Urgent Reason to Stop Smoking

GORE: CIGARETTE SMOKING 'SIGNIFICANT' CONTRIBUTOR TO GLOBAL WARMING

Former U.S. Vice President Al Gore warned hundreds of U.N. diplomats and staff on Thursday evening about the perils of climate change, claiming: Cigarette smoking is a "significant contributor to global warming!"

Oh, yes. Smoking also causes cancer and heart disease, if you thought that global warming wasn't enough reason to quit--but, the global warming fanatics, who defend Gore, might label you as a wacked-out "skeptic" to think that cancer is to be feared more than global warming.

Found at Drudge Report

P.S. "Then, Gore had his staff opened a stack of cardboard boxes to begin selling his new book, "An Inconvenient Truth, The Planetary Emergency of Global Warming and What We Can Do About It," $19.95, to the U.N. diplomats."

Put me down for none.

Two Realities

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to heaven, we were all doing direct the other way - in short, the period was so far like the present period, that some of its noisiest authorities insisted on its being received, for good or for evil, in the superlative degree of comparison only. - Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities

The above quote is given by Dr. Sanity in a heartfelt and terrific posting on her blog. Go read it, ponder its meaning and then come back and comment.

What Is a Global Warming Skeptic?

Frequently, anyone who questions claims on global warming or disagrees with Al Gore is immediately labeled a "global warming skeptic" and condemned. Is it really fair or accurate for the global warming Left to do that? Well, forget the fair part, because anything that furthers their agenda is fair to them, so let's stick with accurate. Well doubting scientists in Australia have been placed on a list of global warming skeptics, which suggests that they are a small and misguided 'clique'. What does it take to be placed on that list? Here are some positions that do that:

As a consequence of the burning of fossil fuels, atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are currently increasing. There is no evidence, however, to suggest this will bring doom or that, by signing the Kyoto Protocol, Australia would make a significant difference to global carbon dioxide levels or to the rate of climate change.

Science shows us that global temperatures have varied throughout the earth’s history. And science has also shown itself more than capable of overcoming remarkable challenges. Sorry if that disappoints the apocalyptically-minded."

I have a problem with the inhabitants of Tuvalu and Kiribati spruiking their imminent demise from greenhouse related climate change. ...The claim about the sun is an even more obvious candidate for skepticism. If it is that much hotter in Kiribati, then one would expect it to be much hotter in a lot of other Pacific Islands, or here in Australia, for that matter.

It is human nature when faced with a problem too large to solve to simply ignore it in the hope it will go away. Funnily enough, the other eco catastrophes so confidently predicted 30 years ago - acid rain, nuclear winter, species extinction, the population bomb - never did eventuate.

Anything unreasonable in those views? Yet, these "skeptics" (a bad name) and people like them are called liars, industry hacks, unqualified, stupid, and worse. The Left wants to win the global warming debate not with science but by being crude and by being bullies. It's just likely that these skeptics are going to keep the world from making a tragic mistake in a gross misallocation of resources over a problem that cannot be solved by man. I would call them honest and sensible. Hmmm. No wonder the Left cannot identify with their views.

It sounds as if we need more skeptics.

Clinton: It Depends Upon What the Definition of "The Truth" Is

The Democrats are trying to claim some kind of victory with former President Clinton's eruption on his FOX interview, but Dick Morris, who worked for the Clinton's and knows the score, disassembles Clinton and his claims.

The real Clinton emerges
By Dick Morris, 09/26/06

From behind the benign façade and the tranquilizing smile, the real Bill Clinton emerged Sunday during Chris Wallace’s interview on Fox News Channel. There he was on live television, the man those who have worked for him have come to know – the angry, sarcastic, snarling, self-righteous, bombastic bully, roused to a fever pitch. The truer the accusation, the greater the feigned indignation. Clinton jabbed his finger in Wallace’s face, poking his knee, and invading the commentator’s space.

But beyond noting the ex-president’s non-presidential style, it is important to answer his distortions and misrepresentations. His self-justifications constitute a mangling of the truth which only someone who once quibbled about what the “definition of ‘is’ is� could perform.

Read the balance of the article to see how various Clinton claims on fighting terror come apart once truth is defined by standards other than his; i.e., the honest truth.

Once again, we're seeing a former Democratic President working hard and after-the-fact to resurrect his legacy years later, ala Jimmy Carter. Do they think that we can't read history? Maybe some can't, but their failures are being exposed. And, it's too bad that the media cares more about protecting the reputations of these men than in exposing their failures to protect Americans.

Dear Mrs. Merkel - An Open Letter To The Chancellor Of Germany

The lady at the left with the kindly eyes and the "grandmotherly" concern that seems to infuse her face is Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany. Mrs. Merkel has joined a very select few, women who head up democracies, freely elected by their peoples. Indira Gandhi, Margaret Thatcher, Golda Maier to name a few and now, to that list add this former physicist now head of one of the leaders of Europe.

Merkel was elected some 10 months ago but has a history of political activity that is more important than her election to the chancellorship.

Dear Mrs. Merkel,
You don't know me, nor will you likely know me, but I am an American born in Germany in 1946. My dad was in the US Army in WWII and was part of the occupation when I was born. In the Fifties, we again lived in Germany and my heart still resides there oft times when I think about my childhood. I'm much older now, nearing retirement and I often think about the relationships between our two countries.

In my childhood, we were close and the needs and aspirations of the Germans were close to the needs and aspirations of the Americans. Freedom being foremost. I was greatly disheartened when the Berlin Wall went up, and I really didn't think it would come down in my lifetime. I thrilled when John Kennedy gave his "Ich bin ein Berliner" speech and in '91 when that awful wall came down, the grin on my face took weeks to dissolve.

Then, something happened; our two countries began to drift farther and farther apart. Our media and the media in Germany took harder and harder stances against each other, our two peoples became more and more distrustful of each other. Germany decided, perhaps, that her best bets lay with the European Union and the policies of the EU. America sort of dithered during the 90's. Then came the crisis in the Balkans and once again, through NATO the two countries had a common cause.

