finds themselves today gripped by the slow seethe, directed inward as much as outward, of one who has come around to see just how much of a fool they've been played for.

There are numbers to argue the reality of what is happening: The latest NBC/Wall Street Journal poll has 81% of Americans believing this country to be very much on the wrong track. Put simply, four out of every five people nowadays have that furrowed brow, that sense of betrayal, that slow seethe.

It is a Becoming, this thing, or perhaps an Awakening. It is very real, and is all around us, and it feels like something very loud is about to happen.

It is happening because of Iraq, to be sure, but the roots of the phenomenon stretch deeper into the soil, down where our basic ideas and ideals are rooted. The Iraq debacle, along with myriad examples of corruption and malfeasance, gives voice to a larger sense of outrage felt by nearly all of us today, an outrage so vast that naming it or describing the totality of it beggars vocabulary.

Americans are realizing that their faith and trust in the workings of the republic have been deliberately undermined, and the simple ability to feel good about their nation has been stolen away. Faith in the constructs of our democracy has turned to gall for the citizen who perceives now the magnitude of this theft. When joined in this by another citizen and another and another again, when the unrest of the one becomes a massed and overwhelming majority, those responsible should rightly tremble before the looming possibilities of what may come to be unleashed.

Most Americans, at bottom, have very little in common with one another. We are a collection of races, creeds, colors, faiths, schools of training and the generational freight of inherited bias and belief. We are separated by region, by upbringing, by the economics of class, by that which we know, that which we have forgotten and by that which we choose to ignore. The distances between us are at the center of our American experience, a rift that would be terminal if we ever lose our core linkage, the thing we all have in common as Americans.

We are from everywhere, with beliefs in everything, and the roots of our national unity can only be found in the weaving of our beginnings. All we have in common, across the broad span of this gathered multitude, are the documented dreams inked onto our Constitution, our Bill of Rights, the Declaration that announced us and the laws that have flown outward since. All we have in common is our faith in that link, in the ideas that created it. That's it. That's the one true bond between us, one both strong and fragile in equal measure.

That is the missing thing people have come to sense, the stolen thing which summons the storm. Partisan sensibilities and the your-team/my-team nonsense of modern politics is being replaced by the broad belief that we have all been screwed, that what is most important has been discarded by those in power. The poll numbers charting low approval for Bush and the GOP are matched by similarly low numbers approving of the new Democratic majority in congress. The former bears most of the responsibility for what has happened, as far as the citizenry is concerned, but the latter's failure to stop or reverse the trend is equally shameful.

The seeds of this Becoming have been planted, and have grown, and the time has come to reap.

The American people are weary of Becoming, weary of watching everything they hold dear getting cast into gutters. The midterm elections last November heralded their peaked frustration, and the power invested in this new Democratic Congress came with an invested trust, a hope that this wrong track would be righted. The American people are tired of waiting, tired of revealed wrongs continuing without consequence or punishment, tired of anticipation. This frustration smells of ozone, and feels electric, and means something very loud is indeed about to happen.

This new Democratic Congressional majority is not new anymore, and it knows what it needs to know, and the time has come to reap. Potential must become actual, actions must have consequences, and our faith in each other and what binds us together must be restored. Enough of talk. The subpoenas must be sent, the oaths must be required, the truths must be told, and the consequences of betrayals must be felt.

This new Republican Congressional minority is not new anymore either, and it knows what it has done, and it must join in the reaping. Matters have progressed beyond the pettiness of parties, because the problems before us can no longer be deflected with spin and blather. Enough of talk. The subpoenas must be welcomed, the oaths required, the truth embraced, and the consequences suffered.

My friend Dan did a small thing the other day. He made sure one small bit of America was right and proper and respected, because it was something he could do within reach of his arm. The Democrats in Congress must do likewise, must reach out their right arm, must make change with their long reach instead of merely promising change; they must do this now. Something is happening today in America, and it involves each and every one of us, and it is going to get very loud if matters continue as they have been.

It is time to reap.

Recipe for the Winning Ticket

2007-06-27T11:07:00.000-07:00

By Rose Pedenko and Tanya Simon

Something is cooking, and it smells like fresh-baked GOPie.

2008 isn't even here yet and the Iowa corn is already popping. Republicans have an opportunity to change the main ingredients to their stock and base that will give them a fresh, crisp (s)tart. Or, perhaps the "spice" of the GOP can be blended anew into a stock-to-your-ribs strategy that will once again unite the party, and ensure a rise to victory in the next Presidential election.

It's never too early to sow the seeds necessary to win in 2008. The key ingredients are already on the party table. We simply need to sift together the parts that have been diluted or missing for too long with our well-seasoned principles.

Let's take a look at what we need to bulk up:

Ingredients and Amount:

Truthfulness = Full measure

Integrity = Full measure

Fearlessness = Full measure

Leadership = Full measure

Experience = Full measure

Secure Borders = Full measure

Limited Government = Full measure

Add:

a dash of Rudy ... a pinch of Fred ... 1 tbsp. of [p]iss and vinegar

Skim off the McCain and bake at 98.6 degrees for 17 months, and let stand for 4 years.

This is the mix of organically grown political ingredients for a Mitt Romney/New Gingrich ticket -- the "slice of American Pie," which will renew and sustain mouth-watering freedom for all U.S. citizens and legal immigrants.

Pie in the sky, you say? Why, you ask, do we count our eggs before they're hatched, baked and dished up?

Newt Gingrich recently said: "...But we hire leaders to change reality to fit our values, not to change our values to fit their failures."

It follows that, as a party, we must use our best ingredients for leaders and not cheesy substitutes in order to win at all costs. We watched that strategy fail in California when Arnold Schwarzenegger was elected governor of the state over Tom McClintock, the true conservative.

With his premium leadership quality, Mitt Romney becomes the perfect filling for the post of President of the United States. Pundits criticize him about being beholden to corporate greasing. But it won't stick, because Romney already made his dough, not to mention he's a Harvard Baker Scholar. The sooner they poke holes in campaign, the faster the steam will be released. Critics chop, slice, beat and spread lies about his intentions, but the combined ingredients will rise to the occasion. Romney can dish with the best of his critics and sweeten the rhetoric with his disarming sense of humor. And, unlike the corporate globalists, he will not replace our tradition of American Apple Pie with Chinese Fortune Cookies.

Newt's experience is the formidable layer that will keep our GOPie from collapsing before it's done. There was nothing flaky about his "Contract with America"; it served time and again to strengthen the party and family tradition of GOPie. Newt is the "ready-to-serve" part of this recipe.

Why ask Speaker Gingrich to fill the number two spot on the ticket? He is the starch that will toughen the party and hold it together. He could create the most powerful Vice Presidency in U.S. history. His "American Solutions for Winning the Future" will ferment in the minds of his detractors and serve to make the next Presidential election appetizing for conservatives, and more palatable to Democrats.

In a field of "open borders" candidates among the current top tier, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich are the only two candidates who seem to understand that just because the apples are picked by migrant illegals does not mean they are legally entitled to a piece of the taxpayers' pie.

We want to serve our GOPie a la conservative mode, and that will take a Romney/Gingrich recipe.

Bon appetit!

Elect Mr. Right, not Mr. Right Now

2007-06-21T16:32:00.000-07:00

You don't become President. The Presidency is an institution and you have temporary custody of it.
-Ronald Reagan

In the four short years of the office's term, the man elected must rise up to and sustain the Constitutional oath: '... that I will faithfully execute the office of the President of the United States and will, to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, so help me God.'

There is no pledge as powerful and as selfless, because it demands that the succeeding custodian of the Presidency continue the eternal uphill struggle for, by and against the myriad domestic and foreign issues that eclipse our lives: hostile world leaders; growing numbers of disillusioned and dissatisfied citizens; invidious politicians on both sides of the aisle who handily switch from ally to adversary between sunrise and sunset; biased media reporting intent on thwarting the Chief Executive's credibility; predisposed civilian groups aggressively intoning issue after issue (whether relevant or not) -- to name a few. And there remains the singular matter that requires our sitting and future President's attention 24/7: the promise by riotous Islamic terrorists to cause America's destruction.

In view of these contentious realities, what distinctions should Americans expect from our next President?

Above all: Leadership. He must be governed by a steel-eye countenance in order to effectively assume the mantle of Commander in Chief and stand knuckle to knuckle with our avowed enemies -- upholding the principle that America takes a backseat to no one.

The next man destined to serve the American people knows to expect a daunting hand-off from George W. Bush, which is why that man must also cross the threshold of the Oval Office fully armed with practical business and management experience required for controlling the White House.

He will be a man who says what he means and means what he says.

He must possess unshakable moral integrity.

He must be fearless when confronted with intense and unending enmity and criticism.

