Jimmy Carter: From Hammers for Homes to Crowbars for White House

Former President Jimmy Carter spoke at an overseas church conference, and he tossed out any message about God's grace for a chance to bash the United States by misrepresenting our mission and conduct in the war on terror and by providing veiled justifications for terrorists. It's bad enough when a future President goes overseas and protests against our country, but it's worse when a former President does the same thing--because people in other countries often give great weight to his words and he sends them mixed signals. Rather than using his position to help our nation, Carter has become a cheerleader for those who don't like us.

President Carter would do well to remember the difficulty of the President's job. He should honor the tradition of former presidents with class, who avoid public criticism of the current occupant of the White House and avoid interfering with our nation's policies. Instead, in trying to rehabilitate the image of his dismal Presidency, Carter goes beyond handling hammers for the poor. He makes unofficial and unwanted visits to the dictators of Cuba and North Korea and criticizes our nation throughout all lands--acting as if that is help. This is nothing new, as he even went behind the back of President Clinton. Based upon the results of Carter's re-election bid, the voters stated that Carter had done enough. Why doesn't he get the message?

Jimmy Carter
(Left of dictator?)

Jimmy Carter has proven to be not only the worst president in recent history, but also the worst former President. And, don't tell me about him constructing homes for the poor, because it takes more than hammers to rebuild an image. At least he shouldn't take a crowbar to rip up the White House and make the job harder for others.

The Fools Around Us Will Be Nigh The Death Of Us!

Stupidity comes in all forms, shapes and sizes. There are lefty fools, commie fools (low may their numbers be), righty fools (although to my way of thinking far fewer of them than of the lefty variety). There are libertarian fools, socialist fools (a whole lot of that variety) and then there are the PC fools. Oh, I know, some of you folk will say "Hey, wait, PC is a product of the right." And you'd be wrong to say that. As a therapist, I've heard time and time again from my peers: "Don't be judgmental." What a load, wrapped in PC and expressed as an escape from making a decision.

As human beings, we cannot help but be judgmental, it is part of our nature. What the left still hasn't learned, and I don't think they will EVER learn is that words mean things.

In the case of the word "judgmental" I offer you the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language definition:

Of, relating to, or dependent on judgment: a judgmental error.

Inclined to make judgments, especially moral or personal ones: a marriage counselor who tries not to be judgmental.

"A marriage counselor who tries not to be judgmental." Ok, let us parse this for a moment. Mary and Joe come to you for marriage counseling. Joe has been having an affair, which he recently "broke off" but has been still calling his "ex" girlfriend. He drinks heavily and becomes abusive when intoxicated. He gambles their savings away. Your job is to help this marriage survive, both say that they want that. Are you really going to be "non-judgmental" and let Joe's transgressions go by the wayside? Of course not, not if you are ethical. Now, you cannot be denigrating of Joe as a person, that would not be appropriate, but calling his behavior? Too often, the term "non-judgmental" is used across the board and such usage is inappropriate.

I submit that we are judgmental from the moment that we wake up and decide whether or not to sleep a bit longer or to get up. I typically wake up around 4 or 4:30 AM. I "choose" not to stay in bed, but get up, fix some coffee, do a little posting perhaps, read the day's dispatches perhaps, or catch CNN or Fox (quietly of course, my bride is still asleep). When I choose to get up I have made a judgment. When I pick out my clothes for the day, I have made a judgment; when I choose who to sit next to on the bus or train or subway, I have made a judgment.

When Mohammad Atta got on board that plane in the morning of 9/11, he made a judgment. When John Kerry made that silly salute he made a judgment. When you opened up this web page, you made a judgment. When Mayor Flower-Mountain Bloomberg decided to have every 5th subway passenger searched but not profile 18-35 year old Arab or South East Asian young men, he made a judgment. And a truly stupid one at that.

I wonder, daily, what it is going to take to get people to wake up out of their PC slumber and recognize that there is an identifiable group of people that want to kill us. Those people are not little girls (fourth photo down from the top), grannies or gramps in wheelchairs, Roman Catholic Nuns or retired Medal of Honor winners. No, these folk are of a certain type (H/T to Robert Bidinotto's blog) and they do indeed mean to do us ill. Jihad Watch (link to the immediate left) notes:

The funeral of British suicide bomber Shehzad Tanweer was held in absentia in his family’s ancestral village, near Lahore, Pakistan. Thousands of people attended, as they did again the following day when a qul ceremony was held for Tanweer. During qul, the Koran is recited to speed the deceased’s journey to paradise, though in Tanweer’s case this was hardly necessary. Being a shahid (martyr), he is deemed to have gone straight to paradise. The 22-year-old from Leeds, whose bomb at Aldgate station killed seven people, was hailed by the crowd as ‘a hero of Islam’.

Some in Britain cannot conceive that a suicide bomber could be a hero of Islam. Since 7/7 many have made statements to attempt to explain what seems to them a contradiction in terms. Since the violence cannot be denied, their only course is to argue that the connection with Islam is invalid. The deputy assistant commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, Brian Paddick, said that ‘Islam and terrorists are two words that do not go together.’ His boss, the Commissioner Sir Ian Blair, asserted that there is nothing wrong with being a fundamentalist Muslim.

Mr. Deputy Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, you are absolutely and totally wrong. The vast, vast, vast (I could add a couple of more here) majority of terrorist attacks (yes Reuters, I used the "T" word - scroll down for the T word entry) were carried out by Muslims. Not Baptists, Not RC Nuns, Not Buddist Monks, Not little girls and Not aging Afro-American Grandmothers. No, they have been carried out by: MUSLIMS, specifically, males between the ages of 16 and 35.

The terrorists are just that, terrorists. Judge William Young got it right when he sentenced Richard Reid, the “Shoe Bomber� in January of this year as reported in CNN:

You are not an enemy combatant. You are a terrorist. You are not a soldier in any war. You are a terrorist. To give you that reference, to call you a soldier gives you far too much stature. Whether it is the officers of government who do it or your attorney who does it, or that happens to be your view, you are a terrorist.

And we do not negotiate with terrorists. We do not treat with terrorists. We do not sign documents with terrorists.

We hunt them down one by one and bring them to justice.

So war talk is way out of line in this court. You're a big fellow. But you're not that big. You're no warrior. I know warriors. You are a terrorist. A species of criminal guilty of multiple attempted murders."

If the worthy Judge can call a terrorist a terrorist, why can’t we profile for terrorism? “Well because, GM, that’s racist and judgmental.�

I’m beginning to think that no one is thinking. Or if they are thinking, they’re not thinking clearly. What is it about our fear of hurting someone’s feelings, of this namby-pamby, wishy-washy cant (Hypocritically pious language) that doesn’t allow us to make judgments when our lives and our civilization is at stake?
We cannot profile, because we must not appear to be racist or judgmental. Oh my gosh! You are a transit cop walking your beat. Over your radio, you hear “Be on the lookout for a 6 foot plus caucasian male with flaming red hair who is wanted for bombing a bus. Subject is wearing red suspenders, blue jeans and a white windbreaker jacket with no shirt underneath.“

Do you bother to look at grandmas, at children, at African Americans, at Arab Americans or do you look for someone fitting the profile, the description? The answer ought to be easy, but under Mayor Bloomberg’s orders, you can’t do that because the description includes the word Caucasian. Of course, I’m being sarcastic. But failure to profile those that fit the terrorist profile is not sarcastic, it is flat out criminal. Paul Sperry's NYTimes as noted in Bidinotto’s blog above states:

Critics protest that profiling is prejudicial. In fact, it's based on statistics. Insurance companies profile policyholders based on probability of risk. That's just smart business. Likewise, profiling passengers based on proven security risk is just smart law enforcement.
Besides, done properly, profiling would subject relatively few Muslims to searches. Elderly Muslim women don't fit the terrorist profile. Young Muslim men of Arab or South Asian origin do. But rather than acknowledge this obvious fact, the New York Police Department has advised subway riders to be alert for "people" in bulky clothes who sweat or fiddle nervously with bags.

Well, a lot of people wear bulky clothes. A lot of people fiddle with their bags. And for that matter, a lot of people sweat. Could the Police Department be any more general in describing the traits of an Islamic suicide bomber? Could its advice be more useless?
Truth be told, commuters need to be most aware of young men praying to Allah and smelling like flower water. Law enforcement knows this, and so should you. According to a January 2004 handout, the Department of Homeland Security advises United States border authorities to look out for certain "suicide bomber indicators." They include a "shaved head or short haircut. A short haircut or recently shaved beard or moustache may be evident by differences in skin complexion on the head or face. May smell of herbal or flower water (most likely flower water), as they may have sprayed perfume on themselves, their clothing, and weapons to prepare for Paradise." Suspects may have been seen "praying fervently, giving the appearance of whispering to someone. Recent suicide bombers have raised their hands in the air just before the explosion to prevent the destruction of their fingerprints. They have also placed identity cards in their shoes because they want to be praised and recognized as martyrs."

Did you get that? A description of the "typical" terrorist "According to a January 2004 handout, the Department of Homeland Security..." Profiles are used all the time in a variety of contexts from insurance companies to the FBI looking at the liklihood of a certain criminal meeting certain behavioral criteria. You profile when you screen applicants for a job. The list is endless, yet, because of our penchant for PC, because we are so afraid of being tagged racist we don't use the noggins that God gave us.

Recently, to convince America that "Moderate Muslims" are not supporting terrorism at all,

a Fatwa was issued by Fiqh Council of North America (FCNA) issued the fatwa, and the Council on American - Islamic Relations (CAIR) organized the press conference, stating that several major U.S. Muslim groups endorsed the fatwa.

Steven Emerson, author of the article also notes:

In fact, the fatwa is bogus. Nowhere does it condemn the Islamic extremism ideology that has spawned Islamic terrorism. It does not renounce nor even acknowledge the existence of an Islamic jihadist culture that has permeated mosques and young Muslims around the world. It does not renounce Jihad let alone admit that it has been used to justify Islamic terrorist acts. It does not condemn by name any Islamic group or leader. In short, it is a fake fatwa designed merely to deceive the American public into believing that these groups are moderate. In fact, officials of both organizations have been directly linked to and associated with Islamic terrorist groups and Islamic extremist organizations. One of them is an unindicted co-conspirator in a current terrorist case; another previous member was a financier to Al-Qaeda.

Also:

The Chairman of the Fiqh Council, Taha Jaber Al-Alwani, is an unindicted co-conspirator in the case against Sami al-Arian, the alleged North American leader of Palestinian Islamic Jihad, whose trial began in June 2005 in Tampa, Florida. Mr. Alwani has been named in court documents as an official of several entities in northern Virginia suspected of being connected to terrorist financing. Documents released in the Al Arian trial show that Alwani funded the Islamic Jihad front groups in Tampa."

The justly acclaimed Norm Geras notes in a recent article:

Human rights are an indispensable part of a morally decent society (though the eager embracing of victimhood is not, and there's no doubt that the discourse of human rights has, along with multiculturalism, encouraged many to regard the status of victim of rights-violation as the most attractive one going, and hence to reach for it at the slightest provocation). But protection from those whose direct intention is to kill the innocent is also indispensable. Such protection may require us to be more ready to accept defensive policies which constrain, or in emergency infringe, individual rights than we've hitherto been accustomed to."

Robert Bidinotto also waits and wonders when Islam will honestly rise up and condem the terrorist clique within.

To put an end to this screed, being judgmental is both normal and human and entirely appropriate in this day and age; the age of terror. Failure to use appropriate tools in this war (profiling) because of fears of not being politically correct is both foolhardy and criminal. When will we wake up to the enemy's tactics? Not too late I hope. There are voices out there that are raising the issue, are there ears to hear and brains to decipher?

Update: A doff of the GM Chapeaux to Gail at Crossing the Rubicon2 for this NY Times article. Read it all!

Update #2: 60 minutes interview with "part of the problem" Again, read it all.

Update #3: A doff of the GM Chapeaux to Glen Reynolds for this. Once again, read it all.

Update #4: Dr. Sanity has more thoughts on the bogus "fatwa" (notice the scare quotes Reuters?)here and here from the President of Iran and here on the distortion of reality by the MSM and perhaps the PC'ers as well? As usual, this terrific lady and psychiatrist nails it smack dab on the head. Read it all links included!

Update #5: Michael Totten has an excellent post on how the war on terror affects tourism, both in our big cities, London, Europe and the Middle east. Thoughtful and as usual, well written.

Update #6: My Dog Vinnie at My Pet Jawa takes on CAIR... Fatwa city!

Wasted Energy on Energy - Congress and President Are a Quart Low

Congress has wasted four years and a lot of energy on a bill that does little for our nation's energy. Today the Senate passed a 1,724 page bill that easily sailed through the House yesterday. President Bush has stated that he will sign the bill into law. As stated in the article below, the bill "does nothing to reduce the high cost of energy, especially at the gasoline pumps, and will not reduce the country's heavy reliance on oil imports. Its supporters maintained that in the long-term it will refocus the country's energy priorities and promote cleaner energy and more conservation."

Great! Is that what Congress was supposed to be solving--no help at the pumps but more conservation! Why did they waste time on that? Is this what we need?

Congress should deal with tough decisions and expand our domestic production of oil and feasible energy sources. Unbelievably, the bill didn't even mention drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, which contains billions of barrels of oil. Instead, we're held hostage to supplies from the Mideast, and we continue to have military and political conflicts there to protect our interests. Just wait until China starts sucking up even more of that oil that we have been buying. Congress wasted time on wind power!!, which makes people feel good and has no potential. We need nuclear energy, but so-called environmentalists keep energy companies so tied up in regulations and lawsuits that the projects stall as soon as they start. Has anyone considered that fighting in the Mideast could be reduced if radical environmentalists stepped out of the way of domestic oil production and nuclear energy? Why doesn't Congress stand up to people who seem more concerned about crippling our economy than saving lives?

Read the highlights of the article below or click on the title for the full article. What do you think should be in our nation's energy plan? In this case, I have to agree with one of the Democrats. Yes, it has come to that. I am agreeing with a Democrat. Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore) said, "This bill is literally a series of missed opportunities." No kidding.

Congress Passes Far-Reaching Energy Bill
By H. JOSEF HEBERT
Jul 29, 4:31 PM (ET)

Below, the article is condensed to show the highlights.

WASHINGTON (AP) - Four years after President Bush called for an overhaul of the nation's energy agenda, Congress presented him with a mammoth plan he said he was eager to sign - even though it costs twice as much as he wanted and won't open an Alaska wildlife refuge to oil drilling.

Some senators said the bill, despite its broad sweep, does nothing to reduce the high cost of energy, especially at the gasoline pumps, and will not reduce the country's heavy reliance on oil imports. Its supporters maintained that in the long-term it will refocus the country's energy priorities and promote cleaner energy and more conservation.

"I look forward to signing it into law," Bush said in a statement, calling the legislation "critically important to our long-term national and economic security."

Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., the chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee who led Senate negotiations on the bill with the House, acknowledged that it will not lower gas prices or even affect oil imports in the short term.

The bill's price tag - $12.3 billion over 10 years - is twice what the White House originally had put forward and raised caution among some senators.

During two presidential campaigns and repeatedly over the last five years, Bush has talked of the need to tap the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska for the billions of barrels of oil that it holds. He views it as key to reducing the country's reliance on foreign oil. It is not mentioned in the energy bill.

"This bill is literally a series of missed opportunities," said Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore

.

There it is. This is not leadership and our nation is going to suffer severely for not having a credible energy plan. Soon, it's going to come to the point that the banks will install gas pumps at the drive-up tellers. You hand over your paycheck and they cash it to fill up your tank. It's just a matter of time until we experience gas shortages like the country did in the mid-1970s. Congress and the President can and should do better. What they have done is avoid short-term responsibility, which will result in long-term problems.

Well, I'll see you at the pumps--but, only while they still have something in them.

Day 180 with no 180, or as John Kerry calls it - Friday

We are now at Day 180 of John Kerry doing a 180 on his promise to sign Form 180. This is mentioned because it is somewhat of an ironic numerical milestone.