September 11th came and Germany stood with us in our determination to take out the Taliban and continues to have troops in Afghanistan, and for that, I am quite grateful. The US then invaded Iraq with a number of allies and the differences between Germany and the US became more important than our similarities. I mourn the loss.

When you were elected Chancellor, I again rejoiced and expressed hope that once again, the United States and Germany could find common cause against an implacable foe, the islamofascists and all that that perversion represents. I still have that hope. I understand that many in Germany do not see the threat that I and many of my countrymen do, and I hope that this divide will not keep us apart. I do know that Germany must come to grips with both an increased presence of islamofascists, and must do something regarding its need for "Gastarbeiter." But don't believe that the problem has an easy solution. Germany has allowed Turkish citizens in for a long time, and many of those folk and their children, and their grandchildren are still there, and still "temporary."

There doesn't seem to be anything as permanent as a temporary governmental program does there? At any rate, I'm hoping that Germany can weather the coming storm and continue to prosper.

Consider this in your deliberations regarding the relationship between our two countries, we still have far more that unites us, than we do that divides us.

Sincerely,
GM Roper
Blogger

Carnival!!!! German American Relations Volume 1, Number 4

The next edition of the Carnival of German American Relations is up and has a great number of articles regarding the relationships between our two countries, past, present and future. This Issue of the Carnival (the 4th) was started in December 2005 by myself and Joerg Wolf who writes at Atlantic Review. You know me, but Joerg too always has provocative things to say.

This issue of the Carnival is hosted by Dialog International and covers posts written in English. some of the excellent articles include "American blogger David Houle sees Berlin as the "city of the future" in his inspirational post, but he is also haunted by the past as he walks around the city." I can identify with his feeling, I love Berlin though I've only been there twice, my memories are indeed Golden; the first time I was there was in the mid 50's with my dad and I was 9 or 10 years old. I remember vividly "Checkpoint Charlie," and was there again on September 11, 2001, a fateful day to be sure.

Read all of the posts picked by Vicker, it's worth your time.

There is also a German blog (with some English picks as well) hosted by Liberale Stimme Online. In all, and even though my German is fairly rusty the pickings are good.

The Next will be on December 11th, catch that one too.

Election Projection Update

The Blogging Caesar has a new UPDATE and it looks as though a dem will take an additional governorship, but no changes (so far) in the House or Senate balance of terror! Heh!

9-11 Memorials: Left Lacks Class

To people on the Left, it's okay to abandon dignity and decorum in any situation to promote their radical political philosophies. If you don't like it, too bad, because they intend to force it down your throats, anyway. But, they prefer to do it in secret until it's too late to change, and they've done it again and will do it again without decent people remaining diligent.

They did this with the memorial at ground zero and they pulled it off with the just dedicated 9-11 memorial in Arizona. The Left used a memorial on 9-11 to make political attacks against President Bush and the war on terror. Here are some samples of inscriptions on the newly dedicated 9-11 memorial:

“You don’t win battles of terrorism with more battles.�
“Congress questions why CIA and FBI didn’t prevent attacks.�
“Erroneous US air strike kills 46 Uruzgan civilians.�

You do see how those inscriptions serve to be memorials to our nation and the 9-11 victims, don't you? Well, if you do, you're doing better than me.

An approving commission member stated that the inscriptions were factual, and therefore acceptable, as determined by an Arizona State University history professor, presumed to be Dr Noel J. Stowe. These "factual" statments include the just mentioned "You don’t win battles of terrorism with more battles.� Is that a fact, an opinion, or did he really not review each statement?

How do others feel? Well, here's two takes on it, and I'll allow you to guess which approves and which does not.

Daily Kos: Righty Blogs Fume Over AZ 9/11 Memorial

Flopping Aces: The Moonbat Arizona 9/11 Memorial (With pictures)

Just once, I would like the Left to show some class and quit injecting their radical politics into every situation, no matter how inappropriate or unrelated. I might as well wish for a billion dollars. It's too bad for society and a blow to dignity and civility, which they never had. Just continue to watch them to stop similar attempts in the future.

9-11 as "Covered" by a Psycho Former President [Updated]

If you had to name a living former President who is a liar and sociopath, who might he be? Well, if you want to see a psycho-president in action, then catch former President Clinton in his interview for FOX News Sunday with Chris Wallace, which discusses the President's failures in fighting terrorism and to dispose of Osama Bin Laden. You'll want to see the entire interview this Sunday, but here's part of it, and I understand that there are other similar exchanges within that interview:

A bit dog barks, and Bill Clinton come across a pit bull when he's questioned. G.M. covered strong reactions of President Clinton and his supporters on recent and related revelations in his posts The Path to 9-11, Inaccurate? and The Path To 9-11: The Left Is A Comedy For Our Times. Wouldn't it have been better to write a good history when one is in office than re-write the actual one after he leaves?

But, I'm not interested in assessing blame. There are far more complications on dealing with terrorists than those to which I'm privy. However, when responsiblility or failure is clear in some areas, why can't Clinton be a man and own up to it and quit trying to cover himself by dragging down others? I don't lose respect for someone, but gain it, when he's honest and admits his failings. I suspect that this will be the pattern for as long as Clinton lives. Students of history and future policy decision makers deserve accuracy to guide them in directing our policies going forward.

(P.S. - To help out you Lefties shouting that President Bush is a liar, there is a difference between out-right lying and passing along information believed to be true from normally reliable sources but later having it questioned.)

[Update]

Bill Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard, believes that it was partly an act when Bill Clinton "lost his temper" with Chris Wallace.