He must passionately pursue every best measure necessary to defend our nation and amplify our security, no matter the cost.

These are only some of the reasons why the Republican Party should not support a candidate who is only partially qualified for the post. To invest any hope in a man based solely on poll popularity or, worse, name recognition, could prove fatal for a teetering GOP and the American people. It would be as dangerous as placing our trust in a non-FDIC bank with a flashy name that caters mainly to the glitterati while dealing junk bonds to the middle class.

We would be incompetent if we champion any Presidential candidate who has broken his sacred marriage vows, or who is inclined to emotional unevenness. The Presidency has already suffered enough shame, so we should not risk the possibility of more reprehensible maltreatment of the station.

We must therefore seriously consider that one candidate who is wholly qualified to be the 44th President of the United States ... that one candidate who is capable of rising up to and sustaining the Constitutional oath ... that one man who can lead us back up the iron mountain we proudly call America.

Choose carefully. Our lives, and the life of our country, depends on it.

IT AIN'T OVER 'TILL IT'S OVER

2007-06-12T15:03:00.000-07:00

The Regime Against the Nation

By Patrick J. Buchanan

Tuesday June 12, 2007

Last week, in one of the great uprisings of modern politics, Middle America rose up and body-slammed the national establishment.

The Bush-Kennedy-McCain amnesty for 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens, and for the businesses that have hired them -- a bill backed by La Raza and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post -- went down to crushing defeat.

Majority Leader Harry Reid fell 15 votes short (45 to 50) of shutting off debate. Like the rout of the Dubai ports deal, the victory was achieved by a firestorm of public protest, reflected in millions of phone calls and e-mails, and citizens marching to town meetings.

The capital's capitulation to the country was unprecedented and astonishing. Not two weeks earlier, the amnesty provision of the bill had been supported by more than 60 senators.

But opponents of this bill, which would reward mass criminality with mass amnesty and eventual U.S. citizenship, ought not rest.

For President Bush is coming back to resuscitate the monster, and this bill has more support in the Senate than the 45 votes it got Thursday. Some Republicans and Democrats who voted not to shut off debate are privately committed to amnesty, if they can be given political cover and face-saving amendments to take home.

Sen. John Kyl is not necessarily wrong when he says, "All we have to do on the Republican side is sit down with those who have amendments, get those amendments in a reasonable package, not too many, but enough so all of the members can say they had their chance."

Kyl reads his party right. For the GOP is the political instrument of K Street and Corporate America -- the folks who fund the party and finance the campaigns. And the No. 1 issue of Corporate America is Bush-Kennedy-McCain. For not only does it give blanket amnesty to businesses for hiring illegals, it legalizes the illegals and ensures Corporate America an endless supply of cheap immigrant labor.

The fundamental reason this bill is not dead is that its authors and backers will never quit. For this legislation is part of a larger agenda of a large slice of America's economic and political elite.

What is that agenda?

They have a vision of a world where not only capital and goods but people move freely across borders. Indeed, borders disappear. It is a vision of a "deep integration" of the United States, Canada and Mexico in a North American Union, modeled on the European Union and tied together by super-highways and railroads, where crossing from Mexico into the United States would be as easy as crossing from Virginia into Maryland. It is about the merger of nations into larger transnational entitles and, ultimately, global governance.

This immigration bill is but a piece of a great global project already far advanced. In 1993, a majority of Americans opposed the NAFTA trade deal with Mexico because they did not believe the propaganda and feared that, as Henry Kissinger said, it represented the architecture of a new world order.

More than a dozen years have elapsed. And the results? Contrary to the promises, our trade surplus with Mexico did not grow. It vanished. In 13 years, we have run $500 billion in trade deficits with Mexico. Last year's $60 billion was the largest ever. Mexico now exports more cars, trucks and auto parts to the United States than we export to the world.

What NAFTA did was enable U.S. companies to close their plants here, fire their American workers, and move their factories and jobs to Mexico, while Mexico continued to export its poor to the United States.

What is the hidden agenda of the global companies, which evolved out of what were once great American companies?

They want a limitless supply of low-wage immigrant labor and an end to penalties for hiring illegals. They want the freedom to shut factories here and move them to nations where wages are low, benefits nonexistent and regulations lax. They want to be able to move products back to the United States free of charge. They want to be rid of their American workers, but keep their American consumers.

They want to be able to go out to Asia and hire bright kids and bring them to the United States to replace middle-age U.S. workers who cost too much. They want to be able to outsource their white-collar jobs to India at a fraction of the wages they pay Americans.

It is about globalism -- and about greed. And, as the Bible says, love of money is the root of all evil. But they have a problem. The nation has begun to awaken to the reality that the vision of the global corporation and the transnational elite cannot be realized without the death of the American republic. And so they are in a fight that is long overdue.

Pat Buchanan is a founding editor of The American Conservative magazine, and the author of many books including State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America

Liberal Animal Control

2007-05-23T10:39:00.000-07:00

by Rose Pedenko and Tanya Simon

They are now coming after our four-legged companions.

Blue state after blue state is now engaged in mandating forced neutering and spaying of our pets -- and with a Dr. Strangelove fanaticism that should instead be directed at improving school systems or providing clinics with the necessary means for lessons on birth control for illegal aliens and unwed pregnant teenagers.

It began quietly in 1990 in San Mateo County, in Northern California. The Board of Supervisors approved the nation’s first law requiring all pets in that region ‘go under the knife.’

“We took a first step toward solving the animal overpopulation problem,” said Supervisor Tom Nolan, the instigator of the San Mateo ordinance. It grants authority to impose a $500 fine on violators who fail to neuter and spay their dogs.

Similar laws passed in New York, New Hampshire and Washington State. While the majority of states fund spay/neuter clinics through license fees, the blue states make it “mandatory” for dog and cat owners to neuter their pets. Nowhere in these proposals are there substantial fines or misdemeanors solely for irresponsible pet owners.

The most recent proposal blossomed the week of April 9, 2007 in Southern California: the “California Healthy Pets Act” (AB1634), which is a thin disguise to exterminate pets. Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa -- the illegal alien’s best friend and leader of the largest Sanctuary City in the country -- has, to no one’s surprise, jumped like a bean with both feet into the fray as a partner to the legislation. He is the new king of finding ways to increase revenues without calling it a tax.

Proponents claim that this ordinance will raise proceeds via license/registration fees and fines to defray the cost of euthanasia, including other animal control services. The only accomplishment this new law will offer is the halving of registration and licensing compliance by pet owners who will go underground to protect their natural rights.

Doctors of Veterinary Medicine are not held to the same doctor/patient confidentiality agreements with a dog or cat, as is the ruling with human beings. Under AB1634, however, DVMs will be placed in the unappealing position of informant: to turn in pet owners whose un-neutered or un-spayed pet has been brought in for treatment.

How is this different from Hitler’s Eisantzgruppen? Will physicians become the states’ Gestapo-like task enforcers so that man’s best friends can be sterilized against their owners’ will (and ultimately vanish ‘for the greater good’)? Will this be the ‘Final Solution’ for some of God’s perfect creations whose only crime is that they were not born human?

On the one hand, curbing the birthrate of cats and dogs to 50% or less is, in and of itself, not a bad idea (unless you own shares in companies like Friskies, Science Diet, or Alpo). On the other hand, demanding without recourse that conscientious pet owners have their pets mutilated, particularly expensive purebred dogs and cats, is another example of the outrageous ideas that bounce up like a Pop Tart from the Liberal Think Tank toaster, such as with their exploitation of late-term abortions as a “progressive” idea.

Like so many other ideas that begin with seeds of sensibility, this one has grown into a morass of liberal logic. The people who dream up these foolish ideas are the same mindless obstructionists who don’t lose a minute’s sleep over the insurmountable problems imposed on society by, as a salient example, illegal immigrants: They overcrowd our hospitals giving birth to anchor babies; their offspring crowd our schools and run roughshod in gangs. They represent an inordinate number of the prison population, and too many, of late, have been caught driving drunk, without a license or documentation, after they killed innocent men, women and children. One of these illegals has been deported 17 times. How many animals are captured and set free 17 times?

We digress to make a specific point, which follows in a side-by-side comparison that shows what is sensible and what is preposterous:

Dogs and cats are not, and were never, a threat to our social infrastructure.

Illegal aliens are a problem that is straining to the breaking point American taxpayer resources, our legal system, our safety and our patience.

Dogs and cats do not purposefully cross state lines to steal, maim or kill for pleasure or gain.

Criminal illegal immigrants commit these offenses every hour of every day.

Dogs and cats expect nothing except a good rub behind the ears, a $3 toy, and one square meal a day.

Arrogant illegal immigrants demand immediate amnesty and equal rights of legal citizens, and offer nothing in return except a cheaper Big Mac.

