BeeJiggity

CONSERVATIVES VS. MODERATES-response to a post

2008-11-21T21:24:00.006-06:00

Response to :My Advice 2 Tha GOP.

Great views on many subjects, but I must object in a few areas.

Abortion has been compared to slavery as a noble cause on which to found a movement. For the GOP to abandon the unborn would be as pragmatic as having told Lincoln that if he would just step aside so that the nomination could be carried by a free market individualist who believed in "slave choice" for states the "the party may well be over."

You are correct that when times get tough, the conservatives get the boot. The reason for this is that tough times beg for a quick fix solution, and big government is the easy answer. That is why Mr. Compassion (W.) threw up what he thought was a $700B quick fix. Now a month later we see that half of the cash is being held by banks forced to take it, and the other half hasn't even been designated for a destination.

The solution to the loss of the conservative is not to give up the wing nuts. It is to more effectively spread the message. If more people understood that the bailout plan was not enough to help and could only be used to grow government then the plan would never have been passed. If that plan was passed during a presidential election and the message was already effectively spread, then the conservative candidate (which we did not have this time around) would have been able to explain the difference between big government Bush, and bigger government Obama. The public would have seen the truth, and we would have averted the train wreck we are barreling toward today.

We are in a fight right now between strict conservatives, and moderates, and I think the answer has to simply be that as strict conservatives, we must lead by selling the vision. Today that vision includes a rejection of the concept of an entity being "too big to fail." There is no such thing as that. The actual dinosaurs are all dead, and that made way for us mammals. Sometimes the structures in place are not the structures that should be in place. Chrysler was bailed out nearly 30 years ago, and thought they have paid back their loans, they are in the same position again. We did not help today's employees by providing a temporary job when they could have been in position to learn new skills 25 years ago.

As to the local issues in GA, I can tell you that there ain't no GOP'sters in Cook County with an ounce of clout, and we get whupt here too. Surely you know about the 20+ death row inmates exonerated for the crimes of which they were accused? That was all done by Democrats. The arresting cops, to the judges, to the D.A. to the appellate judges, to the Mayor and their own defense attorneys, and that truth doesn't turn us away from the damn Dems, does it? No.

The point in that area is that there will always be rouges associated with any political party, but we have to be sure to refer to the actual ideas of the party to attract others of us.

Whitewash discussion

2008-11-21T20:43:00.001-06:00

"Anyone who has traveled to the Far East knows that the mingling of Asiatic blood with European or American blood produces, in nine cases out of ten, the most unfortunate results. . . .
...
The Japanese people and the American people are both opposed to intermarriage of the two races--there can be no quarrel there."

--Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1925
President, 1933-45

At a time when we are being sold a line about the second coming of FDR we need to commit to more scrutiny of the original FDR. Was he the savior of a nation or was he the man who ushered in the weakening of individual responsibility by creating the illusion of what is often known as a government "safety net?"

Did he lead us from the great depression, or did he extend that depression by stifling the growth of private industry? It seems that there is no question he lead us through WWII with wisdom, courage, and valiance and should never be tarnished for those efforts, but his domestic policy must now be revisited; not for reasons of partisanship, but to insure that the options ahead of us today will foster growth of the private sector and prevention of more bloating on part of the federal blob.

Oh, and he was a racist too, huh?

I like it around here already...

Same-O, Lame-O-bama, lama, Ding Dong.

2008-11-21T16:20:00.003-06:00

Rahm Emanuel, Chief of Staff (Clinton Retread)
Eric Holder, Attorney General (Clinton Retread)
Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State (literal Clinton)
Robert Gates, Secretary of Defense (CURRENT BUSH OFFICIAL!!!)

At first I thought Obama was making safe, unassailable choices. Good centerist idea. Now I'm thinking that he can't really be about change with these people around. They are the same as yesteryear.

This is an example of why I didn't trust his brand of "change" in the first place. We don't really know about policy yet, but the people he is putting in place seem to be protectors of the status quo.

The selection of Gates is not yet confirmed, but would mean that GWB the idiot apparently did something right. I already knew that.

Bush didn't lie. Dem's ignored their eyes.

2008-06-11T11:15:00.009-05:00

For years the opposition has cried for hearings and investigations into the lies leading up to the overthrow of Iraq in 2003. Finally they get their way and it seems that there is nothing to show. In this article by by Fred Hiatt in the Washington Post, we see that the real lies are the ones told by members of Congress with access to classified files. They were lies of omission. They seem to have forgotten that they saw everytihing the Bush Administration saw. And agreed with the analysis.

The pithy catchphrase of 2004, "Bush Lied, People Died" is easy to remember. It also serves as a good substitute for thinking. Who said Fox News was the best in propaganda?

From the Washington Post:

'Bush Lied'? If Only It Were That Simple.
By Fred HiattMonday, June 9, 2008; A17

Search the Internet for "Bush Lied" products, and you will find
sites that offer more than a thousand designs. The basic "Bush Lied, People
Died" bumper sticker is only the beginning.

Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), chairman of the Select Committee on Intelligence, set out to provide the official foundation for what has become not only a thriving business but, more important, an article of faith among millions of Americans. And in releasing a committee report Thursday, he claimed to have accomplished his mission, though he did not use the L-word.
"In making the case for war, the administration repeatedly presented intelligence as fact when it was unsubstantiated, contradicted or even nonexistent," he said. There's no question that the administration, and particularly Vice President Cheney, spoke with too much certainty at times and failed to anticipate or prepare the American people for the enormous undertaking in Iraq.
But dive into Rockefeller's report, in search of where exactly President Bush lied about what his intelligence agencies were telling him about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein, and you may be surprised by what you find.
On Iraq's nuclear weapons program? The president's statements "were generally
substantiated by intelligence community estimates."
On biological weapons, production capability and those infamous mobile laboratories? The president's statements "were substantiated by intelligence information."

On chemical weapons, then? "Substantiated by intelligence information."
On weapons of mass destruction overall (a separate section of the intelligence committee report)? "Generally substantiated by intelligence information." Delivery
vehicles such as ballistic missiles? "Generally substantiated by available intelligence." Unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to deliver WMDs? "Generally substantiated by intelligence information."
As you read through the report, you begin to think maybe you've mistakenly picked up the minority dissent. But, no, this is the Rockefeller indictment. So, you think, the smoking gun must appear in the section on Bush's claims about Saddam Hussein's alleged ties to terrorism.
But statements regarding Iraq's support for terrorist groups other than al-Qaeda "were substantiated by intelligence information." Statements that Iraq provided safe haven for Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and other terrorists with ties to al-Qaeda "were substantiated by the intelligence assessments," and statements regarding Iraq's contacts with al-Qaeda "were substantiated by intelligence information." The report is left to complain about "implications" and statements that "left the impression" that those contacts led to substantive Iraqi cooperation.
In the report's final section, the committee takes issue with Bush's statements about Saddam Hussein's intentions and what the future might have held. But was that really a question of misrepresenting intelligence, or was it a question of judgment that politicians are expected to make?
After all, it was not Bush, but Rockefeller, who said in October 2002: "There has been some debate over how 'imminent' a threat Iraq poses. I do believe Iraq poses an imminent threat. I also believe after September 11, that question is increasingly outdated. . . . To insist on further evidence could put some of our fellow Americans at risk. Can we afford to take that chance? I do not think we can."
Rockefeller was reminded of that statement by the committee's vice chairman, Sen. Christopher S. Bond (R-Mo.), who with three other Republican senators filed a minority dissent that includes many other such statements from Democratic senators who had access to the intelligence reports that Bush read. The dissenters assert that they were cut out of the report's preparation, allowing for a great deal of skewing and partisanship, but that even so, "the reports essentially validate what we have been saying all along: that policymakers' statements were substantiated by the intelligence."
Why does it matter, at this late date? The Rockefeller report will not cause a spike in
"Bush Lied" mug sales, and the Bond dissent will not lead anyone to scrape the
"Bush Lied" bumper sticker off his or her car.
But the phony "Bush lied" story line distracts from the biggest prewar failure: the fact that so much of the intelligence upon which Bush and Rockefeller and everyone else relied turned out to be tragically, catastrophically wrong.
And it trivializes a double dilemma that President Bill Clinton faced before Bush and that President Obama or McCain may well face after: when to act on a threat in the
inevitable absence of perfect intelligence and how to mobilize popular support
for such action, if deemed essential for national security, in a democracy that
will always, and rightly, be reluctant.
For the next president, it may be Iran's nuclear program, or al-Qaeda sanctuaries in Pakistan, or, more likely, some potential horror that today no one even imagines. When that time comes, there will be plenty of warnings to heed from the Iraq experience, without theneed to fictionalize more.

If Tax revenue =19% of GDP Increase GDP for More Revenue

2008-05-23T16:51:00.007-05:00

A Wall Street Journal article by Economic researcher David Ranson explains that since 1950 no matter what the tax rate, the revenue collected will be about 19.5% of the GDP. This has held true for 60 years. The issue is that since rich people are experts at making money work, and since rich people don't like to pay taxes, when the taxes go up, they figure out ways to keep from paying taxes. This often includes making less money so they can keep what they earn.

This lends support to the concept that lower taxes for the rich (not everyone, just the experts) creates a better economy for everyone. Interesting.

Let my Resources go!

2008-03-20T09:57:00.006-05:00

In a column published by the Miami Herald today, activist Gal Luft outlines the effects of our continued oil dependence. His prescription is to have Congress mandate flex fuel at a manufacturer cost of $100 per car. I am not sure whether I trust his math, or his insistence on new government mandates, because if the solution is that cheap, why not convert current autos to support flex fuel? Of course I'll await an answer. I'd put $1000 into my car to support US independence, and lower my gas cost.

Until that answer comes, I would say:

While our dependency on oil is cramping our economic style, we must also concede that we have brought this upon ourselves by bowing to those who claim to be protectors of "the environment."

These self appointed protectors along with their elected official followers have prevented us from lowering the cost of gas by restricting our supply of gas. This has happened in 3 crippling ways.

First there is an uncalculated supply of oil off of the costs of Florida, Texas and California. There is also the well publicized supply available in the Alaskan Wildlife Reserve. We have been blocked from getting it. The reasons offered are not acceptable when gas is over $3.00 a gallon.

Second, once the oil is harvested it must be refined, and unreasonable regulations have stood as a roadblock to building new refineries for a quarter of a century.

Third, alternative energy has been blocked by similar unreasonable legislation. When other industrialized nations can depend on nuclear power for more than 75% of their needs, we have surely hobbled ourselves by waiting to build new reactors.

These factors have added to the opportunity seen by by competing nations to weaken us in ways which go far beyond the price we pay at the pump. Move these obstacles, and we will still have years to suffer, but we will at least allow ourselves a certain and proven outlet.

What else is there to say.?

I want to blog more often

2008-03-11T22:33:00.006-05:00

It has 3/4 of a year since I last wrote anything on this blog. I haven't carved out the time to publish my thoughts, and the rest of the world doesn't really seem to care. No, I'm not really surprised, but I do have fun looking back at the things I wrote so many months ago. That was part of the reason I started this thing. The other reason was to offer a wide array of my ideas so that I could direct others to the site when the question came up about what I think. (Yeah, Bee, how often does that happen..? )

I can't say that I disagree with much from last year. I mean now that the guy at the lead of the failed immigration policy is leading the Gopsters to the November election, it is comforting to be able to remind myself exactly what it was that I didn't like about that proposal last year. This means I really have to review my assessment of Sen. McCain. Lately I have been thinking that he would be the best of two evils when paired against Obama or Hillary. In my deepest understanding, that is probably still the case, but if he can make mistakes as dramatic as that immigration bill, do I really want to push him toward the presidency? Again the answer must be to defend against the most pain, and I think he will probably offer us the least pain.

What Michael Moore left on the cutting room floor

2007-06-27T16:26:00.000-05:00

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-oped0626sickojun26,0,7362264,print.story?coll=chi-newsopinioncommentary-hed

By Helen Evans, director of Nurses for Reform, a pan-European network of nurses dedicated to consumer-oriented reform of European health-care systems

June 26, 2007

Michael Moore's denunciation of America's health-care system is about to hit the silver screen. In the film's trailer, a desk attendant at a British hospital smiles while explaining that in Britain's National Health Service, "everything is free." But for free hospital care, Britons pay an awfully high price.

Just ask the nearly 1 million British patients on waiting lists for treatment. Or the 200,000 Britons currently waiting merely to get on NHS waiting lists. Mr. Moore must have missed those folks.

Curiously, though, many American policymakers seem to think that a government-managed, NHS-style system is the answer to all of America's health-care woes. Before heading down that road, however, America's leaders ought to actually investigate Britain's experience with state-sponsored medical care.

Upon launching its state health service in 1948, the British government promised that it would provide its citizens with all the "medical, dental and nursing care" needed, so that "everyone -- rich or poor -- [could] use it." To make good on its plans, the government nationalized more than 3,000 independent hospitals, clinics and care homes.

But today, after nearly six decades of attempting to make socialized medicine work, the NHS is in a perilous state.

Consider waiting lists. Across Britain, patients wait years for routine -- or even emergency -- treatments. And many die while waiting.

Indeed, the NHS cancels around 100,000 operations because of shortages each year. In a growing number of communities, it is increasingly difficult for people to simply get an appointment with an NHS general practitioner for a regular checkup.

Further, when it comes to keeping patients healthy, NHS hospitals are notoriously unfit. After admittance to state hospitals, more than 10 percent of patients contract infections and illnesses that they did not have prior to arrival. And according to the Malnutrition Advisory Group, up to 60 percent of NHS patients are undernourished during inpatient stays.

Consequently, many Britons have turned to outside practitioners for treatment, and the private health-care market has boomed. Today, more than 6.5 million people have private medical insurance, 6 million have cash plans, 8 million pay out-of-pocket for a range of complimentary therapies, and 250,000 self-fund each year for private surgery. Millions more opt for private dentistry, ophthalmics and long-term care.

Meanwhile, despite the state's continued claims that it can deliver quality health care to all, government ministers are increasingly willing to quietly outsource health care to the private sector. In other words, instead of directly providing health care through the NHS, the British government is shifting to simply paying the bills.

In 2000, Tony Blair's government authorized the treatment of state-funded patients in private hospitals for the first time. More recently, the government has made it clear that it would like all NHS hospitals to be recast as Independent Foundation Trusts able to attract private investment.

But even with these efforts, the British government has found it hard to cover its expensive obligations. So in addition to waiting lists, substandard care and increased outsourcing, the government has adopted outright rationing to control costs.

Through a concept called "Health Technology Assessments," the United Kingdom now empowers government-appointed experts to dictate which drugs, procedures and treatments are available for public consumption. Charged with controlling costs and watching the bottom line, these bureaucrats are expected to save money -- not lives.

Already, this system has barred the purchase of Herceptin, a lifesaving breast-cancer drug. Alzheimer's patients have had trouble obtaining Aricept, a drug that improves cognition in those afflicted with the degenerative disease.

The criteria for these denials of care are kept from the public. And patients who could be saved needlessly die.

Rationing, as history proves time and again, is always a recipe for horror.

The U.S. health-care system certainly has its shortfalls. But the solution to America's woes can't be found in the U.K. -- no matter how many movie tickets Mr. Moore sells.

----------

Helen Evans is director of Nurses for Reform, a pan-European network of nurses dedicated to consumer-oriented reform of European health-care systems.

George E. Curry Wants Amnesty---Too Bad

2007-06-21T09:35:00.000-05:00

TO: George Curry
FROM: BeeJiggity
RE: Running a numbers game on Black America

No sir, given my unique history as the descendant of Africans who were kidnapped, enslaved, tortured and denied citizenship in the greatest nation on this earth I expect that anyone choosing to come here, at least follow the rules in place in order to become citizens. I don't expect trespassers to be given free reign to do jobs that my brothers and sisters did very well 15 years ago; do those jobs being paid under the table at an illegal rate of pay; expect the rights and privileges of actual citizens who either followed the rules at a financial and emotional cost, or fought for citizenship rights which are still in question.

Citizenship for them without returning to their country of origin paying fees, waiting for processing, and risking denial is unacceptable.

Work visas maybe.
Civil rights, maybe.
Come out from the shadows, maybe.

Staying here and being citizens, voting, serving on juries, holding elected office, coming and going without scrutiny? No.

The Meeting to Plan 9/11 via Loose Brains

2007-05-02T16:01:00.000-05:00

Thank you Atlas!

Matt Taibbi wrote an amusing satirical blurb in Rolling Stone about what he imagined the 9/11 planning session looked like...

BUSH: So, what's the plan again?

CHENEY: Well, we need to invade Iraq and Afghanistan. So what we've decided to do is crash a whole bunch of remote-controlled planes into Wall Street and the Pentagon, say they're real hijacked commercial planes, and blame it on the towelheads; then we'll just blow up the buildings ourselves to make sure they actually fall down.

RUMSFELD: Right! And we'll make sure that some of the hijackers are agents of Saddam Hussein! That way we'll have no problem getting the public to buy the invasion.

CHENEY: No, Don, we won't.

RUMSFELD: We won't?

CHENEY: No, that's too obvious. We'll make the hijackers Al Qaeda and then just imply a connection to Iraq.

RUMSFELD: But if we're just making up the whole thing, why not just put Saddam's fingerprints on the attack?

CHENEY: (sighing) It just has to be this way, Don. Ups the ante, as it were. This way, we're not insulated if things go wrong in Iraq. Gives us incentive to get the invasion right the first time around.

BUSH: I'm a total idiot who can barely read, so I'll buy that. But I've got a question. Why do we need to crash planes into the Towers at all? Since everyone knows terrorists already tried to blow up that building complex from the ground up once, why don't we just blow it up like we plan to anyway, and blame the bombs on the terrorists?

RUMSFELD: Mr. President, you don't understand. It's much better to sneak into the buildings ourselves in the days before the attacks, plant the bombs and then make it look like it was exploding planes that brought the buildings down. That way, we involve more people in the plot, stand a much greater chance of being exposed and needlessly complicate everything!

CHENEY: Of course, just toppling the Twin Towers will never be enough. No one would give us the war mandate we need if we just blow up the Towers. Clearly, we also need to shoot a missile at a small corner of the Pentagon to create a mightily underpublicized additional symbol of international terrorism -- and then, obviously, we need to fake a plane crash in the middle of farking nowhere in rural Pennsylvania.

RUMSFELD: Yeah, it goes without saying that the level of public outrage will not be sufficient without that crash in the middle of farking nowhere.

CHENEY: And the Pentagon crash -- we'll have to do it in broad daylight and say it was a plane, even though it'll really be a cruise missile.

BUSH: Wait, why do we have to use a missile?