LET'S DO A THOUGHT experiment: Perhaps Bill Clinton, an experienced and sophisticated politician, knew what he was doing when he made big news by "losing his temper" in his interview with Chris Wallace. Perhaps Clinton's aides knew what they were doing when they publicized the interview by providing their own transcript to a left-wing website as soon as possible Friday evening, and then pre-spun reporters late Friday and Saturday. Maybe it was just damage control. Or maybe Clinton did what he wanted to do when he indignantly defended himself, blasted the Bush administration, and attacked Fox News. What could Clinton have been seeking to accomplish? Three things.

Continued in article:
Why Clinton "Lost His Temper"
The former president knew what he was doing.

Maybe Wm. Kristol is right, but I'm not sure that this was all an act. It's probably true that Bill Clinton did intend to produce spin for the Democrats and for his legacy, but I still have to believe from experiences that psychopaths cannot help their rage, and I have to think that even Bill Clinton couldn't turn purple simply on cue, although his bullying was surely intended. He's cunning, but he's still nuts.

The Return of Scipio

Now for those of you not historically inclined, the drawing at the left is a Roman Legionaire. Such as may have been found in the army of Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus Major. "Who the heck is that," you ask? Well, let's have a little history lesson, then I'll tell you why I'm bringing this up.

Scipio (as he is fondly know by those of us old enough to have known him, (there you go with the age/brag thing again...ed!) "...was a general in the Second Punic War and statesman of the Roman Republic. He was best known for defeating Hannibal of Carthage, a feat that earned him the surname Africanus, the nickname 'the Roman Hannibal' and recognition as one of the finest commanders in military history." The man who took down Hannibal and essentially won the Second Punic War.

This little preamble is only because I was curious as to the origins of the name of the blog The Return of Scipio, authored by a charming gentleman and a new friend, Mike Austin.

I first came across his name in a comment he made on another good friend's blog Tim Birdnow who writes Bird Blog so I went to the link he provided and began reading. I sent Mike an e-mail telling him that I liked what I read and had added The Return of Scipio to my blogroll. Gracious gentleman that Mike is, he wrote back and we have been exchanging e-mails ever since. As Mike said "It is always cool to find the like-minded." Yes, it is indeed.

Mike is very near perfectly a true Renaissance Man in its positive meaning. He describes himself as

Teacher. Solo backpacker. Admirer of the Roman Republic. Devourer of books.

"Always I dream of Latin America, where I lived, worked, loved and walked for 14 years of my adult life.

"I am neither scholar nor theologian, nor am I particularly brilliant (no matter what my mom said). I like to write, that is all. I have lived too many lives, read too many books, seen too much of the world, taken too many chances and suffered too many fools—myself included. The results are here." [Note - and he is far to modest imho]

His blog is cogent, on topic with today's issues and full of interesting information about him, his career and his dreams. Good Stuff Indeed Go forth and read, add Mike's efforts to your bookmarks for some really enjoyable reading and be sure and let him know that you appreciate his efforts, even if you disagree with him. I've found very little (how about none bozo... ed!) to disagree with, a truly entertaining blog. Thanks Mike, long may our new-found friendship wave.

Cola Wars Against Muslims

Yes, it's scary, but as revealed by Isaac Schrödinger, whose site I found through another Woody, it appears that Coca Cola and Pepsi have declared war on Islam.

Coca Cola and Pepsi Should Apologize to Muslims

Mr. Subliminal must work in their creative departments or in the mind of whoever came up with this. To the Islamic radicals, beheadings are one thing but giving up Cokes takes it to another level. Let's hope for reason.

Global Warming to Blame Again

Of course, we're always hearing that global warming is to blame or is a threat for many calamities, but here's the latest.

Global Warming Could Boost Illegal Immigration, Expert Says

Global warming might cause an increase in illegal immigration as people "flee storm-ravaged or sun-parched regions" to find refuge in the U.S., according to an expert (Devra Lee Davis, director of the Center for Environmental Oncology at the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute) who addressed a gathering on climate change in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday. ..."Even HIV/AIDS can be thought of as a climate-related disease," she noted.

Wow! Global warming is to blame for a lot. With this expanded knowledge, now I can state with confidence why the Braves didn't win their division this year. Yes, it has to be the fault of global warming. Don't ask me how. Just accept it. However, we shouldn't stretch this too far or kids will start blaming bad grades on the same thing.

What has global warming done to you today?

Political Quiz [Updated & Updated & Upd....]

Today's pop quiz on world politics has one question. Good luck!

Question:
Who recently labeled President Bush as a devil, imperialist, fascist, assassin, stupid, criminal, killer, madman, and genocidal murderer?

Possible Answers:
A. Hugo Chavez
B. Sen. Harry Reid
C. Al Franken
D. The New York Times
E. All of them
F. Answer is A, but the rest didn't disagree.

Voters should be concerned when you cannot distinguish the crazed rants of a South American communist dictator from the impressions given by a major U.S. political party and its mouthpieces.

[Update]

Rep. Charlie Rangel, a Harlem Democrat who has called President Bush just about every name in the book including "our Bull Conner," just concluded a press conference on the Chavez anti-Bush speech in which Rep. Rangel said, "You do not come into my country, my congressional district, and you do not condemn my president. If there is any criticism of President Bush, it should be restricted to Americans, whether they voted for him or not. I just want to make it abundantly clear to Hugo Chavez or any other president, but do not come to the United States and think because we have problems with our president that any foreigner can come to our country and not think that Americans do not feel offended when you offend our Chief of State."

Well, when I heard him, I admit that I was surprised. Maybe he hates the competition on attacking President Bush. But, Rep. Rangel did let some people of the world know that we may have squabbles among ourselves, just like a family, but that doesn't mean that we want outsiders to come here and attack our family members. That's how it should be. Let's see how many other Democrats and members of the media follow suit.

[More]

Leading Bush critic at home calls Chavez a "thug"

One of President George W. Bush's fiercest political opponents at home took his side on Thursday, calling Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez a "thug" for his remark that Bush is like the devil. "Hugo Chavez fancies himself a modern day Simon Bolivar but all he is an everyday thug," House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi said at a news conference, referring to Chavez' comments in a U.N. General Assembly speech on Wednesday. "Hugo Chavez abused the privilege that he had, speaking at the United Nations," said Pelosi, a frequent Bush critic. "He demeaned himself and he demeaned Venezuela."