Dogs and cats don’t roam avenues and boulevards in packs numbering in the hundreds of thousands.

Illegal immigrants force the lock-down of city streets to protest en masse American policies while waving their home countries’ flags, or American flags in faux patriotism at the behest of Spanish talking heads.

Dogs and cats are loyal and trustworthy.

Non-English speaking, rule-busting and intoxicated illegal immigrants are neither willing nor capable of being either.

Dogs and cats provide joy and unconditional love.

Self-seeking illegal immigrants bleed the American taxpayer unconditionally, and without conscience.

So, why are liberal politicians persistently pressing forward like Rommel’s panzer divisions to force pet owners to bring in their canines and felines to be anesthetized and sterilized, and at no later than four months of age? It’s a question that demands sober, logical, and credible answers. It presents the slippery slope of a liberal agenda that has quietly infiltrated American thought via educators and the media.

In the end, as always, the real victims are those who cannot speak for or defend themselves. They are being threatened with arbitrary rules composed by out-of-control liberals and their equally uncontrollable agendas. Clearly it seems that the ‘unborn’ are a menace to liberals: human fetuses and late-term babies allowed to be aborted with impunity, and now the attempt to eliminate conception amongst dogs and cats -- to wipe them out.

The Lefties of the '60s that scared everyone with the idea of over-population are still at it. It is not enough that we are faced with an extremist foreign agenda whose aim is to exterminate westerners. We are systematically being reduced in number, both human and animal inside our own borders. Imagine if the whole of America was placed into the efficient hands of the liberals: In less than two generations there would be no one remaining, except, of course, illegal aliens.

The question is, who will get there to finish the job first?

The View Just Got Brighter

2007-04-25T12:40:00.000-07:00

From Anne Hutchinson and Mary Dyer, to Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony, to ‘Rosie the Riveter,’ American women have stepped up and made great noises to gain representation, equality, free speech, and recognition. However, for her efforts Hutchinson was convicted of treason in 1637 and cast out by the divine commissioners of her Massachusetts colony because her feminist initiatives did not align with those of the men. Mary Dyer attempted to pick up where Anne had left off and was hanged by the same ecclesiastical authorities.

From the beginning, traditionalists associated feminism with mental illness, neurotic behavior, hysteria and even sadism. (It was easier to label such audacious women with epithets than to brazen out their contentions, which goes hand in hand with ‘If you ignore it, it will go away’). The woman, however, would not be ignored, and she didn’t go away. Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony didn’t give up or cave in, and neither backed down from their determined goals; they pushed on with righteous indignation.

It is common knowledge that every historic endeavor has a critical turning point, such as with the women’s movement. When it peaked it did so loudly, brashly, and somewhat hysterically. It began to take shape at the height of the Cultural Revolution, when women of every age, race, persuasion and class underwent sweeping metamorphoses: they became independently outspoken, aggressive, demanding and, to a large measure, fanatic.

At the time, the term ‘radical’ grew to be one of the most overused expressions in all the languages of the world. It remains no less drawn on today, and can be applied without second thought to certain women who are ensconced in high-profile stations -- who have manipulated and sullied those stations with reckless abandon.

As we all know, and must accept, Islamic terrorists promise to wash America -- indeed, the world -- in blood. They wait for the instant an avenue is open to another invasion. We therefore live each day anxiously treading dangerous waters. Adding insult to their pledge to cause injury and death have been the tactless and demoralizing missives of homegrown critics, specifically by another Rosie, but of a much lower esteem:

Rosie O’Donnell -- whose un-tethered and gross outspokenness against our country and our President, as well as her overall behavior, turned intensely macabre.

She proved daily that she is discombobulated by her so-called ‘star’ status and that she is struck senseless with hatred. She overtaxed the right to speak her mind and bluntly ignored the fact that exercising such a right doesn’t make it right when she ruthlessly condemned America and Americans. The First Amendment does not equip her or anyone with the exalted power to walk on water, nor does it make it appropriate for her or anyone to cruelly harpoon and underrate the men and women serving in our military -- or our allies’ military -- who, of their own free will, are placing their personal safety in harm’s way in order to keep us safe from harm.

This person lashed out with tidal waves of anti-American smears, the likes of which hadn’t been heard since ‘Hanoi’ Jane’s carnival shows. Rosie raised the bar of spitefulness so high an Olympic pole-vaulter couldn’t clear it with a NASA booster rocket strapped to his back. Even worse, it appeared she took as hostage the American Broadcasting Company and their sponsors (or was ABC an ‘enabler’ to gain high ratings?), using The View as a launching pad for her aggravating statements.

Rosie claimed she is plagued by bouts of depression, and used this as an excuse for her ranting. Someone should enlighten her with the facts, that there isn’t a person alive today who doesn’t suffer at times from melancholy, because there is a lot out there every day to be depressed over. Simplicity is something we all want but is becoming less and less available due to the constant stress of threats by Islamic terrorists against our lives and our country. It’s the same for everyone and we’re all dealing with it all as best as we’re able -- some better than others; those others, like O’Donnell, worse than the rest.

Despite -- or in spite of -- counter criticism, she chose to toy uncontrollably with self-immolation, the cinders of which she stoked daily with her ugly and baseless comments. Perhaps she has now finally torched her credibility and appeal, as might be the basis for the announcement that she and ABC are parting ways. If so, her departure is coming just in time, because she very well could have taken down with her every breakthrough, every achieved milestone, and every sacrifice made on behalf of women everywhere by pioneer giants such as Hutchinson, Dyer, Stanton and Anthony, as well as the sweat and pride of every gal who riveted bolts into the fuselage of B‑29 bombers that aided in America’s victories in World War II.

The numbers of women heroes of the world, both known and nameless, is inestimable. For the time being that list is safe from being truncated or forgotten, as long as women such as Rosie O’Donnell are never included or associated with the names and memory of the honorable and legendary.

Larry, Moe, and Harry Reid

2007-04-23T15:14:00.000-07:00

The week of April 16, 2007 began with a shocking news report in the early morning, which grew more shocking in each ensuing hour, and concluded in abject horror with the revelation of a massacre of over 30 of our brightest people at Virginia Tech University. In the days that followed we prayed -- and continue to pray -- for their souls, for the recovery of the survivors, and for their families, friends, and fellow students.

The poke in the eye was dealt by the senator from Nevada, on Thursday, April 19, 2007: He plain out ignored the mourning processes over what evil had done what evil had wanted. With the poise of a snake oil salesman he positioned himself before a gaggle of reporters and delivered a revolting testimonial:

“I believe this war is lost.”

If he had ended this statement with “…nyuk, nyuk, nyuk,” then the question in every conservative’s mind would have been finally answered: Stooges are alive and well on Capitol Hill -- and they’re driving our red, white & blue integrity and morale into the ground. (Note: Flying above the senator, which he showed no interest in noticing, was our Stars & Stripes at half-staff in respect, honor and memory of the students and faculty who were killed four days earlier.)

Reid has lashed back against Republicans’ criticism of his statement, and with ambiguity:

“No one wants us to succeed in Iraq more than Democrats.”

String both his messages together and they make about as much sense as NBC’s irreverent decision to broadcast the disturbing personal video and audiotapes of the Virginia Tech shooter only 48 hours after the unspeakable tragedy (the day before the Nevada senator decided he was overdue for his moment in the limelight). (On a personal note, I will never forgive NBC for their avarice by airing that video so soon, nor will I ever pardon them for flip-flopping and ultimately canceling the screwball comedy 3rd Rock from the Sun, a critical and ratings success at the time: proof that liberal television networks (much like the sitting Congress) are nowhere near in touch with practicality.)

Back to ‘Stoogeville:’

Pack in with Reid the rest of his irresponsible sidekicks, like Nancy ‘Give Me an Inch So I Can Be the Ruler’ Pelosi (whose unauthorized trots throughout the Middle East was a blatant act of insubordination as well as a violation of deference for both President Bush and Secretary of State Rice, not to mention jeopardizing national security), and the prodigious vessel we call Congress will be in danger of taking on water. Or, more simply put: Loose lips sink ships.

Senate Majority Leader Reid proved by his loose-lip statement that he, and others of the self-styled ‘new’ Congress, is not a visionary. Neither is he a leader, because a genuine leader who is fully committed to battling the darkest forces of iniquity never lays down his sword to that enemy -- an enemy that is consumed with blind hatred and bloodlust, who gives no quarter to his victims, whether they be men, women, or children.

Reid and his colleagues cannot -- or will not -- accept the true meaning of victory on the scale necessary to once and for all stamp out radical Islamic terrorism. Success does not materialize ‘abracadabra’ like a fuzzy rabbit from inside an illusionist’s top hat. The House and Senate steadfastly refuse to recognize that society allows only one great change at a time, and every great change takes time.