CHENEY: Because it's much easier to shoot a missile and say it was a plane. It's not easy to steer a real passenger plane into the Pentagon. Planes are hard to come by.

BUSH: But aren't we using two planes for the Twin Towers?

CHENEY: Mr. President, you're missing the point. With the Pentagon, we use a missile, and say it was a plane.

BUSH: Right, but I'm saying, why don't we just use a plane and say it was a plane? We'll be doing that with the Twin Towers, right?

CHENEY: Right, but in this case, we use a missile. (Throws hands up in frustration) Don, can you help me out here?

RUMSFELD: Mr. President, in Washington, we use a missile because it's sneakier that way. Using an actual plane would be too obvious, even though we'll be doing just that in New York.

BUSH: Oh, OK.

RUMSFELD: The other good thing about saying that it was a passenger jet is that that way, we have to invent a few hundred fictional victims and account for a nonexistent missing crew and plane. It's always better when you leave more cover story to invent, more legwork to do and more possible holes to investigate. Doubt, legwork and possible exposure -- you can't pull off any good conspiracy without them.

BUSH: You guys are brilliant! Because if there's one thing about Americans -- they won't let a president go to war without a damn good reason. How could we ever get the media, the corporate world and our military to endorse an invasion of a secular Iraqi state unless we faked an attack against New York at the hands of a bunch of Saudi religious radicals? Why, they'd never buy it. Look at how hard it was to get us into Vietnam, Iraq the last time, Kosovo?

CHENEY: Like pulling teeth!

RUMSFELD: Well, I'm sold on the idea. Let's call the Joint Chiefs, the FAA, the New York and Washington, D.C., fire departments, Rudy Giuliani, all three networks, the families of a thousand fictional airline victims, MI5, the FBI, FEMA, the NYPD, Larry Eagleburger, Osama bin Laden, Noam Chomsky and the fifty thousand other people we'll need to pull this off. There isn't a moment to lose!

BUSH: Don't forget to call all of those Wall Street hotshots who donated $100 million to our last campaign. They'll be thrilled to know that we'll be targeting them for execution as part of our thousand-tentacled modern-day bonehead Reichstag scheme! After all, if we're going to make martyrs -- why not make them out of our campaign paymasters? shiat, didn't the Merrill Lynch guys say they needed a refurbishing in their New York offices?

RUMSFELD: Oh, they'll get a refurbishing, all right. Just in time for the "Big Wedding"!

ALL THREE: (cackling) Mwah-hah-hah!

Cornell West Really Sucks.

2007-03-14T12:32:00.000-05:00

At a leftist conference he is asked what it means to be a leftist in the 21st century. (Full answer.) He comes up with a disconnected ranting stream of consciousness that takes us back to the white slaves of 1690.

Take this selection of drivel and laugh. Then tell me what he just said, and how it is that we consider him one of our foremost leaders of thought?

I’m saying, in part, that at least for me to be a leftist these days, in the way in which -- and I take very seriously Antonio Gramsci’s concern about the historical specificity of the emergeous sustenance and development and subsequent define of the American Empire.

And when you actually look closely at that empire, it seems to me what we have to come to terms with is the fundamental role of corporate greed, religious ideologies, white supremacy, the fundamental rule of the popular culture, youth, and acknowledge that anytime you're talking about white supremacy, you’re always already in some ways talking about the treatment of black women.

And if you're concerned about the treatment of black women, you ought to be concerned about the treatment of women across the board.

So the vicious ideologies, the patriarchy, come in. And the same thing would be true for the James Baldwins and the Audre Lordes, the gay brothers and the lesbian sisters. Now, where does that leave us? Well, for me -- and you all know about the Covenant movement of Tavis Smiley, the book that was launched last year, went number one in the New York Times. We sold 400,000 copies within nine months, not reviewed by the New York Times, not touched by the Today Show. Even Oprah wouldn’t breathe on it. And she can breathe on books and sell half a million these days, you know that?

We just ask Sidney Poitier and Brother Elie Wiesel for that. But this book went underground.
Why? Because Tavis Smiley knows that in an American culture that is so thoroughly commodified, driven by corporate greed, thoroughly commercialized, driven by corporate greed, thoroughly marketized, driven by corporate greed, you have to be able to communicate in such a way that you might be able then to shake people from their sleepwalking, which he's done every year now on C-SPAN, and uses his position in order to raise issues of right to healthcare, community-based policing so you can deal with some of this police brutality, especially in black and brown communities of proletarian and lumpenproletarian character, and so forth.

*HUH?*
Are you telling me, now that based on public speaking abilities that President Bush is dumb? Cornell is certainly dumber.

To be Popular or Smart...?

2007-03-05T20:24:00.000-06:00

To me the question is simple. It is one all teenagers have to ask, and anyone with any wisdom has already made the right decision.

According to worldwide popular opinion (which means NOTHING) the US has decide on the latter.

A BBC Survey of 28,000 people has found that the US is a little bit more popular than Iran, a bit less popular than North Korea, and a good bit less liked than Israel.

The article correctly analyzes that nations with significant military power are found to be unpopular by this sample of people. What neither the analysis, nor the people seem to understand is that there is a grand difference between the power held by Israel and the US, as compared to the power held by North Korea or Iran. Anyone who needs an explanation either doesn't keep up with world affairs, or is playing equivelancy games by pretending the military power of the US is held at the expense of the starvation of our citizens.

Not true.

Here's the article:

LONDON (AP) - Israel, Iran and the United States are the countries with the most negative image in a globe-spanning survey of attitudes toward 12 major countries. Canada and Japan came out best in the poll, released Tuesday.
The survey for the British Broadcasting Corp.'s World Service asked more than 28,000 people to rate 12 countries - Britain, Canada, China, France, India, Iran, Israel, Japan, North Korea, Russia, the United States and Venezuela - as having a positive or negative influence on the world.
Israel was viewed negatively by 56 per cent of respondents and positively by 17 per cent; for Iran, the figures were 54 per cent and 18 per cent. The United States had the third-highest negative ranking, with 51 per cent citing it as a bad influence and 30 per cent as a good one. Next was North Korea, which was viewed negatively by 48 per cent and positively by 19 per cent.
Canada had the most positive rating in the survey of 28,389 people in 27 countries, with 54 per cent viewing it positively and 14 per cent negatively. It was followed by Japan and France.
Respondents were also asked their views of the 25-member European Union; 53 per cent saw it as positive and 19 per cent as negative.
Britain, China and India were viewed more positively than negatively, while Russia had more negative than positive responses. Opinion on Venezuela was evenly split.
"It appears that people around the world tend to look negatively on countries whose profile is marked by the pursuit of military power," said Steven Kull, director of the University of Maryland's Program on International Policy Attitudes, which conducted the research along with pollster GlobeScan.
"Countries that relate to the world primarily through soft power, like France and Japan and the EU in general, tend to be viewed positively," he added.
Pollsters questioned about 1,000 people each in Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Britain, Canada, Chile, China, Egypt, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Italy, Kenya, Lebanon, Mexico, Nigeria, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Russia, South Korea, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates and the United States between Nov. 3 and Jan. 16. The margin of error in each country ranged between plus or minus 3.1 percentage points and plus or minus 4.9 percentage points.

Obama Perception vs. Reality

2007-02-24T11:57:00.000-06:00

This article tells why Obama's support will only come from leftists, and those who want to make a statement by voting for a black president.

Those could be the only justification for voting for a hardcore liberal.

Oh he will also be supported by people who aren't really paying attention to politics.

'Cause he's really nice, and he talks pretty. Really. He does.

Perception vs. reality - Examiner.com

The Earth, the earth The earth is on fire...?

2007-02-23T09:31:00.000-06:00

Again, the issue is not whether or not there is Global warming. The issue is whether WE are causing it.

Here is another article that says no. Here are some quotes by an article from Pierre DuPont:

Plus Ça (Climate) Change

...a look at the data shows that within the century temperatures varied withtime: from 1900 to 1910 the world cooled; from 1910 to 1940 it warmed; from 1940 to the late 1970s it cooled again, and since then it has been warming. Today ourclimate is 1/20th of a degree Fahrenheit warmer than it was in 2001.
-----------------
...Solar radiation is reducing Mars's southern icecap, which has been shrinking for three summers despite the absence of SUVS and coal-fired electrical plants...
-----------------
Half of the past century's warming occurred before 1940, when the human population and its industrial base were far smaller than now.
-----------------
While Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" warns of up to 20 feet of sea-level increase, the IPCC has halved its estimate of the rise in sea level by the end of this century, to 17 inches from 36. It has reduced its estimate of the impact of global greenhouse-gas emissions on global climate by more than one-third, because, it says, pollutant particles reflect sunlight back into space and this has a cooling effect.

Those quotes are all illuminating, but the greatest threat of an inaccurate diagnosis of human-caused global warming is similar to the inaccurate assertions made against the use of DDT to curb the spread of malaria. DuPont says:

Sometimes the consequences of bad science can be serious. In a 2000 issue of Nature Medicine magazine, four international scientists observed that "in less than two decades, spraying of houses with DDT reduced Sri Lanka's malaria burden from 2.8 million cases and 7,000 deaths [in 1948] to 17 cases and no deaths" in 1963. Then came Rachel Carson's book "Silent Spring," invigorating environmentalism and leading to outright bans of DDT in some countries. When Sri Lanka ended the use of DDT in 1968, instead of 17 malaria cases it had 480,000.

That is why we better be pretty sure we are the problem before we decide to "fix the problem."

DE don't need any thinkin' Climatologists!

2007-02-23T08:31:00.000-06:00

I thought there was no dispute among scientists about whether human activity causes global warming.

Apparently Delaware's State Climatologist David R. Legates didn't finish off his Kool-Aid. He has had the crazy notion that as State Climatologist he could express his opinion on an (apparently) undecided climate-related topic, while at the same time mentioning that he was the official Climatologist for the State of Delaware. What a leap.

The Governor says, "no." The University of Delaware Assoc. Professor has been banned from mentioning his title anywhere he calls into question the existance of man-made global warming.

How does it make any sense that a state would have a person in such a nondescript position who must be put in check about one of the bigger lies of our day. The lie is not that humans are causing global warming, it is that the scientific community has come to an agreement that humans are causing global warming.

Doesn't science ask us to continue to question, hypothesize, exeriment, conclude, and repeat?

If there is a dispute about the methods of the outcomes, shouldn't we try to address those before claiming that the discussion is over?

The most illustrative part of the Delaware Daily Times article explaining this was this sentence:

"Similar dustups have occurred in Virginia and Oregon recently, as state climatologists there came under criticism for active "contrarian" stands on climate change..."

If you have been named State Climatologist, no matter how useless the title, you probably know the difference between a cumulus cloud and a barometer. Chances are good that you could even be called an "expert." I guess what we have here is another expert who doesn't really count,aka, an independent voice; isn't that what we are supposed to be supporting with positions like that anyway?

Obama's Record Really is Weak

2007-02-17T22:52:00.000-06:00

Second only to his tendency to favor socialist policy, the habit of talking pretty and saying nothing is one that must change for Saint Obama if anyone is to take him seriously. It is the one thing that has glared brightly about since I first heard of him. He seemed like a guy who could get his point across very well, if he ever got around to telling you what that point was.

You don't REALLY know where the guy stands without really paying attention. Today the situation seems to be the same. Over on the OpinionJournal (via RealClearPolitics) Nathan Gonzales goes back to the Senator's record as a legislator in Illinois and details exactly that point.

There are other examples, but the essence is here:

In 1999, Obama voted "present" on SB 759, a bill that required mandatory adult prosecution for firing a gun on or near school grounds. The bill passed the state Senate 52-1. Also in 1999, Obama voted "present" on HB 854 that protected the privacy of sex-abuse victims by allowing petitions to have the trial records sealed. He was the only member to not support the bill...

...Because it takes affirmative votes to pass legislation in the Illinois Senate, a "present" vote is tantamount to a "no" vote. A "present" vote is generally used to provide political cover for legislators who don't want to be on the record against a bill that they oppose. Of course, Obama isn't the first or only Illinois state senator to vote "present," but he is the only one running for President of the United States.

And the details are Here

You're no Abe Lincoln

2007-02-12T10:10:00.000-06:00

Dr Wallace has been kind enough to remind us that Saint Obama is not alligned with the same party of his historic role model. The anointed Senator would not fit in today's Republican party. Well maybe with Chaffe, amd Snow, but not with the Conservative-AntiStatist mainstream which defines the party today. Over at Illinois Review he has a list of some Pioneering Black Republicans who held office to expand freedom.

Check it out Here.

The first commenter Hi-jacks the discussion by asking whether Lincoln would be a GOP'er today, but that should not be the question. Lincoln was the man he was in the party he was in at that time. The question should be whether Obama lives up to the Legacy. And the answer is no.

I commented with this:
Thanks Eric!
First off, I'm tired of all the Obama-love. Next - you are right for noting that "our black people are better than their black people" because we are. Not better as people, but better equipped to guide the nation because of our beliefs.

The Republicans you mentioned were people fighting for the expansion of freedom with policies that would bring freedom to more people.

Obama's policies do not expand freedom. The one he has been kind enough to tell us about is BarracK-Kare. Government-run health care will tap the nation's rescources and weaken future generations. Just as GWB was wrong on the Medicaid Part D, Obama wants to continue the wrong move by expanding to Medicaid Part Z, division S, subset R which will determine whether we use Bactine or Mercuricone when your 8-year-old skins her knee.

We have to beat the drum against his leftist momentum at every opportunity because so many will see a polished speaker who seldom says anything specific. This will pull people to his side. The mantra against him must be that Communism with a smile is still Communism.

What a Dumbo

2006-11-27T10:15:00.000-06:00

To die for your beliefs is worthy.

To kill yourself on purpose is stupid.

Malachi Ritscher burned himself in protest over the US involvement in Iraq.

Stupid.

The best news is that nobody noticed. I'd like to make this blog entry count as negative publicity, but since there really is no such thing, I will settle for calling him stupid.

Darwin in action.

Today's problem with Immigration

2006-11-23T19:53:00.000-06:00

The simple answer is that we need people who will benefit us. We have no obligation to provide benefit to those who simply want to come here. We should match immigrants with our NEEDS. Not our wants.

That means reducing the scope of family tied prioritiy when deciding who gets to come in.

We can only sustain ourselves if we are able to continue to progress.That won't happen if we continue to let isolated Mexican anclaves grow. The people we admit must be able to sustain themselves.

To say this and much more even better, read this article from CityJournal.

Amnesty Bad idea for GOP

2006-11-21T13:14:00.000-06:00

Over at RightWingNews, Mr. Hawkins has some insights for why it would be suicide to suppport amnesty for the millions of illegal aliens in the United States today.

Aside from the fact that they have shown no respect for out borders, the J-Hawk says:

It's short an sweet. Check it out!

I think you can screw Mike Tyson

2006-11-17T14:56:00.000-06:00

Tyson's gonna be a hooka' at Heidi Fleiss' brothel for women in Nevada. That, at least, is the latest story hittin' da net. Maybe it's real, maybe not. Who cares?

The important part is the spin. So here, you go:

A commenter at the Moderate Voice said that this harkens back to the day when Joe Louis became a greeter at a Vegas casino. Really too bad.

See the difference is that before Joe Louis became a greeter, he was respected as a groundbreaking hero.

Tyson has always been one step above an alley rat. This is quite fitting for the animal to be put out to stud.

My only question is: What type of woman wants to take the chance of picking up a phat beatdown from ol' Iron Mike?

hat tip: http://africanamericanopinion.com/ via. http://www.themoderatevoice.com/

No Habeas Corpus for YOU!

2006-11-16T13:01:00.000-06:00

Airport Arrest Turns Up Nuclear Info

(Cyanide? Who carries Cyanide?)

A man was arrested at Detroit Metropolitan Airport after officials say they found him carrying more than $78,000 in cash and a laptop computer containing information about nuclear materials and cyanide.

Sisayehiticha Dinssa, an unemployed U.S. citizen, was arrested Tuesday after a dog caught the scent of narcotics on cash he was carrying, according to an affidavit filed in court. When agents asked him if he had any cash to declare, he said he had $18,000, authorities said. But when agents checked his luggage, they found an additional $59,000. When they scrolled through his laptop, they said they found the mysterious files.

At a court hearing Wednesday, Dinssa was ordered held in custody until at least until Monday at the request of prosecutors. Assistant U.S. Attorney Leonid Feller argued Dinssa was a potential risk to the community and federal agents want to get a warrant to search his computer more thoroughly, The Detroit News reported Thursday. U.S. Magistrate Donald Scheer approved Feller's request to detain him.

Dinssa, who is from Dallas, arrived in Detroit from Nigeria by way of Amsterdam and was headed for Phoenix, Feller said. He is charged with concealing more than $10,000 in his luggage, which carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison, the Detroit Free Press reported.

A message seeking comment was left Thursday with his lawyer, Leroy Soles.

Michigan Anti-Affirmative spin from WSJ

2006-11-14T14:19:00.000-06:00

Opinion Journal adds some meat to the bones of this Michigan Civil Rights Initiative Victory discussion.

I agree wholeheartedly with their conclusions. The simple issue is that it is wrong to discriminate based on race. We all know that it happens, but codification of the immoral practice is not an acceptable way to remedy the situation.

Here are some excerpts:

The political and business establishments, pressure groups like the AARP, labor-union leaders, religious spokesmen, the professoriat, the major Detroit newspapers--all were opposed to MCRI...

opponents loudly claimed that the measure was misleading... "I read it," replied Ms. Alpach. "I understood it. I signed it. Now let me vote on it."
The initiative's opponents enjoyed a fivefold funding advantage, which they used to broadcast a series of scary messages

This thing passed because even traditional opponents from the left couldn't contort logic enough to support it:

as an editorial writer for the very liberal Daily Michigan newspaper has suggested. The campus "is starkly segregated. . . . We live in different student neighborhoods. We go to different bars on different nights. We join in different student groups. There are even separate Greek systems."

The Supreme Court has never said that universities are constitutionally obligated to institute "diversity" policies. Public universities are funded by taxpayers. And those taxpayers have spoken.

Numbers say Immigration Is Key.

2006-11-14T14:11:00.000-06:00

Illegal Immigration is the Key issue to winning back the house.

If only GWB and the losing GOP Hse Members had danced with those of us who brung 'em.

DESIREE COOPER: Prop 2 reactions fairly upbeat

2006-11-09T12:00:00.000-06:00

DESIREE COOPER: Prop 2 reactions fairly upbeat

With the passing of Proposition 2 in Michigan, there will be no more race-based affirmative action in Michigan.

My thoughts on this are quite simple, and the article above has the views of some others who agree with me. First off I think that race-based decision making by public officials will always be suspect. Now in Michigan, that problem no longer exists.