If this keeps up and if Michael Moore comes out to defend President Bush, then I'll know that I've entered "The Twilight Zone" or "Bizarro World."

UPDATE AGAIN (But this time from GM) Well, that didn't take long, for ole Tom Harkin (DIM-0-crat, Iowa) to up the ante:

Iowa Senator Tom Harkin, a democrat, today defended Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's United Nations speech in which Chavez called President George Bush the devil. Harkin said the comments were "incendiary", then went on to say, "Let me put it this way, I can understand the frustration, ah, and the anger of certain people around the world because of George Bush's policies." Harkin continued what has been frequent criticism of the president's foreign policy."

What an ass this man really is. What happened to politics stops at the waters edge?

[More Chavez Insults]

Oh, no! How bad can it get? Further talking about President Bush, Hugo Chavez said, "He walks like John Wayne." And, what's wrong with John Wayne? Chavez is producing more gas than Citgo.

Well, here you can see the kind of person that Hugo Chavez does like....

I'll take John Wayne any day, thank you.

Diamond In The Sunlight

Some things just don't need an explanation do they?

The Big Six Zero

This will be, God willing, my last cancer post. No, not because I won't be around, but because by all appearances I will be around a while longer.

In January of this year, I announced here that I had been diagnosed with Lung Cancer, the Big C:

Thursday, January 26th, I was diagnosed with lung cancer. Talk about a kick in the teeth.

The diagnosis is obviously freightening, but at the same time, it has given me a new resolve. And that resolve is to fight this son-of-bitch right down to the wire and I have every intention of winning."

I had surgery to remove the tumor, six months of chemo therapy that for sure beat me down as bad or worse than anything I have had physically happen to me and then a follow up CT scan that showed no tumors present. That occurred on August 11th and I posted on it as soon as I received the good news. My oncologist said, however, that a P.E.T. scan needed to be also done to detect if there were any new tumors starting somewhere too small for the CT scan to pick up.

With some trepidation, I had the P.E.T. scan on the 11th of September and yesterday, September 20th I had another appointment with the Oncologist to get the results. As I sat in the examining room, all sorts of thoughts flashed through my mind. "Will he tell me good news or bad?" "Where is he, why is he taking so long?" and especially, "Maybe he doesn't want to tell me the bad news even though he has had to tell plenty of others in the past."

Soon, the good doctor did however come in, sit down and "GRIN."

"The P.E.T. scan came back negative, you are cancer free."

Yesterday, the 20th of September was also my 60th birthday, what a really neat birthday present that news was.

And so, this catagory "Medical" is officially retired, the "Fight On Ribbon" has been moved to the right side of the post and I thank each and every one of you for all the good wishes, prayers and thoughts that you have sent my way. Thanks and God Bless!

Update: Welcome o' ye readers of Glenn Reynolds, the esteemed Instapundit.

Prediction

I'm fairly ticked off at the Republicans, with Stevens, McCain, Graham especially and a number of others for a variety of reasons. But, I don't want to see the Democrats in power either. If the voters of our republic elect the Democrats, it will be like cutting off your nose to spite your face and will be almost instantly regretted. But, we have a couple of Edicts from the Blogging Ceasar to contend with and that says it all.

Greenstone Media Off To A Shaky Start

"But a humor of complacency stands in for a language of subversion, and the extent to which you will find the shows funny seems dependent on how seriously you ever considered buying tickets to “Menopause: The Musical.�

A tip 'O The GM Derby to Glenn Reynolds

Mets and Yankees Sew Up Divisions - Let's Move On to Football

Normally at this time of the year, we'll have posts on the progress and victories of the Red Sox and the Braves. Well, this year is not normal. After fourteen straight division championships, the Braves are going to sit at home during the playoffs--well, more likely on the golf courses where they probably spent too much time during spring training. The Red Sox are all but eliminated and will sit wondering how they were swept at home and blew their lead to the Yankees. If anyone is still interested in the baseball races, and we can't imagine why with our two teams out, here is a link to the MLB standings and playoffs.

A New Rule For This Blog

My purpose in starting this blog, back in '04 was to express closely held ideas, have some fun doing so, discuss a bit of mental health issues and to, of course, poke fun at the ideas of the left. Needless to say, I do not self identify as a liberal.

One of the thing's I've noted of late is the incessent ad hominem attacks on commenters from a variety of sources (and I'm not excepting myself or Woody from this either) and the comments get more and more strident, more and more obnoxious, less and less about the ideas expressed, and more and more about the person expressing them.

So, a new rule is added to the blog effective immediately:

Any comment expressing what I consider to be an ad hominem attack on anyone, regardless of the source of that comment will cause this administrator/owner/proprietor to delete that comment without warning or explanation. Argue all you want, but cut out the disparaging remarks about other commenters, authors or their motives and stick to reasoned if not passionate discourse. I have spoken!

Posted by GM Roper at 06:27 AM | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0)

How Can You Enjoy Life With Bush as President?

Just to make liberals mad, because they hate to think that anyone can enjoy life when there is so much to be miserable over with Bush in office, I offer what is really important to a lot of people this time of the year--even our soldiers.

Current College Football Rankings

1. OHIO ST (59) (3-0)
2. AUBURN (2) (3-0)
3. SO CAL (2) (2-0)
4. WEST VIRGINIA (2) (3-0)
5. FLORIDA (3-0)
6. MICHIGAN (3-0)
7. TEXAS (2-1)
8. LOUISVILLE (3-0)
9. GEORGIA (3-0)
10. LSU (2-1)
Link to Complete AP Poll - Week 4

How's your team doing (college or pro)? Is that okay to ask?