Earlier this week, we suggested that you consider doing something helpful and meaningful to mark this day. (Others might as well, if the Senator won't. But, this way, he indirectly is creating good.) Here's the earlier reminder with suggestions - Give 180 for Kerry's 180 on 180 for 180 this Friday (You'll have to read it.) If you choose, you can express yourself positively however you want--perhaps with your time, your money, or your prayers in your faith.

Myself, I will be praying for our nation's people and its leaders. You can express yourself in many ways, but if this is how you might be led today, then you may want to visit the sites of The Presidential Prayer Team and Prayers for Nations & Leaders.

However, when it comes to John Kerry keeping his promise, I don't know if we have a prayer--but, I'll keep trying.

Senate Judiciary Chases More Records Than Lance Armstrong

This in from Scrappleface:

Bush to Senate Judiciary: Release Your Own Records
by Scott Ott
(2005-07-28)

The White House today called for members of the Senate Judiciary Committee to release all of their tax records and other personal documents so Americans can gain insight into the judicial philosophy and character of those who will help choose the next Supreme Court Justice.

"These Senators hold the future of our legal system in their hands," said presidential spokesman Scott McClellan. "They're going to place someone on the court who may serve for 20 or 30 years. So, we need to probe their ideology, and directly ask them whether they will vote for Judge John Roberts before confirmation hearings begin."

The Bush administration has a team of lawyers standing by ready to comb through millions of pages of senatorial documents in an attempt to brand some Judiciary Committee members as "extremists who are out of step with mainstream America."

Makes sense to me! However, I'd make it more like "I'll show you mine, if you show me yours." Then maybe, just maybe, we could get John Kerry to open his military records, too. I'm enjoying, but not surprised at, the hypocrisy of the Senate Democrats on the confirmation of Roberts for the Supreme Court.

"Signs" of Massachusetts Becoming Alabama

The people of Massachusetts and the people of Alabama now have something in common--both of their road systems use Alabama highway signs.

The highway signs in Easthampton, Massachusetts have an Alabama outline. Apparently, someone looked at the federal manual governing highway signs, which uses the Alabama signs as a sample. (First in the alphabet, I guess.) So they showed the guide to the contractor, who apparently isn't too good at geography and gave them exactly what they asked for. The signs stayed up for a week before anyone noticed. As the contractor said, 'the numbers were correct'.

[Via Mac Thomason of War Liberal (lefty) and Braves Journal (makes up for being lefty.) Also, "The Boston Globe" (reallll lefty) has more with pictures.]

Now, can we expect the people of Boston to complete the transformation and start using words like y'all and git-R-done? But, for Massachusetts to really become more like Alabama, it should start by dumping its senators (you know who) and electing some respectable people.

Hey, Alabama. Want a good deal on some slightly used road signs?

Open Letter To John "Do you know who I am?" Kerry: Volume 3

Dear Senator Kerry:

You are probably ignoring my previous letters regarding your promise to sign the Standard Form 180, and I understand that; I'm not one of your fans, nor am I one of your constituents. I'm not a Democrat, I'm not a liberal, I'm not a member of the faux "reality based community."

But I am a veteran, I know that this coming Friday it will be 180 days since you promised to sign the SF 180. I do remember your Senate Testimony, I do remember reports of your meeting with the North Vietnamese in Paris, I do remember the quotes of you claiming falsely that you were in Cambodia in 1968 - sent by President Nixon no less, a month before he was sworn in as president (neat trick that, unique in the annals of political machinations.)

I also remember you telling Mr. Russert that you would sign the SF180 so that the world could "see" your service career.

I remember other things too Senator. I remember reports of you being disgusted when you found the "safe" swift boat assignment you finagled was ordered in-country where someone might actually shoot at you. I remember you "reinacting" your heroism for your Super 8 scrap book. I remember the worlds sloppiest salute when you "reported for duty" as you accepted your Party's nomination for President. I remember you parading a slew of folk that served with you saying how terrific you were under fire, how brave, how wonderful how stupid selfless you were. I also remember that navy records proved that one of the members of that parade had been severely wounded in the head a couple of days before you joined that boat so he could not possibly have served with you and I also remember that when that came out, he ceased showing up to sing your praises.

I remember reports of you claiming to have run your swiftboat through a gauntlet of fire so fierce that no damage was received on your boat at all (amazing how poorly those folks could shoot isn't it?). I remember that there is serious question as to how you received at least one of your much vaunted, but possibly fraudulent THREE PURPLE HEARTS did not come from "enemy fire" but from wounds in the butt when you didn't duck out of the way while you blew up a rice cache.

I remember how you said nothing as the MSM and other liberal sycophants denigrated some of the very bravest who came out against you. Men that had earned their purple hearts, bronze stars and silver stars. I remember the hullabaloo about your silver star, unfortunately, that same silver star had three, count em THREE different citations issued over the years... needed time to get the story straight right did you?

I remember your superciliousness and haughty remarks when President Bush had a tumble on his bike and you asked if he forgot his training wheels. This from a guy who rides a bike that costs several thousands of dollars and wears outlandish costumes while doing so. This from a guy that takes a tumble on a snowboard and then claims "I don't fall, that son-of-a-bitch pushed me." Well Senator, that S-O-B was your secret service protector and you sir were a cad. I remember also reports of you going to the head of a line of folks waiting patiently for tickets for a show and when someone objected to your cutting in, you remarking "Do you know who I am?" Well, guess what Senator, I know who you are, and I know that you think yours doesn't stink.

All this is well and good Senator, because in spite of your efforts, and the efforts of the super-rich George Soros and Tah-Ray-Zuh Heinz (you do marry up don't you Senator?), in spite of the efforts of the MSM, in spite of the efforts of Dan Rather, in spite of the efforts of MoveOn.org and the Democratic Underground, you LOST the election. Thank God!

Senator, if I can remember all of the above, how come you can't remember to sign or be honest enough to sign a SF 180 and release everything to anyone that wants to see it? Not just a few liberal members of the MSM who will probably give you as much cover as you think you need.

In reflection Senator, this Friday will mark 180 days since you promised to "do a 180" and sign the SF 180. I'm still waiting Senator. Stilll....w.a..i...t.....zzzzzzzzzzzzzz!

Give 180 for Kerry's 180 on 180 for 180 this Friday (You'll have to read it.)

For Sen. John Kerry, this Friday, July 29, 2005, represents 180 days of maintaining a 180 reversal of his promise to sign Form 180 releasing his military records to the public. What's the problem?

Let's recap. During the 2004 election, Presidential candidate Kerry "reported for duty" and made great political capital out of his Viet Nam service for which he was lauded as a hero. (Forget that protest business with Jane Fonda.) Some people expressed skepticism and wanted to see the records for themselves. If Kerry was telling the full truth, he had nothing to hide. Wouldn't most heroes want their records displayed to inspire others? Well, most would, but Kerry didn't--and, many suspect that his reason was not modesty.

Well, after the election was stolen from him (he claims); Kerry went on the air to continue pushing his message, which had something to do with flip-flops. On January 30th as a guest on "Meet the Press," Senator Kerry gave into the questioning of Tim Russert and agreed to sign Form 180 to open his military records. This story is explained in greater detail and with links by Judicial Watch.

Now, how long does it take to sign and submit that form? Well, in John Kerry's case it takes at least 180 days or more--much longer than the short 48 days it took for him to get into and out of combat duty. Kerry continues to ignore requests again and again and again, and he ignored pressures to keep this simple promise. Oh, and giving selected releases to a "friendly" newspaper is not the same as your promise.

So, what's to be done when people want the full truth but see that Senator Kerry wants to conceal it? Well, first, you can forget it, because he's never going to do what he said. You can bank on that. Or, you could form protest groups like liberal activists and chant anti-Kerry slogans and march with misspelled signs. Or, you could do something productive and make it meaningful--but, do it with a symbolic 180 for that day.

What can 180 be? It can be time: 180 minutes, or 3 hours, helping a child learn or visiting with the elderly. It could be 180 seconds of prayer for our nation and its leaders. It could be money: $180 to a charity or a political contribution or $1.80 that you stick in the contribution cup for kids at the gas station. It could be 180 (more or less) words in a letter to the media expressing your position on Kerry's inaction. Try to find something meaningful in your life on Friday, and give it the 180 to acknowledge the day, but in a way that it does some good.

So, this Friday, when we recognize day 180 of Kerry's broken promise with our expressions of good and if someone asks you why you did that, simply say, "I'm giving 180 because someone else didn't." Oh, and pass it around.

Braves move into first place with "walk-off" walk

It appeared as though the Braves would drop the opener of this crucial series with Washington and fall a game behind in the race for the NL East. But Adam LaRoche tied the game with a sac fly in the ninth. Then, Andruw Jones drew a four-pitch, bases-loaded walk that allowed pinch-runner Jeff Francoeur to casually stroll home with the winning run amid the loud cheers of a home crowd that got to enjoy the fact that their Braves had finally overtaken the Nationals and assumed sole possession of first place for the first time since June 4. (Story at Atlanta Braves.)

What a funny way to win and take over first place. We'll take it any way we can. I'll be there at the game Wednesday night sitting behind home plate and offering friendly advice to the home plate umpire.

No, this doesn't have anything to do with politics. So what?

UPDATE:
For our friend Jim Hitchcock--a vision from the past for a true blue Dodgers fan:

Pic: Tommy Lasorda explaining strike zone to umpire

Demonizing AGAIN.... Damn Those Democrats

This is not a rant against all Democrats, but rather against a select few. Specifically, those that have the temerity to passive-aggressively bring up the religious beliefs of both Judge Roberts and Governor Mitt Romney of Mass. Take Teddy Kennedy (Whale, Mass.) for example

In the same article, Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, brought up Romney's Mormon faith with the Atlantic interviewer. ''The question you didn't ask," Kennedy said, ''was about Mormonism, whether it would hurt him in a national campaign." [emphasis added...ed]

''The answer is no," Kennedy answered. ''We've moved on. That died with my brother Jack." [emphasis added...ed]

Oh yeah Senator, then why did you bring it up in the first place. You are JUST LIKE your little brother John Kerry who only mentioned that Mary Cheney was a lesbian. You damned flaming hypocrite, how DARE YOU, especially after Nixon's forces tried the same thing against your brother in 1960.

Alex Beam in the Boston Globe notes:

It's a fascinating question," says Alan Wolfe, director of Boston College's Boisi Center for Religion and American Public Life. ''Catholics like to talk about anti-Catholicism and Jews like to complain about anti-Semitism. But a hundred years ago, Mormonism was the most hated religion in America. Since then the religion has changed dramatically. It's almost like a new business taking off -- it's a quintessential American success story."

Wolfe thinks that if Romney's ambitions take him to the 2008 Republican primaries, he's likely to be slimed by political operatives of the Karl Rove mold. ''I think there will be rumors spread about how Mitt Romney has six wives, all of them 14 years of age, stashed in a house in Utah. These rumors will be denied, but they will stick in people's minds. There is some subterranean sentiment about curious practices in Mormonism."

When Romney gave hints of running I wondered how long it would take for some Democrats to bring up his Morman faith. Wasn't long was it. Did you also notice how ole' Karl Rove got slimed too?

Some members of the left are equally trying to out Judge Roberts for being Roman Catholic because of its teachings regarding abortion. Not content to "out" that aspect of his life, they are also dragging his wife's beliefs regarding abortion into the frey. David Kirkpatrick of the New York Times engaged in a little throat cutting:

Judge Roberts's family life and religious convictions helped sell him to Christian conservatives as well. Both he and his wife, Jane Sullivan Roberts, were observant Catholics, Mr. Leo told other allies. They had joined a church in Bethesda to follow their priest, Msgr. Peter J. Vaghi, who was well known in the Washington area as an advocate of Catholic orthodoxy and opponent of abortion."

My, what a neat way of saying Mr. Leo is pro Judge Roberts, but also alerting the NARAL pro-abortion types to the coming fight.

One would hope that the infamous term "politics of personal destruction," derided by but often used by the Clinton administration, would have died a decent death by now. Guess I was wrong.

So, if you are a Democrat and can't stand these tactics (and I know that there are a bunch of you out there) Tell your folks at the DNC to knock it off.

A Doff of the GM Chapeaux to Glen Reynolds, The Instapundit

Moron's Anonymous Meets at 7:00 PM

I'm pretty thick skinned, most of the time, but every once in a while someone manages to get under my skin like a chigger. In yesterday's post about Lt. Governor Catherine Baker Knoll here I said very plainly on the post:

To anyone that doesn't like this post, tough, don't come here and post some half assed excuse for the CHB or in support of those who feel and act like her, for I will surely delete that message. This isn't about the war folks, this is about those who have lost a relative, a friend, a father, a husband, a son. This is about allowing private grief to remain private grief."

I also used the term CHB (go look at the original so I don't have to retype the whole phrase and made apologies to the Family Canidae (Dogs), the specific species I was thinking of, at the time, was Canis Lupis, the Gray Wolf because Knoll came as a wolf (to campaign) in sheep’s (a mourner) clothing.

The site was linked to by the good Professor Glen Reynolds of Instapundit and before long, the hits were rolling in. That was good, this was a story that needed to be told.

When Dr. Reynolds links to someone, especially to a small blog like this one, the usual procedure is to do an UPDATE on the bottom of the original post, thank Dr. Reynolds and to welcome those coming to your blog. But I felt that would detract from the story and so I didn't do that, I put it in the comments section instead. That just seemed right to me!

As far as the story went I had checked it out fairly well (considering I'm a pajama clad blogger and not a real newsman) and as best as I could figure out, it was true. So, imagine my surprise when some fellow sends a comment like this one:

Moron. You might actually want to wait to see Knoll's reply to these accusations -- which, frankly, don't ring true -- before going all of on the "bitch" routine."

Needless to say, I deleted that comment but hung on to the e-mail notification for 24 hours before deciding to write this post.

I'm almost at a lost for words. (Notice I said almost) Why would the commenter think I didn't do some checking first. I found out, that Lt. Gov. Knoll has a habit of saying things out of context, that she has been yelled at by her own party members because she doesn't know how to follow the rules of the senate, she has even mispronounced Governor Rendell's name with THE SCRIPT in front of her, calling him several times Edward G. Robinson, the actor that played mobsters a lot and not his real name, Edward G. Rendell. In fact, Lt. Governor Knoll is known to make comments at either an inappropriate time or inappropriate manner.

Moron? Check it out? Get her side? Well gentle readers, guess what? Governor Edward G. Rendell is issuing a written apology for his Lt. Governor's faux pass! Don't believe me? Check here, here, here, here, and here at The Mudville Gazette

Now, the fellow who called me a Moron has a website, but I'm not going to post his name or his site because I don't want to, and I don't want him to get any traffic. A little petty isn't it? Tough!

But I do have a suggestion for this fellow: Pick up your yellow pages, and look for a moron support group! Apparently you need it more than I do.

UPDATE
Oh, and whoever you are, please check here Moron
INDEED!!!

Now 20,000 Visits AND we actually know who it is!

An interesting thing about visitor milestones of this site is that we had no clue about the identities of the people who landed on those special numbers--like who was 5,000, 10,000, etc. Now that the site has hit 20,000 visitors, we have a winner and can actually identify this person. That even surprised us.

Before, we reveal the name, which is indicated "below the fold," let's look at some hints and see if you can guess the identity of this visitor.

Clues:

01) Is a good person (most of the left just dropped out)
02) Dodger Fan (so, it must not be G.M. or Woody)
03) Logs on from both home and work (Oh, that really eliminated a lot.)
04) Does not require medications to control irrational behavior and flying off the handle (That eliminates...oh, you know, but we better not say who.)
05) Uses Microsoft Windows XP (Mac users, you're out.)
06) Lives on the Left Coast
07) Is a male
08) Regular commenter
.........Getting close yet?
09) Needs help in voting (That eliminates Republicans.)
10) Hates to move and loves airplane noise (That's a GOOD hint.)

That's enough! Who is it and what does he win??!!!

(Continue Reading by clicking the link below.)

NEA: Parents should step aside "for the children"

The National Education Association (NEA) wants what's best for your kids, and it thinks what's best is for parents to mind their own business. In this case, the NEA says don't home school your kids. As the left often whines, it's for the chilllll-drennnnnn (Be sure to draw out the word "children" to make the whining sound realistic). On the other hand, maybe it's to protect the education establishment so that it can keep money in its pockets and keep indoctrinating your kids.