I have always felt that there should be criterion beyond race which should be used to uplift people who are out of the access loop. So many times it is said that AA in education is used to help poor blacks get their first generation into college. Well if education is such a necessity (and it is) why limit that access to blacks? Shouldn't everyone who is poor get the same consideration so we can bring the people from "worse to first?"

The other confusing part of this for me is that the city of Detroit is in Michigan. I don't know the specific figures, but I do know that blacks make up a majority of the city. If that's the case, how does it measure up when calculating the presence of minority business?

I think that is a bit of homework I just gave myself. (Don't expect it to be completed any time soon.)

Rumsfeld out?

2006-11-08T11:59:00.000-06:00

That is what Rush just said.

GWB has a press conference at Noon Central, and he said that this would be the point of it.
Holy shit. Wouldn't this have been a good idea in the summer? We could have spun it as the great apology the left wants so bad. Finally, tangible recognition that there were mistakes, and we are going a new way.

Not a new DEPLOYMENT. A new way to win in Iraq. If there really are going to be some new tactics used in Iraq, why could we not have used that information BEFORE we lost the House? I'm about to get mad around here.

UPDATE: damn.

Here's the new guy. Former CIA Director Robert Gates.

Now it is time to Lead...

2006-11-08T11:54:00.000-06:00

Okay Dems, you got the spotlight.

Whatcha gonna do with it?

It seems that everyone agrees on how to deal with Iraq --- Let them stand up as we stand down. Aka the GWB plan.

Apparently there may be some revenge... (here)

I can't wait to see the results of the investigations into things like:"

No bid Haliburton contracts. This one could really pose a problem, and I happen to be as suspicious as the left on this one.

Who "forged" the documents from Niger which said Hussein sought enriched uranium from them? I expect it to blow up in their faces.

Ya gonna investigate the "lies" leading us to WMD claims in Iraq? Please open that can of worms and hang yourselves.

Ya gonna investigate the wiretapping procedures? Well then, how are we going to find out about ne'er do wells who want to blow us up?

Ya gonna investigate the oil profits in the last two years? Have fun making fools of yourselves again. There will be no smoking gun here.

Lotsa stuff to look forward to .

Oh. it hurts.

2006-11-08T11:33:00.000-06:00

They did it.

We lost it.

Why? Too much moderatin'. Not enough Conservatism.

A few guesses on my part:

1. The Left only saw the Battle of Iraq as a stand-alone item, and spun it that way all day long. If there had been a successful effort to tie Iraq to the inaccurately named "War on Terror" the results would have been different. Iraq is a battle we may have just lost.

2. The Right was ignored on Immigration. In my estimation, the issue to fire up the base with some crossover appeal was the area of illegal immigration. Banning gay marriage was used and seemed to work well enough in 2004, but if in stead,the issue had been immigration related, there would have been crossover appeal, without losing the patriotic "evangelicals."

3. Bush allowed his fear of the nebulous "Health Care" issue back him into a position where he passed the Medicaid prescription drug benefit and at the same time promised a budget breaking benefit which only pays lip-service to the issue. The key here is "Budget breaking."(The affirmative direction he should have taken on this issue was to create an atmosphere where groups of individuals could band together and buy health insurance at reduced rates. That's what big business does, right?)

4. We all forgot to focus on the Judges. Alito and Roberts need friends. Quite unlikely to happen now.

There are other reasons, but these matter a great deal.

Oh, and watch the way we treat a loss. We won't be bitchin about recounts. We lost. We'll deal with it like grown-ups.

I Just Gotta See THIS!!

2006-11-02T09:18:00.000-06:00

93% 0n RottenTomatoes Can't Be wrong!!!

Trailer!

Beginning of the Film!

Opens Friday.

*No milk will be permitted in theaters for fear of milk-snot laughs.

OpinionJournal - The Western Front

2006-11-01T12:07:00.001-06:00

What happens if Michael Steel Wins?

The Dem Death Grip on Blacks in the US is weakened. This article paints details on the landscape.
OpinionJournal - The Western Front

Here are some key points:

In part that is because early on in the primary fight Donna Brazile, who is black and who ran Al Gore's presidential campaign in 2000, warned Democrats not to push Mr. Mfume out of the race lest the party be seen as taking African-American voters for granted. Mr. Cardin won the early backing of his party's establishment and was never able to overcome the perception that he was committing the very sin Ms. Brazile warned against.
If Mr. Steele does win next week, some credit will belong to Gov. Robert Ehrlich. Four years ago Mr. Ehrlich tapped Mr. Steele to be his running mate. The governor has led a fight to fix failing, predominantly black Baltimore schools.
[Mr. Ehrlich] ...met with Mr. Mfume, views him as someone he can work with, and would like to see the Democrat elected as the next mayor of Baltimore.

King makers coming from the right in the northern cities???

Look out Dems. Your days are numbered.

UPDATE 11/5/08 - Well, maybe not. Quit gloating already.

YouTube - RNC Ad - Apologize

2006-11-01T11:31:00.000-06:00

Hot Dang that boy looks dumb.
YouTube - RNC Ad - Apologize

He says he was referring to the President. Well if that was true, he would start by apologizing for mis-speaking. He hasn't done that.

He meant what he said. Anyone who serves in the military is an idiot who did poorly in school. He uses the words "get smart" and then says that those in the military are the opposite ofthe words he used --- essentially they are still dumb.

We dodged a real bullet voting against this fool. Because of this remark, he will never be a serious candidate for president again.

That is a status he deserves.

North Korea Boom!

2006-10-17T11:04:00.000-05:00

Dennis Byrne says: Welcome Back to the 1950s

He has an article oulining our position against tinhorn dictators whose weaponry we want to neuter. He makes the appropriate points, but it really seems like there is nowhere to go but down.

If we're really going to be effective against these independent dictators, what means do we really have?

Here's the Upshot:

Diplomacy supposedly is the effective way to deal with threats and worse. Bush has failed, we're told, because he doesn't know how to do diplomacy. When he "goes it alone," he doesn't know how to do diplomacy. When he takes the multilateral approach, as he has with North Korea, he doesn't know how to do diplomacy. Of course, the criticism overlooks the fact that neither the bi-lateral diplomatic efforts of President Bill Clinton nor the multi-lateral approach of Bush has worked. Diplomacy first didn't work; neither did diplomacy second, third or fourth.
Where does it leave us? After withdrawing from the world's trouble spots, after disengaging from meaningful confrontation with the Kim Jong-ils and Mahmoud Ahmadinejads of the world, what weapons do we have remaining?

Doing nothing lets their threat gather.
Talks don't work.
Sanctions hurt, but they are a step in the right direction.
War is presently impractical.

Glad I'm not president.

(the photo is South Korean troops dismantling loudspeakers that had been used to boom propaganda at North Korea. Not the most effective way to overthrow a dictator. ) http://theseoultimes.com/ST/?url=/ST/db/read.php?idx=669

Dennis Byrne site

Dennis Byrne at RCP

Follow up questions on the Foley/Page deal

2006-10-05T12:16:00.000-05:00

Mark Foley is an idiot creep who should have resigned, and deserves to be shunned.
That said, there are some interesting angles here.

1. In DC 16 is the age of Consent. Is it legal to hit on a 16 year old or not? If you are over 25 it is certainly not moral.

2. Seems that the page, Jordan Edmund, is now 21, and was 18 when this really happened. If that is the case, isn't this scandal in the same relm as the Clinton -Lewinski scandal i.e., an inappropriate relationship between an employer an employee. (see here - includes pix!)

3. Most media reports make little distinction between the e-mails, and the IM's. (Click the link!) The only strange part of the e-mails was a a request for a photo, but the IM's go into themes like levels of arousal, and methods of masturbation. Considering that the IM's were not distributed until Friday were the e-mails alone, enough to hang the Congressman?

4. IM records vanish into the ethers after the discussion, so who saved the transcript, and who held those records for more than a year???

5. This story broke just days after the deadline to file for a replacement candidate passed. Co-Inky-Dink?

=================================================
In other similar news:

And who are the other gay Republicans under wraps?

And why are the Dems "outing" gay people? Do they think there is something wrong with being gay? Why not lay out all the cards on this?

Lets get into asking and telling!

Which reps/Senators are gay or bi?
I want all 635!

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++===
UPDATE: RUSH SAYS SUBPOENA ALL IM RECORDS BETWEEN REPS AND PAGES. I DIG IT!

Poor summary of Intelligence report

2006-09-26T10:55:00.000-05:00

This is a more detailed account of the infamous CIA report saying the we are creating more terrorists because of the Iraq War:

More of What You Won't Read in the NYT
Yesterday, we noted that the MSM (along with their fellow travelers in the intel community), had apparently "cherry-picked" information from a recent National Intelligence Estimate, making their case that the Bush Administration's War on Terror had actually made the problem worse. In closing, we observed that if the NIE was that biased, it represented a grave disservice to both the community and the nation.

Thankfully, the actual NIE is not the harbinger of disaster that the Times and WaPo would have us believe. According to members of the intel community who have seen the document, the NIE is actually fair and balanced (to coin a phrase), noting both successes and failures in the War on Terror--and identifying potential points of failure for the jihadists. The quotes printed below--taken directly from the document and provided to this blogger--provide "the other side" of the estimate, and its more balanced assessment of where we stand in the War on Terror (comments in italics are mine).

In one of its early paragraphs, the estimate notes progress in the struggle against terrorism, stating the U.S.-led efforts have "seriously damaged Al Qaida leadership and disrupted its operations." Didn't see that in the NYT article.

Or how about this statement, which--in part--reflects the impact of increased pressure on the terrorists: "A large body of reporting indicates that people identifying themselves as jihadists is increasing...however, they are largely decentralized, lack a coherent strategy and are becoming more diffuse." Hmm...doesn't sound much like Al Qaida's pre-9-11 game plan.

The report also notes the importance of the War in Iraq as a make or break point for the terrorists: "Should jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves to have failed, we judge that fewer will carry on the fight." It's called a ripple effect.

More support for the defeating the enemy on his home turf: "Threats to the U.S. are intrinsically linked to U.S. success or failure in Iraq." President Bush and senior administration officials have made this argument many times--and it's been consistently dismissed by the "experts" at the WaPo and Times.

And, some indication that the "growing" jihad may be pursuing the wrong course: "There is evidence that violent tactics are backfiring...their greatest vulnerability is that their ultimate political solution (shar'a law) is unpopular with the vast majority of Muslims." Seems to contradict MSM accounts of a jihadist tsunami with ever-increasing support in the global Islamic community..

The estimate also affirms the wisdom of sowing democracy in the Middle East: "Progress toward pluralism and more responsive political systems in the Muslim world will eliminate many of the grievances jihadists exploit." As I recall, this the core of our strategy in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Quite a contrast to the "doom and gloom" scenario painted by the Times and the Post. Not that we'd expect anything different. But the obvious slant of their coverage does raise an interesting question, one that should be posed to their ombudsman or public editor. If sources used by the papers had access to the document, why weren't they asked about the positive elements of the report? Or, if sources provided some of the more favorable comments regarding our war on terror, why weren't those featured in articles published by the Times and the Post?

The ball's in your court, Mr. Keller and Mr. Downie. We'd like an answer to these questions, since they cut to the heart of whether your publications can actually cover a story in a fair and objective manner. We won't hold our breath waiting for a response.

100% lifted from Spook86, at In From The Cold.
Hat tip RightWingNews.

Update: Opinion Journal says declassify the entire report. Or as Fox might say "You (White House) declassify, We (The People) Decide."

More Racists in Dem than GOP?

2006-09-26T10:00:00.000-05:00

(click to enlarge)

Whatever the actual number is, when it comes to the ratio of racists with the Dems or the GOP, one thing is clear. If racist tendencies end your affiliations then you can be alligned with neither one. This July Article from John Hawkins is a great place to start when considering which national party is racist--- or not.

Racist Democrats vs. Colorblind Republicans

by John Hawkins
Posted Jul 05, 2006
Sadly, Democrats have managed to trick a lot of black Americans into believing that the GOP is a racist party. But, in truth, the Democratic Party was, is, and will likely continue to be the home of far more racists than the GOP. Let me explain why I say that.

To begin with, the Republican Party was founded by anti-slavery activists, in contrast to the pro-slavery Democratic Party. It was Abe Lincoln, a Republican President, who led the North to victory in the Civil War and freed the slaves while the Democrats did everything in their power to keep black Americans down.

Fast forward to 1898 in Wilmington, N.C., where Democrats murdered black Republicans so they could stage, "the nation's only recorded coup d'etat." Then, in 1922, Democrats in the Senate filibustered a Republican attempt to make lynching a federal crime. A little later on, FDR nominated former Klansman Hugo Black to the Supreme Court. Contrast that to Republican President Dwight Eisenhower, who actually "sent troops" to ensure that schools in Little Rock, Ark., were desegregated and ordered the "complete desegregation of the Armed Forces." Noticing any trends?

But, that was such a long time ago, right? Things really changed in the '60s, didn't they? Yes, Americans -- particularly black Americans -- really owe Democratic President Lyndon Johnson a debt of gratitude for destroying American families and causing the number of illegitimate births to skyrocket -- by pushing entitlement programs that made it much easier to have children out of wedlock.

Remember George "segregation now, segregation tomorrow and segregation forever" Wallace standing in the door of an Alabama schoolhouse to keep black children from being able to go to school with whites? George Wallace was a Democrat. Remember Bull Connor turning water hoses and dogs on civil rights protestors? Bull Connor was a Democrat.

But, what about the revolutionary Civil Rights Act of 1964? That's where the Democrats showed their mettle and Republicans were proven to be racists. Right? Wrong. 82% of Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 versus only 64% of Democrats. Furthermore, a few years later, it was Republican Richard Nixon who first put teeth behind affirmative action.

But, what about today? You'd think that with Democrats receiving upwards of 90% of the black vote in some cases, that there would be few, if any, prominent black Republicans while black Americans would be amongst the biggest power players in the Democratic Party. However, the opposite has often turned out to be true. Once you look past the gerrymandered districts that have to remain in place because so many liberal whites simply won't vote for black candidates (There are only five black Democrats in the House representing majority white districts), you'll see that the Republican Party has surpassed the Democrats in many areas.

Who's the only black American currently on the Supreme Court? Clarence Thomas. The first black Secretary of State? Colin Powell. The first black woman ever to be a Secretary of State? Condi Rice.

Who's one of the fill-ins for the most popular conservative radio host on earth, Rush Limbaugh? Walter Williams. The most desired 2008 nominee as selected by the right side of the blogosphere in 2006? Condi Rice. Who did those same bloggers select as the most desired nominee to replace Sandra Day O'Connor when she retired? Janice Rogers Brown tied for first place.

Meanwhile, what do we see from Democrats? We see Oreo cookies being thrown at Maryland's black U.S. Senate candidate Michael Steele and black Republicans being called "Uncle Toms" and compared to "Aunt Jemima."

Moreover, let's take a look at a couple of studies that actually set out to compare how racist Republicans and Democrats actually are. First off, a professor from Yale looked at voting patterns and she found that:
"...(W)hite Republicans nationally are 25 percentage points more likely on average to vote for the Democratic senatorial candidate when the GOP hopeful is black. ...In House races, white Democrats are 38 percentage points less likely to vote Democratic if their candidate is black."
It would have been interesting for them to poll black Republicans and Democrats as well, for comparison's sake, but however you slice it, there are a lot more white Democrats than white Republicans willing to defect to the other side rather than vote for a black candidate.

Then there is another study, this time from a professor at Stanford -- of how much government largesse Democrats and Republicans believe people deserved to be given after Katrina -- and, surprise, surprise: Democrats behaved in a racist fashion while Republicans didn't:
"But for Democrats, race mattered -- and in a disturbing way. Overall, Democrats were willing to give whites about $1,500 more than they chose to give to a black or other minority...." Republicans are likely to be more stringent, both in terms of money and time, Iyengar said. "However, their position is 'principled' in the sense that it stems from a strong belief in individualism (as opposed to handouts). Thus their responses to the assistance questions are relatively invariant across the different media conditions. Independents and Democrats, on the other hand, are more likely to be affected by racial cues."
Here's the reality: there are racists in both parties. But, there are a lot more of them in the Democratic Party and there always have been. But ironically, Democrats have managed to use the GOP's belief in a colorblind America against us. Because so many Democrats have no problem with using racial discrimination for political purposes, they'll support policies like reparations, Affirmative Action, and racial quotas that Republicans simply won't. Then they deftly distort and exploit incidents like the Katrina rescue efforts and Bill Bennett's condemnation of the idea that black babies could be aborted to reduce the crime rate to convince black Americans that the GOP hates black Americans.

This is all despite the fact that for a large number of black Americans, the GOP is a much better fit than the Democratic Party. The GOP is the party that's friendly to religion, anti-abortion, against gay marriage, tough on crime, and for low taxes and school vouchers. Yet, so many black Americans have been deceived into sticking with the Democrats even though the Dems do so many things that are harmful to our country as a whole and to black Americans in particular.

That's why if you're a black American who thinks the GOP better represents your views than the Democratic Party, then it's time to join the Republican Party. Don't let the Democrats lie to you and tell you that the GOP is full of racists, especially when there are so many distinguished black Americans out there who can tell you otherwise. Look to Condi Rice, Colin Powell, Rod Paige, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Larry Elder, J.C. Watts, Michael Steele, Ken Blackwell, Lynn Swann -- and you'll see that the GOP judges people not "by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

Copyright © 2006 HUMAN EVENTS. All Rights Reserved.

Don't Sleep on Lupe!

2006-09-22T08:47:00.000-05:00

When a bruvah gets backing from JZ (Big Money) and Kanye (Producer Unparalled), then can rap about skateboarding, without sounding like Candyman, Nice and Smooth (yes, I just dissed them) or Kid Frost, then I'm down. Kick Push Video.

Lupe Fiasco was on 'GCI last night where they played some tracks from his new album. In the spirit of Chicago Style hip hop, he's not a criminal. I really dig that. He also uses fat hype beats This is an interview with him in the Sun-Times. Interesting guy. Groovin jams. I will be coppin it soon.

Buy his album here.

Hugo is a piss-ant.

2006-09-21T12:54:00.001-05:00

That's all for now.

I'll bitch more later.

WVON-AM 1690 Goes 24 Hours!

2006-09-18T23:15:00.000-05:00

After 43 years of broadcasting from 10pm until 1pm (no afternoon, no evening programming) WVON-AM Chicago moves to a 24 hour format starting September 18. Along with the expanded hours, Chicago's only Black Talk Radio station increases power from 1000 to 10,000 watts, now broadcasting to listeners throughout the entire Chicagoland area.

