Tuesday, November 29, 2005
Sunday, November 27, 2005
Stanley Tookie Williams is scheduled to die for executing 4 unarmed people. With his own execution, as determined by the people of California, weeks away the usual bleeding hearts are asking the governor to grant clemency. A pre-requisite for clemency should be whether the person has admitted remorse. Tookie has not.
Now I noticed that Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon are among those believing Tookie is more valuable to our society alive as opposed to eliminated. OK so how about instead of full clemency we have a conditional clemency where Tim and Susan are appointed probational custodians of Tookie and confine him in their house for two years of house arrest. They advocate turning this monster loose on the rest of us so because he's rehabilitated so they should have no problem bringing him into their home. Then they could help him develop his literary career and community outreach programs to steer young people away from gang life in the urban jungle.
Saturday, November 26, 2005
Friday, November 18, 2005
Support Our Troops, Clean This House in 06
We should thank God every day that our ancestors were made of sterner stuff.
My favorite line:
"You need not to have a great understanding of the world but rather common sense to realize that it is our duty as HUMAN BEINGS to free the oppressed. If you lived that way would you not want someone to help you????"
Is that not what liberals profess to believe in? The liberation of the oppressed? They're just not up for the difficulty and sacrifice required to actually do it.
Thursday, November 17, 2005
What I found humorous was the background music is the opening of a song by Traffic called "The Low Spark of High Heeled Boys."
When the going gets tough in the GWOT the Senate tips their hand that they are willing to run like high-heeled Nancy Boys.
Ok... maybe it was just me finding it subtly clever.
Where the WMDs Went
by Jamie Glazov
Should be required reading in the US Senate.
And a reason that many 'knuckle-dragging right-wingers' like myself are actually stupid enough to believe that Saddam had a hidden hand in 9/11 is because we remember the news articles from many years ago.... but then our minds are also capable of manipulating thoughts larger than can be placed on a bumper-sticker or protest placard.
Wednesday, November 16, 2005
Should China help regulate it ? How about Egypt or Venezuela ?
Or Saudi Arabia, or Iran or the French and Germans or the Russians ?
Wonder why these countries are advocating UN control ?
Go ahead.... take a guess.
Res ipsa loquitur
The American Spectator In Their Own Words
In the effort to alleviate the Democrats short-term memory loss there are two quotes from the article I would like to note. They are from the President of the United States outlining the threat:
"In the next century, the community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now -- a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists, drug traffickers, or organized criminals who travel the world among us unnoticed. If we fail to respond today, Saddam, and all those who would follow in his footsteps, will be emboldened tomorrow by the knowledge that they can act with impunity, even in the face of a clear message from the United Nations Security Council, and clear evidence of a weapons of mass destruction program." (Bill Clinton, Remarks At The Pentagon, 2/17/98)
"Let's imagine the future. What if he fails to comply and we fail to act, or we take some ambiguous third route, which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction and continue to press for the release of the sanctions and continue to ignore the solemn commitments that he made? Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction. And some day, some way, I guarantee you he'll use the arsenal. And I think every one of you who has really worked on this for any length of time, believes that, too."
(Bill Clinton, Remarks At The Pentagon, 2/17/98)
Those two quotes clearly identify a grave and imminent threat to the national interests of the United States. So why did they choose to not act to eliminate the threat? Was 'containment', which is the international community losing its will to eliminate the threat, not allowing Saddam to fall into the reasoning pattern described by Clinton in the second quote?
Why, Mr. Clinton, after clearly identifying the threat, did you not eliminate it when you had the chance?
And now you run around saying things like THIS.
Building a better legacy, one lie at a time.
Saturday, November 12, 2005
Bush Speech, Veteran's Day 2005
Here was my first impression after hearing the speech: Thank God the grownups are running the country. Now if we could just get the kids to settle down and pay attention.
Out and about on the sphere the '3 paragraphs' are the hot topic. Those are three very hard to refute paragraphs. Can't wait to watch the stuttering and stammering on the Sunday morning shows. ( see Russert Trips Kennedy a few posts down )
But the line I heard that I think has the greatest implication in the long term was this one:
"The United States makes no distinction between those who commit acts of terror and those who support and harbor them, because they're equally guilty of murder."
Note the context of that part of the speech was Syria and Iran, especially Syria with the 'guilty of murder' part. And I also believe we've heard that line before in the context of Afghanistan. Ask the Taliban what it means.
Ya know, I do sometimes think we ought to withdraw American combat troops from Iraq... straight through Damascus. Take a good look through the Bekah Valley while we're there. Never can tell what, or who, one might find.
Tuesday, November 08, 2005
"My program for educating youth is hard. Weakness must be hammered away. In my castles of the Teutonic Order a youth will grow up before which the world will tremble. I want a brutal, domineering, fearless, cruel youth. Youth must be all that. It must bear pain. There must be nothing weak and gentle about it. The free, splendid beast of prey must once again flash from its eyes..That is how I will eradicate thousands of years of human domestication..That is how I will create the New Order."
-- Adolf Hitler, 1933.
Now watch THIS slideshow posted over at Moonbattery.com
I was wondering the other day why somebody hadn't raised a stink about these reporters revealing things like this. Is this not classified information? It is about time to reign in this nonsense. I'd like to see some reporters and editors get 'frog marched' out of their offices.