Terrorists are trying to use that time to gain traction and the only way to beat them, and those that sponsor terrorism, is to slash their malignant ideology to zero. Reid and the others who think and speak like defeatists will never grasp this fact, because their reach falls miserably short due to their short-sightedness.

For Reid to state to the world -- to the sworn enemies of peace -- that the war in Iraq is lost (and on the basis of intelligence reports for just one week) is not a sign of strength. It is fearful, ignorant, and unmanly.

Senators represent the people, but Reid’s statement -- and statements and actions by others like him -- is disloyal and a slap in the people’s face. And the people include each devoted member of our armed forces -- Army, Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard, Marines -- serving not just in Iraq but in every outpost in the world. The value of their mottos, particularly Semper Fi, is plainly and dishonorably alien to Reid.

Slap me, and I’ll turn the other cheek. But slap our men and women in uniform and you have stepped way over the line.

Senator Reid said this war is lost. There is only one response that that comes to mind which is succinctly appropriate. As 3rd Rock’s high commander, Dick Solomon, retorted often and with sustained relish:

“No, Harry. You’re WRONG.”

There are houses, and there are houses

2007-04-02T16:58:00.000-07:00

Look over the descriptions of the following two houses and see if you can tell which belongs to the environmentalist.

HOUSE NUMBER 1:

A 20-room mansion (not including 8 bathrooms) heated by natural gas. Add on a pool (and a pool house) and a separate guesthouse all heated by gas. In one month alone this mansion consumes more energy than the average American household in an entire year. The average bill for electricity and natural gas exceeds $2,400.00 per month. In natural gas alone (which last time we checked was a fossil fuel), this property consumes more than 20 times the national average for an American home. This house is not in a northern or mid-west “snow-belt,’ either. It’s in the South.

HOUSE NUMBER 2:

Designed by an architecture professor at a leading national university, this house incorporates every “green” feature current home construction can provide. This house contains only 4,000 square feet (4 bedrooms) and is nestled on arid high prairie in the American southwest. A central closet in the house holds geothermal heat pumps drawing ground water through pipes sunk 300 feet into the ground. The water (usually 67 degrees F.) heats the house in winter and cools it in summer. The system uses no fossil fuels such as oil or natural gas, and it consumes 25% of the electricity required for a conventional heating/cooling system.

Rainwater from the roof is collected and funneled into a 25,000-gallon underground cistern. Wastewater from showers, sinks and toilets goes into underground purifying tanks and into the cistern. The collected water then irrigates the land surrounding the house. Flowers and shrubs native to the area blend the property into the surrounding rural landscape.

HOUSE NUMBER 1 (the 20-room, energy-guzzling mansion) is located outside Nashville, Tennessee. It is the abode of that renowned environmentalist (and filmmaker), Al Gore.

HOUSE NUMBER 2 (a model eco-friendly house) is on a ranch near Crawford, Texas. Also known as “the Texas White House,” it is the private residence of the President of the United States, George W. Bush.

So, whose house is gentler on the environment?

Yet another story you WON'T hear on CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, MSNBC or read about in the New York Times or the Washington Post.

How Many Wounded Marines Would Nancy Pelosi Offer a Ride to?

2007-02-09T11:40:00.000-08:00

A Marine Returns Home in Style
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

HICKAM AIR FORCE BASE, Hawaii, Feb. 9, 2007 - A Marine wounded in Iraq traveled the final leg of his journey back to his unit in style yesterday.

Lance Cpl. Steven Eastburn, a member of 2nd Battalion, 3rd Marines, at Kaneohe Bay, arrived back in Hawaii on an executive jet, after being offered a ride from Travis Air Force Base, Calif., by Marine Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Eastburn was undergoing treatment at Travis for wounds he suffered in Haqlaniyah, Iraq, on Jan. 31.

Pace visited servicemembers at David Grant Medical Center at Travis while his C-40B aircraft was being refueled. Eastburn was at the hospital, and Pace asked the 20-year-old Marine if he would like a ride back to Hawaii. "Of course I said, 'Sure,'" the Marine said.

"This is a big government plane," the chairman said. "We can always make room for one more."

Eastburn was wounded while pulling guard as his squad was setting up an observation post. A sniper shot him through the right arm just above the elbow. "There was a second shot, but he missed," the lance corporal said. "My squad leader came out to get me."

His squad gave him immediate attention then got him to a medevac point. He was flown to Balad Air Base, Iraq; and then Landstuhl, Germany; before going on to Andrews Air Force Base, Md.; and finally to Travis.

At Andrews, Eastburn received a new treatment called a peripheral nerve block. The treatment uses a machine to place a small bit of local anesthetic into the affected area. "It gives the wound a chance to heal without the side effects of morphine or other drugs," said Air Force Dr. (Lt. Col.) Bill Whelan, a flight surgeon traveling with the chairman. "Many people get nauseous due to the side effects of morphine. But with this, Steven is able to eat and gain strength. He's doing well."

Eastburn will be assigned to Tripler Army Medical Center in Hawaii, closer to his unit's home base.

As the jet pulled up to the distinguished visitor area at Hickam, a number of people were there to meet and greet the chairman and his wife, Lynne. Eastburn's parents were also there. The chairman came up the aisle of the plane and told the young lance corporal to "lead everybody off the plane."

"Thanks for the ride, Sir," the lance corporal told Pace. "I won't forget it."

[Web Version: http://www.defenselink.mil/News/NewsArticle.aspx?ID=2988]

Australia Won't Back Down

2007-02-05T09:29:00.000-08:00

This is a reprint of a piece that has been traveling around the Internet for some time, but I wanted to bring it back to everyone's attention, so it can serve as an example of how Americans should maintain our rights against certain peoples who wish to infiltrate, take control and destroy everything we have worked for, and which our forefathers and mothers worked and died for.

"Australia Now!"

Muslims who want to live under Islamic Sharia law were told on Wednesday to get out of Australia, as the government targeted radicals in a bid to head off potential terror attacks. A day after a group of mainstream Muslim leaders pledged loyalty to Australia and her Queen at a special meeting with Prime Minister John Howard, he and his Ministers made it clear that extremists would face a crackdown. Treasurer Peter Costello, seen as heir apparent to Howard, hinted that some radical clerics could be asked to leave the country if they did not accept that Australia was a secular state, and its laws were made by parliament. "If those are not your values, if you want a country which has Sharia law or a theocratic state, then Australia is
not for you", he said on National Television.

"I'd be saying to clerics who are teaching that there are two laws governing people in Australia: one the Australian law and another Islamic law that is false. If you can't agree with parliamentary law, independent courts, democracy, and would prefer Sharia law and have the opportunity to go to another country, which practices it, perhaps, then, that's a better option", Costello said.

Asked whether he meant radical clerics would be forced to leave, he said those with dual citizenship could possibly be asked to move to the other country. Education Minister Brendan Nelson later told reporters that Muslims who did not want to accept local values should "clear off. Basically people who don't want to be Australians, and who don't want, to live by Australian values and understand them, well then, they can basically clear off", he said.

Separately, Howard angered some Australian Muslims on Wednesday by saying he supported spy agencies monitoring the nation's mosques.

Quote: "IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT.

Take It Or Leave It. I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali, we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians."

"However, the dust from the attacks had barely settled when the 'politically correct' crowd began complaining about the possibility that our patriotism was offending others. I am not against immigration, nor do I hold a grudge against anyone who is seeking a better life by coming to Australia." "However, there are a few things that those who have recently come to our country, and apparently some born here, need to understand." "This idea of Australia being a multi-cultural community has served only to dilute our sovereignty and our national identity. And as Australians, we have our own culture, our own society, our own language and our own lifestyle." "This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom"

"We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society .. Learn the language!"

"Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture."

"We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us."

"If the Southern Cross offends you, or you don't like "A Fair Go", then you should seriously consider a move to another part of this planet. We are happy with our culture and have no desire to change, and we really don't care how you did things where you came from. By all means, keep your culture, but do not force it on others.

"This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom, “THE RIGHT TO LEAVE'."

"If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted."

Circulate this amongst ourselves, and American citizens will find the backbone to start speaking and voicing the same truths.

We hold these truths to be self-evident...

2006-12-29T15:55:00.000-08:00

Don't sweat the petty things, and don't pet the sweaty things.

One tequila, two tequila, three tequila, floor.

Once nice thing about egotists: They don't talk about other people.

To be intoxicated is to feel sophisticated but not be able to say it.

Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

The older you get, the better you realize you were.

I doubt, therefore I might be.

Age is a very high price to pay for maturity.

Procrastination is the art of keeping up with yesterday.

Women like silent men; they think they're listening.

Men are from earth. Women are from earth. Deal with it.

Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach him how to fish and he will sit in a boat and drink beer all day.

A fool and his money are soon partying.