This is great news for Black Chicago. Here's the spin from Chicago's legendary Defender Newspaper.

I called in this morning to say Congrats, and to denounce some victimology.

I told my wife about it, and SHE agreed with me. That's a first!
Ooooooooo it felt good.

Clik da pik, visit their bogus site. (Great station, bogus website.)

or LISTEN LIVE.

2nd Place, or Not First place???

2006-09-15T08:50:00.000-05:00

Yesterday in the news, I heard the spin that 2006 was the second hottest summer on record. It was said in one sentence with obvious implications that we should concern ourselves with global warming. It's getting hotter than ever --- right?

Today a Drudge headline answers the only question remaining in my mind.

SUMMER 2006 TEMPS FAIL TO BREAK RECORD SET IN 1936.

Was global warming to blame for that as well? Could we have stopped it then too?

Convert or die?

2006-09-14T23:49:00.000-05:00

Okay, I'm late to the column. Thank you, Tom Roeser, for the reminder. Mark Steyn is a genius. again.

Just trust me and read it.

What are you ready to die for?

Luis Lopez Lived--- We are glad.

2006-09-11T12:33:00.000-05:00

I have joined a project to memorialize the victims of the demons. I was able to find nothing on the victim I was randomly assigned. I found a note by someone who said she is his niece. On July 19 of this year (2006) she had this to say about him: (here)

He was my uncle
And he was a very good person
He married my aunt and my mother and him were very close
It was hard to deal with his death
It seemed to affect my mother most
She would dream of him
And cry so much
It hurt us all alot
He was such a good man
And it bothers me
That he died
For he wasnt a bad person
In Fact one of the best persons i have ever met
They did not find his body
But found his leg
I miss him very much
and love him alot
May He Rest In Peace
Infinite Love,
Andreina

His name was Luis Lopez. He died because of our Freedom. Keep him in our prayers.

We celebrate the glory of his life. Though it has been unsung, we must remember to honor him with the same passion we honor those whose lives we know. Rest in peace, Luis.

This is a part of the 2996 project. We Celebrate the Victims.

OUTRAGE - - - Five Years Later

2006-09-11T09:03:00.000-05:00

I couldn't let today pass without typing out some of my thoughts on the events of September 11, 2001. I have been too busy to blog lately, but when days like this come, and I say nothing, I wonder why I have this public listing of my thoughts.

Where was I on Sept 11?
Well I was awakened by a phone call on Sept 11, 2001. I worked a shifted schedule at the time, and didn't usually get up until about 9:00. My girlfriend (Later Mrs.Jiggity) called some time earlier than that to tell me that some planes had crashed into the WTC in New York. She knew I was interested in politics, and expected this to be something I would probably want to see. I initially thought the pilot had been drunk and would really be in trouble --- trouble? Hell the guy was dead now. It didn't take long before I turned on the TV and radio, and learned that there was a lot more happening on that day.

I don't really remember whether both towers had been hit when I started absorbing information, but between the time when I started watching and the time when they collapsed, I was weakened, and stunned. The death count was told, and they kept climbing. I remember thinking that each number I heard would eventually be wrong again. "People will be dying from this event for days, or maybe even weeks, " I thought.

The big question in my mind was simple, "What if one of those things falls down?" I wondered how many people were trapped inside. Listening to commentators, I heard a number of 50,000.

WHO DID THIS?
Who tried to kill 50,000 people in one blow?
Who thought their movement would be helped by this?
Who didn't understand that the USA is the wrong beehive to poke a stick into?

I was convinced that whoever it was had sealed their own fate, and the fate of their ideology. At the time, I knew very little about the subjects we all pretend to be experts on today; bin Ladin, Islamic Fundamentalism, the Taliban, and the term "weapons of mass distruction." How could this great nation respond in any way other than rigid defiant outrage? Somebody's gettin' nuked. Fast!

Then the thing happened for which I could find no words.

One of those skyscrapers dropped.

AAAARRRRRHHHHHGGGGGHHHHH!!!
WHY?
I DON'T CARE WHAT WE DID; WHATEVER YOU THINK WE DID; THIS CANNOT STAND!
I couldn't catch my breath. I could only exhale. My face contorted, and my chest caved in. My lips flexed into a cramp, and I wanted it to stop.

One of those skyscrapers dropped. It didn't make sense. and five years later it still doesn't make sense. Of course all things end, but I never expected to see the death of a 100+ story building. Hailing from Chicago, I have always hoped the skyscrapers would last as long as the pyramids of Egypt. Combining this inconceivable spectacle with the death of up to 50,000 (eventually reduced by mercy from God) melted me to spontaneous tears for days.

I also remember the sight of people who jumped to their death. Imagine that choice. "How will I create my own death?" Maybe I run to the stairwell filled with smoke, and crowds of people. Maybe I look for a letter opener, and stab my throat. Maybe I jump and feel the euphoric rush of "flight." Death is here today. I retain my free will and still have some say in how I go. Even if I exercise nothing, I still chose. Waiting in a corner where no phone lines connect me to the rescue crews is a choice as well. What fate is this?

EVIL.
Only evil could do this on purpose. Insanity. The word "fanaticism" seem too romantic for these demons.

OUTRAGE!!!
That was exactly what I thought on the day of the 11th. I was outraged. Appropriately, the next day, the Chicago Sun-Times ran that single word as its headline.

By now, it seems like that day should be history. Today it's ripples still wash over us. It is not yet history. It is still a current event. It still stabs.

Today, again, we cry.

Update 9/14: Check out this string of e-mails from 9/11, from PARLANCHEQ. Nothing spectacular, just very interesting to see what people did on that day.

Let's Hear it for the UN! (Useless Nexis)

2006-08-22T16:51:00.002-05:00

From the esteemed Mr. Boortz:

It seems that Hezbollah had a bit of help in killing Israeli soldiers
during their five-week war. The help came in the form of nifty little night vision goggles found by the IDF. How many?
Try 250 sets found in a Hezbollah stronghold.
Now this may come as a bit of a surprise to you, but Hezbollah doesn't exactly have a manufacturing process cranking out these night vision goggles. The were made in England.
How, you ask, did they come to be in the possession of Hezbollah? It seems that
these goggles were shipped from Great Britain to Iran in 2003 under a United
Nations program to combat rampant drug smuggling in Iran.
So ... here's your chain of possession.
From Great Britain to the United Nations.
From the UN to Iran.
From Iran to Hezbollah.
Any questions?

Lie photo Lie

2006-08-22T09:39:00.000-05:00

This from CNET shows a gallery of retouched photos intended to change perception. And like it or not, perception is not reality.

WHEN DID NANCY AND TONYA REALLY PRACTICE TOGETHER????

Illegal means "Illegal"

2006-08-22T08:38:00.000-05:00

The city of Hazleton, PA passed a law which will impose stiff penalties on employers and landlords of illegal aliens, aka tresspassers. Let's remember that the key word here is Illegal.

In the WAPO story we learn that Hazleton has decided to take the issue seriously.

The act imposes a $1,000-per-day fine on any landlord who rents to an illegal immigrant, and it revokes for five years the business license of any employer who hires one...

AND

[Mayor Louis J. Barletta] has received 9,000 favorable e-mails and has raised thousands of dollars for the city's legal defense on a Web site called Small Town Defenders.

Go Louis, Go!
---------------------------------------------------------------

As an aside, I see how some who support this illegal activity could draw a parallel to the past when small towns devised laws to keep black people out of their cities. This is simply not the same. In this case, Hasleton, PA has imposed penalties on activities which are already illegal.

There is no violation of civil rights, because the fines target citizens who provide support for illegal activity. These illegal activities are being commited by people who have no legal right to be in the country. There is no parallel here. Black victims of the past were citizens being excluded without relationship to whether they had already broken the law.

The struggle is not the same. We must restist those who say that it is.

Hellzbollah's new publicist: Molly Ivins.

2006-08-18T09:10:00.000-05:00

I understand that the comment was meant in jest, but the irony here is that there is so much attention being paid to the efforts of Hellzbollah in rebuilding Lebanon and we have been in the effort of rebuilding Iraq for years. In light of that, does Leftist Pillar Molly Ivins deem our effort as noble? Lets take a look...

In other news, we have the answer to a troubling part of the Middle East jigsaw puzzle: how to rebuild Iraq. We ought to drop Halliburton like a skillet full of rattlesnakes and get Hezbollah on the job. Did you ever see a better rebuilding bunch than this Hezbollah? The shooting hadn’t even stopped yet when the “Army of God” was hustling around with plywood and duct tape, putting everything back together. And who do they get to pay for it all but the Arabs. Now that’s what I call rebuilding!

Of course not. She throws blame at Haliburton, and makes Hellzbollah look good. How do they (the left) even claim to be on our side?

Full Drivel

Anna Diggs Terrorists?

2006-08-18T08:07:00.000-05:00

Why do I find it difficult to identify with the "Civil Rights Establishment?" It is because of incidents like this. This is just more proof that they have outlived their usefulness, and we're getting dimininshing returns. The "Civil Rights Establishment" is a very close relative to the counterculture movement of the '60s. What this means is that many of the people of that generation (CR) also have deep hostility against great institutions of the day. The favorite target, and ever-present source of all evil is, once again, the USA.

Anna Diggs Taylor has the esteemed distinction of being the first black American woman named chief judge of Eastern District of the United States District Court. She no longer holds that position, but still serves as a judge on the same court.

Anyway, this woman of great stature and groundbreaking abilities has ruled that the NSA wiretapping program, designed to defend the US against attacks by hostile non-state actors (Aka Terrorists), is unconstitutional.

The essence of this issue is that the monitoring of communications to and from foriegn destinations are part of the president's duty to defend us against outside attacks. No one in the US making connections to another person in the US has been target by this program, and until the story broke last December, none of the "Loyal opposition" complained about the program.

This is all just another case of people trying to weaken GWB. What they don't understand is that as they weaken him, they create loopholes for "evildoers."

Pathetic.

No, I'm not dead yet.

2006-08-14T12:39:00.003-05:00

Yes, I've been missing in action for weeks, but the good news is that my numbers at work have been flying high. That's probably part of why I'm not here too much.

My wife and I Vacationed in San Francisco/Sonoma Valley where we had some great meals, saw some big redwoods, and walked a lotta' steep, thigh-burning hills. I shot some nice photos, and these are just a few. We stayed at the Mark Hopkins Intercontinental, where I saw Peyton Manning as I entered an elevator. ...Cool.

I wanted to simply claim my existance.

I will be opinionated again soon.

Thanks for checking.

And now to complete the Tragedy...

2006-07-05T11:13:00.000-05:00

Enron Captain Dies of Heart Attack.

A few questions come to me as I consider this story. One is political, and the other is more personal. First, I wonder what impact this has on the theory that 'Ol Kenny Boy is being sheltered from harm by his bud George W? I mean if there was a noose worth wiggling out of, this one was it. First he gets caught, then he gets convicted, then he DIES!!!

You would think a little clout from the Oval Office would have stepped in to save him at some point! I mean at worse case, maybe ol' GW is thinking that he should let the chips fall where they may, but after the conviction I would expect someone to smuggle Lay out of the country, and have him get off easy. If there was any clout from the Oval Office...

I guess this is the part of the story where the conspiracy theorists say that Lay faked his death to do exactly that. Well, maybe they got me.

The other question plays into my own little conspiracy theory, and it is this:
Did Lay kill himself? A heart attack just weeks before being sentenced to life behind bars seems a bit mercy-filled. I mean, at this point, life was over for him, and he had no real incentive to get a taste of life in Oz-superlight.

Well, that't my spin.

No Big Whoop!

2006-06-27T12:01:00.000-05:00

I heard the news last night.

I was disappointed in one of my heroes. I thought that he had fallen off the wagon, and was back to the oxy, or some other mood altering drug.

WRONG!!!

The reports didn't say what drug it was. If they had, you would not have posted the the same way you did. I am no sick freak, and now I know there will be a landslide of sexual inuendo jokes. Well let the games begin.

Until I found out what the "prescription drug" was,I was hurt. There was a time when, there was no light shining on the area he spoke of. He has ushered in an era where the Classical Liberal (Look it up - Try Wikipedia) ideology could be explained, and not just ridiculed. I understood, and agreed. I thought this would be another opportunity for the left to hold him up as a failed testament to the conservative ideology.

WRONG!!!

So many on the left dream of the day when you no longer have to deal with his dispensing of reasonable thought in the face of sheer lies. That day will come, but that day is not today.

IT WAS VIAGRA. NO BIG WHOOP.

Limbaugh Detained at Palm Beach Airport

Star Wars (SDI) Update

2006-06-20T13:49:00.000-05:00

SDI has grown since originally proposed by Reagan. It is embraced by an international group of nations working to push it's development further, and prevent missile attacks around the world.

Alan Dowd of Tech Central Station has a comprehensive update:

Star Wars: The Sequel

thanks again, ronnie.

Wish we had Star Wars now, Don'tcha?

2006-06-19T12:45:00.000-05:00

http://www.thepeninsulaqatar.com/Display_news.asp?section=World_News&subsection=Rest+of+the+World&month=June2006&file=World_News2006061944850.xml

Yes, I am still alive.

Just really busy.

Time to eat some Legal Donuts

2006-06-01T12:00:00.000-05:00

(And post a picture of Michelle Malkin, and hope to drag some of her readers here. Gratuitous, but honest.)

Dunkin Donuts is going to verify the employees at all their shops to be certain they have not hired any illegeal aliens. Good move. Here.

I'm going there with real dollars!

This means they will avoid the huge fines the Senate will require in the new immigration legislation.... Bwwwwahahahhaahha. *Whew* I kill me--- HA!

Spiegel Interviews Iranian Leader

2006-05-30T09:11:00.000-05:00

He denys that the Holocaust happened, but says that if it did happen the land used to host Israel should be in Europe. Europe (Germany) is the party who wronged the Jews of WWII. Why should Jordan, Syria, Egypt, and the people of Palestine provide the land when they didn't commit the crime, he asks.

Well, that one is a bit over my head at the moment. Outside of the logistical nightmare, and the fact that Jerusalem is not in Europe, it may make sense. (Yes, you heard it here first! A blogger who says that he doesn't know the answer to a geopolitical question. Ooh the humiliation.)

The part I do understand is that when asked about freedom, democracy, and their role in governing people, he gives the reporter a Walter Payton forearm shiver, and slips away without answering. I find it quite interesting that he is cryptic in this answer, but he is so open about other issues. I am also disppointed that the reporter didn't make him clarify his remark.

If you remember the letter written to Ol' GW clearly says that the concepts of western liberalism, and democracy have failed, and another path must be traveled. The reporter was sharp enough to catch that statement. Here's the quote:

SPIEGEL: In this letter you also write that Western liberalism has failed. What makes you say that?
Ahmadinejad: You see, for example you have a thousand definitions of the Palestian problem and you offer all sorts of different definitions of democracy in its various forms. It does not make sense that a phenomenon depends on the opinions of many individuals who are free to interpret the phenomenon as they wish. You can't solve the problems of the world that way. We need a new approach. Of course we want the free will of the people to reign, but we need sustainable principles that enjoy universal acceptance - such as justice. Iran and the West agree on this.

The lack of follow up on that one, however, means the interview only gets a B+ when he should have gotten an A. His other questions and follow-up were done very well. The critical point is that the power of the people to govern themselves is under attack. Too many people refuse to recognise that truth.

Read all about it!

Integration on Soul Train!

2006-05-23T09:47:00.000-05:00

Who knew that boys and girls once danced together on Soul Train?

Avery delivers da video, and da audio here!

Slammin.

Another reason Why I'm a Republican.

2006-05-23T09:24:00.000-05:00

But always conservative (aka classical liberal) first.

Here's the heart from Herman Cain.

"They can't keep waiting for the Michael Steeles, the Lynn Swanns to draw people," said Cain, host of a radio talk show in Atlanta and former chief executive of Godfather's Pizza. "You've got to go to the black voters, to the black community and say, 'We are pro-life. We believe in the Second Amendment. We are fiscally responsible.' You can't keep waiting for black Republicans to reach in. You have to reach out."

and here's the... the other heart. (Yes. I said that.)

In west Mississippi, Yvonne Brown is challenging an incumbent black Democrat in the 2nd Congressional District. She said minds do not change until people meet someone who is black and Republican.
"We know there are black Republicans, and we know Frederick Douglass and Abraham Lincoln were Republicans, but we don't see it," said Brown, 53, the mayor of Tchula, a town of about 2,300. "It's not immediately touchable.

"I'm out there. I'm touchable. It makes a difference."

Hat tip: the Dr. Eric Wallace, black Republican running for the State Senate in Illinois.

That's "Macaroni and Cheese"; Not "mac and cheese."

2006-05-23T08:36:00.000-05:00

Joseph C. Phillips has a column on the releveance of Macaroni and Cheese.

Wonderful Subject!

It reminded me of my Aunt Jean. She had the ultimate recipe, and none other is fit so be served in the same room. As I understand it, my sister was given most of the recipe, but never the whole thing. She tinkered and dang near figured it out. Sometimes she gets it right. It happens often enough for us not to ask her to stop. Even when she is off the mark, she comes up with some of the best stuff ever drawn from an oven.

It is so peculiar that something like that is as universally seen as the mark of a great meal. With that being the case, I pose this question: Is it too much to say "Macaroni and Cheese" and leave the "mac and cheese" to the orange powder pasta?

Don't get me wrong, I hold the orange powder pasta in apropriate esteem. Without a doubt I had it more often than Macaroni and Cheese. We only got Macaroni and Cheese at Thanksgiving and Christmas. It was revered food. The orange powered pasta, however, was a frequent Friday night compliment to the Polish sausage. Okay, it may not be the same deeply ingrained tradition as the beloved Macaroni and Cheese, but it was good on a Friday night. My sister and I used to stack them up into pyramids, and they reminded us of cartoon sticks of dynamite. So that's what we called them; "Dynamites."

Of course I was the king of cornball, so when I bit into the first forkful, I had to make the "BKAOWWWW!" sound. Aaaaah, just the memory.

Macaroni and Cheese. Dynomites. I'm really going back now.

Welcome to Land of the Free, Ayaan Hirsi Ali!

2006-05-22T08:56:00.000-05:00

We add another hero to our ranks:

Luckily for Ms. Hirsi Ali, she has found a country that doesn't fear her willingness to criticize the religion into which she was born. While visiting the Netherlands last Thursday, Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick said the former Dutch legislator could come to the U.S. regardless of her status in the Netherlands. "We recognize that she is a very courageous and impressive woman, and she is welcome in the U.S."