The NEA had one of its "top people" assess home schooling, which has become very popular and successful across the nation. Here's the article by Dave Arnold titled "Home Schools Run By Well-Meaning Amateurs". Countering that is a site run by a home schooling mother, who does this on her own time and on her own web site titled "Another Anti-Homeschooling Fisking". (As a good mom, she features her kids and her church, but the link is for her rebuttals to the NEA article.)

Most people who oppose home schooling often know little about it or have a financial or political interest in fighting it. People who have taught their own children have done it for altruistic reasons--doing what is best for their children as they view it. I trust parents to make the best decisions for their children. On the other hand, when education discussions touch home schooling, vouchers, and accountability: the NEA can always be found in opposition, which maybe is not usually best "for the children."

By the way, I should know something about this subject, as we home schooled our children for many years, and they are doing quite fine. We chose to obtain our resources through Calvert School, and there are many other professional programs for home schoolers including programs for military kids. You can judge for yourselves.

Oh, yes. The NEA author and expert, Dave Arnold, is head custodian at an elementary School in Illinois--a noble and useful job, but not one that would indicate that he is an expert on this subject. But, based upon its position, apparently the leaders at the NEA aren't either.

Jane Fonda: Out of Iraq or my bus runs you over! (If it doesn't run out of oil first.)

Jane Fonda, who did a stint in Viet Nam, is calling for the withdrawal of U.S. military forces from Iraq and will kick off her "anti-war movement" with a national bus tour.

In announcing her coming out, she said, "I have not taken a stand on any war since Vietnam. I carry a lot of baggage from that." (Hey, Jane. You could have dumped some of that baggage had you ever admitted that you were wrong and actually apologized. We are a forgiving people for those who are truly sorry.)

However, for this new bus tour, I have some questions for Ms. Fonda:

1. Will your bus come equipped with an anti-aircraft gun for photo-ops?
2. While your bus will run on vegetable oil, wouldn't it be cheaper to burn a fuel that you produce in great quantities -- Bull &%!+ ?
3. Will John Kerry get out and help you push the bus when it runs out of fuel, and could we face a new oil war--one against the farmers for vegetable oil?
4. Also, will John Kerry be helping your movement by conducting secret negotiations with Sadam Hussein?
5. Since the enemy beheads POWs, how will you be able to betray them?
6. Can we look forward to an appendix to your book "My Life So Far" or will you just tell us to re-read it from the beginning since you're repeating history?
7. Will your bus make it over the water to Baghdad and will Ted Kennedy be available to drive that leg?
8. Please, please...once you leave Atlanta on this tour, will you stay gone for good...and take the run-away-bride with you?

Readers, please help Jane Fonda plan her trip and tell her where to go.

Brother Against Brother

Two young women, blogging at Euphoric Reality have researched and written extensively regarding

"The first in a seven-part series about jealousy, truth, and honor between men who fought in a place called Vietnam."

Their article today is the first of a series. A Sample:

"Throughout its history, the United States military has been home to some of the greatest warriors found anywhere in the world. Story after story can be found of men who distinguished themselves on the battlefield; their actions a testament to the bravery and sacrifice that has made and kept our nation free. All one needs to do is read the National Archives; the military websites; the award citations of soldiers like Medal of Honor recipient Sgt First Class Paul Smith and Silver Star recipient Leigh Ann Hester to know the caliber of men and women that have unselfishly stepped forward, answering the call of our country’s defense."

"Vietnam was no exception. In the midst of a world that had seemingly gone mad; in the thick of humid jungles and against an enemy with no uniforms and no rules, men fought bravely and with honor. For many, the honor came not in exemplary deeds, but for simply having the courage to step onto a helicopter day after day; to go out on patrol, to keep fighting the fight. For some, it came as they stood outside a full chopper crying; not out of fear, but because their brothers were dying out on a knoll and there was no room on the helicopter for them to go and help try to save them. As in any conflict, in Vietnam there were those who rose above the call of duty, giving more than anyone asked or expected."

Go and read the whole thing, you won't be disappointed.

Short Attention Span Update

For our ADD readers and our ADD writer, the types who like to wear out remotes cruising channels, the following brief posts from the week are offered for you to quickly scan--with no commercial interruptions.

Posted by GM Roper at 08:00 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Cruella DeVille Is Alive And Well And The Lt. Governor Of Pennsylvania

Anyone who knows me, knows that I generally abjure foul language. I seldom use it, except occasionally, with very close friends or in private communication. I do not use it in political discourse generally, though there have been times when I'm so angry it has been used.

But, generally, I don't like curse words in political discussion, I find them to be offensive. Yet, the words do have their place on occasion. This is one of those occasions. Catherine Baker Knoll, Lt. Governor of the State of Pennsylvania is a cold heartless bitch BITCH(CHB from here on) and I apologize for the use of the word and to the slur cast on female members of the family Canidae.

The esteemed (NOT) CHB. recently showed up at the funeral of a member of the Armed Services, Staff Sgt. Joseph Goodrich, 32 who was killed in Iraq on July 10 of this year. The CHB was not invited to the funeral, and was seemingly there to, are you ready for this dear readers, campaign!

According to the Pittsburgh Post Gazette's story by Tom Barnes the family was handed her card and the CHB said "I want you to know our government is against this war."

Does this CHB have NO SHAME AT ALL? Believe me gentle reader, if this had been a conservative or a republican who said that, I would be equally infuriated. How dare she? This was a time of grief, of loss, of remembrance of the life of a loved one. It might even have been a celebration of the life of Sgt. Goodrich. It was not a place for politics, period and you would expect that the CHB would have understood that.

For what it's worth, I extend my sympathy to the Goodrich family, and to those who knew and loved Sgt. Goodrich. I hail his sacrifice for those who are much less fortunate, the people of Iraq. Sgt. Goodrich did not die in vain, but in a cause that is greater than all of us, the cause of freedom.

To, anyone that doesn't like this post, tough, don't come here and post some half assed excuse for the CHB or in support of those who feel and act like her, for I will surely delete that message. This isn't about the war folks, this is about those who have lost a relative, a friend, a father, a husband, a son. This is about allowing private grief to remain private grief.

New Feature

On the side bar to the left, if you scroll down a bit you will find a section with this title "Major Media Links." In there, you will find links to American, British and Continental newspapers/magazines of all sorts; Conservative, Liberal, Centrist, I even linked Pravda from Russia.

Knowledge is power, if you want knowledge, see what others say!

It also gives me source material to poke fun at the left and at Europe. Heh!

If you have a suggestion for an added paper, please let me know and I'll consider adding it. Send it to me via my e-mail link on the upper part of the sidebar.

Cheers and happy reading, but always come back here!

Future History? Of Course Not, But Freedom Is Threatened!

Every once in a while, I get this wild urge to write silly poetry. I've also written some poetry that got published under my nom de plume "Geörg Mann." This next bit of silly verse is just that, silly. Meant in fun, except for the tail end. Read, enjoy, laugh, or, if you've no sense of the absurd, get ticked off.

Listen my children and I will mention

The midnight crowning of Hillary Clinton.

On the 4th of November of twenty o’eight;

Hardly a man can forget that date.

The ascension of Hillary Clinton

She said to her hubby “if the repubs march
By vote or by stealth from the voting booths tonight
Use your cell phone to call me, all right?
Call me from home or ‘neath a street light,
One ring if by vote, two if by stealth
And I will take all George Soro’s wealth
And buy the votes that we democrats need
From every illegal or homeless person
And even the dead, indeed.

You know the rest, in books you have read
How democrat voters, illegals, homeless and dead
Voted for Hillary, voted for Hillary one and all
And over the nation hung a great pall.
Till the votes were all counted and lo and behold
The Democrats wealth had gone for the gold.
The tally was totaled while we all lay innocently abed
From stuffed ballot box and machine the votes were all counted
And the margin of victory for Hillary mounted
To the ceiling and higher the vote talley soared
And Bill turned to Hillary
“Hey babe, we’ve scored.�

The coronation came, Hillary got her crown
She made conservatives illegal, she put them all down.
She opened the borders to all that would come
And tripled the tax on all, from services and gum
To shoes and fast food, to movies and fun.
She outlawed our congress and took all our rights
And we lay down, with nary a fight.

This alternate future, is silly, and stupid at best
It cannot happen, put your mind at rest.
But listen my children, and be very afraid
That some day your freedoms will all be waylaid
If you don’t stand up now and be counted for sure
A loss of liberty you will endure.
For there are those around us, all filled with hate
They want our freedom, what makes our land great.
Protect your fellow, raise your voice in one shout
Freedom is what we are about

And Rest assured my kiddo’s, it will all be OK
For you live in Liberty in the U.S. of A

Michael J. Totten: The Logic Of Pacifism

Michael Totten has penned (pixeled?) a brilliant essay on the "Logic of Pacifism over at Tech Central Station. A sample:

Several commenters blamed the 7/7 terrorist attacks in London, in one way or another, on regime-change in Iraq. Markos Moulitsas Zuniga (Daily Kos) described the attacks as consequences of the war. Professor Juan Cole characterized them as blowback. Paul Reynolds at the BBC said they were Britain's punishment.

Only those who opposed the invasion of Iraq trot out this argument, though. Many of them either minimize or entirely ignore the fact that the invasion of Afghanistan and the toppling of the Taliban enraged Islamists as much if not even more so. The Taliban, after all, are fellow Islamists. The Baathists, from the point of view of Islamists, are socialists and infidels."

More:

It's real simple. If invading Iraq was a bad idea because it enraged Al Qaeda and handed them fodder for recruitment propaganda, then invading Afghanistan was likewise a bad idea because that, too, enraged Al Qaeda and handed them fodder for recruitment propaganda. If military action provokes retaliation, and retaliation must be avoided, then any and all military action must be avoided always and everywhere. Fighting the enemy anywhere at all will produce exactly the same result: they won't like it and will want to fight back. That always happens in war. Otherwise it wouldn't be war."

Totten ends with:

Those who think invading Afghanistan was wise and invading Iraq was a mistake can and will have pacifist logic thrown at them by others (like British MP George Galloway) who also opposed removing the Taliban. If you know how to argue with pacifist opponents of regime-change in Afghanistan, then you know how to argue with pacifist opponents of regime-change in Iraq."

Those that fail to understand that we cannot, must not abandon this war will also be those that can't understand why the Islamo-Fascists will, if you will allow the bloodythirsty phrase, have lined them up against the wall. This war is not about nice, not about understanding motivations, not about differences in culture. This war is about a mindset held by the Islamo-fascists that we will be conquered and either submit (dhimitude) or die.

Further evidence that this war preceeded 9/ll and both Afghanistan and Iraq is provided by The Anchoress (caution, strong photographic evidence that may shake a pacifists belief) who writes:

Let’s not forget bin Laden’s own words in 2001 rallying against the West and trying to convince the world that our efforts in Afghanistan were unjust because, “there is no evidence of the involvement of the people of Afghanistan in what happened in America.� (H/T Glenn Reynolds) Rather like those insisting the same about Iraq, today."

Tell us some more how terrorists are only responding to regime change in Iraq, and how if only we would obey the “insurgents� there and leave Iraq, all of this would end. Tell us that some more, Mr. Galloway, tell us that some more, ladies and gentlemen of the press. Tell us all about it you tired, phoney, so-called intellectuals and sophisticates. Tell us how terror that has existed for decades is all the fault of George W. Bush and his poodles Tony Blair and John Howard (Trey Jackson has a terrific video of Howard telling it like it is here."

The Anchoress could also have included the bombing of the Moscow Metro here:

The Marine Barracks bombing


followed only seconds later by the bombing of the French Paratroopers headquarters
and the US Embassy bombing 6 months earlier

John Howard - Gutsy PM of Australia

Transcript sent to Katheryn J. Lopez at National Review Online

PRIME MIN. HOWARD:

Could I start by saying the prime minister and I were having a discussion when we heard about it. My first reaction was to get some more information. And I really don't want to add to what the prime minister has said. It's a matter for the police and a matter for the British authorities to talk in detail about what has happened here.

Can I just say very directly, Paul, on the issue of the policies of my government and indeed the policies of the British and American governments on Iraq, that the first point of reference is that once a country allows its foreign policy to be determined by terrorism, it's given the game away, to use the vernacular. And no Australian government that I lead will ever have policies determined by terrorism or terrorist threats, and no self-respecting government of any political stripe in Australia would allow that to happen.

Can I remind you that the murder of 88 Australians in Bali took place before the operation in Iraq.

And I remind you that the 11th of September occurred before the operation in Iraq.

Can I also remind you that the very first occasion that bin Laden specifically referred to Australia was in the context of Australia's involvement in liberating the people of East Timor. Are people by implication suggesting we shouldn't have done that?

When a group claimed responsibility on the website for the attacks on the 7th of July, they talked about British policy not just in Iraq, but in Afghanistan. Are people suggesting we shouldn't be in Afghanistan?

When Sergio de Mello was murdered in Iraq -- a brave man, a distinguished international diplomat, a person immensely respected for his work in the United Nations -- when al Qaeda gloated about that, they referred specifically to the role that de Mello had carried out in East Timor because he was the United Nations administrator in East Timor.

Now I don't know the mind of the terrorists. By definition, you can't put yourself in the mind of a successful suicide bomber. I can only look at objective facts, and the objective facts are as I've cited. The objective evidence is that Australia was a terrorist target long before the operation in Iraq. And indeed, all the evidence, as distinct from the suppositions, suggests to me that this is about hatred of a way of life, this is about the perverted use of principles of the great world religion that, at its root, preaches peace and cooperation. And I think we lose sight of the challenge we have if we allow ourselves to see these attacks in the context of particular circumstances rather than the abuse through a perverted ideology of people and their murder.

PRIME MIN. BLAIR: And I agree 100 percent with that. (Laughter.)

Howard is entirely right! As Marc Antony said in "Julius Ceasar:"

O, pardon me, thou bleeding piece of earth,
That I am meek and gentle with these butchers!
Thou art the ruins of the noblest man
That ever lived in the tide of times.
Woe to the hand that shed this costly blood!
Over thy wounds now do I prophesy,
--- Which, like dumb mouths, do ope their ruby lips,
To beg the voice and utterance of my tongue ---
A curse shall light upon the limbs of men;
Domestic fury and fierce civil strife
Shall cumber all the parts of Italy;
Blood and destruction shall be so in use
And dreadful objects so familiar
That mothers shall but smile when they behold
Their infants quarter'd with the hands of war;
All pity choked with custom of fell deeds:
And Caesar's spirit, ranging for revenge,
With Até by his side come hot from hell,
Shall in these confines with a monarch's voice
Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war;
That this foul deed shall smell above the earth
With carrion men, groaning for burial.

-- William Shakespeare

Info regarding the true meaning of the verse above is obtained from Thomas writing at Minstrels: from 'Julius Caesar'.

Context: This words are said by Mark Antony to Caesar's corpse. Antony, Caesar's most devoted friend, has just made his peace with Caesar's murderers (Brutus, Cassius et al.), hence the 'Pardon me'; yet, as these words make clear, he has already resolved to take revenge on the conspirators. As it turned out, his bloodthirsty words were indeed prophetic: for the next 10 years, the Roman empire was wracked by a series of civil wars, culminating (finally) in the ascension of Caesar's nephew Octavius (later known as Augustus) to power.

Commentary: As poetry, perhaps, this speech of Antony's may not be
remarkable, but as dramatic verse it is stunning. Note the gradual
escalation of tone and emotion, from the subdued and sorrowful 'Pardon
me' at the beginning to the heraldic fury of the four lines beginning
with 'And Caesar's spirit...' at the end - as Antony's feelings run
higher, his words become more intense and the imagery he uses becomes
simultaneously more complex and more powerful. At the end of the speech, one feels almost sorry for Brutus and his co-conspirators.

This short extract also illustrates Shakespeare's remarkable facility
for coining phrases which have passed into idiom - in just 20 lines
(that too, from a play not as highly regarded as some others), we have
'the tide of times', 'hot from hell', 'the dogs of war'...

thomas.