ALL THE BEST TO EVERYONE IN THE NEW YEAR!!

"Nuts!"

2006-12-14T15:10:00.000-08:00

On or around December 22, 1944, Brigadier General Anthony McAuliffe, artillery commander of the 101st Airborne Division, sent a one-word response--"Nuts!"--to the surrender ultimatum that was hand-delivered to him by the Germans, whose armored units had completely encircled the American forces at Bastogne.

On December 23, 1776, General George Washington met in secret conclave in Pennsylvania with his staff officers. In that meeting he laid out his plan that they would cross the Delaware River and effect an assault on Trenton, New Jersey, against 1200 Hessian troops that were barracked there—the same troops that had slaughtered a large number of Washington’s soldiers in Brooklyn. Upon hearing this proposal to traverse the ice-bound river on Christmas morning, one officer, General Gates, told Washington in no uncertain terms that the idea was futile and hopeless. He insisted they surrender to the British, who were chasing them, because troop strength of the Continental Army had shrunk to a little over 2,000 from 20,000. Gates also accused the General of being unfit for command—in today’s vernacular: Nuts.

In these particular instances, which coincidentally occurred at Christmastime, defeat appeared undeniable. But defeat underestimated the relentless faith of Generals Washington and McAuliffe, both of whom held strong to a deep-rooted belief that victory would somehow be theirs: As difficult as it must have been, the Delaware River crossing was successful, as was the Continental Army’s assault on the Hessians; and the 101st Airborne retaliated, sending the Germans running back to the Fatherland. The 101st then went on to fight in Bavaria, Austria and the Rhineland.

Events like these are at the apex with some of the finest moments in American history. Such conviction and steadfast devotion to liberty and democracy is the basis of the committed struggle for better and non-violent tomorrows, which is desired and prayed for by Americans and all freedom-starved peoples everywhere.

It is now December 2006, and the rules of engagement have drastically changed. The musket, the BAR (Browning Automatic Rifle) and bayonet have been replaced with nuclear armament, brazen suicide bombers, and terror reprisals threatened against Americans on American soil. At the time of this writing, a news bulletin appeared on the Internet issued by Fox News which read [verbatim]: The FBI has sent a bulletin to state and local law enforcement warning of possible terrorist reprisals as the health of an incarcerated terror mastermind [blind Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman, the alleged architect of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing] fails, FOX News has learned.

America and the free world presently exist in a state of emotional siege, yet spiritually penniless politicians who hold Christmas and American traditions in contempt are pushing for a humiliating withdrawal of our troops from Iraq. Just like General Gates, they want to surrender. Democrats seem to possess a morbid fascination with failure, as long as it’s not their own.

There is universal agreement that war is not a gracious pastime; it is abominable. Today, however, it is a fearful necessity, because the enemy we face and their progeny are dedicated and determined to spill their blood in exchange for the lives of Americans and the devastation of the United States.

Crimes by Islamic terrorists have been carried out in nearly every corner of the globe, and continue each minute of every day. They must be stopped. If not, their random slaughter of innocent people will never end. Quoting the words of Leo Tolstoy: “If we don’t stop them now, the crime will be perpetrated, if not today, then tomorrow.”

If the Democrats are able to cause a pull-out of our troops from Iraq and submit to threats by Iran and others, then General Washington’s resolve and General McAuliffe’s stand of strength, along with every sacrifice by every American from the Revolutionary War to present day to keep America durable and free, will have all been a tragic exercise in futility.

It would be nuts.

Eating Tips for the Holidays

2006-12-14T10:08:00.000-08:00

[Author Unknown]

1. Avoid carrot sticks. Anyone who puts carrots on a holiday buffet table knows nothing of the Christmas spirit. In fact, if you see carrots, leave immediately. Go next door, where they're serving rum balls.

2. Drink as much eggnog as you can and quickly. You can't find it any other time of year but now. So drink up! Who cares that it has 10,000 calories in every sip? It's not as if you're going to turn into an "eggnog-aholic" or something. It's a treat. Enjoy it!!! Have one for me. Have two. It's later than you think. It's Christmas!

3. If something comes with gravy, use it. That's the whole point of gravy. Gravy does not stand-alone. Pour it on. Make a volcano out of your mashed potatoes. Fill it with gravy. Eat the volcano. Repeat.

4. As for mashed potatoes, always ask if they're made with skim milk or whole milk. If it's skim, pass. Why bother? It's like buying a sports car with an automatic transmission.

5. Do not have a snack before going to a party in an effort to control your eating. The whole point of going to a Christmas party is to eat other people's food for free. Lots of it. Hello???

6. Under no circumstances should you exercise between now and New Year's. You can do that in January when you have nothing else to do. This is the time for long naps, which you'll need after circling the buffet table while carrying a 10-pound plate of food and that vat of eggnog.

7. If you come across something really good at a buffet table, like frosted Christmas cookies in the shape and size of Santa, position yourself near them and don't budge. Have as many as you can before becoming the center of attention. They're like a beautiful pair of shoes. If you leave them behind, you're never going to see them again.

8. Same for pies. Apple, pumpkin and mincemeat - have a slice of each. Or, if you don't like mincemeat, have two apples and one pumpkin. Always have three. When else do you get to have more than one dessert?

9. Did someone mention fruitcake? Granted, it's loaded with the mandatory celebratory calories, but avoid it at all cost. I mean, have some standards.

10. One final tip: If you don't feel terrible when you leave the party or get up from the table, you haven't been paying attention. Reread tips: Start over, but hurry. January is just around the corner.

Remember this motto to live by:

"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body. But rather to skid in sideways, chocolate in hand, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO-HOO what a ride!"

MERRY CHRISTMAS!!!

Keith Ellison ... the Koran ... and Fahrenheit 451 Revisited

2006-12-05T15:03:00.000-08:00

By the time the Democratic Congress is finished with their "chores" and high-tail it with their pockets filled with taxpayer money, there will be no religion and no religious books remaining in this country -- either Jewish, Christian, Protestant, Mormon, Evangelical, et al.

The Left are systematically and purposely razoring our national traditions, and using the Constitution as a napkin to wipe their twisted mouths with.

If Democrat Ellison wants to take his oath on the Koran, let him ... as long as it's not in the United States of America. How about Syria? or Iran? I'm sure he'd be welcomed with open arms in either of those countries.

Someone has to put his foot down on this one, because this squirrel is personally weary of seeing so many of our traditions stomped on (i.e., Christmas carols, saying 'Merry Christmas;' school prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance; men and boys not removing their caps at ballgames when our National Anthem is played, etc., etc.). These have all been branded by the Left as "evil" or "unacceptable" or, worse, "un-Constitutional."

The state of affairs is not great right now, but now is not the time to kick ourselves when we're down. Besides, everyone seems to be forgetting that there are those other muslims who have made it their career to kill as many "infidels" (that's you and me, folks) that they possibly can -- specifically, Christians and Jews.

Whoever isn't happy with the way things are run here in America (and God knows, we're far from perfect, but still supremely better than the other nations on this planet), you should just pack up and shove off ... maybe spend a weekend basking in the sun at the Tehran Hilton.

POWs’ Lawsuit Could Force Kerry to Come Clean on Vietnam “War Crimes” Charges

2006-10-20T09:56:00.000-07:00

Reprinted from Newsmax.com

When John Kerry slandered an entire generation of men who fought in Vietnam he branded them as "war criminals." Today, much of the same thing is being said about our young men and women in Iraq.

Now, a lawsuit filed in Philadelphia’s Court of Common Pleas will test the very foundation of Kerry’s anti-war persona for the first time. It isn’t dubious medals or Kerry’s disputed service record in Vietnam that is being called into question. This time Kerry may finally be forced to answer for the events that launched his public career, one that made him an anti-war hero for many American liberals and a turncoat for millions of Vietnam veterans.

The lawsuit (Vietnam Veterans Legacy Foundation, et al. v. Kenneth Campbell, et al.) challenges the basis, the factual accuracy of then Lt. (j.g.) Kerry’s acrimonious testimony before the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1971. It was there Kerry’s public career was catapulted with his now ubiquitous portrayal of American soldiers as murderers, rapists and torturers "who ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam . . . [and] razed villages in a fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan."

For the anti-war, anti-American protesters, the American soldiers are the "terrorists," and the enemies are the victims of a barbaric U.S. military which tortures and murders defenseless civilians.

That false premise, one of the most vicious and enduring smears spawned by Kerry 35 years ago, will also be put to the test once Kerry’s true "Band of Brothers" are put under oath in a Philadelphia courtroom.

The background to this lawsuit is long and complex, but even a condensed version is rich in irony and poetic justice.