Democrats Plot against the Black guy

2006-05-22T08:43:00.000-05:00

Drudge reports that the DNC actively worked against the re-election of New Orleans mayor, Ray Nagin. (here)

Imagine the firestorm this would have been if it were the GOP against their party's black candidate. Even though few in the party were happy about an Alan Keyes candidacy in the IL election for US Senate, I don't remember RNC agents continuing the campaign for Jack Ryan.

You only get good news from the Right

2006-05-22T08:16:00.000-05:00

While all political viewpoints offer criticism for the current state because of the desire to replace said state with their own suggestions, in today's political landscape, word of our achievements and victories are almost exclusively written by the Free Market Capitalists.

Here's another example by Michael Baron:

...we seem to be living by far in the best economic times in human history... But aren't we also living in times of record strife? Actually, no. Just the opposite. The Human Security Centre of the University of British Columbia has been keeping track of armed conflicts since World War II. It reports that the number of genocides and violent conflicts dropped rapidly after the end of the Cold War, and that in 2005 the number of armed conflicts was down 40 percent from 1992.

Now that doesn't have to remain the case, he says:

After our victory in the Cold War, Francis Fukuyama proclaimed that we had reached "the end of history," by which he meant the end of any serious argument over what constitutes the best kind of society. That is disputed by the Islamist fascists, who have made it clear that they will do whatever they can to inflict harm on our civilization.

Entire Article is Here.

Two Years For Booker Rising!!!

2006-05-12T08:44:00.000-05:00

In case there is anyone who reads me and misses Booker today. I like t opretend I have an independent audience beyond the cat who watches me type here. I guess I'm talking to the mythical rabbit in the movie with Jimmy Stewart, "Harvey." Anyway, whoever you are, be sure to Hop on over there and wish a great big Happy Blogoversary.

Today is two years!

Go Shea! It's your Blogday! Go Shea! It's your Blogday!

Here's another two cents on The Illegals

2006-05-12T08:28:00.000-05:00

I wish there were more people who recognise that the first word in the term "illegal immigrant" is "illegal."

Some people don't like that term. For them I suggest the term "trespassers." I don't really know the law on this, and I don't suggest that we do this, but when there is a trespasser on your land, at some point you have the authority to shoot 'em, don't you?

No we shouldn't shoot the trespassers from other countries. We should enforce the laws already on the books.

The issue of illegal immigration is not about terrorism. It is about the law! When you learn to respect the law, it will makes sense.

Too many "activists" supporting Trespassing do not respect the law. Until then, they will continue to:

Intentionally equate the sales taxes paid by tresspassers with income taxes paid by citizens.

Intentionally equate the of marches by trespassers with e-mails, phone calls, letters and votes by citizens.

Intentionally equate trespassers who bus tables for less than minimum wage with citizens whodon't have the legal option to work for less than minimum wage.

Intentionally equate of those who illegally trespass from Serbia, Yugoslavia, Russia, and Romania with Black citizens who were (and sometimes still are) denied equal protection under the law.

Just Driving me NUTS!

Iran Sounds like the Left

2006-05-10T12:59:00.000-05:00

I just read the first few paragraphs of the 8 page letter. No there's no surprise here. Iran sounds like the ranting cukoos of the left. It is Wednesday, and I am just getting to browsing over the letter from Ahmadinejad to 'Ol GW. I will write out these comments as I go through the letter itself, giving my full unfiltered initial reaction.

First though, my expectations:
I believe the Iran sees that there are dissenters here who are open to using propaganda from any source which opposes 'Ol GW, and I think the dissenters are the target audience for the writer of the letter.

I expect that this letter will be used by the left here in the US as an example of an olive branch offered to the "warmonger" in the White House.

I expect that the ideas in letter will be ignored by the White House when it comes to dealing with Iran.

See. I don't expect much to come of this. We know what they have, and what their intentions are, and we don't want them to cross that goal. They know this, and only want to shift the PR battle in their favor. Of course the left will oblige them.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BACK TO THE LETTER!

He starts asking how a Christian could have attacked Iraq. Oh I get it! The hypocracy angle. Sounds like the left to me. But in his case it is an advantage for us to be weak spined. It allows the opponent to set the tone, and expect us to cower when they confront us. He quotes the debunked 100k dea d in Iraq and weighs the price. Okay...

"on the pretext of wmd." yada, yada, yad....Oooh. Bit my tounge. Says the goal wasn't to topple Hussein, but to find the WMD. Nope. Not since Clinton. Our policy has been to end Hussein's reign in Iraq. Hell, he was shooting at our airplanes.

"Saddam was supported by the West." This sounds like a typical caller into a radio talk show. What is he doing, collaborating with Nancy Pelosi? If he's not, I can't see the difference between the two.
------------------

Guantanamo Bay----Secret Prisons----Occupation---- then again the Christian hypocracy claim. Where's the "Illegal Wiretapping" complaint? Isn't he missing something here? It sounds to me like those who would supply the opponents of the US with propaganda fodder have fed him well.

How is it that the leaking of these programs does NOT qualify someone as a traitor?
---------------

Surely he doesn't expect to persuade any American that Israel has no right to exist. Didn't we already cross that bridge? They're here, the're near, Get used to it. What the heck is this (PBUH) thing they keep putting after Jesus' name? Now after Moses' name?

Hello Wikipedia.

oh. That's rather nice. Really, I think it is quite respectful. They get points for that.

Thank you Wikipedia.
-------------------------------------

Now he says that the only time technological progress has been a crime was in the Middle Ages. Thus their persuit of nukes is in keeping with expected advancement. Sounds like the leftists upset with 'Ol GW for refusing to buckle under to the Kyoto Gods.

Chomsky, right?
-------------------------------------

...Quick kiss of Hugo's a55... non sequitor into the benign nobility of the residents of Africa, and the Christian Hypocracy thing again bla, bla, bla...

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

OKAY! He finally talks about Iran! And makes clear why it is that they should be wary of us. Well, that one I will concede. But it was the enemy of my enemy thing for us.
---------------------------------

Oh, here comes the "Bush is too secretive" claim.
Oh, and the complaint about remembering that people want to kill us. Interesting that if we just forget about the whole Sept 11 thing, the "Blame America First" crowd would blame America if we are hit again.

"It is our fault for being weak, and looking like a target. If we had kept in the forefront of our minds the attacks of September 11 we would have seen this one coming," they would say.
--------------------------------

This guy really is just a Democrat.

"The question here is 'what has the hundreds of billions of dollars, spent every hear to pay for the Iraqi campaign, produced for the citizens?' "

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

500 rhetorical questions on the role of a national leader.
Welcome to 7th grade.
------------------------------------

It is ironic the way he continues to make religious references. ...So much hate speach... The US left, of course, loves that, but if someone in our government does the same, they have a cow.
--------------------------------------

Now the voice of the left reminds us that we all worship the same God. Well, I got news for you buddy. If the God you worship didn't take human form and die to clean your sins, then he ain't the same God. If Jesus ain't God, in your faith, then it ain't the same God. Close, but no cigar. That don't make you a bad guy or nothin, but it does mean the guy Muhammad speaks for is not the same guy Jesus is.

I am not very Bible savvy, but this one drives me nuts.

He reminds me of Farrakhan.

I'm not that stupid.

Thanks for playin'.
---------------------------------------------

This is where he really brings it home to preach to the left:

"Liberalism and Western style democracy have not been able to help realize the ideals of humanity. Today these two concepts have failed."

The US left is still in love with communism, but when Iran says that the West has failed, the left thinks it means that communism is the next step. This is why we can't get anywhere with them when it comes to seeing Islamofacism as the enemy.

They hear an attack on capitalism, but fail to hear the support for a Caliphate.(Wiki Thanky) Anyone with half a brain knows that is what he is talking about, but since he knows that most of the left is welded to the attack against capitalism, or Western Liberalism, he knows they will go for the okey-doke.

By "Liberalism," he means free markets, and free people.

He doesn't like that.

Aint that a hint?

Time for some BushBashing

2006-05-04T18:43:00.000-05:00

I doubt that I am breaking any new ground here, but I'd guess that if 'Ol GW had been on the right track on his domestic policy (outside of tax cuts) his polling numbers would be much better right now. He's only gotten it right on the Judges, and that's only after he was smacked back to alertness on the whole Meiers fiasco. He's wrong on spending. He's wrong on borders. He's wrong on the prescription drug benefit. So let's kick him while he's down, and hope we can get him to wake up once again. This time it's the borders.

Of course the GOP wants to keep the House and Senate this fall, and I guess I want them to as well. I'm not sure why. Maybe it is just pride. I'd hate to see the Dems gloat over the victory, and then claim he's a Lame Duck for two years. Well, it is more than that, because where GW is just wrong, the Dems are treasonist.

Case in point: Immigration.

We're at a point where there's no distinction between legal and illegal. Bush wants to just let everybody stay where they are. This after five consecutive years of neglect when it comes to the US/Mexican border. If only we had some enforcement at the border during his tenure, then we would have an illegal population of under 10 million. We've got to respond. No, we aren't going to march in major cities. We have jobs, and can't afford to just walk out on them. Even for just a day. How, then, do we get the message across that we are fed up?

Well in July of 2004, I sent the RNC $25. I really thought they could use the money. Kerry hadn't been mopped up just yet, and I thought things were still a tossup. I figured every little bit helps; throw some to my guy. Since then their fund raisers have been steaked out in my mailbox. I sent back a couple of surveys, and I might have written another check. I don't really remember. The key here is this. When the noble Minutemen first set up camp along the border, I sent back one of the money requests with a note to get tough on the borders. I said I would send another check when they had done something there. Needless to say they haven't seen another penny since.

I'm really not happy about it. I'd rather be out the cash. Instead, I'm out the security and frustration level. Whenever I hear someone say that "ferners" will do jobs that Americans won't I get hot. Pair that up with black unemployment rates. Goodbye ferners, hello full black employment. Not exactly. I know many of us need to get new attitudes about work, but many of us don't. Illegal aliens lower wages for the low end. That's all there is to it. Them gone doesn't really give unskilled blacks jobs, but it does just seem right. I mean when the first name of your status is "Illegal" you might want to get a clue or something.

Look, I was going somewhere with this, and as I avoid work, I remember that I had a point. Here's the point. The next time I get a solicitation to contribute to the RNC, I'm going to send them one of these:

And I hope they get the point soon.

Sounds like LSB is up for some BushBashing too.
She's going a bit far for me, but it could be a good way to wake 'em up.

Gangster is the problem.

2006-05-02T08:56:00.000-05:00

Nice to meet you, but... wrong. Well, partially wrong. Gangsterism, or Thug life is a plague on us all, and rap music just happens to be more deeply afflicted than other parts of society. Pimping has been elevated to equate a modern priesthood, and has replaced drug dealing as the preferred activity to build 'street cred.' But the problem is not rap. That is like saying that guns casue crime. Simply not true. If you wrote a rap yourself, you probably wouldn't glorify criminality, and neither would I. Rap itself is a tool, an just like the screwdriver used to threaten me to give up my bike at age 9, it is a tool being misused.
Maybe it could be said that the spoken word is not music, but the vocal intonations used in rap along with the track or even live music in the background clearly prove that rap is music. I understand your attitude about it's negative consequenses, and back in the mid-to-late-80's I had the same opinion. I'm from Chicago, and House music was huge here, so rap got little attention. The only attention it did get was the news coverage of a concert fight or something else negative. In those days, the messages in rap was nowhere near as negative as the grand swath of they are today.
If you want to reassure yourself and be in tuned with your optimistic side, I can give you some examples of rap that don't fit the negative bill. Now, I'm not talking about the Fresh Prince, or some Disney drivel, I mean rappers who are deep into the game, but are not really about crime.
Some examples of people who are talented rap records but not tied into the negative include the following:

Passing Me By - Pharcyde Check the video
http://www.nobodysmiling.com/hiphop/showvideo.php?rid=1951&path=pharcyde
Freedom - Jurassic 5 (Ode to Freedom)
If you only knew - Jurassic 5 (Anti-"Keepin it real")
Bonita Applebum - Tribe Called Quest (Classic Appreciation of a woman)
Sharp Shooters - Talib Kweli & Dead Prez (Second Ammendment Defense)
Jesus Walks -Kanye West (Grammy winnner for Best Rap)
I used to love H.E.R. - Common (Laments negative portrayal in rap)

RESPONSE TO THIS

Two Faced Cop-out

2006-05-01T07:57:00.000-05:00

In his review of the new film "Flight 93" reporter Joel Siegel tries to offer up an insightful quick-hit review by mentioning that the some of the cast played themselves, and that there was no happy ending, and no relief from the sorrow. He says it is sure to make his "Ten Best" for the year. Sounds like it is worth look. He then cops out. He just can't let himself state the conclusion he leads up to. He cannot recommend the film. I don't know why he stopped short. I want to say that is was his liberal, blood dripping heart, but I don't know this guy. I want to say that he hopes to balance his actual review against his Lib-Elite friends who think Iraq was invaded to defend 41's honor. He wants to have it both ways, and I'm calling him on it.

Yea, I decry "bull-$h!t" Joel, you wimped out. Here is the quote that jacks my head:

The screen goes black. And from the audience, no applause. Sobs. Real, deep, heartfelt sobs. That's why I can't recommend you see this movie.

WHAT?

What did he say about "Titanic," or about "Steel Magnolias," or "Fried Green Tomatoes," or "Schindler's List"... hell, what would he say about "My Girl?" AAAARRRGH! [control yourself, Bee--- it's just a goofo review.] Casablanca ends on a sad note, and it is the greatest movie ever made. How can you justify holding back a recommendation because it ties you to the moment it depicts? AARRRRGHHHH!!!!!!!!!

The motion picture is probably the most powerful, and influential art form ever devised, and when you get one that hits you the way an actual story hit you, it seems that a reviewer would want droves to flood the seats.

My gut reaction is that he doesn't want to recommend a vehicle that will help boost the approval ratings for the president. I have not yet seen the film, from the reviews I have come across (admittedly, less than 5) it does justice to the situation. Any film that offers an accurate depiction of the events of September 11 will remind us of the struggle, no make that WAR, we find ourselves roped into, and my right-wing paranoia leads me to think that Ol' Joel Siegel don't want none of that.

If you think you have the stomach for it, here's the review.

I don't recommend you read it.

Dennis Byrne Is IN THE BUILDING!!!

2006-04-27T09:47:00.000-05:00

Okay, yes, yes, yes, I am a nerd. But that's what this whole thing is about isn't it?

This morning as I gobbled my granola while listening to 'ol Bill Bennett, I noticed an Tribune editorial by a guy I hadn't read for years. He was a featured columnist in the Sun-Times during the mid 90's. Around that time the 'Times tossed me a mornin' paper gratis for weeks on end. It usually happened in the spring when the Bulls were making their championship runs, or in the fall when the... well nothing happened in the fall. Anyway, I think it was their attempt at the "puppy dog close" but they did it so often it turned into a case of me getting the milk for free. I never subscribed to the Times.

When I did read it, however, I always liked the sharp wit and original insights written in a column by Dennis Byrne. He always made me laugh or say "Damn, he got that right!" As time drifted on, Jordan retired (for real at some point) and the papers died down. I didn't see anything for Mr. Byrne years.

Stumbling upon him this morning, where he wrote an article for the Tribune about our post Kennedy habit of convicting every other Illinois governor, made me say "Damn, he got that right!" AGAIN! Then at the end of the article there was a listing of his current position as a Chicago area writer b'da, b'da, b'da... and his blogsite. Yes!!!

So I got excited, hopped in the shower and got ready for work then made some calls, and hopped on to his site. He could use some exposure, because he can really craft a word.

To be honest he was probably my favorite columnist (along with his late collegue Steve Neal) at that time, and has probably only been replaced by Mark Steyn (Chek da' blogroll) because I hadn' t seen anything from him.

Well now that he's back in the public eye, I'll be expecting a lot!

His Blog:
Dennis Byrne

Some of his columns:

Beatin' up on Da'Mayor

Sorry State of Illinois

Cowards We're not (Assessment on the WOT)

Minutemen enlist Help from San Diego

2006-04-23T20:25:00.000-05:00

Homeless Advocate Ted Hayes wants to spotlight the fact that illegal immigrants are most likely to take jobs that black people did. They deflate wages on the lower end, and who is it already living on the low end? Oh yeah, black poeple. Maybe Kanye had a point. (Probably not.)

(CBS) LOS ANGELES Several black activists plan to join members of the Minutemen Project to protest illegal immigration, which organizer Ted Hayes touted as the "biggest threat to blacks in America since slavery."

The protest, organized by Hayes' Crispus Attucks Brigade and the American Black Citizens Opposed to Illegal Immigration Invasion, is scheduled to start at 1 p.m.

Hayes, a homeless activist, alleged that most homeless people in Los Angeles are black and illegal immigration compounds the problem since blacks refuse to accept the "slave wages" that many illegal immigrants accept.

Many pro-immigration rallies were held in recent weeks; most of which, called for amnesty to the nation's estimated 12 million illegal immigrants. Many Southland public officials, including Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, supported the protesters.

"While all Americans are suffering from this invasion, we blacks are suffering the most," Hayes said. "We feel like the leaders promoting this issue are being insensitive. This country wasn't built on the backs of immigrants like (Villaraigosa) says. It was built on the back of West African slaves."

Immigrant activist Nativo Lopez believes Hayes is out of step with most black leaders and that both blacks and Hispanics face the same problems.

"Unfortunately, (Hayes) thinks that way," Lopez said. "He has a right to express his opinion, but I don't agree with him. Many and most African American leaders think otherwise and we're appreciative of their support. I'm not interested in Latinos being pitted against African Americans," he said. "We are all in the same boat. We will pull ourselves up together."

The Minutemen Project formed by Jim Gilchrist, patrols the Mexican border. He may attend the protest along with other Minutemen Project members. Hayes said that Minutemen Project members have been unfairly portrayed as racist.

"I've been down to the border with them. They're not racist," Hayes said. "They don't care what color you are."

Da Link.

Racist Repkublicans? ...bore me again.

2006-04-19T14:38:00.000-05:00

I am really tired of people telling me that the GOP is racist. We all are. Here is another proof of the truuf. From Right Wing News.

Let's See Just How Racist Conservatives Are By RtWingNtCase & xtremewing

I believe this is a first for RWN. An entire post culled together (after being cleaned up just a bit and adding links) from posts made by two people in the comments section.

Let's see just how racist conservatives are...

1. Emancipation Proclamation issued by...a Republican President.

2. Slavery abolished under...a Republican President and a Republican Congress.

3. Japanese interned under a Repub...no, wait...sorry, that was a Democrat.

4. (Percentage wise), more Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act than Democrats. They must've had some ulterior racist motive of which only they were aware.