Marines in Iraq Watch Football

Frequently when I attend sports events, as I did at Auburn this past weekend, military planes or helicopters fly over just before the start. Guess what. The crowd loves it and applauds the military. They are proud of our troops and support them with good wishes other than whining "I'll be glad when Bush is out so that you can cut-and-run come home." Our military doesn't complain about their duties like the Left complains. Their voting records support that.

The football crowd of 87,451 stood and sang both "God Bless America" and the "National Athem" before the game. Hands were over hearts. The crews that flew over landed, came to the game, and were individually introduced and loudly cheered. Auburn even has trained our national bird, a bald eagle, to circle inside the stadium with the crowd yelling before the game. (And, I gotta tell you. It's pretty cool when an eagle is swooping just a few feet over your head.) You won't see this kind of patriotism at Harvard or Stanford.

Now, on this issue, someone from the Left will quickly bring up Pat Tillman--only for them to further show that we should be miserable for enjoying something that he can no longer enjoy. They only use his name to attack the country that he defended. I think that Pat Tillman would approve of this post and our carrying on with American traditions. Don't you think that the War on Terror allows and encourages Americans to continue with their normal activities--just as we did with the World Series after 9-11?

So, to the Left, excuse me for enjoying living and carrying on with American values and traditions, even with all the problems that you want to discuss to bring us down. There's more to life than misery. That's something that we don't need to debate. That's something that you need to learn.

Oh, and I still support the troops when I do this--a lot more than you, and our troops support and defend Americans to enjoy our freedoms and traditions. Take advantage of it.

He's Baaaa-aaack!

One of my all time favorites, Blogging Caesar is BACK, bringing all the best projections for the upcoming races. You may not like his prognostications, but you can rely on his data. In 2004, he called it almost exactly on the button. Bookmark his site.

Pitiful Pelosi Prattles Poppycock!

Nancy Pelosi (Dimwit-California) is running hard to be speaker of the house, and it is a possible (though not likely) outcome of this November's congressional elections. Recently, she uttered the unbelievable statement "It shouldn't be about national security."

From the Washington Post:

Then came the questions. "This is now the third election in a row in which they've raised security issues just before the election," the first questioner said of the Republicans. "Why won't it work for them a third time?"

"We won't be Swift-boated on the national security issue," the minority leader maintained.

"As you know," came the follow-up, Republicans "are citing past votes by you and other Democrats."

Pelosi was defensive. "I have five children," she said. "Five grandchildren, going on six. And I consider myself the ultimate security mom." By way of clarification, she felt compelled to add: "Democrats are committed to hunting down Osama bin Laden."

A third questioner pointed out that Republicans have regained the lead on national security. "This is what, I guess, campaigns will be about," Pelosi conceded with some reluctance. "It shouldn't be about national security."

I don't think I've ever heard such a dimwitted response from a member of congress (though a number from Jack "I surrender" Murtha and John "I have the hat" Kerry could concievably qualify).

Uh, Ms. Pelosi, if we don't have National Security, we won't have anything else. Tell your grandkids that!

Muslims Prove Benedict's Quote Of Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Paleologus Correct

Pope Benedict:

The emperor [Manuel II Paleologus] must have known that surah 2, 256 reads: "There is no compulsion in religion". According to the experts, this is one of the suras of the early period, when Mohammed was still powerless and under threat. But naturally the emperor also knew the instructions, developed later and recorded in the Qur'an, concerning holy war. Without descending to details, such as the difference in treatment accorded to those who have the "Book" and the "infidels", he addresses his interlocutor with a startling brusqueness on the central question about the relationship between religion and violence in general, saying: "Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached". The emperor, after having expressed himself so forcefully, goes on to explain in detail the reasons why spreading the faith through violence is something unreasonable."

The "rational" Muslim response? Burning five Christian Churches, killing in cold blood by shooting a nun in the back, killing a Christian in Baghdad for the sin of being Christian, Violent Demonstrations, burning the Pope in effegy. The Pope issued a "clarification" indicating that he didn't mean to insult any Muslam but that clarification wasn't enough it seems to the "rational" Muslims rioting.

The Pope also noted in his speech at the University of Regensburg:

Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul. "God", he [the Byzantine emperor] says, "is not pleased by blood - and not acting reasonably is contrary to God's nature. Faith is born of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats... To convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a strong arm, or weapons of any kind, or any other means of threatening a person with death..."

Victor Davis Hansen noted:

... by quoting from the emperor rhetorician Manuel Paleologus—whose desperate efforts at strengthening the Morea and the Isthmus at Corinth a generation before that awful Tuesday, May 29, 1453 all came to naught—the Pope failed to grasp that under the tenets of radical Islam of the modern age, context means little, intent nothing, learning less than zero. If a sentence, indeed a mere phrase can be taken out of context, twisted, manipulated to show an absence of deference to Islam, furor ensues, death threats follow, assassins load their belts—even as the New York Times or the Guardian issues its sanctimonious apologies in the hope that the crocodile will eat them last. "

Note the furor of the hordes protesting what the Pope didn't say, note the rampage over some silly-assed cartoons, note the slaying of a film-maker in the Netherlands, note the death threats against a British-Indian novelist, note the irrationality and the total lack of reason in those rampaging.

This is not the reaction of an ordered society, this is either the calculated manipulation of the "mob" by those with an ulterior motive, or, it is the reaction of a 7th century society so deeply mired in its belief system that it cannot conceive of a mindset different than its own. Bill Cork, writing in Built On A Rock asks:

Can you discuss the presumption out of which you operate? Can you explain how the expressions of Muslim law, as lived out in your societies, are consistent with other teachings of your own religion, not to speak of thinking about basic human rights, which the rest of the world has arrived as via...you know...centuries of...reasoned thinking?"