It had it roots in 2004 with the documentary Stolen Honor: Wounds that Never Heal. Many may recall the film, although it is probably best known for not being seen, suppressed after Sinclair Broadcasting Company courageously announced it was going to air the documentary in its entirety. Thanks to Kerry and his liberal colleagues in the Senate and their enablers in the mainstream media, Sinclair was browbeaten into withdrawing the film, its broadcast license threatened by a Kerry campaign manager in 2004. The film’s producer, Carlton Sherwood, a Pulitzer Prize and Peabody Award-winning investigative reporter, interviewed former POWs for the documentary.

I was among those whom Sherwood, a decorated Marine combat veteran himself, asked to participate in Stolen Honor. I was a POW for nearly six years, held in North Vietnam prison camps, including the notorious Hanoi Hilton, a place of unimaginable horrors — torture, beatings, starvation and mind-numbing isolation. When Kerry branded us "war criminals," he handed our captors all the justification they needed to carry out their threats to execute us. Thanks to Kerry, Jane Fonda and their comrades in the anti-war movement, our captivity was prolonged by years. The communists in Hanoi and Moscow couldn’t have had a better press agent to spread their anti-American propaganda.

To guarantee Stolen Honor would never be seen by anyone — not even theatre-goers — the producer was slapped with a libel and defamation lawsuit. That lawsuit was filed by a long-time anti-war disciple of the Massachusetts Senator. He was one of Kerry's key war crimes "witnesses," one of several on whom Kerry claims he based his Senate testimony.

The lawsuit put a unique spin on the definition of defamation, claiming that Stolen Honor had damaged the public reputations of himself, Kerry and others by simply quoting their own words and criticisms of America during the Vietnam war!

The POWs and the wives of POWs who participated in Stolen Honor refused to abandon the facts conveyed in the film. For some of us, it was the first time since our release by the Communists in 1973 that we were able to have our voices publicly heard, to tell our stories about the consequences of Kerry’s treachery. In 2005, we formed a nonprofit organization, the Vietnam Veterans Legacy Foundation (VVLF), to gather records, documents and other materials to form a fact-based, educational repository for students and scholars of Vietnam history and to tell the true story of the American soldiers in Vietnam. The VVLF’s mission is "to set the record straight, factually, about Vietnam and those who fought there."

For our efforts, we were promptly sued by two long-time anti-war Kerry followers and VVAW members. It was clear that Kerry not only wanted to punish us for Stolen Honor; he intended to use surrogates to sue us into permanent silence and financial ruin.

Forced to spend huge sums to defend ourselves from these frivolous lawsuits, we have filed a countersuit against these Kerry surrogates and intend to reveal the truth about the lawsuits and their sponsors. We believe that we can prove that the purpose of nearly two years of litigation was to protect John Kerry, to drain us financially and spiritually, and to prevent us from setting the record straight.

At stake is ultimately nothing less than the integrity of the American military in Vietnam, the honor of the men who served their country, the nobility of those who gave their lives, and the truth of America’s history in Vietnam. Until or unless we do correct the existing record, the American military may never be free of the myths and smears of Vietnam, its honor and integrity cleansed as it fights to defend freedom at home and around the world.

Our mission is hardly over. We hope you will join us in fighting this battle . . . for our soldiers, then and now. For more information about Vietnam, the foregoing litigation, or to make a donation, please access the VVLF website now — Go Here Now.

Col. George E. "Bud" Day
Director and President
Vietnam Veterans Legacy Foundation

Col. George E. "Bud" Day, USAF (Ret.,) was a POW in North Vietnam for five years, seven months and 13 days. He served in three wars (WWII, Korea, and Vietnam) and earned the Medal of Honor. He is the Air Force’s most decorated living veteran. He is the Director and President of the Vietnam Veterans Legacy Foundation, Inc., an organization created to better educate and inform the public about the Vietnam War, its events, its history, and the men and women who sacrificed to serve their country. Please go here to read Col. Day’s statement in its entirety.

Americans Do Not Have a Severe Disease

2006-10-17T15:43:00.000-07:00

On July 12th of this year, Claire Shipman of ABC News wrote an article entitled “Gorbachev: Americans Have a Severe Disease.” http://www.abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=2182020&page=1

In it he said, “Do you [America] really think you are smarter than we are?” He went on to say that Americans are arrogant and “…are trying to impose their way of life on other nations.”

Mr. Gorbachev did not state which other nations he referred to. If the former Soviet Union (his own country) is one of those nations, I don’t think I’d be far off base if I were to say, “Yes, America today is smarter than Russia.”

Is it arrogant for me to make such a statement? Marginally. But I believe my response is no more arrogant than the likely utterances of, say, Ramses the Great, or Hannibal, or Alexander, or Queen Elizabeth I, or even Czar Ivan (the Terrible of Holy Russia), all of who bled and drew blood to build, expand, and strengthen empires. Historical archives are stacked to the rafters with the names of such arrogant men and women.

It is fact that no country on Earth is without error or sin, not even America. Many mistakes are made in the formation and growth of a nation. Just as with the raising of a child, no plan is perfect, and neither are all solutions to specific problems ideal. Humans and lands grow and progress by fault. America has grown, prospered and is future-minded; here is where freedom reigns, for now and always. At the same time, unfortunately and shamefully, there are other countries, such as Russia and in the Middle East, who appear to be marching backwards to their primordial origins.

Presently, Russia is in a state of ruin. Doubtless, her citizens—particularly the elderly—would not mind terribly if we would impose our way of life upon them, namely, employment, trade, decent transportation, healthy food (or rather, any decent food); higher education, healthcare, to name only a few. (Granted, our healthcare, political, and industrial systems are overdue for serious restructuring, but, as is, they remain far and away supremely better than what does not exist in Russia today. Insofar as our healthcare is concerned, just ask any of the injured Iraqi children who were brought here by our soldiers and given complimentary medical treatment.)

In the area of benevolence, Mr. Gorbachev should be reminded that, apart from the monetary aid provided by the U.S. Government, aggregate donations from ordinary American citizens like myself topped three-quarters of a billion dollars for the victims and countries devastated by the earthquake and tsunamis of December 2004. Our president ordered the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln and other strike groups deployed to assist, as well as American hospital ships. There were also foreign troops from Singapore, Japan, and Australia. And everywhere, in every country and region affected by that tragedy, were volunteer American private enterprises side by side with other nations’ citizens ministering selflessly to the injured, displaced, and deceased.

Where was Russia on that list? I have researched reports and found only inconsequential data. Yet, Mr. Gorbachev made audacious and outrageous accusations against the United States of America.

Mr. Gorbachev broke bread and brokered for peace and nuclear disarmament with one of our greatest presidents. He took pleasure in our 5-star hospitality, which was offered in friendship and trust. He is, therefore, incautious to suggest Americans suffer from a severe disease. For Mr. Gorbachev to make such a remark is no different than a person opening his home to a friend in sincere amity and later the invited friend badmouths his host.

I am of Russian origin and proud of it. But I do not call myself a Russian-American. I am an American. Period. So when I read such baseless material quoted by someone I once admired, I am discomfited with the fact that he and I hailed from the same, once great nation.

Today there is only one great nation on Earth: America. It is to America I have pledged my complete allegiance. Warts and all, I would never scorn, ridicule or belittle the country that lovingly opened her arms to my family and provided them safe haven from the ravages of World War II.

Before he proffers further idle statements, I would suggest Mr. Gorbachev first look at his own country and peoples, because whatever phantom illness he claims Americans are afflicted with is a trifling compared to the unattended ailments and widespread squalid poverty in which a vast majority of Russians are forced to subsist today. And when those in Russia are blessed with escape from their desolate existence, more often than not their final destination is but one port: America.

Mr. Gorbachev, if it is a disease having the privilege of being an American with the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, then may no scientist ever discover a cure.

Liberals Say They Don't Lie. They Just Don't Report The Truth.

2006-10-16T10:07:00.000-07:00

American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Oct. 15, 2006 - Iraqi security forces and Multinational Division Baghdad soldiers worked together to kill three terrorists and detain 14 suspected terrorists over two days this week.

U.S. soldiers from Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 1st Battalion, 22nd Infantry Regiment, seized a large weapons and munitions cache while conducting a combat patrol west of Baghdad Oct. 11.

The soldiers seized 5,000 13.5 mm armor-piercing rounds, 130 82 mm mortar rounds, four 120 mm mortar rounds, 30 60 mm mortar rounds, five rockets, 28 RPG rounds, five 40 mm high-explosive rounds, 13 grenades, five RPG launchers, five rifles and various bomb-making materials.

An explosive ordnance disposal team performed a controlled detonation of the weapons and munitions.

And, a combined U.S.-Iraqi patrol consisting of U.S. soldiers from the 463rd Military Police Company, 1st Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, and Iraqi policemen engaged an unknown number of terrorists during a firefight in Saab al Bour, north of Baghdad, on Oct. 11. Two suspected terrorists were detained. Iraqi soldiers from 2nd Tank Brigade, 9th Iraqi Army Division, identified the two in custody as the same men who had fired at them on previous days.