5. Affirmative Action implemented under a Republican President (Nixon).

6. First black Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as well as first black Secretary of State, under a Republican President.

7. First black woman named as Secretary of State...under a Republican President.

8. Still, lots and lots of KKK members in Congress are part of the Republican Party. No...my mistake again - Byrd is the only one I found (and he's a Democrat).

9. Republicans oppose the school choice and vouchers that the...majority of blacks support. Oops, my mistake again - Republicans support them while Democrats oppose them.

10. Well, at least the majority of blacks are pro-choice, right? Nope, most are...pro-life.

11. Well, at least most support gay marriage. Sorry, my mistake again. Once more, Republicans are more in line with majority black views than Democrats.

12. Republicans throw Oreo cookies at...black people running for Congress. Darn, that's the Dems, too.

13. Republicans enacted the Jim Crow laws. Nope, wrong again.

14. Republicans are racist because the Democrats say we are. That's about as close as I can get.

Black College Athletes Graduation Rates Rise

2006-04-18T12:08:00.000-05:00

Good News: Black athletic graduation rates are up since 1984.

Surprise News: Black College atheletes graduate at higher rates than black students in general.

Non-Surprise News: Black women fare better than black men for jocks and geeks alike.

Surprise News II: Black Female graduation is nearly 20% higher than white male graduation rates.

I'm happy to hear the good news.

Here's the story.

Related: Glen "Big Baby" Davis of LSU not going pro.

Send in the Bricks

2006-04-18T03:01:00.000-05:00

Seems that there is a campaign to send bricks to congress in attempts to show support for building the Great Wall of Texas. Good!

Send-a-brick.

I'm not about to try to mail a brick, but my Congressman, Bobby Rush, may get a brick delivered to his local office. Delivered by hand, not thrown. I will resist that urge.

Hat tip: (Michelle Malkin)

Hussein For DEM Ticket in '08

2006-04-18T02:35:00.000-05:00

In 2008, for president, who can the left agree on?

Hussein.

Saddam, that is.

They agree that we supported him in the 80's.
They agree that April Gillespie told him it was okay attack the Kuwaitees.
They agree he was no threat to the USA.
They agree his nation is a sovriegn victim of the USA.
They agree that the invasion of Iraq was (and is) an illegal, unjust war.
They agree that the "illegal war" is for oil.
They agree that the Food for Oil Scandal is poppycock.
They agree that we gave him his wmd stock.
They agree he had no wmd.
They agree that Condi will continue the mission...

With that in mind they can all support One Leader for President in 2008...

(Thanky, American Digest.)

Detroit To follow model of Reagan?

2006-04-17T01:32:00.000-05:00

After making a few suspicious moves as mayor of Detroit, it seems that Kwame Kilpatrick "The Hip-Hop Mayor" of Detroit may have decided to make some moves in the right directions.

In an article by Josh Hendrickson at Tech Central Station, we find that the mayor is leaning toward privatization in attempts to cut the fat and keep the budget in line.

I wonder whether that means he will be looking toward school vouchers any time soon???

Here's the skinny. Form your own conclusion.

I cannot hire as I cannot fire.

2006-04-13T09:17:00.001-05:00

That's from a Bloomberg report on French employment laws. People want the benefits without the costs. Consider this; if you are bad at your job and get fired, it is the employer's way of staying in business which makes the other jobs at that business possible.

As someone putting up the capital to make the business run, private employers have to be able to pull the plug when they see their investment going the wrong way.

That's not the case in France. Cheque this out.

21st Century's Best Stock Quarter Yet!

2006-04-11T08:11:00.000-05:00

Quick Gist:

"the S&P 500 scoring its strongest first-quarter gain in seven years"

Faltering economy huh?

Hat tip: Right Makes Right

Update: U.S. Rose More Than Forecast in March

Re-Taking America

2006-04-10T09:40:00.000-05:00

The Nation Of Aztlan

This is a video of people who want to turn part of the US into the mythic land of Aztlan. It reminds me of Black Nationalists who want to grow a nation of their own. The common factor in both movements is the political scourge of the 20th Century; Communism.

Why do commies tell blue colar people that they should try to leave the current system? Don't they see that the path from there is only the "Road to Surfdom?"

In this case, however there is no reason to try to address the issue. There are parts of the US that were given to us by Mexico. That battle is over. You can't have it back.

Some people aren't working with a full deck here.

March '06 - Safest Yet

2006-04-09T20:48:00.000-05:00

I meant to Link to this earlier, but here goes:

When ranked by average casualties per day, the month of March 2006 turned out to be the least deadly for US troops serving in Iraq. That news comes from icasualties.org where there is a running toll of the troops downed and injured during their presence in Iraq since the US invasion.

I lifted this from the Washington Post:

Combat-related deaths during March numbered 25, declining for the fifth consecutive month.

That sounds like good news to the US forces IMHO, but about an inch higher in the same article, the tooth gnashing seems to be under way for the wrong reasons. Jonathan Finer the author, suggests that "a surge in killings of Iraqi troops and civilians writes that the overall death rate in the conflict is growing." Well if we are able to dodge bullets faster, and they end up biting bullets faster, doesn't that mean we have the momentum swinging our way?

Our goal (to the delight of the Very-Kerry types) has been to reduce our own involvement, and increase the involvement of the Iraqis. Looks like Ol GW wins again! (don't remind me of immigration, don't remind me of immigration, don't remind me of immigration)

Hat Tip: Scott Wickham Experience

Would the Real Cyntiha McKinney Please Stand Up?

2006-04-07T08:32:00.000-05:00

When I decided to look for pictures of C-MaK to compare her old and new looks, I thought they would be more difficult to distinguish than they turned out to be. Looking at them side by side, they seem to be the same person, but I knew what I was looking for.

The whole matter seems to have been blown out of proportions, (kinda like her new do... Bwwaaa hahahaahh. I kill me. Ha!)

I thought about it and decided that the whole incident was a mistake, but once it happened, she decided to ride it out and be defiant for a while so she could jockey for a better position in the hierarchy of Victimhood Claimants.

This incident, and her election loss a few years ago lets her be seen as a target of the "evil racist" right wing. Oh, yeah, the Jews hate her too. Just ask her.

She likes it that way.

Anyway, with all that conservative energy against her, she has got to gain capital among the moonbat left.

and again, she likes it that way.

What other serious person would accuse the president of allowing an attack like Sept. 11. Well it worked. We'll be against almost anything she says for years.

She likes it that way.

Conservative Blacks Love Black People

2006-04-07T07:56:00.001-05:00

Cynthia's Interests asks:

If you are Black and Republican, is it a Party requirement to automatically have a disdain for anything that represent or remind you of Blackness?

Quite contrary to the line pushed by the victimology aristocracy, we do like, and even love black people, and we know we are black. If we didn't how would you know by reading our websites?

Racial disclosure is not something required. It's a choice.

Look at the blogrolls of the Internet's conservative opinion makers. Usually you find links to other black Conservatives, and often links to black Leftists!!! Black Pride meets Free Speech!

Though we consider our conscious choices to often be more important than our born-in-skin-color, we recognize that our skin color played a role in where we are today. We also see the fact that others with our same skin color are often in sad positions. The issue here is that we think the best way to address the issues of blacks, and others, is to face them by putting our best foot forward and do the most we can do on our own.

The left seems to want to blame someone else, or demand apologies, or beg for favors from others. While we must balance the politics of leveraging our interests and using available advantages, we should not force others to help us because of their guilt about what was done against us. We must be able to pedal our talents and virtues based on our talents and virtues alone. Only then can we leverage those assets into demands for more from others.

It's all about the Capitalism.

2006-04-04T23:32:00.000-05:00

It must be true that analysts who dote on one subject are able to shed light on other subjects if only we as their audience will do some additional analysis of our own. In the debates about immigration, two opinions of mine have been formed in exactly that way. The opinions were formed before the 500,000 stormed the streets of Los Angeles, but since that does seem to be the theme for this spring’s punditry, I thought I would throw in my “Jack Handy’s”.

I have considered the musings of someone else on another subject, and developed ideas on a new subject that seem to be original. I’m sure someone has come up with this line of thought before, but I don’t remember anyone telling me about it.

For some time now I have enjoyed the columns of Mark Steyn. Since September 11, and probably even before then, he has amused me with his lava-hot wit, and an uncanny grasp of the situation the world is in. To put it simply, he has said that Europe is dying because they have not re-populated themselves, or, they have not had enough children to continue to grow. The same is true to a degree here in the US, especially when it comes to white people. And by now we have all heard that a shrinking re-population rate hits the blue staters even harder than us the sister-lovin’ inbred wing-nuts.

Wired Magazine has a feature called “Infoporn” where they make a graphic to illustrate the condition of the entire world related to some new subject every month. Well one month they made a graphic illustrating the level of youth in a population. No, no, no, I don’t mean the number of people who own an iPod, or who have a gold-front-grill. Their youth map laid out the worldwide topography based on the age of each country’s population.

Well speaking from my Cold War code book, the first and second worlds lean pretty old, and the third world… Pakistan, India, Africa, South America, well let’s just say that most of them were born after Reagan demanded the Berlin Wall be torn down.

All of this led me to one of the possible reasons why Ol’ GW has dang near ignored the issue of illegal immigration for the last 5 years. His thoughts could be that we need the influx of young people to compete with the population growth forecasts in other regions of the world. I mean, if Americans are dying off, isn’t it a good idea to try to replace them with younger, larger familied, death defying Latin Americans? Sure there would be some mild culture clashing, but as soon as they learned English and we learned to the “bachata” the rest was just spare change. It’s just a theory, but aside from the security issue, it could easily be the way to insure that we don’t just dwindle away.

My second idea hatched by listening to others talk about different issues is that while I am wholeheartedly in favor of democracy in Iraq, we could do well to spreads some capitalism here in the Western Hemisphere. We could start with Mexico and Venezuela. Just as a center for free market capitalism in the Arab Mid-east would light a torch under the oppressive regimes there, that same spirit would allow our southern neighbors to stay home and compete from there. I’m sure they would be quite happy to have our military might fight against the corruption rumored to be so deeply rooted in their politics and industry. That does not mean that I am ready to lend out our military. When they are done in Iraq, it would be nice to catch a breather.

The growth of capitalism in Mexico, though, would make it easier for us to weaken support for the next contestant in the Axis parade, Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez. Not content with winning the Miss Universe competition on a regular basis, Chavez has done more to revive Communism in the last 5 years than anything Fidel Castro had done through the previous 25.

If only we could spread in Latin America, the rising tide would tip his boat right over. This would reduce our flood of illegals (aka trespassers) and provide more economic stability worldwide.

Again, these are just thoughts. And they’re copyrighted so… no, they’re not. Please paste and link as you wish.

Commies of a feather, denounce together.

2006-03-09T10:18:00.000-06:00

China says that "the life and security of the people of the United States has not been under efficient protection" in a response to the State Department's report on human rights.

This report should be ignored by government officials.

If that ain't a case of the pot calling the kettle "metal." "Black" is only on the outside, and sometimes pots aren't black, but they are all metal to the core. Sure the US has some areas we could improve upon, but China is "metal" to the core.

In this we see anothe softball served up from the Red Chinese of China, to the Red Democrats in the US. Commies of a feather, denounce together. Watch the way this plays out. You can be sure that the right will be defensive, and defend the US once again, but the left is certain to try to turn this into political capital. Even from human rights abusers like China.

Wait 'till the Christian right in China responds to this.

We'll be waiting a long time.

Blanche Kelso Bruce - HERO!

2006-03-02T10:56:00.000-06:00

Now for a bit of Black History outside of the confines of February. March 1 is the birthday of the first Black US Senator to serve out his full term, and the only person to serve out a full term who was ever a slave.

Happy Birthday Senator Bruce!

I find it quite ironic that Other than Senator Edward Brooke of Mass, the Other Black Senators were from Mississippi. Well not really. The two from IL are really not from Mississippi, but there are so many blacks here from Mississippi, I've heard Chicago called North Mississippi.

Anyway Back to our story.
There have been only five Black US Senators.
This is a list of them with their bios.

(stolen from Here)
There was:

REVELS, Hiram Rhodes, (1827 - 1901)

Senate Years of Service: 1870-1871
Party: Republican
FIRST BLACK SENATOR

REVELS, Hiram Rhodes, a Senator from Mississippi; born in Fayetteville, Cumberland County, N.C., on September 27, 1827; attended various schools, seminaries, and Knox College, Galesburg, Ill.; barber; ordained a minister in the African Methodist Episcopal Church at Baltimore, Md., in 1845; carried on religious work in Indiana, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Missouri; accepted a pastorate in Baltimore, Md., in 1860; at the outbreak of the Civil War assisted in recruiting two regiments of African American troops in Maryland; served in Vicksburg, Miss., as chaplain of a Negro regiment and organized African American churches in that State; established a school for freedmen in St. Louis, Mo., in 1863; settled in Natchez, Miss., in 1866; elected alderman in 1868; member, State senate 1870; elected as a Republican to the United States Senate; presented his credentials upon the readmission of Mississippi to representation on February 23, 1870; took the oath of office on February 25, 1870, after the Senate resolved a challenge to his credentials, and served from February 23, 1870 until March 3, 1871; first African American Senator; secretary of State ad interim of Mississippi in 1873; president of the Alcorn Agricultural College, Rodney, Miss., 1876-1882; moved to Holly Springs, Marshall County, Miss., and continued his religious work; died in Aberdeen, Miss., January 16, 1901; interment in Hill Crest Cemetery, Holly Springs, Miss.

BRUCE, Blanche Kelso, (1841 - 1898)

Senate Years of Service: 1875-1881
Party: Republican
FIRST BLACK TO SERVE OUT FULL TERM IN THE SENATE

BRUCE, Blanche Kelso, a Senator from Mississippi; born in slavery near Farmville, Prince Edward County, Va., March 1, 1841; was tutored by his master’s son; left his master at the beginning of the Civil War; taught school in Hannibal, Mo.; after the war became a planter in Mississippi; member of the Mississippi Levee Board; sheriff and tax collector of Bolivar County 1872-1875; elected as a Republican to the United States Senate and served from March 4, 1875, to March 3, 1881; was the first African American to serve a full term in the United States Senate; appointed Register of the Treasury by President James Garfield 1881; recorder of deeds for the District of Columbia 1891-1893; again Register of the Treasury from 1897 until his death in Washington, D.C., on March 17, 1898; interment in Woodlawn Cemetery.

BROOKE, Edward William, III, (1919 - )

Senate Years of Service: 1967-1979
Party: Republican
FIRST BLACK SENATOR ELECTED BY POPULAR VOTE &
ONLY BLACK SENATOR EVER RE-ELECTED

BROOKE, Edward William, III, a Senator from Massachusetts; born in Washington, D.C., October 26, 1919; attended the public schools of Washington, D.C.; graduated from Howard University, Washington, D.C., in 1941; graduated, Boston University Law School 1948; captain, United States Army, infantry, with five years of active service in the European theater of operations; chairman of Finance Commission, city of Boston 1961-1962; elected attorney general of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in 1962; reelected in 1964; elected as a Republican to the United States Senate in 1966; reelected in 1972 and served from January 3, 1967, to January 3, 1979; unsuccessful candidate for reelection in 1978; first African American elected to the Senate by popular vote; lawyer; awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom on June 23, 2004; is a resident of Miami, Fla.

MOSELEY BRAUN, Carol, (1947 - )

Senate Years of Service: 1993-1999
Party: Democrat
FIRST BLACK WOMAN IN THE US SENATE

MOSELEY BRAUN, Carol, a Senator from Illinois; born in Chicago, Ill., August 16, 1947; educated in Chicago public schools; graduated, University of Illinois 1969; graduated, University of Chicago School of Law 1972; admitted to the Illinois bar in Chicago 1973; prosecutor, office of the United States Attorney, Chicago 1973-1977; member and assistant majority leader, Illinois house of representatives 1978-1988; recorder of deeds, Cook County, Ill., 1988-1992; elected as a Democrat to the United States Senate in 1992, and served from January 3, 1993, to January 3, 1999; unsuccessful candidate for reelection in 1998; ambassador to New Zealand and Samoa, December 15, 1999-2001; candidate for the Democratic nomination for president in 2004; entrepreneur; is a resident of Chicago, Ill., Atlanta, Ga., and Union Springs, Ala.

OBAMA, Barack, (1961 - )

Senate Years of Service: 2005-
Party: Democrat
FIRST BLACK... WELL, NOTHING SENATE RELATED.
FIFTH BLACK IN THE US SENATE

OBAMA, Barack, a Senator from Illinois; born in Honolulu, Hawaii, August 4, 1961; obtained early education in Jakarta, Indonesia, and Hawaii; continued education at Occidental College, Los Angeles, Calif., and Columbia University, New York City; studied law at Harvard University, where he became the first African American president of the Harvard Law Review, and received J.D. in 1992; lecturer on constitutional law, University of Chicago; member, Illinois State senate 1997-2004; elected as a Democrat to the U.S. Senate in 2004 for term beginning January 3, 2005.

Thanks to Booker and Blackelectorate.com (my home page) for the story.

Even the Venezuelan Foriegn Minister agrees

2006-03-02T07:39:00.000-06:00

''It's a natural byproduct of their confrontation with the United States,'' said Armando Durán, a columnist and former Venezuelan foreign minister. ``Chávez looks for an alliance with those who confront the U.S.''

According the former foriegn minister, Chavez wants to butt heads. Some speculate that this is a move to position himself as the Anti-American for the upcoming December Election, but I think there has to be more than that. When these two (or three if you count Cuba) countries are already working joint ventures to build major manufacuturing plants, "Houston, we have a problem."

Days earlier, Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte told the Senate Intelligence Committee that Venezuela is ``seeking closer economic, military, and diplomatic ties with Iran and North Korea.''

Again there is that word. MILITARY. And then we get word that Hugo wants to vote against reporting Iran to the UN security council. What is the purpose of the UN again, please? Oh, right it was established in part, to give influence to rogue nations who would normally have no international presence. Okay, not really, but sometimes it sure does look that way...

The Full Story Here:

Chavez's wooing of Iran called Troubling
Miami Herald

Bedtime for Hugo?

2006-03-01T09:53:00.000-06:00

Chavez states he will work to smash US empire

La Havana, Cuba, February 4, 2006 (Notimex).- Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez stated that the US government will try "hard to maintain the empire," but "we'll do everything we can to smash the empire.

"We're happy because of the maximum representatives for that killer government hurting us," Chavez stated during a speech in the Plaza de la Revolucion in La Havana. Cuban president Fidel Castro was there.
---------------------------------------

Because of things like this, some have asked whether we are going to go in and pull a "Panama" or a "Grenada" in the land of Ms. Universe.