And the real danger to the world at large is that these islamofascists cannot sense that they will not win, that they will be defeated. The world of civilized men and women will soon tire of the bloodthirstyness of these fascists and will rise up and smite them. I do not hope for that, but I know human behavior. The Islamo-Fascists MUST bring themselves to the table. If they do not, they will be slaughtered, by the ones, by the tens, by the hundreds until this scourge is lifted from the earth.

The ACLU Attempts Borking Of Judge Roberts

Everyone, well, almost everyone knows about the ACLU. What most folk don't know however is how far that they will go in attempting to block any nominee that President Bush puts up. Their most recent media release:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Media@dcaclu.org
WASHINGTON -- The American Civil Liberties Union today expressed deep concern about some of the civil liberties positions advocated by Judge John Roberts, President Bush's choice to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court.
While serving as principal deputy solicitor general from 1989-1993, he authored briefs calling for Roe v. Wade to be overruled, supporting graduation prayer, and seeking to criminalize flag burning as a form of political protest.

"All these positions were rejected by the Supreme Court," said Steven Shapiro, the ACLU's National Legal Director. "But the Supreme Court remains closely divided on many of these questions."

As a senior Justice Department official, Roberts was in a position to help shape the government's legal positions as well as represent them.
At a minimum, the Senate should determine the extent to which the positions taken in these briefs also reflect Roberts's personal views.
Judge John Roberts was appointed to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in May 2003. He received his undergraduate and law degrees from Harvard University and clerked for Justice Rehnquist. He served in a number of positions in the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations, including as principal deputy solicitor general from 1989 to 1993.
"The Supreme Court has played a pivotal role in advancing freedom," said Anthony D. Romero, ACLU Executive Director. "Without the Supreme Court, the South would still be segregated, illegal abortions would be claiming thousands of lives, the indigent would have no right to a lawyer, and lesbian and gay Americans could be imprisoned for their private sexual conduct."
"The stakes could not be higher," Romero added.
The ACLU will only oppose a Supreme Court nominee on a majority vote of its 83 person national board.

First, Roberts wrote briefs as an attorney, in the Solicitor Generals office. The job of the Solicitor General is to represent the President and the Administration in matters before the courts. Thus, by questioning this, in essence the ACLU is saying that the President didn't have a right to legal counsel OR that John Roberts shouldn't have done his job if he disagreed with the position of the President. OMG... can you imagine if all criminal attorneys had to follow that advice... "Don't do your legal best to defend and support your client." What happened to the legal professions stance that every person appearing before the courts has a right to effective legal council?

The ACLU wants "...the Senate ... [to] ... determine the extent to which the positions taken in these briefs also reflect Roberts's personal views." Wait a minute, what happened to "no litmus test?" What did the ACLU have to say when Justice Ruth Ginsburg refused to answer questions regarding matters that may come before the court? What do you want to bet that they were mum?

Then they make this statement:

Without the Supreme Court, the South would still be segregated, illegal abortions would be claiming thousands of lives, the indigent would have no right to a lawyer, and lesbian and gay Americans could be imprisoned for their private sexual conduct."

Of course the implication is that Judge Roberts would have opposed those issues. How do they know? But even that is not the purpose of the sentence. The purpose is to attempt to make Judge Roberts to be separate from the mainstream. Actually, I hope he is on matters of the takings clause, the 9th and 10th Amendments, the interstate commerce clause that OUGHT to be about commerce only, the late stage abortion issue etc; the liberal five in the SCOTUS need a really healthy conservative to balance their (IMHO)stupidities.

What the ACLU doesn't want is an honest and open debate on Judge Roberts merits to be voted up or down to the bench of the Supreme Court of The United states.

I hope they are ashamed of themselves. I know they probably aren't, but one can pray... or maybe not.. what was the latest SC decision on prayer on the internet?

Update: Captain Ed over at Captain's Quarters has a post up on the pro-abortion folks trying to Bork Judge Roberts by pointing out his wife being staunchly pro-life. His job, his responsibility, his beliefs are all part of the upcoming hearings to be held. His wife's? I would ask if they have no shame, but that would be a rhetorical question.

Words Mean Things: Why Is That A Hard Concept To Grasp?

In current political parlance, there seems to be a major disconnect between the terms "debate," "free exchange of ideas" and the left. So often in the last years, the left has been particularly nasty in it's interaction with the right. Now, I'm not foolish enough to believe that there is not ANY nasty, snarky, mean-spirited, stuff coming from the right, both now and in the DOC (Day's of Clinton), but it seems to be worse now on the part of my unfavorite leftoids.

I have cut loose with a four letter word or two in my time, but I usually disdain the use of foul language (now, don't get me wrong, I love FOWL language - fried chicken, cock-au-vin, roasted turkey, pheasant under glass, etc.) but cursing to me seems to detract from any argument.

Let's take a look at some recent exchanges: From Marc Cooper's site and some lefty type commenters:

We've been lying down, getting anally raped by your kind for years GM. There will be no more sitting down anymore, only standing up."

"PS Fuck you"

"I would add that Democrats need to keep telling their 2006 election narrative: Republicans are an out-of-control, corrupt, and highly partisan majority party that without fail heads for the most right wing, confrontational position."

"Go to hell GM. You're a heartless, lying right-wing troglodyyte and total fucking idiot who doesn't give a shit about what this president is doing to future generations. You'll spin and lie and say anything just to buy time to see your backward agenda enacted. I'm sure you and your red state comrades will be pleased when the Bush court legalizes sexual intercourse with all non feral barnyard animals. Perhaps they'll do so on the inauguration of Jefferson Davis."

[Note: emphasis added in all the above]

And that is just from a single post that Marc has up. Now, I will explain that Marc does not necessarily endorse that kind of language and is quite welcoming of rightist points of view though he almost never agrees with it.

From another source, the infamous Democratic Underground to be specific:

This is the best the RETARDICANS can do?

"...it doesn't appear as if Mr. Roberts has *any* experience as a judge. He's a mob lawyer, plain and simple and the mob is George Orwell's party.[note, referring to Judge Roberts]"

"Bush and his GOP goon squad are going to start bringing out the rubber truncheons and whacking the liberals on the elbow in retaliation for "partisan politics."

"I'm trying to get as much as I can on this guy. So far, it seems that just over half of the people on Daily Kos are saying that we should be relieved that this guy isn't a raving lunatic and that the Dems should save their firepower for "extraordinary circumstances." Fuck that. The SCOTUS *is* extraordinary."

this was added on one post:
[Note: emphasis added in all the above]

Nifty huh? Nuke the Republicans? Who the heck knows. But I digress, more samples here from that Arbiter of Class, that paragon of sayings including "Screw them" The Daily Kos:

If you want to attack Roberts, start researching his opinions, his law review articles, and any other relevant materials. But to say that he's inexperienced is simply an incorrect and frankly laugh-inducing argument. Let's stick to arguments that make sense and have a chance of outlining differences between right-wing legal jurisprudence and what the general public deems acceptable -- [Note: wow, that one actually made sense.]

"Let the Republicans defend incest and rape, as they push the police state nominee and defend treason in cases where they do it. [Note: Ahhh, that's more of what I expected]

"Who gives a hoot about "extensive, unprecedented prior consultations" with the Senate if you ignore what they say? Why waste everyone's time with this dog and pony show if you're not going to consider other's views?" [Does it occur to this commenter that consultations means listening to what the Dems have to say, not necessarily AGREEING with what they had to say? Nah, I thought not!]
[Note: emphasis added in all the above]

But, I digress. This essay is about words meaning things, we have an excellent discussion (separate and apart from the use of foul language above) on intrepretation of the Constitution from Justice Antonin Scalia regarding original intent vs. actual meaning. Example, Protien Wisdom's entry "In which I discuss hermeneutics with a leftover steamed dumpling from last night's dim sum meal." How's that for a delightful blending of words? Jeff Goldstein has excellent fun taking on Stanly Fish's Op-Ed in the New York Times and does a bang up job (you really need to read the whole thing as GR the Instapundit would say.) Fish's argument is that one needs to "interpret" the meaning of the constitution, not take the words used as what they mean. Wow, how thick is that? OK, I say to you "I'm gonna punch you in the nose" but I actually mean "I'm really upset with you and it almost drives me to the point of violence and I really wish you wouldn't do what you did that angers me so." Fish really has it wrong her folks, his argument is that since words only convey intent, we must look for the intent. To heck with that. If you threaten to punch me in the nose, I'm going to take you at your word.

In the lexicon of the Islamo-fascist we understand that we have two choices, death or dihimitude. Well, Fish would argue, and I know that I'm being glib, I know the meaning of my words here, that their intent is to remove the crusader from their midst and let them have their Muslim state as Allah intended it. Well, no, they are saying submit or die. Their actions say submit or die with dying being their preference. Stanley, Stanley, Stanley, please tell me what it is that you don't understand? Scalia cannot ask the authors of the Constitution what they meant, he can only go on what they said. These people (the authors that is) were educated, passionate men, they knew which words to use.

The left has choices of "intent" in their interpretation of the Constitution, to wit, Congress shall make no law..... What is difficult about that? The left LOVES the first amendment, especially the separation clause. Of course, there is no "separation clause" per se, according to the left, it as the authors "intent." No it wasn't, they didn't say NO ONE could pass a law, they said CONGRESS shall make no law respecting the establishment of a [state] religion, or prohibiting the free expression of religion. The exact words are:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Now, folks this isn't rocket science. You can argue all day long that this means that schools can't open with a non-sectarian prayer and you can't display a Menorah, or the Ten Commandments or any of the other "stuff" that the ACLU demands of modern society. It means what it says: Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

The vast majority of the people endorsing the constitution were religious men. They had a state religion, the Church of England and they wanted no part of having the state shove another one down their throats. They said nothing about display, nothing about prayer in school, nothing. N.O.T.H.I.N.G. Got that?

Too, I've often wondered why the Left, the ACLU, and others of that way of thought have decided that the amendments all mean what they say except for the 2nd, 9th and 10th. When was the last time the ACLU stood up for those rights that "are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people." Can't answer that readily can you?

Well, enough for today. Just remember, if you want to have courteous discourse with someone and they cuss you out because of your political beliefs, you must be a conservative and they must be a liberal. Yes, I'm kidding, I know it goes both ways. Unfortunately, usually, today, it doesn't.

Update: Welcome Mudville Gazette Readers, stick around, I'm sure you will find some other interesting stuff.

Another Update: More Good Reading at the TRAFFIC JAM at Outside the Beltway

Judge Roberts and Political Wars

Judge Roberts has been nominated for the SCOTUS. Here is a great bio of him and I urge you to read it. Then take the poll below. It's not scientific, and it is in fun, but vote the way you really think.

Judge John Roberts Jr. has been nominated for the Supreme Court by President Bush. Should he:
	Be confirmed with all due haste but don't break the filibuster regardless
	Be confirmed, but the Democrats should grill the heck out of him
	Be confirmed with the overturn of the filibuster if necessary
	Be BORKED soundly regardless of his qualifications because he is ugh "conservative"
	Use the filibuster, but give in later
	Keep politics out of the supreme court. Confirm or deny, but no more damn politics!
	Who is Judge John Roberts?
	Do you want fries with that?
Free polls from Pollhost.com

Liberals Sabotage Conservative Site

If you're a regular visitor to this site, you may have noticed that the site looks different. (No kidding!) The format is a mess. We're having technical problems and there are strong indications that liberals have sabotaged the site to keep you from learning and spreading truth. However, the only hint that we have that this might not be true is that we don't know any liberals smart enough to pull that off. In the meantime, thanks for bearing with us until the problem is corrected.

Update: Well, I owe Jim Hitchcock, one of my favorite liberals a beer and a Richard Simmons tape. I wasn't able to fix it, but Michael Slobokan who writes Slobokan's Site O'Schtuff was. It turns out that there was an extra < / div> code in there so I guess it wasn't liberal sabotage after all. By the way, if you have never visited Michael's site, please do so. Michael has a very, very visually pleasing site, full of great posts and is a solid conservative too (Take that Jim Hitchcock.) PLUS he is a Texan and that makes him tops in my book. I will note that I overlooked that extra bit of code at least half a dozen times, so, my hat is off to Michael and the GREAT work he does INCLUDING the design of this site.

Michael, Thanks so very much.... GM Roper

Ebonics in Schools - Whaddup wid dat?

Liberals can feel good inside because a government school system has implemented an Ebonics program ""to improve black students' academic performance". Of course, it doesn't matter if this actually hurts the students in the long run, because no one is being "judgmental" about how someone else speaks or writes. Employers will just have to get use to it. Yeah. Let's stand in a circle and light candles.

One can only feel badly for these students whose education and opportunities are being thrown away by people who mean well but actually make problems worse.

However, if this becomes a trend and if you're an educator in need of Ebonics language lessons to teach, you can go to this on-line course. You could be the most popular teacher in da hood. (Be careful of strong language and don't go to any links.)

All joking aside, this is really sad and not the direction that any schools should be taking.

Zero Casualties at Student- Marine Event - Principal Relieved (or should be)

Last month a Marine returning from Iraq was tossed out of a middle school by a principal who claimed that she was concerned for "the safety and welfare of our children." This Marine had requested and been invited to meet and thank the students who had written him. Because of this school principal, the event was moved off of school property--and, guess what. The students met with this Marine and his fellow Marines and no one was killed or maimed! In fact, they look pretty happy to me. Thank goodness the fears went unfounded.

By looking at the picture, one might conclude that the community disagreed with the school decision by 1,000 to 1--with the one being the principal. As a principal she may be relieved; and now, maybe, she should be relieved as the principal. (For having bad principles?).

Be Careful What You Ask For: Part 743

George W. Bush
President
1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
Washington, District of Columbia

Dear Mr. President:

I am taking time to write to you to protest the treatment of the detainees at Guantanamo Naval Base’s Camp X-Ray. The Muslim individuals you have detained there are being held under conditions reminiscent of what was done in Abu Ghraib, Auschwitz, and the Gulags and as an American, I do not appreciate what you are doing in my name.

I cannot believe that you do not understand that their cultural differences mandate that we treat them humanely, with kindness and compassion. They have been removed from their culture on, what at best, seem to be spurious circumstances and their having an attitudinal problem with their captors seems perfectly normal. I understand that you have a war to fight, but these people are prisoners of war and are entitled to all the considerations of Prisoners of War.

Please insure that these POW’s and any future POW’s have all of their rights protected. Their food must be culturally acceptable, prayer rugs must be provided, copies of their holy book must be provided and their cultural needs met. They should never see women in circumstance other than what they are used to in their culture.

America stands for acceptance and tolerance of differences and these people deserve our kindness and consideration and nothing less. I demand that you begin to treat them as guests in our country until this unpleasantness with other cultures be resolved.

Sincerely:

John Q. Liberal, Atty.
American Civil Liberties Union

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington D.C.

Dear Mr. Liberal:

Thank you for your recent letter criticizing our treatment of the Taliban and Al Qaeda detainees currently held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The administration takes these matters seriously, and your opinion was heard loud and clear here in Washington.

You'll be pleased to learn that thanks to the concerns of citizens such as yourself, we are creating the Terrorist Retraining Program, to be called the "Liberals Accept Responsibility for Killers" program, or LARK for short. In accordance with the guidelines of this new program, we have decided to place one terrorist under your personal care.

Your detainee has been selected and scheduled for transportation to your residence next Monday. Ali Mohammed Ahmed bin Mahmud is to be cared for pursuant to the standards you personally demanded in your letter of admonishment. We will conduct weekly inspections to ensure that your standards of care for Ahmed are commensurate with those you so strongly recommended in your letter.

Although Ahmed is sociopathic and extremely violent, we hope that your sensitivity to what you described as his "attitudinal problem" will help him overcome this character flaw. Perhaps you are correct in describing these problems as mere "cultural differences."

Your adopted terrorist is extremely proficient in hand-to-hand combat and can extinguish human life with such simple items as a pencil or nail clippers. He is also expert at making a wide variety of explosive devices from common household products, so you may wish to keep those items locked up, unless you feel that this might offend him.