The answer is, of course, that the rioting Muslims (not to be confused with all Muslims) believe in the very tenets that Manuel II said that they do, spreading of their "faith" by the sword. Just ask the Fox newsman and cameraman. And, as a last bon mot, a last item in this little post, consider this:

Cross Posted at The Real Ugly American and at The Wide Awakes

UPDATE: The Howard Government has blasted the imams in Australia and has figuratively read them the riot act:

The Howard Government's multicultural spokesman, Andrew Robb, yesterday told an audience of 100 imams who address Australia's mosques that these were tough times requiring great personal resolve.

Mr Robb also called on them to shun a victim mentality that branded any criticism as discrimination.

"We live in a world of terrorism where evil acts are being regularly perpetrated in the name of your faith," Mr Robb said at the Sydney conference.

"And because it is your faith that is being invoked as justification for these evil acts, it is your problem.

"You can't wish it away, or ignore it, just because it has been caused by others.

"Instead, speak up and condemn terrorism, defend your role in the way of life that we all share here in Australia."
A tip 'O The GM Derby to The Instapundit

How Refreshing!

The Democrats Plan For The War On Terror

Now the TRUTH can be told; my super-duper, secret, covert, undercover operative has discovered the democratic party's plan to conduct the war on terror.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

Oriana Fallaci Has Just Died - Reposi In Pace

Checking in with Baron Bodissey of The Gates Of Vienna I just learned that Oriana Fallaci has died. As Baron Bodissey remarked:

... all of us will have to work that much harder now that she is gone.

Shame on the government of Italy for prosecuting her for telling the truth.

Rest in peace, Oriana Fallaci.

As one of his commenters noted:

You were a light in the struggle against the coming of the dark ages of Islam - May others be able to lift and carry the torch and show us the path to walk, for surely as long as we walk in the dark we will stumble and fall and we need all the light we can get."

"You chose the good fight, in spite of threats to your personal safety and freedom, may your name and work never be forgotten!"

Amen and Amen!

UPDATE: Michael who writes the fine blog "The Return of Scipio" has a post up on Oriana Fallaci. A tidbit:

She placed herself front and center in this latest war between Western civilization and Islam. Oriana pulled no punches, as ferocious against the surrender of her beloved Italy to multiculturalism as she was when sitting face to face with the Ayatollah Khomeini.

I can't think of a finer epitaph for this fine lady. Thanks Michael.

If You Think Bush Is Bad, Try Lincoln

My good friend and fellow conservative Tim Birdnow has an interesting piece on Mr. Lincoln's presidency and notes that if the Bush Administration were run in the same way as the Lincoln Administration there would be hell to pay. An exerpt:

Of course, Lincoln did many things which earned him disrepute in his day; he suspended the writ of Habeas Corpus, threw critical newspapermen in the slammer for being, well, critical, issued martial law wherever he thought it might help the war effort, etc. Critics of the Bush Administration simply don`t realize how mild the provisions in the Patriot Act are, nor how gentle and law-abiding Bush is compared to Lincoln. The treason of the New York Times would have landed the editors and half of the news staff in prison without charge or possibility of parole if Lincoln were president instead of Bush. He didn`t put up with any nonsense.

Go, read the whole thing then come back and comment (and drop a comment for Tim as well).

Women, Do Not Read This! Really.

I guess that new all-women talk-radio is going after the slow learner market.

Men are more intelligent than women, claims new study

It is research that is guaranteed to delight men - and infuriate the women in their lives. A controversial new study has claimed that men really are more intelligent than women. The study - carried out by a man - concluded that men's IQs are almost four points higher than women's. ...Women needn't feel despondent, however, as the scientists believe women can achieve just as much as men - as long as they work harder.

If men are really smart, they won't mention this study to their wives or girlfriends. If you're a woman and you read this despite the warning, take it as a lesson to listen to a man when he tries to tell you something.

My name is G.M. Roper and I approved of this message. Well, not exactly, but Woody wanted some cover.

Air America Bankrupt - Financially and Otherwise [Updated]

Gotta like the contradiction in the headline from liberal Think Progress.

EXCLUSIVE: Air America To Declare Bankruptcy, But Progressive Radio Remains Strong

Here's how their liberal commenters responded to the news:

● Progressives get their news from reading blogs and other online sources. ...Let the radio format go the way of the Dodo… let’s concentrate on more and better online media.
● R.I.P., Air America. If it had been a right-wing network, this administration would have secretly funneled millions of dollars into it.
● This country needs to have a place for people too smart to listen to the right wing noise machine. those who will dance in the streets and cheer the demise (premature) of Air America only show that they are not in favor of a free country where everyone has a right to speak and also to hear their kind of politics.
● What a shame…I’m sure this is Bush’s fault too.
● That proves that the neo-cons are still back in the dark ages of radio …and all other things….the Progressive and “Green Peopleâ€� are downloading and Ipoding. We are the future!

Wow! They're better than conservatives, free speech means someone else should pay their bills, and Bush is to blame.

And, do you want to know how these people who are so compassionate and worried about working families are treating the employees that they laid off? They gave them NO SEVERANCE PAY! I bet Al Franken got his paycheck, though.

To think that these people want to run our country.

Additional News:

As this news gets out and the story develops, we find more information, which includes a claim by Al Franken that his checks are behind, too. When you read about the lies and mismanagement of the group, you have to wonder about Franken's sanity in supporting them--if he's being honest, which is a rarity.

However, I think that the comment by one of their primary investors speaks volumes:

Norman Wain, a Cleveland-based former radio executive and investor in Air America, says he hadn't heard about any financial difficulties. "I know nothing about it," he says. "They don't communicate with investors very well. They only come to us when they're looking for more money."

Now, that does make them sound like Democrats and how they think of taxpayers--an endless source of money to fund useless programs.

09/14/06 - For Current Updates:

The Radio Equalizer with Brian Maloney follows this matter with current and in-depth information, if you have continued interest. He speculates that this announcement was leaked prematurely or falsely as part of insider politics. He also reports this: "Oddly enough, all network spokesperson Jamie Horn could do when finally allowed to address the by-then out-of-control story was to infer that conservatives were to blame for it."