I think Bush is more likely to act quickly and without UN interference because the percieved threat is here in the Americas. I find it quite interesting that the new golden child of Communism is rolling past China as an ally. He alligns himself with the spokes of the Axis itself.

The hanwriting that should be easy to see is that Chavez wants to be 100% at odds with the policies of the US. If that were not the case, he would not pick our three most hated international neighbors to build closer economic and MILITARY ties.

I think this means that Chaves wants to prop himself up to his citizens and to the world as the little guy who stands up to US power. He is making a grave mistake.

To have a stronger influence and be taken seriously as a democrat, he needs to develop more business at home. Treating Venezuela like Saudi Arabia, where the state owns the greatest natural rescource, suppressing it's people's freedom does not gain points with us.

Because funny is never off limits.

2006-02-09T13:25:00.000-06:00

http://www.tshirthell.com/store/product.php?productid=585

Their Eyes were reading Smut

2006-01-06T08:30:00.000-06:00

This is one my wife and I talk about all the time. Why is it that the black section of the bookstore is filled with pornography? Nothing but "Booty Books." Full length nothing.

For the mainstream audience, these things are sectioned off to an area called "Romance Novels." I guess they are filled with tycoons and the women they sweep off their feet, buff garneners and their employees, or former criminals hoping to be successful detectives until "she" walked in.

In the black world the diference is this. ... Well really I don't know what the diference is. I guess in "Booty Books" there is the single mother, or the brotha on the DL, or the reporter-ette hoping to balance a career, and a hot sex life while traveling to Aruba and struggling to get past "the Man." Or in her case the snippy white bi*** standing between the heroine and an anchor position on the 10:00 news.

Any way it goes, it should not be classified as general reading with black characters. It's porno. How do I know? I haven't read an entire "booty book" before, but I do know how to open a book and find the "good part." And the "good part" ain't no Desparate Housewives. It's rough. And it shouldn't be confused with actual literature, or even general reading. It is pathetic.

According to author Nick Chiles, he has noticed the same thing too. In the New York Times, no less:

January 4, 2006

Op-Ed Contributor

Their Eyes Were Reading Smut

By NICK CHILES

Snellville, Ga.

LAST month I happened to go into the Borders Books store at the Stonecrest mall in Lithonia, Ga., about a half-hour from my house here. To my surprise, it had one of the largest collections of books by black authors that I've ever seen outside an independent black bookstore, rows and rows of bookcases. This is the sort of discovery that makes the pulse quicken, evidence of a population I've spent most of my professional life seeking: African-American readers. What a thrill to have so much space in a major chain store devoted to this country's black writers.

With an extra spring in my step, I walked into the "African-American Literature" section - and what I saw there thoroughly embarrassed and disgusted me.

On shelf after shelf, in bookcase after bookcase, all that I could see was lurid book jackets displaying all forms of brown flesh, usually half-naked and in some erotic pose, often accompanied by guns and other symbols of criminal life. I felt as if I was walking into a pornography shop, except in this case the smut is being produced by and for my people, and it is called "literature."

As a black author, I had certainly become familiar with the sexualization and degradation of black fiction. Over the last several years, I had watched the shelves of black bookstores around the country and the tables of street vendors, particularly in New York City, become overrun with novels that seemed to appeal exclusively to our most prurient natures - as if these nasty books were pairing off back in the stockrooms like little paperback rabbits and churning out even more graphic offspring that make Ralph Ellison books cringe into a dusty corner.

Early last year I walked into a B. Dalton bookstore in a New Jersey mall where the manager had always proudly told me how well my books were selling. This time, I was introduced to a new manager who was just as proud to show me an enhanced black books section teeming with this new black erotica. I've also noticed much more of this oversexed genre in Barnes & Noble bookstores over the past few months, although it's harder to see there since the chain doesn't appear to have separate black fiction sections.

But up until that visit to Borders in Lithonia, I had thought this mostly a phenomenon of the black retail world, where the black bookstore owners and street vendors say they have to stock what sells, and increasingly what sells are stories that glorify and glamorize black criminals. The genre has been described by different names; "ghetto fiction" and "street lit" are two I've heard most often. Apparently, what we are now seeing is the crossover of this genre to mainstream bookstores.

But the placard above this section of Borders in Lithonia didn't say "Street Lit," it said "African-American Literature." We were all represented under that placard, the whole community of black authors - from me to Terry McMillan and Toni Morrison, from Yolanda Joe and Benilde Little to Edward P. Jones and Kuwana Haulsey - surrounded and swallowed whole on the shelves by an overwhelming wave of titles and jackets that I wouldn't want my 13-year-old son to see: "Hustlin' Backwards." "Legit Baller." "A Hustler's Wife." "Chocolate Flava."

I've heard defenders say that the main buyers of these books, young black women, have simply found something that speaks to them, and that it's great that they're reading something. I'd agree if these books were a starting point, and that readers ultimately turned to works inspired by the best that's in us, not the worst.

But we're not seeing evidence of that. On Essence magazine's list of best sellers at black bookstores, for example, authors of street lit now dominate, driving out serious writers. Under the heading "African-American Literature," what's available is almost exclusively pornography for black women.

As I stood there in Borders, I had two sensations: I was ashamed and mortified to see my books sitting on the same shelves as these titles; and secondly, as someone who makes a living as a writer I felt I had no way to compete with these purveyors of crassness.

That leaves me wondering where we - writers, publishers, readers, the black community - go from here. Is street fiction some passing fad, or does it represent our future? It's depressing that this noble profession, one that I aspired to as a child from the moment I first cracked open James Baldwin and Gabriel García Márquez about 30 years ago, has been reduced by the greed of the publishing industry and the ways of the American marketplace to a tasteless collection of pornography.

I realize that publishing is a business, but publishers also have a responsibility to balance street lit with more quality writing. After all, how are we going to explain ourselves to the next generation of writers and readers who will wonder why they have so little to read of import and value produced in the early 21st century, why their founts of inspiration are so parched?

At times, I push myself away from the computer in anger. I don't want to compete with "Legit Baller." But then I come across something like "The Known World" by Edward P. Jones and again I am inspired.

But I must say that I retain very little of the hope and excitement and enthusiasm that I had when my first book was published eight years ago. I feel defeated, disrespected and troubled about the future of my community and my little subsection of this carnivorous, unforgiving industry.

Nick Chiles, the editor in chief of Odyssey Couleur magazine, is the co-author, with Denene Millner, of "A Love Story."

Holy Hellbound Calendar!

2006-01-05T09:09:00.000-06:00

Some misguided Christians in Germany thought it would be a good idea to make a calendar featuring, get this, --- Erotic images from the Bible.

Here's the Skinny:

A German Protestant youth group has put together a 2006 calendar illustrated with erotic scenes from the Bible.

The 12 re-enacted passages feature a bare-breasted Delilah cutting Samson's hair and a nude Eve offering an apple.

The Nuremberg-based group said they wanted to represent the Bible in a way that would entice young people.

Nuremberg pastor Bernd Grasser said: "It's just wonderful when teenagers commit themselves with their hair and their skin to the bible."

"There's a whole range of biblical scriptures simply bursting with eroticism," said Stefan Wiest, 32, who took the racy photographs.

Anne Rohmer, 21, wearing garters and stockings, posed on a doorstep as the prostitute Rahab.

"We wanted to represent the Bible in a different way and to interest young people," she told news agency Reuters.

"Anyway, it doesn't say anywhere in the Bible that you are forbidden to show yourself nude."

Bernd Grasser, pastor of the church in Nuremberg where the calendar is being sold, said he was supportive of the project.

Hosny Mubarak Doesn't like Black People

2006-01-03T10:35:00.000-06:00

I'm going to have to agree with the fellow Bookerista and the CaribPundit. Egypt needs no more money from me or my government. Let them stand on their own two. From Nory Younis, here is the upshot.

A camp of Sudanese refugees was expelled form a Cairo park using water hoses, and police batons with brutal beatings in the dark of night.

At 1:00 am, and it was really cold, security forced started flushing the Refugees with three water cannons from three different sides. First spray lasted for almost 6 minutes..

From the report, there seemed to be a special disdain reserved for the black Sudanese, without regard to their religion.

Refugees lined up and started warming up too but saying ‘allah akbar’, ‘la ilaha ella allah’ and ‘hasbona allah wa neama al wakil’ meaning there is no god but allah and only him we delegate to handle our injustice. The Christians chanted Halleluiah. And this set identity for the war players. The few civilian audience started cheering for the Egyptian army against the dirty / black / Christian parasites. Yes, there was no humanity in the scene.

And you thought George Bush didn't like Black People. Hah.

Bolivia enters the "Against Us" Column

2005-12-27T20:39:00.000-06:00

sounds like I'm spinning doesn't it? Well read the last sentence. The commies are coming, the commies are coming!

Morales Headed Toward Victory in Bolivia
By FIONA SMITH
Associated Press Writer
Nearly complete vote tabulations Wednesday pointed to an easy victory by leftist leader Evo Morales, showing the coca grower with more popular support than any Bolivian president since democracy was restored two decades ago.

Morales, an Aymara Indian active in street protests that drove two presidents from office since 2003, had 54.3 percent of the votes cast in Sunday's election, according to official returns based on tallies from 93 percent of polling places.

Turnout was near 85 percent, much higher than in previous elections in this poor South American nation, the electoral court said. He campaigned against Bolivia's free-market policies and vowed to be Washington's "nightmare" while criticizing the U.S.-backed campaign to eradicate the coca crop, which provides the base of cocaine.

Morales' outright majority in the eight-man race was unexpected. It is the first time since democratic rule resumed in 1982 that Bolivia's presidential election did not end inconclusively at the ballot box, leaving it to Congress to make the final choice.

The surprising strength of his victory was one reason widely held fears of post-election chaos dissipated. Fitch Ratings, an international credit rating agency, kept Bolivia's credit rating unchanged Wednesday, saying Morales' government might have a greater degree of legitimacy than its recent predecessors and therefore lead to better governance.

Conservative parties held on to many seats in Congress, but Morales' strong victory should give him leverage with Bolivia's political and business elite as he makes the transition from leader of street protests to his nation's presidents, analysts said.

"If the opposition parties are seen as not being constructive and blocking everything Morales tries to do that would not be in their own interests," said Michael Shifter, vice president for policy at Inter-American Dialogue, a Washington-based think tank.

"I think that they initially would have to be pretty cooperative, recognizing that Morales has a very broad and impressive mandate."

The National Electoral Court wasn't expected to formally declare Morales the winner until all votes are counted, but his victory margin has increased as ballots arrive from his strongholds in remote areas.

His conservative rival, Jorge Quiroga, conceded defeat after finishing with just 28.6 percent, and Bolivia's caretaker president was already organizing a transition team in anticipation of Morales' inauguration Jan. 22.

Morales, 46, will be the country's first Indian president during its 180 years of independence even though Indians make up a majority of the population.

Although he is a coca farmer himself and long a critic of the anti-drug eradication campaign, Morales insists his government will fight drug trafficking, but also will preserve a legal market for coca in Bolivia. For thousands of years, people in the Andes have chewed coca to stave off hunger, made it into tea or used it as medicine.

Morales leads the Movement Toward Socialism party and counts Cuban President Fidel Castro and Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez among his closest allies. But he says he will protect private property while turning over "vacant, unproductive" land to poor farmers and increasing state control of Bolivia's natural gas reserves.

He also has said he welcomes good relations with the United States, but won't accept a "relationship of submission."

In turn, U.S. diplomats have offered congratulations, but expressed caution about the victory of a man who has described himself as the "nightmare" for the United States.

Aphorisms - by John Leo

2005-12-27T11:02:00.000-06:00

I liked this one from S. Korea's Kim Jong Il. It applies well to tyrants:

“Live for the state and the state will live for you.”

Aphorisms 2006

By John Leo

Dec 26, 2005

People no longer bother much to create new aphorisms, adages and memorable sayings. But when they do, this column boldly moves to collect them. “An aphorism is a one-line novel,” said Ukrainian author and aphorism fanatic Leonid Sukhorukov. Here are some more recent extra-short novels.

“The plural of anecdote is not data,” said Frank Kotsonis. “A journey of a thousand miles starts with an airline ticket. Unless you’re crazy,” observed aphorist Chad Carter. “We campaign in poetry; we govern in prose,” said President Jed Bartlet of TV’s “West Wing.” “Where there’s Saddam, there’s Gomorrah,” said author and blogger Stefan Kanfer of Stefan Kanfer’s Gadflights.

“Nobody ever went to a ballgame to see the umpire,” said chief justice John Roberts, talking about the properly modest role of judges. Ann Coulter, typically sharper than your average aphorist, said: “When conservative judges strike down laws, it’s because of what’s in the Constitution. When liberal judges strike down laws. It’s because of what’s in the New York Times.”

“Every liberal thinks he’s intellectually superior to conservatives; every conservative I know wants to think of himself as morally superior,” said former Clinton administration official Paul Begala. “Whichever side denounces the other for politicizing the issue is losing the argument,” said Rep. Barney Frank.

Columnist and author David Brooks wrote: “If the true thing is obvious and boring, the liberal person will go off and say something original, even if it is completely idiotic. This is how deconstructionism got started.” (Conservatives, when they stumble on a new idea, tend to keep saying it over and over, .he said at length too excessive for an aphorism.) Blogger Megan McArdle, who writes under the name “Jane Galt” at Asymmetrical Information, offered “Jane’s Law: The devotees of the party in power are smug and arrogant. The devotees of the party out of power are insane.” In the Hawks vs. Doves sweepstakes, Charles Moore wrote in the Daily Telegraph of London: “Remember that the hawk is a bird that can see things from a long way off.” A less serious reflection on hawkishness came from thriller-writer Joseph Finder: “Hawks may soar, but chipmunks don’t get sucked into jet engines.”

North Korean dictator Kim Jong-Il issued a sort of aphorism this month: “The Destiny of a Nation Is a Destiny of an Individual and the Latter’s Life is Guaranteed by the Former’s Life.” This needs work. Try this version, KJI: “Live for the state and the state will live for you.”

Author Tammy Bruce, writing about the cult of victimology, wrote: “When your victimhood is your empowerment, recovery is the enemy.” “Heroes don’t have to be public figures; they can be right in your family,” said Billy Crystal, referring to his mother and father. Crediting his mother, law professor and blogger Eugene Volokh of The Volokh Conspiracy write: “Other people’s children always grow up more quickly.”

“Any law named after a person is bad law,” wrote law professor and blogger Glenn Reynolds of InstaPundit. “The right to offend is far more important than any right not to be offended,” said Andrew Sullivan, “You can’t defend except by offense,” said Donald Rumsfeld, taking the offensive. “Corruption keeps us safe and warm,” says a cynical character in the movie Syriana Michael Kinsley wrote: “If hypocrisy is the tribute vice pays to virtue, piousness is virtue paying tribute to itself.” Writer Mark Steyn said, “Multiculturalism is a kind of societal Stockholm Syndrome.” In the Washington Post, Ruth Marcus wrote: “Diversity at the expense of quality is no virtue, but quality without diversity is nonetheless a vice.” Aphorist Mauro Cherubini said, “Computers make it easier to do a lot of things, but most of the things they make it easier to do don’t need to be done.”

“There is nothing quite so powerful as an idea whose time has passed,” said David Frum. “Many people think the purpose of their faith is to make THEM feel good,” said aphorist Lee Frank.“Politics is kind of like sport for old guys” said Mitt Romney, governor of Massachusetts. “On a net basis, modernity is good for you,” said the late Wall Street Journal editor Robert Bartley.

The late media critic David Shaw, lamenting the number of chatterers it takes to broadcast Air America, said: “It shouldn’t take a village to raise a radio program.” Entrepreneur Bo Peabody said: “The vast majority of the press is not concerned in covering what is actually happening. They are interested in covering what they think people want to think is actually happening.” “Falsetto is the highest expression of emotion,” said press critic Jack Shafer. Chris Browne, the cartoonist of “Hagar the Horrible, “ said “Everybody has to believe in something-I believe I’ll have another drink.”

The aphorism "We campaign in poetry, we govern in prose," spoken by President Jed Bartlet on West Wing, was coined years earlier by New York Governor Mario Cuomo. The "I believe I'll have another drink" line came from W.C. Fields.

LaShawn Does not Hate Black People!!!

2005-12-22T12:53:00.000-06:00

LaShawn Barber holds her own again as one of the most outspoken speakers of our day. As a conservative and a Christian, she is used to persecution, but today she decided to address the issue of whether she hates black people.

Her answer is "no."

Check it out Here.

Clinton has it both ways. again.

2005-11-16T08:35:00.000-06:00

Fat boy bill.

He just can't shut up. And when he talks it always comes from both sides of his neck. I wish I had the full quote, but he says the Iraq Invasion was a "big mistake" and that, "Saddam is gone. It's a good thing, but I don't agree with what was done, "

So, fatty, why didn't you do something beyond shooting at scuds from 30K feet? He says the planning was wrong, and parts of that we all agree with, but the planning he would have done included regime change. As soon as that 'ol Hussein died.

Double talking phony.

Clinton says Iraq invasion was a big mistake
By ASSOCIATED PRESS
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates

The United States made a "big mistake" when it invaded Iraq, former President Bill Clinton said Wednesday, citing the lack of planning for what would happen after dictator Saddam Hussein was overthrown.
"Saddam is gone. It's a good thing, but I don't agree with what was done, " Clinton told students at the American University of Dubai.
"It was a big mistake. The American government made several errors ... one of which is how easy it would be to get rid of Saddam and how hard it would be to unite the country."
Clinton did however say that the United States had done some good things in Iraq: the removal of Saddam, the ratification of a new constitution, and the holding of parliamentary elections.

Gay Marriage ammendments work for the right.

2005-11-08T16:36:00.000-06:00

Well the question must be decided by someone, and the legislatures are too scared to be accountable. We could just pass a law, but legislatures are afraid of the backlash. They don't really want new definitions of marriage, but they want to be able to say that it is the will of the people.

The fact is that the current definition IS the will of the people.

If it was not true the issue would energize people to go vote for the new definitions. The people don't really want new definitions. While those who suport new definitions are not fired up, those who see a growing trend of redefining 'normal' are fired up. They vote.

Every time it appears on a ballot (outside of San Francisco) it will lose, and the GOP'ers (and anyone else) supporting it will win.

France don't need no Stinkin Patriot Act

2005-11-08T15:36:00.000-06:00

Looks like they're getting tough in Gaul.

Bloggers Who Urged Rioters Investigated

Paris prosecutors opened an inquiry Tuesday into two young bloggers who urged French youths to riot and revolt against the police, a judicial official said.