Meanwhile, a separate U.S. patrol from 1st BCT observed eight local nationals acting suspiciously and detained them near Boob al Sham, north of Baghdad on Oct. 11. The GIs requested assistance from Company C, 1st Battalion, 66th Armor Regiment, 1st BCT, 4th Infantry Division.

The reinforcements arrived to assist the first patrol and to maintain custody of the detainees. The second patrol returned to their base to question the detainees. All were released except for an Iranian fighter.

And, a combined U.S.-Iraqi patrol from 2nd Tank Brigade, 9th Iraqi Army Division, and 463rd Military Police Company, attached to 1st Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, killed three terrorists and detained one during a firefight in Saab al Bour on Oct. 10.

After receiving small-arms fire, the patrol engaged the terrorists, killing one and wounding several others. The patrol then called for aviation support and continued to press the fight against the enemy forces. U.S. Army AH-64D Apache attack helicopters from 1st Battalion, 4th Aviation Regiment, Combat Aviation Brigade, 4th Infantry Division, responded and engaged two terrorists in an open field.

In a separate incident, U.S. soldiers from 1st Battalion, 17th Infantry Regiment, 172nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team, detained a terrorist cell leader and three of his associates in Adhamiyah Oct. 10.

And U.S. soldiers seized a large munitions cache while conducting a combat patrol northwest of Baghdad, Oct. 10.

The soldiers from Company A, 1st Battalion, 22nd Infantry Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 1st Armored Division, seized 123 rocket-propelled grenade rounds, seven 120 mm mortar rounds, five 20 mm mortar rounds, 41 illumination rounds, a RPG launcher, four boxes of .50-caliber ammunition and various bomb-making materials.

An explosive ordnance disposal team performed a controlled detonation of the munitions.

As of Oct. 11, Iraqi forces and U.S. soldiers had cleared more than 95,000 buildings, 80 mosques and 65 muhallas, detained more than 210 terrorist suspects, seized more than 1,700 weapons, registered more than 750 weapons and found more than 41 weapons caches in support of Operation Together Forward. The combined forces have removed more than 206,393 cubic meters of trash from Baghdad streets.

(Compiled from Multinational Division Baghdad news releases.)

[Web Version: http://www.defenselink.mil/News/NewsArticle.aspx?ID=1611]

Free Schooling For Illegal Immigrants On How To Buy Food Stamps

2006-10-13T11:23:00.000-07:00

There's been a lot of noise in the media lately on the immigration problem that is growing in our country.

For those who are not familiar with what is occurring in the State of California, I attach a link to an October 13 Los Angeles Times report, which proves that the problem is getting way out of hand.

Read it and weep.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-stamp13oct13,1,224178.story?ctra

Pardon Me While I Whip This Out

2006-10-06T12:00:00.000-07:00

Scandals, whether political, sexual, or otherwise, have been a skein of yarn in the overall knitting of the fabric of any country’s social structure.

Here in America, the Democrats of late have been beating their tom-toms and whooping their war chants over incidents involving a fellow named Foley and his alleged electronic misconduct involving a couple of younger fellows.

Sigh.

Backtrack 300 years. Scandals were just as prominent then, and no better or worse. In 1777 there was Conway Cabal’s conspiracy to oust George Washington as commander of the Continental Army. Conway missed by a mile. General Washington was elected the first President of the United States.

By the 1800s, the list of bad boys and girls doing nasty things grew, and kept growing: Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton’s duel. Hamilton lost, by the way. And there was Judge John Pickering’s impeachment by the U.S. Senate for spewing vitriol and obscenities while on the bench and in a state of inebriation. Tammany Hall. Crédit Mobilier of America. The Whiskey Ring. William Belknap, Secretary of War, and the bribes he accepted.

Between 1900 and 1945 were the Newport Sex Scandal and the Teapot Dome Scandal. Things seemed to be tapering off. But the lull was only temporary.

Between 1945 and 1999 the list not only grew, it was impressive. To name only a few:

The 1951 Department of Justice tax scandal ... Robert Mitchum busted and jailed for smoking a marijuana cigarette ... Joe McCarthy ... Billy Sol Estes ... Bobby Baker ... Ingrid Bergman left her husband to be with Roberto Rossellini. (Not a bad thing, actually, because from that union sprouted the magnificent Isabella Rossellini.) ... Adam Clayton Powell, Jr. ... Senator Thomas Dodd ... Justice Abe Fortas ... The Pentagon Papers ... Watergate ... President Gerald Ford’s pardon of Richard Nixon ... The Milk Money Scandal ... “Lancegate” ... “Billygate” ... First Lady Betty Ford admits she’s an addict ... Senator Herman Talmadge ... Abscam ... William Casey ... Iran-Contra ... The Keating Five ... The House Banking Scandal ... Vince Foster’s “suicide ” ... Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich’s financial bad behavior ... Whitewater ... Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky.

Then 2000 rolled around:

Enron ... Trent Lott’s resignation over racial hullaballoos ... Bill Frist's involvement in campaign finance improprieties ... Abu Ghraib ... Tom DeLay ... Janet Jackson's wardrobe "malfunction" ... Sandy Berger removing classified documents, then pleading guilty ... Abramoff-Reed Indian Gambling Scandal ... Mel Gibson (funny thing, Barbara Walters publicly stated that she would never again speak to Mel after his arrest for drunkenness and alleged anti-Jewish remarks. Now we're hearing that Ms. Walters is incensed that it was not she but the classy Diane Sawyer who has nailed a first-since-the-incident interview with Mr. Gibson. Shades of John Kerry: "I voted for it before I voted against it.")

And now, Mark Foley.

On the peccadillo peter meter, Mr. Foley's bugaboo should be rated a measley "2," 10 being the worst. Yet, the Democrats have called for a jihad against him, and at a time when more heinous events have occured in our country, namely the killing of innocent children in their schools. How can the Democrats justify their wailing over a couple of inappropriate e-mails when mothers and fathers have had to bury daughters who had been shot to death in cold blood?

In the grand scheme of things, this, like all other scandals before it, will not cause Earth to crash into the sun, and neither will the crops wither and die. Liberals should accept that this latest tittle-tattle pales in comparison to lean pastrami on rye, which is more tasty and fulfilling. They should also engage in a good game of dodgeball, which they would find more fun and satisfying.

Democrats should expend the same amounts of energy that they've poured over the Foley affairs on convicting, sentencing and executing terrorists who plot and kill innocent Americans, as well as men who kidnap, torture, rape and murder little boys and girls.

I have arrived at the conclusion that it would be best if the Republican Party remain in control, warts and all, to iron out the kinks, mend the rips and tears, and resolve the problems they have created. It's either them or the whimpering, simpering Left who have accomplished little or nothing other than bang their gongs at a time when respectful silence should have been the order of the day.

I'm now anxious to hear what the Left have to say -- if they could take a break from marinating in their own testosterone -- about North Korea's detonation of an underground nuclear device. This is something to lose sleep over. Not Mark Foley.

2008 Democratic Convention Agenda

2006-10-05T14:59:00.000-07:00

6:00 p.m. - Opening flag burning ceremony
6:05 p.m. - Opening secular prayers by Rev. Jesse Jackson and Rev. Al Sharpton
6:30 p.m. - Anti-war concert by Barbra Streisand
6:40 p.m. - Ted Kennedy proposes a toast

7:00 p.m. - Tribute theme to France
7:10 p.m. - Collect offerings for al-Zawahri defense fund
7:25 p.m. - Tribute theme to Germany
7:40 p.m. - Ted Kennedy proposes a toast
7:45 p.m. - Anti-war rally (Moderated by Michael Moore)

8:25 p.m. - Ted Kennedy proposes a toast
8:30 p.m. - Terrorist appeasement workshop
9:00 p.m. - Gay marriage ceremony (both male and female couples) (Formal Attire Optional)
9:30 p.m. - *Intermission*

10:00 p.m. - Posting the Iraqi Colors by Sean Penn and Tim Robbins
10:10 p.m. - Re-enactment of Kerry's fake medal toss
10:20 p.m. - Cameo by Howard 'Yeeearrrrrrrg!' Dean
10:30 p.m. - Abortion demonstration by N.A.R.A.L.
10:40 p.m. - Ted Kennedy proposes a toast and late night swim
10:50 p.m. - Pledge of allegiance to the U.N.

11:00 p.m. - Multiple gay marriage ceremony (threesomes, mixed and same sex) Rep. Barney Frank (D, Mass.), Sponsor (Formal Attire Optional)
11:15 p.m. - Maximizing Welfare workshop
11:30 p.m. - 'Free Saddam' pep rally
11:59 p.m. - Ted Kennedy proposes a toast

12:00 p.m. - Nomination of democratic candidate

P.S. Any chance anyone could get Ted Kennedy to drive Hillary home from the convention?