Naturally.

All Women Talk Radio - I Give It Six Months [Updated]

Greenstone launches all-women radio talk network

Greenstone Media, a radio company whose founders include social activist Gloria Steinem and actress Jane Fonda, has launched an all-women, all-talk network across the United States.

Steinem said the network, which is run by women, aims to provide an alternative to current radio talk, which she describes as "very argumentative, quite hostile, and very much male-dominated."

Well, first, "all-women, all-talk" goes without saying. But, to state that an all-woman network is an alternative to "hostile" talk radio is to ignore who are the very founders of the network.

I give it six months. They just want to be around until the fall elections, anyway, as a way to skirt campaign laws and to advertise under the guise of talk radio for the Democrats right up to the elections.

Update:

Here is Greenstone Media's home page, where they introduce their new on-air personalities. If they wanted "women talk radio," what was wrong with these people--Laura Ingraham, Michele Malkin, even Tammy Bruce, or especially these famous women radio hosts?

Dem Majority = Struggle to Impeach Bush = Chaos for America

Democrats deny it, but the signs are that they will make the impeachment and conviction of President Bush a priority if their party wins a majority in Congress. Power and payback combined with irrational hatred takes precedence over urgent issues such as fighting terror, energy independence, and building our economy. The efforts of the Democrats and the radical left are so pervasive, that a search engine reveals over five million results when the words "impeach Bush" are entered. Shouldn't the American public know more about this rarely mentioned Democratic agenda and know that the Democrats will put their interests ahead of doing work for our nation?

Consider the following examples of attempts to bring the Left together on impeaching President Bush, and this Left is the same coaltion of people who now control the Democratic Party.

As a light starter, maybe you would enjoy the site of Impeach Bush Coalition, which includes a sidebar stating, "How Bush's grandfather helped Hitler's rise to power"--certainly true and an impeachable offense in their minds.

Perhaps, another site titled Impeach Bush would be more interesting, because it offers arguments and talking points to the great unwashed about how to counter any rebuttal to impeachment--besides the usual statements that someone is stupid and full of s#!+, which is what I usually hear. Oh, their arguments don't have to be truthful or logical. They just have to be stated repeatedly and with force to shut up critics. You just cannot find such precise instructions on conservative sites, whose readers can make up their own minds and arguments.

Maybe the Demoratic progressives (I love that tag) at Democrats.com will convince you that Bush needs impeaching for reasons from their long lists which extend from "Lying about Iraqi WMD's to Congress and the American people" to "Reading 'My Pet Goat' during the attack" to "Turning the world against the United States" (Oh, my!) to "Packing the courts with right-wing judges to outlaw abortion" to "Stealing the Presidential elections of 2000 and 2004" (and, isn't their loss of power to him the real issue?) on to "Allowing global warming, which will cause massive environmental damage" continuing to "Illegally 'outing' CIA agent Valerie Plame, an important anti-terrorism official" to, hold on, "Letting a gay male prostitute roam free in the White House." (Don't tell Barney Frank about that one.)

These sites offer t-shirts, bumper stickers, and coffee mugs for the cause. Liberals are suckers for these things.

We could pass these impeachment activists as nuts, but they are the ones who are now in control of the Democratic Party. In addition, there are serious people on the left who push this. For instance, consider an article in The Nation titled "The Impeachment of George W. Bush" by former Democratic representative Elizabeth Holtzman, who gives us this how-to formula for impeachment (emphasis added):

Mobilizing the nation and Congress in support of investigations and the impeachment of President Bush is a critical task that has already begun, but it must intensify and grow. The American people stopped the Vietnam War--against the wishes of the President--and forced a reluctant Congress to act on the impeachment of President Nixon. And they can do the same with President Bush. The task has three elements: building public and Congressional support, getting Congress to undertake investigations into various aspects of presidential misconduct and changing the party makeup of Congress in the 2006 elections.

So far, this scenario is playing out just as scripted, and Democrats throughout the nation are holding non-binding votes (of course) to impeach President Bush. If and when the Democrats gain a majority in the House and possibly the Senate, the impeachment issue that they don't mention in their campaign ads will move to the front of their priorities. Then, reasons that the Democrats used to oppose the impeachment of President Clinton will not matter, anymore. (Can we just "move on?") The Democrats want power and want revenge, and those matter to them more than anything that is good for the United States.

They need to admit it but won't, and the American voter needs to know their plans to put the party ahead of the real work for our country. The way to stop them is to reject their agenda and to support their Republican opponents. The fall elections are important and the future or America is at stake.

Who do you want in charge--people who have kept us from another terrorist attack or people who think that attacking our President takes priority over America's interests and protection?

The Democrats and the Left have been very busy. What are you going to do about it?

America Going to the Dogs-Another Hyphenated American

Yeah, the Left gets wackier and wackier. You might remember that PETA recently called on the U.S. military to evacuate all Americans during the war in Lebanon--not just the human Americans. Well, not to be outdone, at a national conference, the President of the Humane Society of the United States urged more animal rights laws to replace animal ownership laws, and he emphasized that by asking everyone to start referring to dogs as ''Canine Americans.'' A press release described conference attendees as "educated professionals" or, as I like to call them, "Psycho-Americans."

A Motto Even the Islamofascists Can Understand!

"Lan astaslem."
I will not submit, I will not surrender!

A tip 'O The GM Derby to Michele Malkin and to Dr. Sanity for the pointer.

Clinton Lies Again And You Have To Ask Yourself Why?

Clinton is called by many on the right a pathological liar. He is even called that by some on the left, for example Former Senator Bob Kerrey once said "He's [Clinton} an uncommonly good liar." He's lied about this, about that, he's lied by commission and by omission. One of my favorites is when he was attending Ron Brown's funeral and he was video taped walking with another member of his entorage laughing at something until he saw the camera, then he quivered his lip, wiped his eye. What an actor! Clinton is most famous for his "I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewensky..." He told that to his wife, his child, his cabinet and only fessed up cause Monica Dearest saved a certain blue dress.