Ahmed will not wish to interact with your wife or daughters since he views females as a subhuman form of property. This is a particularly sensitive subject for him. He has been known to show violent tendencies around women who fail to comply with the dress code that he considers appropriate, but I'm sure that over time they will come to enjoy the anonymity offered by the bhurka. Just remind them that it is all part of respecting his culture and his religious beliefs.

Thanks again for your letter. We truly appreciate it when folks like you inform us of the proper way to do our job.

Take good care of Ahmed and good luck!

When Kitties Overdose!!!

This Day in History - Ted Kennedy Swims the Channel !

In 1969 on this night, Ted Kennedy made Mary Jo Kopechne a famous person--by killing her. Then, he tried to cover up his deed by swimming across a channel and concocting a story about why he left the girl to drown--even though help and telephones were nearby.

John Farrar, the rescue diver who examined the Chappaquiddick accident scene, was convinced that Mary Jo Kopechne had not only survived the crash, but had also lived for some time by breathing a pocket of trapped air. Farrar did not believe that she had drowned, but instead had died by asphyxiation as the oxygen in the air she was breathing was used up and replaced with carbon dioxide. "She was alive, easily an hour, maybe two," he said.

Then, Ted Kennedy engaged in lies and cover-ups to save his skin. Why not? It was too late for her, and he was a Democratic U.S. Senator and the darling of liberals. (At least Democrats today make women famous by just ruining their reputations.)

So, the next time that Ted Kennedy starts lecturing the President and this country on integrity, just remember this dark and dishonest part of his past. And maybe, to make everyone feel good, the left can light a candle for Mary Jo tonight.

Don't Drink And Drive

More information and pictures are available at "Y Ted K.com"

Reminder thanks to Grouchy Old Cripple in Atlanta

The Lady That Osama And All The Other Islamo-Fascists Fear!

The so called "Lipstick Lesbian" Irshad Manji is a Canadian television "Talking Head" who wrote The Trouble With Islam. In the UK Sunday Times she gives an interview with some depth as to her beliefs. This interview needs to be read in its entirety by anyone who is interested in how the west is perceived by radical islamo-fascists. A sample:

If we are at fault for not encouraging Muslims, they fail to “celebrate the precious gift� of British freedom: “Why do they protest against France for making it illegal to wear hijabs, but not against Saudi Arabia for making it illegal not to wear them?�; more Muslims, she contends, have been killed in recent years by fellow Muslims than by westerners.

Manji thinks Muslims should take tolerant parts of the Koran and ignore the hellfire. Does this, I ask, include Koranic references to “lewd acts� of homosexuality? She offers counter examples of its tolerance but they seem faintly absurd � should it matter what a bunch of people over a millennium ago made of homosexuality, or indeed anything else? She, not unlike the fundamentalists, picks and chooses the bits that suit her.

The state has a dilemma: to encourage moderate Islam � absurdities and all � or shirk from interfering, which will let extremists blossom. Isn’t a key problem of Islam that it has no structure? Any Church of England vicar calling for a jihad would receive a pretty sharp summons to Lambeth palace; imams are autonomous. “Yes, decentralisation would be good if it encouraged people to debate. But instead people just cower to their local imam.�

She excuses Blair glossing over violent aspects of Islam as “he is only trying to divert a backlash against Muslims, bless him� but she despises the Muslim Council for not coming clean. “Even if Muslims are only interested in slick PR, it would be a great move to recognise the problem; it would spread trust. And I am not asking them to do anything Jews and Christians haven’t done.�

Read the whole thing.

A doff of the GM Chapeaux to Glen Reynolds

Why the Left Can't Learn...or How an unruly class treats substitute teachers

You may have heard educational concerns such as "No student left behind" or "Why Johnny can't read." I have a similar concern for the Left and express that as "Why the Left can't learn". I am trying to understand why many, if not most, people on the left cannot accept other views and learn something new. Not only do they not accept other views, their attitudes seem to be hate and disdain for anyone who doesn't agree with them.

At first, I was going to title this "Why the Left Hates the Right," and if you have debated someone from the left or watched television square-offs between the sides, I think that you understand why that title might be appropriate. But, let's not list offenses. Let it suffice that contentious communication is costly to individuals and to the nation. My interest, rather, is to understand people from the left and to determine why they act as they do. In short, why can't the left learn?

With that background, here are my observations on learning, and I humbly offer these to the left to help them--and, to the right to understand the left.

What does learning demand?

1. Learning demands that you listen rather than drown out others. Drowning out commencement speakers, disrupting the President's speech, and engaging in constant and annoying group chants makes it impossible for you to listen. I've heard it said that God gave us two ears but only one mouth, and that we should use them accordingly.
2. Learning demands that you debate issues rather than call people names. Saying "you're a lying moron" is not a good response in debates. Adding the F-word to that does not improve the response, and that gets you an F from me for your debate grade. Good debate requires good manners, and you can't learn if you treat the other side like an unruly class does a substitute teacher.
3. Learning demands that you break from the herd instincts that limit exploration of alternatives. Being in a herd is like being on a dog team--unless you're the leader, the view never changes. Try to be an individual rather than just group member expected to conform. Expand your frame of thinking.
4. Learning demands accepting and analyzing facts. Don't ignore facts. Also, check the facts, as too many people are willing to tell give you just enough information to get you on their side--the wrong side.
5. Learning demands honesty. When you lie, you may fool some but you have moved the discussion from the real issue to one of your credibility--resulting in no agreement. Honesty is also saying what is correct rather than what you think others want to hear or what is acceptable to a group with speech codes.
6. Learning demands civil discourse and does not require profanity. A good argument does not need supplementing with foul language.
7. Learning demands not jumping to conclusions. There is a reason that the term "knee-jerk liberal" came into use. Don't go there. Before you accuse or act: calm down, think rationally, gather all the facts, be analytical, and make a reasoned and informed decision. If you need more time, you have my permission to wait.
8. Learning demands courage. Have the courage to discuss all points of view, to allow others to express their views without judgment, and to avoid the political-correctness trap. Have the courage to say what you know despite what your "friends" think. It's okay to call mass murderers by the name terrorists rather than merely bomber.
9. Learning demands that you form or accept supportable conclusions rather than resort to emotional demands. That only works when my wife needs something fixed around the house.
10. Learning demands...a number ten. What? Well, there isn't a number ten. I'm leaving this for you to complete. This post is an attempt to understand and explain a problem. It is not a final report, and it can use your input. Can you explain the left and give a point to help in our communication with them? We welcome views from all sides!

Don't go there yet, but I have a Continuation Link at the bottom with additional information. First, there is a comment that I wrote to members of the left at a site in which they had gotten out of control in their attacks against individuals of the right. You can view it and guess how they responded. The second part contains links to articles and comments that others have made on this subject. It makes for interesting reading.

The subject of how a liberal thinks and learns is complex, and I'm going to look around and see if I can find someone trained in mental health issues to explain it more to me. (G.M.?) I said that this was about learning, and I'm trying to learn myself. In fact, I think that dealing with liberals has taught me a lot--especially patience. But, this is an intellectual pursuit and I'm not trying to bash anyone.

However, I'm so concerned about people on the left that I'm thinking about starting a new program--"No liberal left behind".

Continue reading "Why the Left Can't Learn...or How an unruly class treats substitute teachers"

Rove Found Guilty By Dems

Washington (AP)
Following a lengthy trial over the last 12 years, and at a cost of $154,000,000 including $39.47 for defense expenses; the testimony of at least 94,491 reporters and 304,322 Democratic Party operatives, a jury of his peers pronounced Karl Rove guilty of outing someone.

The jury has declined to say who was outed for fear of becoming objects of additional investigations. On juror, who declined to be named stated that the overwhelming evidence produced by the witnesses "had to mean something, surely it did, didn't it?" Asked if he believed any republican witnesses, the juror stated that he hadn't heard any.

Following her election to the Presidencey in 2008 again in 2012 and declairing herself Queen in 2013, Her Royal Majesty Hillary I had outlawed republicans.

Rove was captured trying to escape to raft to Cuba after hiding out for 6 years in Dade County Florida. He attempted to escape to Cuba, the last democracy in the Western Hemisphere, but was captured 6 miles off the Florida Keys in a raft made of papers stolen from the National Archives, Rove said on his capture "Damn leaks did me in."

His conviction included all lesser included charges including an episode of Jay Walking in 1953.

Judge Harry Reid, called the "Executing Judge" by his detractors (both of them surviving by fleeing the country,) is expected to announce the Death Penalty for Rove.

A pro-forma appeal of the conviction will be filed tomorrow and is expected to take the full 15 minutes assigned to it by the appeals courts. Following which, execution by being stoned with old Korans will take place at the federal detention center at Guantanamo Bay.

Couldn't Resist

Routinely surfing this morning, I stopped by Raven's blog "And Rightly So" I noticed a picture of Jacques Chirac President of France, Junichiro Koizumi of Prime Minister of Japan and Tony Blair Prime Minister of England with Chirac saying something to Blair. I also noted Dr. Rusty Shackleford's Jawa Report (via Mad Dog Vinnie)linking to the entry and went there to see what was what.

Mad Dog Vinnie noted that he had "gratuitously stolen" the image from Raven, so I gratuitously stole it from both of them and added my own bon mot.

On a serious note Gregory Djerejian of the Belgravia Dispatch has written a serious piece on French perfidity following French leaks of erronius information. The French really are disgusting at times.

Moral Relativism And Terrorism

Yesterdays post concerned the Sound Of Silence from the Muslim world regarding the ongoing terrorism; New York, London, Madrid, Russia, Chechnya, Nairobi, Rydiah, Baghdad, Cairo, Lebanon, Jerusalem, Qandahar. If a Christian sect with world wide membership committed the same kinds of atrocities against Catholics or perhaps Muslims, what do you suppose the headlines of the world would say? Exactly and there-in lies the problem. Some folk, blinded by their inability to say ill of the so-called 3rd world, by their inability to face the reality of this struggle, indeed, perhaps even hoping that in some way, the western democracies will receive their comeuppance.

This is the Moral Relativism of today. A relativism where the BBC removes the word terrorist from its site and puts up "bombers" in less than 24 hours after the bombs went off in London. A world where the morally blind wonder "Why do they hate us so." A world where CAIR is more concerned with Muslims being offended than with what may happen to those same Muslims if, say, a nuclear device is ever set off in a large city that is likely to have a hefty Muslim population. A world where an Imam can denounce terrorism in English on television, then get up in his pulpit and in Arabic praise the islamo-fascists, note their ascension into heaven and the rewards of martyrdom. This topsy-turvy world.

In yesterdays Opinion Journal, the online edition of the Wall Street Journal, James Taranto writes:

Now and then a terrorist actually takes the trouble to explain his motives. London's Daily Telegraph reports on the trial of the man who allegedly (and now confessedly) murdered Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh:

Mohammed Bouyeri, a baby-faced 27-year-old with dual Dutch-Moroccan nationality, broke his vow not to co-operate with the Amsterdam court by admitting shooting and stabbing his victim last November.

"I take complete responsibility for my actions. I acted purely in the name of my religion," he told its three-strong panel of judges.

"I can assure you that one day, should I be set free, I would do the same, exactly the same." . . .

Bouyeri then turned to the victim's mother, Anneke, in the public gallery, and told her he felt nothing for her. Mrs. van Gogh watched as he read out from what appeared to be a statement: "I don't feel your pain. I have to admit that I don't have any sympathy for you. I can't feel for you because you're a non-believer."

This had nothing to do with Israeli "occupation" of "Palestinian lands," America's "unilateral invasion" of Iraq, "torture" of prisoners at Guantanamo or Abu Ghraib, the widening "income gap," or any of the other litany of complaints that the terror apologists trot out. Islamist terrorism arises from religious fanaticism and hatred, plain and simple.

In 2002, in a Harper's Magazine article, George McGovern (yes, that failed presidential contender) writes:

President Bush has said repeatedly that the terrorists hate us because of our freedom. I don't believe that. The world's people have always admired our freedom. What they don't like is the arrogance and indifference to world opinion inherent in so much of our international policy.

Well Senator, you were wrong, the terrorists hate us because they are taught to hate us in their perverted religious system. And no, you dunderheads that think I'm castigating all Muslims, I'm not. I'm castigating those in that religion that spew hate. Just as I would any preacher or rabbi that got up in a pulpit and did the same.

If western civilization is ever ground under the heel of islamo-fascism, it will not be because of their strength of arms on the battlefield, it will be because of terrorism and more importantly, our own complacency by saying nothing to the radical Imams.

Tony Blair, Prime Minister of Great Britain expressed surprise and disappointment on learning that the islamo-fascists who set off the four bombs were British citizens of Pakistani descent. But why should he or anyone be surprised? There have been in London and elsewhere numerous Imam's preaching hate, defiance, jihad in England for some time. Perhaps the English, believing that if they were "tolerant," practiced "multi-culturalism" and opened their arms to the oppressed of the old British Empire that they would be safe from internal attack. All this while the Islamic heretics in their midst used the cover of Islam to preach hate, destruction, JIHAD

The Dutch/Moroccan Mohammed Bouyeri along with the young Brits (Shehzad Tanweer, Mohammad Sidique Khan, Hasib Hussain, and may have done the world a favor by exposing the real reason they are terrorists - their faith. Still others, such as this young man give ample evidence of the paucity of the multiculturalist left. The terrorists, islamo-fascists, jihadists, suicide bomber, what ever you wish to call them do this out of religious fervor, they are most often, middle class or better, educated and captured by a religious wasteland of hate.

There can be no doubt that the lack of outcry against the terrorists from the vast majority of Muslims will work against their own civil liberties, and against ours. During WWII, numerous Japanese-Americans were interned in what can only be called a massive racial animus aimed at anyone of Japanese descent. This interning also happened for "some" German-Americans, but nowhere near to the extent that the West Coast Japanese-Americans were interned. Those of the Muslim faith are generally identifiable by their garb or by their appearance. Should more such attacks occur, I dread the loss of freedoms that will occur for all of us.

Border restrictions that pale beyond what is current, identity cards, loyalty oaths, all the makings of a police state both in this country, and in Europe. And though it will be understandable in terms of a people blindly striking out in "self defense" it will not be a pretty sight.

One answer to this scourge is to stand up firmly, vociferously and loudly and condemn terrorism to the highest degree humanly possible. The whole world, united against a true fascistic ideology that does not care who it strikes. Old, young, retired, children, men, women, combatants, non-combatants, Christian, Jew, Moslem, Buddhist, Animist, atheist, poly-theist, black, white, brown, yellow, tan, red. Indian, Native American, German, French, British, Sudanese, South African, Brazilian, all will become targets because as in the words of Mohammed Bouyeri:

"I take complete responsibility for my actions. I acted purely in the name of my religion,..."

"I can assure you that one day, should I be set free, I would do the same, exactly the same."

"I don't feel your pain. I have to admit that I don't have any sympathy for you. I can't feel for you because you're a non-believer."

As Robert James Bidinotto noted in his blog:

This moral inversion is fueled by toxic philosophy. Thanks to a long gray line of ideological dope-pushers, Western intellectuals, politicians and cultural leaders are addicted to the self-destructive hallucinations of moral relativism, altruistic self-sacrifice, cultural self-loathing and political appeasement of sworn enemies. Self-blame, along with cowardly calls for more "understanding" and "restraint," are their only knee-jerk responses in the face of each new outrage.

UPDATE: Via Instapundit
In an interview with John Howard, PM of Australia:

...these people are opposed to what we believe in and what we stand for, far more than what we do. If you imagine that you can buy immunity from fanatics by curling yourself in a ball, apologising for the world - to the world - for who you are and what you stand for and what you believe in, not only is that morally bankrupt, but it's also ineffective. Because fanatics despise a lot of things and the things they despise most is weakness and timidity. There has been plenty of evidence through history that fanatics attack weakness and retreating people even more savagely than they do defiant people.

Another Update: Mudville Gazette has has a great list of reads up GWot Central as it were.

Update #3, Jeff Jarvis calls a spade a spade:

What they did is a crime. That's all it is, nothing more. A crime.