"This message comes to you today from an old country, France, from a continent like mine, Europe, that has known wars, occupation and barbarity. A country that does not forget and knows everything it owes to the freedom-fighters who came from America and elsewhere. And yet has never ceased to stand upright in the face of history and before mankind. Faithful to its values, it wishes resolutely to act with all the members of the international community. It believes in our ability to build together a better world." - Dominique de Villepin 02/14/03Speech to the Security Council before Operation Iraqi Freedom
Hummm...How has that noble statement stood against the passage of time ( and captured douments?)
French corruption scandals
Chirac allies among 47 accused in major French corruption trial
French Connection to Oil for Food Probed
Former French UN ambassador held over Iraq oil-for-food
This is how I saw them in the Summer of 2003, a view that has stood the test of time.
Monday, November 07, 2005
I had noticed previously how Kennedy is a season BS artist. I didn't agree with what he was saying but I did notice the complete and well-formed ideas of a pro on top of the game. That is how he handled the initial discussion on Iraq until Russert presented a quote as an example of the misuse of intelligence to sway public opinion before the Iraq invasion. I recognized whose quote it was and thought to myself that surely Russert wouldn't be baiting Kennedy. so let me quote the MSNBC transcript of the exchange and note Kennedy is sent mentally reeling and unable to come square center again for about three paragraphs:
"MR. RUSSERT: You talked about Iraq. There's a big debate now about whether or not the data, the intelligence data, was misleading and manipulated in order to encourage public opinion support for the war. Let me give you a statement that was talked about during the war. "We know [Iraq is] developing unmanned vehicles capable of delivering chemical and biological warfare agents...all U.S. intelligence experts agree they are seek nuclear weapons. There's little question that Saddam Hussein wants to develop them. ... In the wake of September 11th, who among us can say with any certainty to anybody that those weapons might not be used against our troops, against allies in the region? Who can say that this master of miscalculation will not develop a weapon of mass destruction even greater--a nuclear weapon. ..."
Are those the statements that you're concerned about?
SEN. KENNEDY: Well, I am concerned about it, and that's why I believe that the actions that were taken by Harry Reid in the Senate last week when effectively he said that we are going to get to the bottom of this investigation, this had been kicked along by the Intelligence Committee, by Pat Roberts for over two years. And Harry Reid did more in two hours than that Intelligence Committee has done in two years. And the American people are going get this information.
And it's important that they get this information about how intelligence was misused because of the current situation. It's important to know where we've been, but it's important to know where we are today, because we're facing serious challenges over in Iran. We're facing serious challenges in North Korea. And we cannot have a government which is going to manipulate intelligence information. We've got to get to the bottom of it, and that is what the Democrats stood for on the floor of the United States Senate last week. That was a bold stroke, one that has the overwhelming support of the American people. It's about time they get the facts on it. They haven't got the facts to date. They deserve them, and they'll get them.
MR. RUSSERT: But, Senator, what the Democrats stood for on the floor of the Senate in 2002--let me show you who said what I just read: John Kerry, your candidate for president. He was talking about a nuclear threat from Saddam Hussein. Hillary Clinton voted for the war. John Edwards, Joe Lieberman, John Kerry. Democrats said the same things about Saddam Hussein. You, yourself, said, "Saddam is dangerous. He's got dangerous weapons." It wasn't just the Bush White House.
( Watch the Seantor Stumble Here )
SEN. KENNEDY: The fact is--and I voted against the war, because every military--I'm in the Armed Services Committee, and every military leader highly decorated, military leader, said that it was foolish to have a military intervention at that. General Hoar, with the Marines--General Hoar, who has more Silver Stars than you could possibly count said if we go into Baghdad, it'll look like the last five minutes of "Private Ryan," so we know we had enough information to vote against it, I believe.
But the point about this is, we have the 9/11 that talked about the intelligence agencies. The failure of the FBI to talk to the CIA and the rest of it, but they also recommended that we find out how intelligence was manipulated. Now, we are--we had that committee set up under Pat Roberts. It has done virtually nothing. It has done--it's been dismissive. But Harry Reid is going to get them to tell the truth, and the American people will understand it. And then hopefully when we get a clean house in the White House and we get individuals that are going to help this president lead for an openness in government, we can avoid any kind of activity like that in the future."
Not a coherent paragraph after the revelation it was a John Kerry quote. If you can't dazzle them with brilliance...
Sunday, November 06, 2005
from its own folly again, Pierre...
then call the Iranians or Syrians,
we're busy helping our friends.
I'm sorry but... I have no sympathy for those that won't lift a hand to preserve their culture and nation. In fact I'm in a ROTFLMAO state of mind....
Saturday, November 05, 2005
Wednesday, November 02, 2005
Tuesday, November 01, 2005
Iraq: Arab League scuttled secret exile offer for Saddam: U.A.E. officials
I hold the belief that the central tenet of the invasion of Iraq was not WDM but to remove the Hussein family from power. Mission accomplished. All other considerations were of less pressing importance. Whatever it takes to be rid of Saddam and his regime. To quote Orwell, "War is evil, but often it is the lesser evil."
If this is true about the Arab League fumbling the chance to avert war then it indicates to me that by Washington's willingness to let Hussein go into exile then this wasn't a pre-determined war cooked up in Texas by a cabal of neo-con boogie men wanting to enrich Halliburton and line their own pockets with all that stolen oil. It could be what it was billed as; an end to Hussein's rule over Iraq and his threat to the region by any means necessary.
By the way, that was official US policy established by the Clinton administration.