Our War Against the Death Worshipers

2006-09-26T12:15:00.000-07:00

Recently, a friend sent me an e-mail which I found disturbing. It's been circulated around the world, and it reveals a forced sickness within the Islamic faith, a faith which, as I understand it, was borne out of love, brotherhood and peace, but which has been exploited to the detriment of peace-loving Muslims, and possibly the human race.

I refer to "Suicide Killers" by documentary French filmmaker Pierre Rehov. http://www.pierrerehov.com

On July 15, 2005, Mr. Rehov appeared on MSNBC's "Connected" program, and discussed the London terrorist attacks that occurred there on July 7, 2005. The following is a text of that interview. Mr. Rehov provides us with a full picture of the individuals and mindsets we are battling.

"Suicide Killers" is based on interviews that he conducted with the families of suicide bombers and would-be bombers in an attempt to find out why they do what they do.

Q - What inspired you to produce "Suicide Killers," your seventh film?

A - I started working with victims of suicide attacks to make a film on PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) when I became fascinated with the personalities of those who had committed those crimes, as they were described again and again by their victims. Especially the fact that suicide bombers are all smiling one second before they blow themselves up.

Q - Why is this film especially important?

A - People don't understand the devastating culture behind this unbelievable phenomenon. My film is not politically correct because it addresses the real problem, showing the real face of Islam. It points the finger against a culture of hatred in which the uneducated are brainwashed to a level where their only solution in life becomes to kill themselves and kill others in the name of a God whose word, as transmitted by other men, has become their only certitude.

Q - What insights did you gain from making this film? What do you know that other experts do not know?

A - I came to the conclusion that we are facing a neurosis at the level of an entire civilization. Most neuroses have in common a dramatic event, generally linked to an unacceptable sexual behavior. In this case, we are talking of kids living all their lives in pure frustration, with no opportunity to experience sex, love, tenderness or even understanding from the opposite sex. The separation between men and women in Islam is absolute. So is contempt toward women, who are totally dominated by men. This leads to a situation of pure anxiety, in which normal behavior is not possible. It is no coincidence that suicide killers are mostly young men dominated subconsciously by an overwhelming libido that they not only cannot satisfy but are afraid of, as if it is the work of the devil.

Since Islam describes heaven as a place where everything on Earth will finally be allowed, and promises 72 virgins to those frustrated kids, killing others and killing themselves to reach this redemption becomes their only solution.

Q - What was it like to interview would-be suicide bombers, their families and survivors of suicide bombings?

A - It was a fascinating and a terrifying experience. You are dealing with seemingly normal people with very nice manners who have their own logic, which to a certain extent can make sense since they are so convinced that what they say is true. It is like dealing with pure craziness, like interviewing people in an asylum, since what they say, is for them, the absolute truth. I hear a mother saying "Thank God, my son is dead." Her son had became a shaheed, a martyr, which for her was a greater source of pride than if he had became an engineer, a doctor or a winner of the Nobel Prize.

This system of values works completely backwards since their interpretation of Islam worships death much more than life. You are facing people whose only dream, only achievement goal is to fulfill what they believe to be their destiny, namely to be a Shaheed or the family of a shaheed.

They don't see the innocent being killed, they only see the impure that they have to destroy.

Q - You say suicide bombers experience a moment of absolute power, beyond punishment. Is death the ultimate power?

A - Not death as an end, but death as a door opener to the after life. They are seeking the reward that God has promised them. They work for God, the ultimate authority, above all human laws. They therefore experience this single delusional second of absolute power, where nothing bad can ever happen to them, since they become God's sword.

Q - Is there a suicide bomber personality profile? Describe the psychopathology.

A - Generally kids between 15 and 25 bearing a lot of complexes, generally inferiority complexes. They must have been fed with religion. They usually have a lack of developed personality. Usually they are impressionable idealists. In the western world they would easily have become drug addicts, but not criminals. Interestingly, they are not criminals since they don't see good and evil the same way that we do. If they had been raised in an Occidental culture, they would have hated violence. But they constantly battle against their own death anxiety. The only solution to this deep-seated pathology is to be willing to die and be rewarded in the afterlife in Paradise.

Q - Are suicide bombers principally motivated by religious conviction?

A - Yes, it is their only conviction. They don't act to gain a territory or to find freedom or even dignity. They only follow Allah, the supreme judge, and what He tells them to do.

Q - Do all Muslims interpret jihad and martyrdom in the same way?

A - All Muslim believers believe that, ultimately, Islam will prevail on earth. They believe this is the only true religion and there is no room, in their mind, for interpretation. The main difference between moderate Muslims and extremists is that moderate Muslims don't think they will see the absolute victory of Islam during their lifetime, therefore they respect other beliefs. The extremists believe that the fulfillment of the Prophecy of Islam and ruling the entire world as described in the Koran, is for today. Each victory of Bin Laden convinces 20 million moderate Muslims to become extremists.

Q - Describe the culture that manufactures suicide bombers.

A - Oppression, lack of freedom, brain washing, organized poverty, placing God in charge of daily life, total separation between men and women, forbidding sex, giving women no power whatsoever, and placing men in charge of family honor, which is mainly connected to their women's behavior.

Q - What socio-economic forces support the perpetuation of suicide bombings?

A - Muslim charity is usually a cover for supporting terrorist organizations. But one has also to look at countries like Pakistan , Saudi Arabia and Iran, which are also supporting the same organizations through different networks. The ironic thing in the case of Palestinian suicide bombers is that most of the money comes through financial support from the Occidental world, donated to a culture that utterly hates and rejects the West (mainly symbolized by Israel).

Q - Is there a financial support network for the families of the suicide bombers?

A - There used to be a financial incentive in the days of Saddam Hussein ($25,000 per family) and Yasser Arafat (smaller amounts), but these days are gone. It is a mistake to believe that these families would sacrifice their children for money. Although, the children themselves who are very attached to their families, might find in this financial support another reason to become suicide bombers. It is like buying a life insurance policy and then committing suicide.

Q - Why are so many suicide bombers young men?

A - As discussed above, libido is paramount. Also ego, because this is a sure way to become a hero. The shaheeds are the cowboys or the firemen of Islam. Shaheed is a positively reinforced value in this culture. And what kid has never dreamed of becoming a cowboy or a fireman?

Q - What role does the U.N. play in the terrorist equation?

A - The U.N. is in the hands of Arab countries and third world or ex-communist countries. Their hands are tied. The U.N. has condemned Israel more than any other country in the world, including the regime of Castro, Idi Amin or Kaddahfi. By behaving this way, the U.N. leaves a door open by not openly condemning terrorist organizations. In addition, through UNRWA, the U.N. is directly tied to terror organizations such as Hamas, representing 65 percent of their apparatus in the so-called Palestinian refugee camps. As a support to Arab countries, the U.N. has maintained Palestinians in camps with the hope to "return" into Israel for more than 50 years, therefore making it impossible to settle those populations, which still live in deplorable conditions. Four hundred million dollars are spent every year, mainly financed by U.S. taxes, to support 23,000 employees of UNRWA, many of whom belong to terrorist organizations (see Congressman Eric Cantor on this subject, and in my film "Hostages of Hatred").

Q - You say that a suicide bomber is a 'stupid bomb and a smart bomb' simultaneously. Explain what you mean.

A - Unlike an electronic device, a suicide killer has until the last second the capacity to change his mind. In reality, he is nothing but a platform representing interests which are not his, but he doesn't know it.

Q - How can we put an end to the madness of suicide bombings and terrorism in general?

A - Stop being politically correct and stop believing that this culture is a victim of ours. Radical Islamism today is nothing but a new form of Naziism. Nobody was trying to justify or excuse Hitler in the 1930s. We had to defeat him in order to make peace one day with the German people.

Q - Are these men traveling outside their native areas in large numbers? Based on your research, would you predict that we are beginning to see a new wave of suicide bombings outside the Middle East?

A - Every successful terror attack is considered a victory by the radical Islamists. Everywhere Islam expands there is regional conflict. Right now, there are thousands of candidates for martyrdom lining up in training camps in Bosnia , Afghanistan and Pakistan . Inside Europe , hundreds of illegal mosques are preparing the next step of brain washing to lost young men who cannot find a satisfying identity in the Occidental world. Israel is much more prepared for this than the rest of the world will ever be. Yes, there will be more suicide killings in Europe and the U.S.

Sadly, this is only the beginning.

Comment by Moose and Squirrel: I think it's time for the Liberals and Democrats to quit referring to these lunatics as "insurgents," and to also quit taking their side against the United States of America. Don't you?