But when we treat it as something else, when we try to understand it, when we grant the veil of political correctness -- of understanding, even tolerance, invoking fuzzy words like "otherness" -- we risk spreading the crime, making it if not acceptable then at least understandable for others. It is a cousin of glamorizing crime, of turning these scum into ideological, religious Bonnies and Clydes.

Update # 4: Tim Birdnow has a nifty little post up at the Bird Blog.

15,000 Readers! G.M. Maxes Credit Cards for Prizes

It seems like only yesterday that we were giving away Richard Simmons motivational tapes, boxes of rubber bands, and invitations to a cookout and bowling with G.M. for those people who helped the site reach the 10,000 visitor milestone. Well, maybe not yesterday. It was actually less than a month ago. Well, those valuable prizes have done the job. Some time today, July 14, 2005, the site will reach the next milestone of 15,000 visitors! G.M. is digging deep into his pockets to come up with fitting prizes for this round of winners.

In all sincerity, we have to give thanks to the readers and commenters of this site for the great job that they do in their exchanges and for the encouragement that they give us. Because of all of you, in just a few weeks this site increased the reader count by fifty percent of the numbers that had previously taken the first seven months to reach!

Thank you for making this site interesting and for helping us to show support for our nation, our military, our faith, and, naturally, our politics. We even like those who don't agree with our politics, because we know that the fact that you are here gives us hope for you. Now, let's start on the next 5,000 and reach more people with the good news about our country.

Bidinotto Strikes A Blow For The Repudiation Of Terrorism From the Muslim World

Robert James Bidinotto (RJB for brevity) is a writer whom I have enjoyed reading for at least the last few months. I don't remember how I got to his blog, but get there I did and I've not regretted it in the least. According to his "About Me" section of his blog Mr. Bidinotto

...is an award-winning writer, editor and lecturer who reports on cultural and political issues from the philosophic perspective of principled individualism.

As of July 2005 Robert became editor of The New Individualist, the monthly magazine of The Objectivist Center, a philosophic research and advocacy organization. In the previous year, he was editor of Organization Trends and Foundation Watch, monthly publications of the Capital Research Center -- a private watchdog group that monitors the activities of nonprofit advocacy organizations and foundations. Robert also serves as a senior fellow of the Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise.

I've read a lot of his stuff, had an argument with him in which he corrected me for misreading his name below someone else's comment which was actually placed at the top of his comment(and he was right too... damn it) but I have also enjoyed the intellect behind what he writes. RJB is a thinker in a world of feelers. I'd like to think I'm close to that level, but I've no illusions. This guy makes his living writing, and his latest not only will make you think, but will leave you breathless if you have any sense at all. Of course, judging from some commenters on some of his posts, they don't have any judgment, but that is the subject of another post.

In his latest, RJB tackles the question of why there is no massive and sustained condemnation from the Muslim world and Muslim leadership for the terrible destruction wrought by the islamo-fascist terrorists:

If there really is some sort of ongoing war between "extremists" and "moderates" for the soul of Islam, it appears to be one of the quietest contests in the history of ideological warfare.

Whatever the ancient history of Islam, in distant days when more enlightened thinkers and civilized rulers prevailed, I see precious little evidence that these sorts represent any significant part of contemporary Muslim thinking or leadership. If they do, they certainly haven't been very vocal, or active, about rooting out the terrorists in their midst and repudiating their views.

When a supposedly Christian fundamentalist nutcase, Eric Rudolph, bombed U. S. abortion clinics and gay nightclubs, he was forced to live a marginal, virtually reclusive life hiding in a remote rural area.

Not so Muslim terrorists, who arise from even the upper classes of Muslim nations by the tens of thousands, and find vast social infrastructures of sympathizers -- including governments -- throughout the Islamic world, eager to shelter, support and protect them.

"But wait," some cry. "Just recently the leaders of the Muslim world denounced the attacks on London." Yes, they did, and the Imam's in their Mosques called for more blaming this bombing on maybe Jews, maybe the US, maybe... Oh, the seeming paranoia runs rampant. But, really, it is not paranoia, it is subterfuge and misdirection.

Director of London's Al-Maqreze Centre for Historical Studies Hani Sibai[as reported in MEMRI...ed.]: There are No "Civilians" in Islamic Law;The Bombing is a Great Victory for Al-Qa'ida, Which "Rubbed the Noses of the World's 8 Most Powerful Countries in the Mud"

In an interview, Al-Siba'i noted:

I think that British Prime Minister Tony Blair made a grave error when he spoke before the investigation and claimed that the perpetrators of these acts were acting in the name of Islam. I think that he will pay the price for this grave error in the future. No possibility should be ruled out. We do not rule out the possibility that it was done by the intelligence agency of another Western country hostile to Britain. We do not rule out countries... or some Zionist Americans who wanted to overshadow the G-8 summit. But at the same time, we do not rule out the Al-Qa'ida organization.

That baffles me to no end, that anyone could calmly sit there, look at the history of recent terrorist attacks and calmly blame Israel or the US. Now, I too believe that the attack doesn't have to have come from Wahhabi fundamentalist islamo-fascists. It could have come from ... oh, say WWII German agents planted in a cell sixty-five years ago, but I wouldn't even bet YOUR mortgage payment on it.

There is a major disconnect between what the average Muslim hears in the Mosque from Wahhabist Imam's and this for example. While the photo's from Bahrain are greatly appreciated in terms of saying to the terrorists "Enough!" it is, not enough.

More from MEMRI:

Under the title "Expel Extremism Today," Al-Arabiya TV Director-General Abd Al-Rahman Al-Rashed wrote: "For over 10 years now, I myself and other Arab writers have warned against the dangers of the reckless handling of the extremism that is now spreading like a plague within the British community.

"It was never understood why British authorities gave refuge to suspicious characters previously involved in terrorist activities. Why would Britain grant asylum to Arabs who have been convicted of political crimes or religious extremism, or even sentenced to death? Not only were they admitted to this country, but they were also provided with accommodation, a monthly salary, and free legal advice for those who want to prosecute the British government.

"The answer, I believe, is what... I call 'blind generosity.' This bizarre reasoning stuns individuals such as students who wish to establish careers abroad and whose [applications for British] citizenship are rejected. These people do not have criminal records like the others [to grant them entry].

Bidinotto goes on to note that much of the current "stance" of the "global Islamic community" has at least roots in the refusal of the moral relativists to call a spade a spade if you will forgive the "contract bridge" reference. He notes that

Noted New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, certainly no right-winger, is only one of the latest to call upon Muslims to clean up their own stables.

But Friedman is only one of a very few voices calling out in the wilderness. The huge silence is deafening if you will. RJB goes on to say:

How many years, and how many more bloodbaths, will it take? And how long do we in the West patiently tap our feet, waiting for such reforms in the absence of any visible signs that they are taking place? Don't we have a right at some point to pronounce judgment on the Islamic culture itself?

And has that point now come? or even long since passed?

Among Western cultured classes, it is, of course, considered bad form to even ask such questions. Such words smack of (shudder!) intolerance -- intolerance being the only thing intolerable to moral relativists. Let Muslim fanatics shoot babies, bomb nightclubs and buses and subways, chop off the heads of Red Cross nurses, hijack civilian airliners and ram them into civilian office buildings...and their immediate (and only) response is to wail: "How did we drive them to these desperate acts?" Let the victims demand violent retribution, however, and their immediate (and indignant) response is: "Warmongers!"

This moral inversion is fueled by toxic philosophy. Thanks to a long gray line of ideological dope-pushers, Western intellectuals, politicians and cultural leaders are addicted to the self-destructive hallucinations of moral relativism, altruistic self-sacrifice, cultural self-loathing and political appeasement of sworn enemies. Self-blame, along with cowardly calls for more "understanding" and "restraint," are their only knee-jerk responses in the face of each new outrage.

Robert Bidinotto has written what may be a masterpiece in the effort to have Muslims condemn the terror caused by Muslims and I encourage you to read every word of his essay. He has a multitude of links to other sources and has well documented his thesis. If you are a blogger, I encourage you to add him to your blogroll. I have.

Phun With The Phrench!

English Content, Global Awareness

Surprising absolutely no one, the vast majority of readers of this blog use browsers set as using English as the primary language. In fact, 95% of the readers of this blog use English thusly.

What was surprising were some of the other languages that have logged in at GM'S Corner. The other 5% are the following languages. German, Dutch, French, Spanish, Italian, Thai, Danish, Ukrainian, Turkish, Polish, Hungarian, Finnish and initially the most surprising of all, Farsi. But on reflection I shouldn't have been surprised. There is a growing freedom movement in Iran and I support that 100%.

So there you have it, GM's Corner goes Global!!!!

Its About Time

Bahrain - probably not effective, but it is at least a start. Maybe when the rest of the Muslim world wakes up and this becomes The Muslim Creedo... but sadly, not until then.

Canada Applies French Influence -- Insults U.S. Workers

A Canadian auto executive said that a car plant will be constructed in Canada because U.S. workers are stupid. Them's fight'n words where I come from. Let's see if this guy knows what he's talking about or if this is just more phony Canadian snobbery to the U.S.

Here's the story. Toyota announced that they would build a new plant in Woodstock, Ontario. Why there rather than the Southeastern U.S., which has seen an explosion of new car plants? According to Gerry Fedchun, president of the Toronto based Automotive Parts Manufacturers' Association, "The educational level and the skill level of the people down there is so much lower than it is in Ontario." In the report by the CBC, Fedchun added (maybe sneered) that workers in Alabama and Mississippi are often illiterate. Well, Monsieur Fedchun may also think that people in Alabama and Mississippi don't wear shoes, either.

Let's look at some figures. Canadian taxpayers are giving $125 million in location incentives. Canadian taxpayers are providing $5 per hour in health care benefits, which translates to $13 million with that size employment, which is over $100 million in an eight year period. Then, the Canadian taxpayers are on the hook for $275 million in related and supporting industries for Toyota. That totals $ 1/2 Billion that they gave away to attract the plant! Now, who really are the stupid ones?

So, you still think that it was their brains rather than their money that got the plant? According to this recent survey, "...42 per cent of Canadians have low literacy (scoring either Level 1, the lowest level where a person is, for example, unable to read a medicine label; or Level 2, where only the simplest of messages are comprehended and there are limitations on learning new skills.)" and at one time Canadian managers concluded, "The estimated annual cost of illiteracy to Canadian business is $1.6 billion for industrial accidents alone. This does not include the cost of illiteracy from lost productivity in other areas."

These smart Canadians are going to learn that there are no poetry and cappuccino breaks at a car plant. You use your muscles and have to sweat. The fact is that auto plants locate where labor is cheap, incentives high, and lifestyles for management and their families are good. If a new plant recruits factory workers from the bottom of the labor pool, they may get someone who can physically do the job even though they didn't graduate from college. They would find this whether outside of Tuscaloosa, Alabama or Woodstock, Ontario. I don't think that southern auto manufacturers have any second thoughts about their location decisions. Mercedes and BMW are just as smart as those guys from Toyota.

Southern workers, in fact all U.S. workers, are the best. People in the U.S. work harder and longer than our friends in the cold north and other parts of the world. And, surprise, they can read, too! The states have compulsory education, and I don't think that even the public schools turn out illiterates.

So Canada, just don't tell us that you got a car plant because southern workers are stupid compared to you. We're not that dumb.

But, for you, Toyota--have fun doubling your paperwork in both English and French, dealing with the biggest government bureaucracy that you'll ever see, and having to melt the ice off of car parts before you can install them.

And, Canadians, if you want the U.S. military to continue to provide your defense and fight your battles that you can't or won't do, please don't be offended if we use some stupid, shoeless Southern hicks to do the job.
____________

UPDATE of July 15, 2005: When the disparaging comments about our auto workers were published, I wrote the Canadian auto association, which is led by the executive making the remarks, and "The Birmingham News," which is the major newspaper in the area of most of the new car plants in the South. Today, "The Birmingham News" wrote me and provided this reponse from Mr. Fedchun of the association. You may follow the Continuation Link to the letter and apology from Mr. Fedchun. It is being placed here for those might come to this entry from a search or link, and they should have both sides to be fair and to see the resolution to this point. Additional information may also be added if it becomes available.

Continue reading "Canada Applies French Influence -- Insults U.S. Workers"

Political Disagreement Or Tribalism?

One of the joys of the blogosphere, at least to me, is surfing around and seeing what others think and how others handle their blogs and getting a giggle or two from comical things. Yesterday I was cruising in the neighborhood of The Discerning Texan and noted he had a cartoon up. Got a chuckle, copied it and put it up on my blog too with a link to TDT and a tip of the old GM Chapeaux (that is hat for you non French speaking lefty types)(oh, wait, don't all lefty's speak, breath, eat, sleep, dream French? Or was that Just John Kerry?)

But I digress, getting up this morning bright and early around ohhhh, say O Dark FortyFive I logged on and found a 5:55 am comment from Jassalasca Jape who blogs at a blog of the same name. Still with me folks? I'm a-gittin-to-da point, shore am!

Now, JJ is a lib who has a "Devil's Dictionary" Type blog a'la Ambrose Bierce JJ's comment was thus:

What an amusing instance of cheerleading. Here are a few questions, for what it's worth. Has it ever occurred to the readers of this space that the United States might soon be forced to face up to crises for which there are no off the shelf solutions, and about which reasonable minds might differ? Will it be enough for you to say that it was someone else's fault? Is that the best that your nation can do? Is America really as tribal as it looks from the outside?

I think you should all know that JJ also calls a supporter of the war either a "cheerleader" and said of me that "GMRoper is a drums-of-war cheerleader with a blog..."

Well, those were good questions. So I responded. Here ya be:

Interesting comment. I'm not sure who is cheerleading for whom however. To the author of this space, the concept of "crisis" indicates that there is not an "off the shelf" solution. If there were, it would be a managable problem and not a crisis. Reasonable minds do in fact differ. From the comments on this blog, one can see a wide variety of differences, from radical lefty types to radical righty types and all types in between. In fact, that is one of the reasons my progressive friend Marc Cooper has my blog on his blogroll with the sobriquet "Reasoned discourse." Though sometimes the discourse is less than reasoned. ;-)

Fault is such a trendy word, lets use the term responsible instead. I was late to work many years ago and was involved in an accident when a drunk driver plowed into my car. I was not at fault in that accident, but I was responsible for being late, I was responsible for taking that route to work and I was responsible for being where I was when the accident occurred. Do you discern the difference.

If I anger you, and you punch me in the nose, that action is strictly and only your responsibility. I have some responsibility for what I said/did to anger you, but you and you alone are responsible for your actions.

The same is true with the actions of terrorists, regardless of what we do or do not do, they are totally and solely responsible for their acts of terror, for the death and destruction and for their choice of actions. To deny this is to fly in the face of reality.

Does America look "tribal" from the outside, or is that a misconception from the left. The fact of the matter is that most group interactions are somewhat tribal in nature. In strife or in competition, or in business, its is one side looking for an advantage over another. In most cases, both sides deal understanding that they can take or not take the deal. I don't have to pay one store $40.00 for a shirt if I can pay another store $35.00 for the same shirt.

Your "tribal" comment is a pejorative, but I don't accept that other than it's meaning as a group of people with a similar outlook. If your argument is that we look primitive instead, than you are grossly mistaken. Primitive is the concept of dihimitude, of burkas, of cutting off peoples heads for reasons of instilling fear and revulsion in others. It is the use of murder and calling it "honor killings." It is cutting the throat and shooting a film maker because you didn't like his film, it is declaring a fatwa against an author because he writes a book that is a less than glowing account mentioning Mohammad in a less than glowing light. Does that make me "judgmental?" You bet it does, but not one whit less judgmental than your description of our society as appearing "tribal."

JJ, not satisfied has responded while I was getting this post ready:

Personally, I've never been fond of the political correctness thing (and that goes for both sides of America's monotonous political spectrum). The "tribal" epithet is sure enough pejorative, and was used deliberately, to lend force to the question.

With respect, I believe that your reasoning highlights the atrophy of political debate in American society. Responsibility is indeed the issue. A truer word was never said. But responsibility has two meanings, and you yourself use it in two senses here. To hold someone responsible for a battery, to hold businessmen to their contracts, to exercise consumer choice, these forms of responsibility assume the pervasive, all-surrounding presence of a legal system, which enforces rights and obligations and imposes restrictions on behavior.