The youths, a 16-year-old French teen and an 18-year-old with Ghanian nationality, were detained Monday in the Paris region, the official said.

They were to be placed under investigation, a step short of formal charges, for inciting harm to people and property over the Internet, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because French law bars the disclosure of information from ongoing investigations. The charge carries a risk of up to five years in prison and a $52,800 fine.

Damn Kids.

Wish for the best in France

2005-11-08T14:50:00.000-06:00

I find it ironic that France now finds itself the target of worldwide media scrutiny for the exact opposite reason the US was under the microscope. We were too bold, they have been to soft.

The Euro-suck ups on the left always want to remind us of how much more advanced Europe is when it comes to race relations. When I was growing up, people would always talk about how progressive France was. They would use the example of Josephine Baker. She moved to France after being too popular too black, and too nude. Well She is probably disapppointed by their inaction today.

From the left I hear that these are just disenfranchised and discriminated youths, and from the right I hear that they are the footsoldiers of the Mujahadeen, ready to overtake all of Europe.

I think the right is right, but there is surely a bit of both. What I don't understand is how it is that it takes 12 days for riots and car-burnings to warrent curfews. I mean, What took ya so long? Here in the states, we value order. We'd have shot those kids after 5 days, and by day 12 we'd be back to fighting over Judge Alito.

Different Strokes for different folks. folks.

Some Tee-Shirts!

2005-11-08T14:16:00.000-06:00

I need to get me one of these Tee-Shirts! They're cool.

I went to Bradley University in Peoria, IL, and since I think Bradley may lose the fight to keep the name "braves" I thought I'd bring up the fact that I have always been partial to the name "Fightin' Squirrels." Our squirrels were always so friendly. They were red, and the ones I was used to in Chicago were grey (or is that 'gray'?) I have a shirt now with the Fighting Squirrels Football team's Undefeated Season. Really it is every season since about 1971 when we disbanded our football team. I could get a t-shirt like this:

http://www.cafepress.com/peoriatees.34808642

Who can you believe anymore?

2005-09-29T10:51:00.000-05:00

LA Times

Katrina Takes a Toll on Truth, News Accuracy
Rumors supplanted accurate information and media magnified the problem. Rapes, violence and estimates of the dead were wrong.By Susannah Rosenblatt and James RaineyTimes Staff WritersSeptember 27, 2005BATON ROUGE, La. — Maj. Ed Bush recalled how he stood in the bed of a pickup truck in the days after Hurricane Katrina, struggling to help the crowd outside the Louisiana Superdome separate fact from fiction. Armed only with a megaphone and scant information, he might have been shouting into, well, a hurricane.The National Guard spokesman's accounts about rescue efforts, water supplies and first aid all but disappeared amid the roar of a 24-hour rumor mill at New Orleans' main evacuation shelter. Then a frenzied media recycled and amplified many of the unverified reports."It just morphed into this mythical place where the most unthinkable deeds were being done," Bush said Monday of the Superdome.His assessment is one of several in recent days to conclude that newspapers and television exaggerated criminal behavior in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, particularly at the overcrowded Superdome and Convention Center.The New Orleans Times-Picayune on Monday described inflated body counts, unverified "rapes," and unconfirmed sniper attacks as among examples of "scores of myths about the dome and Convention Center treated as fact by evacuees, the media and even some of New Orleans' top officials."Indeed, Mayor C. Ray Nagin told a national television audience on "Oprah" three weeks ago of people "in that frickin' Superdome for five days watching dead bodies, watching hooligans killing people, raping people."Journalists and officials who have reviewed the Katrina disaster blamed the inaccurate reporting in large measure on the breakdown of telephone service, which prevented dissemination of accurate reports to those most in need of the information. Race may have also played a factor.The wild rumors filled the vacuum and seemed to gain credence with each retelling — that an infant's body had been found in a trash can, that sharks from Lake Pontchartrain were swimming through the business district, that hundreds of bodies had been stacked in the Superdome basement."It doesn't take anything to start a rumor around here," Louisiana National Guard 2nd Lt. Lance Cagnolatti said at the height of the Superdome relief effort. "There's 20,000 people in here. Think when you were in high school. You whisper something in someone's ear. By the end of the day, everyone in school knows the rumor — and the rumor isn't the same thing it was when you started it."Follow-up reporting has discredited reports of a 7-year-old being raped and murdered at the Superdome, roving bands of armed gang members attacking the helpless, and dozens of bodies being shoved into a freezer at the Convention Center.Hyperbolic reporting spread through much of the media.Fox News, a day before the major evacuation of the Superdome began, issued an "alert" as talk show host Alan Colmes reiterated reports of "robberies, rapes, carjackings, riots and murder. Violent gangs are roaming the streets at night, hidden by the cover of darkness."The Los Angeles Times adopted a breathless tone the next day in its lead news story, reporting that National Guard troops "took positions on rooftops, scanning for snipers and armed mobs as seething crowds of refugees milled below, desperate to flee. Gunfire crackled in the distance."The New York Times repeated some of the reports of violence and unrest, but the newspaper usually was more careful to note that the information could not be verified.The tabloid Ottawa Sun reported unverified accounts of "a man seeking help gunned down by a National Guard soldier" and "a young man run down and then shot by a New Orleans police officer."London's Evening Standard invoked the future-world fantasy film "Mad Max" to describe the scene and threw in a "Lord of the Flies" allusion for good measure.Televised images and photographs affirmed the widespread devastation in one of America's most celebrated cities."I don't think you can overstate how big of a disaster New Orleans is," said Kelly McBride, ethics group leader at the Poynter Institute, a Florida school for professional journalists. "But you can imprecisely state the nature of the disaster. … Then you draw attention away from the real story, the magnitude of the destruction, and you kind of undermine the media's credibility."Times-Picayune Editor Jim Amoss cited telephone breakdowns as a primary cause of reporting errors, but said the fact that most evacuees were poor African Americans also played a part."If the dome and Convention Center had harbored large numbers of middle class white people," Amoss said, "it would not have been a fertile ground for this kind of rumor-mongering."Some of the hesitation that journalists might have had about using the more sordid reports from the evacuation centers probably fell away when New Orleans' top officials seemed to confirm the accounts.Nagin and Police Chief Eddie Compass appeared on "Oprah" a few days after trouble at the Superdome had peaked.Compass told of "the little babies getting raped" at the Superdome. And Nagin made his claim about hooligans raping and killing.State officials this week said their counts of the dead at the city's two largest evacuation points fell far short of early rumors and news reports. Ten bodies were recovered from the Superdome and four from the Convention Center, said Bob Johannessen, spokesman for the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals.(National Guard officials put the body count at the Superdome at six, saying the other four bodies came from the area around the stadium.)Of the 841 recorded hurricane-related deaths in Louisiana, four are identified as gunshot victims, Johannessen said. One victim was found in the Superdome but was believed to have been brought there, and one was found at the Convention Center, he added.Relief workers said that while the media hyped criminal activity, plenty of real suffering did occur at the Katrina relief centers."The hurricane had just passed, you had massive trauma to the city," said Lt. Col. Pete Schneider of the Louisiana National Guard."No air conditioning, no sewage … it was not a nice place to be. All those people just in there, they were frustrated, they were hot. Out of all that chaos, all of these rumors start flying."Louisiana National Guard Col. Thomas Beron, who headed security at the Superdome, said that for every complaint, "49 other people said, 'Thank you, God bless you.' "The media inaccuracies had consequences in the disaster zone.Bush, of the National Guard, said that reports of corpses at the Superdome filtered back to the facility via AM radio, undermining his struggle to keep morale up and maintain order."We had to convince people this was still the best place to be," Bush said. "What I saw in the Superdome was just tremendous amounts of people helping people."But, Bush said, those stories received scant attention in newspapers or on television.Times staff writer Scott Gold contributed to this report.

Another reason to hate Fat Boy Bill

2005-09-22T10:29:00.000-05:00

"Pentagon lawyers during the Clinton administration ordered the destruction of intelligence reports that identified September 11 leader Mohamed Atta months before the attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center, according to congressional testimony yesterday."

Peggy Noonan Clobbers Bush Spending!

2005-09-22T10:10:00.000-05:00

And he deserves every word. I'm sick of having to explain how it could be that conservatives believe in less government spending when GWB is giving drunken sailing a bad name.

It's a long one, but she is dead on all along the way.

---------------------------------------------------
http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/?id=110007291
'Whatever It Takes'
Is Bush's big spending a bridge to nowhere?

Thursday, September 22, 2005 12:01 a.m.

George W. Bush, after five years in the presidency, does not intend to get sucker-punched by the Democrats over race and poverty. That was the driving force behind his Katrina speech last week. He is not going to play the part of the cranky accountant--"But where's the money going to come from?"--while the Democrats, in the middle of a national tragedy, swan around saying "Republicans don't care about black people," and "They're always tightwads with the poor."

In his Katrina policy the president is telling Democrats, "You can't possibly outspend me. Go ahead, try. By the time this is over Dennis Kucinich will be crying uncle, Bernie Sanders will be screaming about pork."

That's what's behind Mr. Bush's huge, comforting and boondogglish plan to spend $200 billion or $100 billion or whatever--"whatever it takes"--on Katrina's aftermath. And, I suppose, tomorrow's hurricane aftermath.

George W. Bush is a big spender. He has never vetoed a spending bill. When Congress serves up a big slab of fat, crackling pork, Mr. Bush responds with one big question: Got any barbecue sauce? The great Bush spending spree is about an arguably shrewd but ultimately unhelpful reading of history, domestic politics, Iraq and, I believe, vanity.

This, I believe, is the administration's shrewd if unhelpful reading of history: In a 50-50 nation, people expect and accept high spending. They don't like partisan bickering, there's nothing to gain by arguing around the edges, and arguing around the edges of spending bills is all we get to do anymore. The administration believes there's nothing in it for the Republicans to run around whining about cost. We will spend a lot and the Democrats will spend a lot. But the White House is more competent and will not raise taxes, so they believe Republicans win on this one in the long term.

Domestic politics: The administration believes it is time for the Republican Party to prove to the minority groups of the United States, and to those under stress, that the Republicans are their party, and not the enemy. The Democrats talk a good game, but Republicans deliver, and we know the facts. A lot of American families are broken, single mothers bringing up kids without a father come to see the government as the guy who'll help. It's right to help and we don't lose by helping.

Iraq: Mr. Bush decided long ago--I suspect on Sept. 12, 2001--that he would allow no secondary or tertiary issue to get in the way of the national unity needed to forge the war on terror. So no fighting with Congress over who put the pork in the pan. Cook it, eat it, go on to face the world arm in arm.

As for vanity, the president's aides sometimes seem to see themselves as The New Conservatives, a brave band of brothers who care about the poor, unlike those nasty, crabbed, cheapskate conservatives of an older, less enlightened era.

Republicans have grown alarmed at federal spending. It has come to a head not only because of Katrina but because of the huge pork-filled highway bill the president signed last month, which comes with its own poster child for bad behavior, the Bridge to Nowhere. The famous bridge in Alaska that costs $223 million and that connects one little place with two penguins and a bear with another little place with two bears and a penguin. The Bridge to Nowhere sounds, to conservative ears, like a metaphor for where endless careless spending leaves you. From the Bridge to the 21st Century to the Bridge to Nowhere: It doesn't feel like progress.

A lot of Bush supporters assumed the president would get serious about spending in his second term. With the highway bill he showed we misread his intentions.

The administration, in answering charges of profligate spending, has taken, interestingly, to slighting old conservative hero Ronald Reagan. This week it was the e-mail of a high White House aide informing us that Ronald Reagan spent tons of money bailing out the banks in the savings-and-loan scandal. This was startling information to Reaganites who remembered it was a fellow named George H.W. Bush who did that. Last month it was the president who blandly seemed to suggest that Reagan cut and ran after the attack on the Marine barracks in Lebanon.

Poor Reagan. If only he'd been strong he could have been a good president.

Before that, Mr. Mehlman was knocking previous generations of Republican leaders who just weren't as progressive as George W. Bush on race relations. I'm sure the administration would think to criticize the leadership of Bill Clinton if they weren't so busy having jolly mind-melds with him on Katrina relief. Mr. Clinton, on the other hand, is using his new closeness with the administration to add an edge of authority to his slams on Bush. That's a pol who knows how to do it.

At any rate, Republican officials start diminishing Ronald Reagan, it is a bad sign about where they are psychologically. In the White House of George H.W. Bush they called the Reagan administration "the pre-Bush era." See where it got them.

Sometimes I think the Bush White House needs to be told: It's good to be a revolutionary. But do you guys really need to be opening up endless new fronts? Do you need--metaphor switch--seven or eight big pots boiling on the stove all at the same time? You think the kitchen and the house might get a little too hot that way?

The Republican (as opposed to conservative) default position when faced with criticism of the Bush administration is: But Kerry would have been worse! The Democrats are worse! All too true. The Democrats right now remind me of what the veteran political strategist David Garth told me about politicians. He was a veteran of many campaigns and many campaigners. I asked him if most or many of the politicians he'd worked with had serious and defining political beliefs. David thought for a moment and then said, "Most of them started with philosophy. But they wound up with hunger." That's how the Democrats seem to me these days: unorganized people who don't know what they stand for but want to win, because winning's pleasurable and profitable.

But saying The Bush administration is a lot better than having Democrats in there is not an answer to criticism, it's a way to squelch it. Which is another Bridge to Nowhere.

Mr. Bush started spending after 9/11. Again, anything to avoid a second level fight that distracts from the primary fight, the war on terror. That is, Mr. Bush had his reasons. They were not foolish. At the time they seemed smart. But four years later it is hard for a conservative not to protest. Some big mistakes have been made.

First and foremost Mr. Bush has abandoned all rhetorical ground. He never even speaks of high spending. He doesn't argue against it, and he doesn't make the moral case against it. When forced to spend, Reagan didn't like it, and he said so. He also tried to cut. Mr. Bush seems to like it and doesn't try to cut. He doesn't warn that endless high spending can leave a nation tapped out and future generations hemmed in. In abandoning this ground Bush has abandoned a great deal--including a primary argument of conservatism and a primary reason for voting Republican. And who will fill this rhetorical vacuum? Hillary Clinton. She knows an opening when she sees one, and knows her base won't believe her when she decries waste.

Second, Mr. Bush seems not to be noticing that once government spending reaches a new high level it is very hard to get it down, even a little, ever. So a decision to raise spending now is in effect a decision to raise spending forever.

Third, Mr. Bush seems not to be operating as if he knows the difficulties--the impossibility, really--of spending wisely from the federal level. Here is a secret we all should know: It is really not possible for a big federal government based in Washington to spend completely wisely, constructively and helpfully, and with a sense of personal responsibility. What is possible is to write the check. After that? In New Jersey they took federal Homeland Security funds and bought garbage trucks. FEMA was a hack-stack.

The one time a Homeland Security Department official spoke to me about that crucial new agency's efforts, she talked mostly about a memoir she was writing about a selfless HS official who tries to balance the demands of motherhood against the needs of a great nation. When she finally asked for advice on homeland security, I told her that her department's Web page is nothing but an advertisement for how great the department is, and since some people might actually turn to the site for help if their city is nuked it might be nice to offer survival hints. She took notes and nodded. It alarmed me that they needed to be told the obvious. But it didn't surprise me.

Of the $100 billion that may be spent on New Orleans, let's be serious. We love Louisiana and feel for Louisiana, but we all know what Louisiana is, a very human state with rather particular flaws. As Huey Long once said, "Some day Louisiana will have honest government, and they won't like it." We all know this, yes? Louisiana has many traditions, and one is a rich and unvaried culture of corruption. How much of the $100 billion coming its way is going to fall off the table? Half? OK, let's not get carried away. More than half.

Town spending tends to be more effective than county spending. County spending tends--tends--to be more efficacious than state spending. State spending tends to be more constructive than federal spending. This is how life works. The area closest to where the buck came from is most likely to be more careful with the buck. This is part of the reason conservatives are so disturbed by the gushing federal spigot.

Money is power. More money for the federal government and used by the federal government is more power for the federal government. Is this good? Is this what energy in the executive is--"Here's a check"? Are the philosophical differences between the two major parties coming down, in terms of spending, to "Who's your daddy? He's not your daddy, I'm your daddy." Do we want this? Do our kids? Is it safe? Is it, in its own way, a national security issue?

At a conservative gathering this summer the talk turned to high spending. An intelligent young journalist observed that we shouldn't be surprised at Mr. Bush's spending, he ran from the beginning as a "compassionate conservative." The journalist noted that he'd never liked that phrase, that most conservatives he knew had disliked it, and I agreed. But conservatives understood Mr. Bush's thinking: they knew he was trying to signal to those voters who did not assume that conservatism held within it sympathy and regard for human beings, in fact springs from that sympathy and regard.

But conservatives also understood "compassionate conservatism" to be a form of the philosophy that is serious about the higher effectiveness of faith-based approaches to healing poverty--you spend prudently not to maintain the status quo, and not to avoid criticism, but to actually make things better. It meant an active and engaged interest in poverty and its pathologies. It meant a new way of doing old business.

I never understood compassionate conservatism to mean, and I don't know anyone who understood it to mean, a return to the pork-laden legislation of the 1970s. We did not understand it to mean never vetoing a spending bill. We did not understand it to mean a historic level of spending. We did not understand it to be a step back toward old ways that were bad ways.

I for one feel we need to go back to conservatism 101. We can start with a quote from Gerald Ford, if he isn't too much of a crabbed and reactionary old Republican to quote. He said, "A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you have."

The administration knows that Republicans are becoming alarmed. Its attitude is: "We're having some trouble with part of the base but"--smile--"we can weather that."

Well, they probably can, short term.

Long term, they've had bad history with weather. It can change.

Here are some questions for conservative and Republicans. In answering them, they will be defining their future party.

If we are going to spend like the romantics and operators of Lyndon Johnson's Great Society;

If we are going to thereby change the very meaning and nature of conservatism;

If we are going to increase spending and the debt every year;

If we are going to become a movement that supports big government and a party whose unspoken motto is "Whatever it takes";

If all these things, shouldn't we perhaps at least discuss it? Shouldn't we be talking about it? Shouldn't our senators, congressmen and governors who wish to lead in the future come forward to take a stand?

And shouldn't the Bush administration seriously address these questions, share more of their thinking, assumptions and philosophy?

It is possible that political history will show, in time, that those who worried about spending in 2005 were dinosaurs. If we are, we are. But we shouldn't become extinct without a roar.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next Lesson: ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION.

Myth De-Bunker: School Vouchers

2005-09-22T10:05:00.000-05:00

This PDF runs through 7 myths about school vouchers.

We need more.