Legal systems don't do a perfect job of fixing people with responsibility. We are taught the importance of following the rules, and we teach the same to our children. But no matter how streamlined you try to make it, any organized process costs money, and that means that some bad acts go unpunished, and some people are able to avoid their obligations. Perfect justice is impossible, and anyone who has had the misfortune to experience the legal system up close and friendly has felt the frustration of that fact.

We all have a sense of moral responsibility, as well. In large, the rules of the legal system track our moral sense (hacking a person's head off, for example, would violate the criminal law in any one of the fifty states, as would the act of killing a person and eating their flesh, or the act of killing someone through slow poisoning with a view to inheriting their assets). Where the law fails, whether because of imperfect enforcement, or because of a hole in the law that we think should not be there, we feel frustration. Everyone does.

Osama bin Laden and his little band of suicidal assassins changed nothing. We have always wanted perfect justice, and we have always had to make do with second best. If there are limits to justice inside a well-ordered society, there is going to be more slack in the world beyond its borders. Everyone with common sense, which I do believe includes present company, knows this.

What I do not understand is the point of this pronounced tendency among Americans today to actively flog this dilemma for emotional impact (with images such as "cutting the throat", for example). Nor do I understand why Americans pretend that because there is a set of "Democrat ideas" and "Republican ideas", that one of those baskets of wisdom must necessarily be right. I see lots of churning, and no dialog between the partisans of these so-called political parties. The thinking, if there is any, seems to be taking place elsewhere. Between the heads of the tribes.

And I think that a reasonable lefty deserves a reasonable response.

JJ, May I call you that? Pending your answer I will because Jassalasca Jape is just to hard to type out each time. Besides, I think your blog and your name is kinda neat. But, what is Jassalasca?

I digress, JJ, you have called it "America's monotonous political spectrum." I'm not sure that I would disagree with you, there seems to be a decided lack of decorum on both sides at times, sometimes egged on by the other "side" and sometimes egged on by our side. But so what? Our society, and from your e-mail address I assume you live in Japan and perhaps are not an American (English perhaps or Australian?) or if you are, you are a "gone native" ex-pat (no, that is not intended as a pejorative); our society is built on competition, in our schools, our sports, business and of course politics as well as even the good old sibling rivalry - several times did I want to strangle my brothers or my sister (but I still love them).

You comment that my reasoning highlights the atrophy of political debate in American society. I disagree, equally respectively. While I do agree that the calumny has reached drastic proportions, it is the responsibilty of both party's to pull back. I believe that my comments are entirely within reason and do not overly castigate others. That is not my way. You can check with associates that I blog with and I'm positive that they would tell you the same thing. I admit to being an American Chauvinist, but I happen to believe that this Country is the ultimate hope of the world for freedom and for democracy. We have our problems, internally and externally but I would defend an American radical leftist with my life if he/she were threatened with an islamo-fascist.

You also commented that my use of responsibility was right on; for assault and for business, legal systems etc., leading to the term Justice. Howver, please note that my comments were directed towards the former. Justice, as a concept is imperfect at best, a goal to strive for, but one that can only sometimes be obtained fully. Our system is a system of laws, not of justice. Sometimes they can be the same thing, not usually however.

I would disagree that we all have a "sense of moral responsibility." That would seem to equate the morals of you or me or people we are intimate with and the morals of a terrorist. For they do have a "moral code." Not ours, and, if I need say it, one that is absolutely antithical to ours.

You comment that "Osama bin Laden and his little band of suicidal assassins changed nothing." Unfortunetly, so far you are correct but only to a point. The islamo-fascists have declared war on western civilization. Something that the left side of the aisle has yet to fully comprehend. Much is made in this country of the term "Neo-Con" usually meant as a former liberal turned by the events of September 11, 2001. Maybe so, but there have not been enough neo-cons formed if you will.

You seem to not understand that our two political parties are often seemingly at each others throats. It's called politics and it's the same the world over, whether between the Democrats and Republicans in the USA or between the Social Democrats and Christian Democrats in Germany or the Jiminto (Liberal democratic party) and the Minshuto (Democratic party) of Japan; the PRI (Institutional Revolutionary Party) and the PAN (National Action Party) of Mexico. JJ, that is human nature, to think that your ideas are better than the ideas of someone else. Chauvinistic? Sure. Again, but so what? We must come to grips with what our nature is, not roll around in the clover and wish for something different.

On the site that you seem to "hang out" at, you find a similar lack of rectitude that you accuse my side of... do you remember calling me a "a drums-of-war cheerleader with a blog..." was that meant to foster debate? Or when you posted a comment on my blog and then went to the blog you hang out on and saying (bragging?) that you posted a stealth comment and wondered how long it would take for me to "delete" it. Well, are you satisfied that I don't delete comments unless the language is pretty foul. One commenter called me the banned fellow "glasses" with no more evidence than I have a pair of glasses on my side bar that "can be used to increase or decrease print size." How tolerant or even intelligent is that? A commenter on the "other blog" said I "trafficked in abused children." This is not only a great calumny, but I have spent almost my entire professional life working with severely disturbed individuals, sometimes running up thousands of dollars of pro-bono work. Yet, this "liberal" who probably preaches "tolerance" has the gall to say something as nasty as that. Bernhard, the moderator(?) of the blog/forum doubted that I had ever been to Russia based on my stupid mistake of calling St. Petersburg Stalingrad rather than the correct Leningrad. Yet, please believe that I can absolutely prove that I was there. That is respect of others that you seem to be wanting those on the right to have? If so, please do some more work on your side of the aisle before asking me to change those on my side. One last point JJ; you wonder why we "flog this dilemma for emotional impact" and cite "with images such as "cutting the throat" for esample." JJ, we did not put that out on the internet, they did. We did not fly planes into two occupied civilian sky scrapers, they did, we did not blow up schools, shoot children, dress our children in suicide bomber outfits, or even plant bombs on trains, busses or subway's, they did. But, if we do not remember, we will have a repeat for that is their tactic. Remember that JJ, that is their tactic. I hope you never have to experience terrorism in Japan, but I'm afraid that you eventually will. Because that is their tactic and world domination by islam is their goal. Not all Muslims believe as do these islamo-fascists, but there are enough of them to scare the hell out of me, and they ought to scare the hell out of you too.

Too Rich; Too Too Rich!!!

A Tip of the GM Chapeaux to The Discerning Texan

Linkers of the Revolution - Unite, Lift the Chains From Your Consciousness!!!!

Joe Carter at Evangelical Outpost thinks we need to raise our consciousness because Live 8 is doing something, even as Bob Geldolf said, "Something must be done, even if it doesn't work."

I don't have a real problem with the Live8 music fest, I kind of hope that they have an effect (though so far they really haven't had much of an effect. But that is due to those nasty governments of Zimbabwe, Sudan, etc. - not the fault of the feel gooders) But this appears in the Contra-Costa Times:

According to the New York Times, the concerts included more than 200 musical acts scheduled to play more than 69 hours of music. Organizers said 5.5 billion people would be able to watch or listen on the Internet and more than 182 television stations and 2,000 radio networks and stations. Coldplay’s Chris Martin called the concerts "the greatest thing that's ever been organized, probably, in the history of the world."

So, I hereby proclaim that I will raise my personal consciousness regarding moonbattyness with a view to finding a cure.



1. Raise your consciousness.
2. Show others that you have raised your consciousness by linking to this post and displaying the Official Logo of LotR on your blog (see above).
3. Tell the world exactly what it is you are raising your consciousness about (it can be anything you want).
4. Use your raised consciousness to exert political pressure on the G8 summiteers.
5. Feel good about having participated in an action that, while not having actually affected anything, has allowed you to be part of the greatest thing that ever been organized – probably -- in the history of the world.

As Geldolf said, "Something must be done, even if it doesn't work." Oh, that makes me feel better Geldolf...

Moon Rise

Sometimes, no words are needed.

Take The Log Out Of Your Own Eye Before You Complain About The Mote In Someone Else's Eye

The Imam's are "worried!" Oh please! You want to insure that there are no retalitory actions, then begin to police your own "Racist Right Wing" Islamo-fascists. Start a call from the pulpit against them. Issue a Fatwa or Twenty! Scream it from the Minarets that this is a perversion of Islam. Maybe then, maybe you can rest easy. Hypocrites!

From the Times Online:

MUSLIM leaders voiced fears yesterday that racist right-wing groups are already seeking to stir up hatred against their community after the bomb attacks.

Talks were being held with police and local authorities to ensure the security of mosques and areas where there are large Islamic populations.

Although the Government emphasised that it would not “jump to conclusions� about responsibility for the attacks, there was a grim acceptance among many community leaders that the perpetrators would turn out to be extremists linked to their religion.

A Tip of the GM Chapeaux to Danny Carlton

"Steyn Online" - On Target!

Mark Steyn is one of my favorite Brit Authors. He is funny, irreverent, thoughtful, acerbic, piquant, and did I mention funny? He is also an excellent judge of political inanities and the meaningless drivel of the far left. In addition, Steyn has a way of getting to the core of the GWoT and it's fight against the islamo-fascists. In his latest (here) Steyn reviews the political thinking surrounding OBL, the Madrid bombing, the Bali bombing and ties it together and wonders "what will Britain do?"

Me too Mr. Steyn, but I suspect that as in WWII, they will stand tall and proud and will not give in to the new threat of fascism, and every thinking person in the world will stand with them.

A tip of the GM Chappeaux to The Mudville Gazette

In Solidarity - We Are All Brits Today

Today, July 7, 2005, England has been attacked by the forces of darkness. The same forces that attacked the United States in 2001 and Spain in 2004. When will the world at large learn that these are evil people. When will the forces of freedom and democracy learn that you cannot negotiate with these people, that they need to be expelled from humanity. These islamo-fascists are the scourge of the earth and need to be wiped out in their entirety. 100% of them, if they are 18 or older, they need to die. Judgmental? Angry? Infuriated by those who want to "undestand" these beasts and figure out "why do they hate us so?" Damn betcha I am, and I make NO APOLOGIES for it. England, we stand with you, we will not falter. I am adding a smaller version of the flag below to my sidebar and it will remain there until this war is won. I urge all bloggers, to go here and copy the flag for your own blog.

A grateful thanks to Are You Conservative

Update: Danny Carlton at JackLewis.net Has an excellent compilation of sources up... go visit.

The Paucity Of The Chicken Hawk Argument

One of the major disconnects between the left and the right these days is the war on terror. Most of the left doesn't get it, most of the right does from my point of view. Duncan Black writing as that well known Atrios recently attacked the Young Republicans and their chair a Mr. Taylor for this comment:

Most of our members either serve, have served, or plan to serve in the United States Armed Forces, or have participated in events or projects supporting the United States Armed Forces. We will not be intimidated.

Atrios notes that Young Mr. Taylor's Young Republicans

Most serve, have served, plan to serve, OR HAVE PARTICIPATED IN EVENTS OR PROJECTS, such as Operation Drink a Beer for the Troops, Operation Burn a Dixie Chick CD, or Operation Put a Yellow Ribbon on my SUV, supporting the United States Armed Forces.

This was all preceded by this comment:

THE ARMY can't find enough recruits. Could there be a clearer expression of Americans' disenchantment with the war in Iraq?
This is democracy where it matters. No one should doubt that young Americans would willingly go to war if they believed in it.

Of course, this was BEFORE the Army announced that June's quotas were more than met or that re-inlistment quotas of those ACTIVELY serving in the Middle East often reach 150% of needs.

But that is not my point of contention with many on the left, my point is that the favorite sobriquet of the left for those of us who support the war on terror, who know the proclivities of the islamo-fascists (even as many of the left do) is the dreaded term "Chicken Hawk." Oh, the horror!

The argument is thus: "You can't support the war on terror (or the war in Iraq) (or the war in Afghanistan) unless you are willing to enlist and put your life on the line for what you believe. What a load of bullshit, crap, caca! a cursory search of the internet discovers a number of arguments totally refuting the Chicken Hawk observation, notably Donald Sensing who writes at The Sound Of One Hand Clapping here :

What gives you the justification to speak against the war?

What are your credentials that make you someone I or our nation’s leaders should listen to regarding national security?

Why should non-serving supporters be silent while non-serving critics be heard?

Of course, Sensing, having much more "sense" than Atrios has has a lot more for you to read so I encourage you to read it all.

The argument regarding the paucity of Atrio's comments (argument?...no, an argument is when you can present real evidence..ed.) is further reduced by a comment made by Blackfive:

(the Armys)...3rd Infantry Division in Iraq surpassed it's re-enlistment goal by 250%...that should tell you what the men and women that are actively engaged in the fight think of the mission in Iraq.

Uh, Mr. Black, did you get that? 250%! So, those with first hand knowledge (which Mr. Black does not have - to my uncertain knowledge) of the rigors of combat and service in the Middle East in the current war are re-inlisting at a rate 2 1/2 times greater than expected. How can that be Mr. Black?

One of the sites I read and enjoy is Winds of Change. In an article posted by Armed Liberal the "meme" of the Chicken Hawk charge is once again taken out. In Operation Yellow Donkey Armed liberal points out earlier attempts to drive a stake through the heart of the meme but also makes this comment:

It's an immoral position, a politically naive position, and one that undermines our polity. Plus it's just plain rude.

Can't say I disagree. In fact, one of the commenters (Bill -here) in Sensing's article noted:

How many are willing to go to Iraq, Israel, and now, Lebanon, and act as human sheilds (REAL human sheilds not the cutesy fashionable and oh so bogus ones who went to support Saddam’s Iraq - and don’t pretend that that wasn’t their long-term goal when all the math was done) for Iraqis volunteering to be police in their new state - or substitute themselves for hostages held by foreign “insurgents�, or stand between the Palestinian Terrorists and Israeli settlers in Gaza as they are evacuated, or stand between anti-Syrian Lebanese politicians and shrapnel form pro-Syrian “operatives.� Don’t worry, you wouldn’t have to join the military for that � just as before the Iraq war when they thought they were just goign to protect orphanages and mosques, you can come as you are. Of course, just as the “human sheidls� in Iraq freaked out when they were asked to acutally put themselves in harm’s way. I doubt that we’ll see a lot of volunteers.

Those that make the chicken hawk argument are intellectually dishonest and their argument is not to foster debate about the war or its outcome or the rationaile for it, it is simply to shut up anyone who dares to disagree with them. If you use the chicken hawk argument than you absolutely must be willing to enlist yourself, after all, we all understand that change is much more rapid "from the inside." No takers? Hmmm, didn't think there would be!

America wishes President Happy Birthday! (Well, most of America.)

Today, July 6th, is the birthday of President George W. Bush, who was born in 1946. Please join us in wishing the President a Happy Birthday and many more! You can express your birthday greetings to the President in the comments and by going to the White House Web Mail. If you are a Democrat or just curious, please visit this site and see the graciousness of the left in its birthday wishes. Anyway, at least we still have class. Happy Birthday, Mr. President!

The Law Of Unintended Consequences

There are consequences, and there are consequences. Le Building: Short, Sweet, Funny.

If The Declaration Had Been Written By The Left

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God and Gaia entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind fellows with our way of thinking requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation divorce.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal with some men more equal than others, that they are endowed by their Creator those of us with the intelligence to rule with certain unalienable alterable Rights, that among these are Life (unless you are a fetus), Liberty (save the freedom to think conservatively) and the pursuit of Happiness (providing you do it our way). –That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed intelligencia, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it take it to the United Nations for consideration by the Security Council and or the Human Rights Committee, and to institute new Government federally funded programs, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness according to what we say is allowable. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes if at all; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed and thus, we support for decades such tyranny as we find in opposition to conservative thought and or freedom loving peoples. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government duty to continue to live under rules promulgated by those that truly know better, and to provide new Guards for their future security more funding for such programs as we can devise for the betterment of mankind. �Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States and while we find this to be difficult, we understand that his upbringing and society at large are to blame for his Tyranny and that prior to our full and unalterable no-contest divorce, said George III requires therapy and understanding. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

A Tribute To America, From Americans

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..."
...............The Declaration of Independence, Philadelphia, Penn., July 4, 1776

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
...............The Preamble To The Constitution of The United States of America

"I know not what course others may take, but as for me, Give me
Liberty; or Give Me Death!"
...............Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775.

"The Preservation of the sacred fire of Liberty, and the destiny of the republican mode of government, are justly considered as deeply, perhaps as finally staked on the experiment entrusted to the hands of the American People."
...............George Washington "The First Inaugral Address" April 30, 1789

"It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."
...............Abraham Lincoln, Gettysburg, Pa, November 19, 1863

Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.
...............John Kennedy, January 20, 1961

"Never tiring, never yielding, never finishing, we renew that purpose today, to make our country more just and generous, to affirm the dignity of our lives and every life. This work continues. This story goes on. And an angel still rides in the whirlwind and directs this storm."
...............George Bush, January 20, 2001

America the Beautiful

O beautiful for spacious skies,
For amber waves of grain,
For purple mountain majesties
Above the fruited plain!
America! America!
God shed his grace on thee
And crown thy good with brotherhood
From sea to shining sea!

O beautiful for pilgrim feet
Whose stern impassioned stress
A thoroughfare for freedom beat
Across the wilderness!
America! America!
God mend thine every flaw,
Confirm thy soul in self-control,
Thy liberty in law!

O beautiful for heroes proved
In liberating strife.
Who more than self the country loved
And mercy more than life!
America! America!
May God thy gold refine
Till all success be nobleness
And every gain divine!

O beautiful for patriot dream
That sees beyond the years
Thine alabaster cities gleam
Undimmed by human tears!
America! America!
God shed his grace on thee
And crown thy good with brotherhood
From sea to shining sea!

O beautiful for halcyon skies,
For amber waves of grain,
For purple mountain majesties
Above the enameled plain!
America! America!
God shed his grace on thee
Till souls wax fair as earth and air
And music-hearted sea!

O beautiful for pilgrims feet,
Whose stem impassioned stress
A thoroughfare for freedom beat
Across the wilderness!
America! America!
God shed his grace on thee
Till paths be wrought through
wilds of thought
By pilgrim foot and knee!

O beautiful for glory-tale
Of liberating strife
When once and twice,
for man's avail
Men lavished precious life!
America! America!
God shed his grace on thee
Till selfish gain no longer stain
The banner of the free!

O beautiful for patriot dream
That sees beyond the years
Thine alabaster cities gleam
Undimmed by human tears!
America! America!
God shed his grace on thee
Till nobler men keep once again
Thy whiter jubilee!

Words by Katharine Lee Bates


The Star Spangled Banner

Oh, say, can you see, by the dawn's early light,
What so proudly we hail'd at the twilight's last gleaming?
Whose broad stripes and bright stars, thro' the perilous fight,
O'er the ramparts we watch'd, were so gallantly streaming?
And the rockets' red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof thro' the night that our flag was still there.
O say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?
On the shore dimly seen thro' the mists of the deep,
Where the foe's haughty host in dread silence reposes,
What is that which the breeze, o'er the towering steep,
As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses?
Now it catches the gleam of the morning's first beam,
In full glory reflected, now shines on the stream:
'Tis the star-spangled banner: O, long may it wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!
And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion
A home and a country should leave us no more?
Their blood has wash'd out their foul footsteps' pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight or the gloom of the grave:
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.
O, thus be it ever when freemen shall stand,
Between their lov'd homes and the war's desolation;
Blest with vict'ry and peace, may the heav'n-rescued land
Praise the Pow'r that hath made and preserv'd us as a nation!
Then conquer we must, when our cause is just,
And this be our motto: "In God is our trust"
And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

-- Francis Scott Key


The Battle Hymn of the Repulic


Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord;
He is trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored;
He hath loosed the fateful lightning of his terrible swift sword:
His truth is marching on.

I have seen him in the watch-fires of a hundred circling camps;
They have builded him an altar in the evening dews and damps;
I can read his righteous sentence by the dim and flaring lamps;
His day is marching on.

I have read a fiery gospel, writ in burnished rows of steel:
"As ye deal with my contemners, so with you my grace shall deal;
Let the Hero, born of woman, crush the serpent with his heel,
Since God is marching on."

He has sounded forth the trumpet that shall never call retreat;
He is sifting out the hearts of men before his judgment-seat;
Oh, be swift, my soul, to answer him! be jubilant, my feet!
Our God is marching on.

In the beauty of the lilies Christ was born across the sea,
With a glory in his bosom that transfigures you and me:
As he died to make men holy, let us die to make men free,
While God is marching on.

-- Julia Ward Howe

Happy 4th of July Everyone....Happy Birthday America

Special Thanks to Pat Santy, M.D. and while you're at it, go read the Declaration of Independence that she put up for us all.

God Bless this Great Land.

Musical Treat From Iraq

This video is provided by the Royal Dragoon Guards. You may have already seen it, but that is no reason not to enjoy it again. Enjoy!

Tip of the GM Chappeaux to Tom Grey at Liberty Dad

"Baath" is synonymous with crime.

A

A Tip of the GM Chappeaux to Michael Totten

Single Issue Politics - Time For The Nuclear Option Gets Closer!

John Bambenek holds forth on the retirement of Sandra Day O'Conner. He posits that this is going to be one of the nastiest confirmation hearings since Robert Bork's Nomination, and, regretably, I agree. Sayeth Bambenek:

O'Connor is the 5th vote for legal abortion, which means the hearings will be all about one issue, and one issue alone. Abortion. The Democrats will not compromise or yield on that issue which means filibusters and character assasination. It means no replacement will be forthcoming anytime soon.

If you thought the Bork treatment is bad... you ain't seen nothing yet. This will be the ugliest fight to take place in the Senate for a long long time.

Are the Democrats so wedded to that ideology that they will filibuster? That they will "Bork" anyone but a confirmed pro-abortion liberal/moderate? That they will force the nuclear option? If so, well let them. They will lose this one for sure if the Republicans have any backbone at all (which is of course the real question).

Perhaps President Bush will make a recess appointment as a means of bypassing the effort of the Dems. If so, watch for all hell to break lose. Personally, I hope that the Dems try to filibuster, regardless of the reason. I would LOVE to see the filibuster destroyed in the so called nuclear option and I've written about it here, here, here and here also with a semi-totally tongue in cheek offering just yesterday

QandO make the single issue argument against the Dems that Ted Kenndey (Whale - Mass) made back in 1981 during the confirmation of Sandra Day O'Conner:

It is offensive to suggest that a potential justice of the Supreme Court must pass some presumed test of judicial philosophy. It is even more offensive to suggest that a potential justice must pass the litmus test of any single-issue interest group. The disturbing tactics of division and distortion and discrimination practiced by the extremists of the new right have no place in these hearings and no place in the nation's democracy."

This time, Mr. Kenndey, substitute "...extremists of the new left..." above, and you will be on target, not that you intended to be. After all, we all know that Democrats do not have a single issue of "hate Bush" at all. Qand0 wraps up with this:

All that stuff Senator Kennedy used to say about the "disturbing tactics of division and distortion and discrimination practiced by the extremists of the new right", which "have no place in these hearings and no place in the nation's democracy"?

He was just kidding. Apparently."

Make no mistake, regardless of who Bush nominates, the Democrats will not back down from their standard villification tactics until and unless Bush capitulates to their desires regarding this appointment.

I guarantee you that the Democrats and their ally Jim Jeffords will wrap their oratory in the most high falutin' terms. The Dems will go all out to portray any Bush appointment as fullfilling that "extraordinary circumstance" clause in the extra-constitutional agreement of the so called "Fourteen Senators." I can hear it now:

Mr. President, I stand before this august body today in defiance of the attempt of President Bush to ... "

Fill in your own blanks. Because this is NOT about left/right, this is NOT about Republican/Democrat, this is NOT about right vs. wrong from the Democrats point of view, this is about a single idea that the Democrats are absolutely wedded to, the right to kill the unborn on demand and only that. No matter what they wrap this "present" in, it ain't 'bout nottin' else.

The Next Supreme Court Justice.... GM's Corner Has The Answer!!!

There seems to be a lot of concerns from the Democrats regarding who President Bush will nominate to fill the vacancy created by the resignation/retirement of Justice Sandra Day O'Conner. They (the Dems.) want to be consulted so that the next Justice won't be a radical, will support abortion on demand (while at the same time saying [out of the other side of their mouths] they don't have a litmus test) and one that doesn't make them reach for the "extra-ordinary circumstances." Too, they want a moderate or preferably a liberal with a cherry on top.

Well, GM, your purveyor of truth, justice and the American way has the answer. The next Justice should be picked from the following list:

1. Hillary Clinton
2. Ted Kennedy
3. Harry Reid
4. Dick Durban
5. Barrak Obama
6. Joseph Biden
7. Barbara Boxer
8. Christopher Dodd
9. Russell Finegold
10. Dianne Feinstein
11. James Jeffords
12. John Kerry
13. Frank Lautenburg
14. Patrick Leahy
15. Barbara Mikulski
or
16. Patty Murry

"Wait a minute GM, are you OUT OF YOUR COTTON PICKIN' MIND? Those are ALL 100% LIBERAL Democrats" I can hear all of my conservative brethren now.

Heck no.... first we villify them in committee, bring up everything they have ever written, every thought, every pseudo-scandel, every grocery list from 1968, every social faux pas, every skeleton in every closet of everyone they are related to, then as soon as they get to the floor for a vote, 55 Republican Senators stand up and announce that this is an extra-ordinary circumstance and Phill-E-Buster.... Then let the President make a recess appointment of a real conservative over the Labor Day holliday. Simple huh? Effective in showing the obstructionists for exactly what they are? You Bet!

The Declaration of Independence has room for your signature.

Will this weekend be just another "Fourth of July" with a day off from work and maybe a cookout with the family...or, will you take a moment to remember why we celebrate this day and to honor our founders and this nation? I hope you do both. You know how to do the first. Let me suggest something to help you with the second.

First, why do you think we celebrate Independence Day or the Fourth of July, as many refer to it? Is it to show our patriotism? Is to honor our soldiers? Is it to remember our fight for independence? What about this? The History Channel in its Classroom Study Guide says, "It provides Americans with a day to reflect upon and to honor the diversities of the American people that are united in a common heritage." Well, that's not how I would explain it, but I guess it could be that and all of the above, too. In my simple view, Independence Day is the special time that we set aside once a year to honor and recognize the courage and sacrifices of our nation's founders and what that means to our freedoms today.

To understand the full meaning of Independence Day, you might have to put yourself in the place of the men who founded this nation and the revolution. The signers of the Declaration of Independence faced arrest and the loss of everything they owned. Many patriots suffered and gave their lives in the war and with inadequate provisions. Yet, all of them had the courage and determination to act and prevail. Maybe they have a lesson for us today? If you were in our fight for freedom, could you have done the same as our founders and patriots?

And, what is the document that they signed to initiate our independence--the Declaration of Independence? Maybe it's something that we should read from time-to-time. Here's part of what it says with my emphasis added:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed....

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States.... And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

It took a lot of courage to sign that didn't it? Read the last line again..."we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor." That was no minor risk or sacrifice, and they did maintain their honor. Would you have signed the declaration of our separation from England if you were in their positions? Think about it and keep reading.

We don't have a time machine, but at The National Archives you have a chance to place your signature on an exact duplicate of the original Declaration itself and to print that out, and maybe you could use that as a symbol of your commitment to freedom and liberty. Join the signers of the Declaration by clicking here.

Also, consider including your family and use this as a fun teaching opportunity for younger people. After all, we want them to know that Independence Day is more than just about diversity. Print out the document of our freedom with their names and give it to them as a souvenir. Besides the sites linked above, which I hope you will check, here are other useful and educational sites to help you and others learn more about our founding and fight for freedom.
Revolutionary War Virtual School
Colonial Hall
A Users Guide to the Declaration of Independence

So, what does Independence Day mean to you? Did you sign the "Declaration of Independence" and print out a copy? I did. How are you going to celebrate this weekend? In any and all events, have a safe, happy, and memorable holiday, and thanks for taking the time to appreciate our nation and honor the people who made it and our freedoms possible.
__________

Update: The History Channel just sent out an email about their weekend special titled "Force of July." The series starts today with the American Revolution, which is followed by other military themed shows. Their Fourth of July Exhibit provides additional information, and you can go to a nice clip about the National Archives and the Declaration of Independence--which beats me, as I have never even figured out how to put a picture on our site. Why don't you tape the shows so that you don't waste the weekend in front of the television. (I just thought that I would say that before the wives did.) Have a safe one, and look for me at the fireworks show if you're in Peachtree City.

Beautiful, Blond, Sans Clothing & Pole Dancing!!!

Normally, I do not approve of risque material on this blog, however, this dear lady I know sent me a photograph that I just had to post. If you are offended by "a little" risque posting, please don't click on read more below, just go about your business as if nothing happened and as if you have absolutely no purient interests.

Thank You,
The Management

Continue reading "Beautiful, Blond, Sans Clothing & Pole Dancing!!!"

The After Effects of Nuclear War In The US Senate.

Reuters - Washington D.C. Despite the Democrats belief that they could obstruct the selection of judges by a sitting President through the use of a parliamentary device called filibuster, Democrats are reeling from the effects of the Nuclear burst located in the US Senate the other day.

John McCain (RINO, Az) had noted on "Meet The Depressed" during an interview that the selection of the next Supreme Court Judge would really be, "with all due respect" up to only 14 Senators. Despite the knowledge that no where in the US Constitution does one find that kind of language, McCain proceeded to try to influence the constitutional mandate of Advise and Consent in just that way with the retirement of Justice Sandra Day O'Conner.

Justice O'Conner, the first woman elevated to the high bench surprised everyone by submitting her resignation to President Bush, even before the expected retirement of Chief Justice William Rehnquist. The President of course, made a number of laudatory remarks following receipt of her resignation from the lifetime appointment.

Conservative commentators then hunkered down expecting a week or two or twelve's worth of hoopla generated by the MSSM (Main Stream Stupid Media). One person in a man on the street interview noted "Well, at least it got Aruba off the air."

As expected, the first out of the box with criticism was Teddy Kennedy (Whale - Mass) who apparantly felt he had to comment before heading out to Happy Hour on this July Fourth Weekend. Kennedy noted on Thursday

The 14 Senators who reached the landmark bipartisan compromise in the nuclear option debate made a pledge to one another and a plea to the President that the advice function must not be given short shrift, and that serious consultation with the Senate in the nomination process is the key to a successful confirmation process. Separate and independent assessments of nominations by each Senator are precisely what the framers wanted us to do. They wanted Senators to be a check on the Executive's proposed judicial selections, as a safety net for the Nation if the President overreaches by making excessively partisan or ideological nominations.

GM Roper, of GM's Corner, a famous and by liberal lights an infamous Blogger retorted

No Senator Kennedy, the Constitution calls for advise and consent. In order for that to happen, the Senate must actually vote and say to the President, "Good choice!" Or perhaps "No Thanks, next?" The idea that the founding fathers wanted any group of senators to block a vote on "excessively partisan or ideological nominations" is your own construct and you will NOT find that language in the constitution. But then, Senator, I wouldn't expect you to understand that because of your excessive partisanship and your ideological blindness.

As the Senate prepared for war, the left demanded that the President submit a list of nominees whom they could then discern who would be acceptable. Of course, they left out that whom the left thought acceptable may not be acceptable to the rest of the senate, or indeed the rest of the country.

When Senator Reid (Reactionary - Nv) announced a filibuster over the President's nomination, Senator Frist (Doc - Tenn) reached under his desk and pushed the Nuclear Button. The Vice President then stated that there was an objection to filibuster and the vote to overturn that Senate Rule was 51-49 along pretty much party lines with a few RINO's voting aginst and a few conservative Democrats voting for.

Thus ends a long an hoary tradition in the Senate. Democrats are sitting in the aisles weeping in frustration muttering "Wait till its our turn." However, as Karl Rove noted, "With this behavior, the American People are not likely to give the Democrats another turn for some time."

C. My Sarcasm contributed to this report as did John Q. Satire