He was recently caught in another lie, one he didn't have to tell, and one that he must have known he'd be caught at. He was in St. Lewis this weekend campaigning for some Democrat or other and made a talk or twelve. He was taped by radio station KMOX and heard by a new friend of mine Wayne. Wayne writes:

Something of interest occurred on Sunday. I regularly listen on the internet to radio station KMOX in St. Louis on Sunday mornings. Bill Clinton had spent Saturday in St. Louis campaigning for some congressman (name I don't recall). KMOX played several excerpts from his talk and repeated the excerpts several times through the morning programming. One excerpt I heard then paid more attention to the second time I heard it was this: Clinton:

"When I was at the World Trade Center the next day after the attempt to bring it down in '93, an Arab man came up to me and said: 'Mr. President, in no way do we Arabs support this bombing and I hope that all of us are not included as sympathizers."

As I recall, Clinton never did visit that site at anytime. Am I correct or wrong on this? This is so typical of the way Clinton lies to make a good story with whomever he is talking. Another strange thing about the lie: An Arab just walked up to him and started talking? No way. It disappointed me that KMOX continued to play this excerpt of Clinton knowing that he had to be lying (at least I would assume they knew he was lying). Clinton on many occasions would bald-face lie, full well knowing that everyone would soon enough realize it. Clinton is the epitome of the pathological liar."

No Wayne, you are not mistaken, not only did William Jefferson Clinton not visit the site of the WTC on February 27th (the next day), no Secret Service Agent worth his salt would let an Arab male just walk up to the President and begin a conversation. Not after the attempt by Squeeky Fromm against President Ford AND the attempt on President Reagan, just didn't happen.

So, why would Clinton tell a lie that is so easily disproved? In the words of Dick Morris: "Because He Could."

The Path To 9-11: The Left Is A Comedy For Our Times

The subject of 9-11 is frought with pathos. It is both a sad remembrance and an act of war. But, on the 5th anniversary of this tragic day, the American Broadcasting Company (ABC) has decided to show a production of a "Docu-Drama" called "The Path To 9-11". Now, in and of itself, that is nothing remarkable, the history of the socalled "docu-drama" is long and comical for its historical inaccuracies and/or outright fiction, witness the productions of "Death Of A President" in England for example (which many have defended on the grounds of "free speech").

Yet, let a shibboleth of the left be challenged (Clinton was a terrific - though perhaps oversexed president) and watch the fur fly. The reaction of much of the left is almost comical, nay, it is entirely comical and I'll take a few snippits from here and there to prove my point.

First up my friend Marc Cooper (a self identified "progressive") posts "The ABC's of Panderning" in which he states:

L.A. Times media columnist Tim Rutten perfectly nails the shameless shlockmeisters at ABC who think it's just spiffy to capitalize on the pain of the 5th anniversary 9/11 to broadcast one more manufactured piece of dreck -- a two part "docudrama" on the Twin Tower attacks powered by blatant right-wing spin.

Now, Marc is a friend of mine, and my 'blogfather' if you will and I highly respect him and his blog (though that does not apply to some of his more vociferous commenters). But gee could the rhetoric be more appalling, could the prose be a little more turgid? Understand please, as a progressive, Marc is no friend of the Bushes or the Republicans, but having said that, he is no friend of the Democrats either.

More amusing (if that is indeed the word) are some of the comments from that blog entry. This one for example:

NeoDude Says:
September 9th, 2006 at 9:14 am

When has Right-Wing Nationalists (SALUTE!!!), in any Western tradition, not exploit a national tragedy?

Oh gosh, "Right-Wing nationalists." Codewords for fascists perhaps? Oh, the humanity!

How about this one (if you are a fan of conspiracy theories you will LOVE this one):

r. l. c. Says:
September 9th, 2006 at 10:14 am

It really is obvious what happened here. These projects don’t get made overnight and when ABC Entertainment (NOT the news division) OK’ed this Bush was riding high - just been reelected and had increased majorities in both houses of Congress. And what were the pundits saying? Why the GOP wiould be ruling the roost for a long time to come and the Dems were in “Disarray� (a town near Vegas, I believe). So why not get in bed with right wing crazies? They would be in position to help the Mouse with issues like Intellectual Property and Media Ownership. Its not personal, just business.

(Hell Robert Iger was a Clinton Contributor, as were a lote of ABC/Disney Execs)

Sure the Dems would complain but what could they do? Well its now two months from an election that will probably produce a tsunami for them and the miniseries don’t look so hot now does it? That is what happens when you listen to experts!

Can you say "off base?"

But Marc's commenters are rational compared to others (although that is obviously not saying much). For example, Ann Althouse has a terrific post on some of these left-wing rantings here and she has a link pointing to something called "AMERICAblog" with some suggestions to sue, boycott etc Disney, ABC and Apple because of the so called docu-drama. A sample:

Certainly we're going to be live-blogging the show, Sunday and Monday. I'd appreciate those of you in Australia and New Zealand, if the show does air there shortly, please give us feedback as to what they cut and what's still in the show? It will give us a window as to what defamatory material Disney/ABC insisted on keeping in the show, which will help the lawsuits and our organizing.

Secondly, when the show airs in the US, if Disney/ABC still run it, I want to be sure a number of us are live-blogging it to list the defamation and the errors. If Disney/ABC insist on making a cartoon out one of the blackest days in America history, then we will hold them responsible."

Aren't these the same guys who "demand" freedom of speech on campuses and other venues? Does that apply only to speech from their side? Funny, I thought that speech was free for ALL OF THE UNITED STATES. I guess not. But I digress, as funny as the posting is, some of the comments (over 380 of them) are even funnier (or would stranger be a better word choice?) For example, this little bon mot:

I think iTunes is a really good place to hit Steve Jobs and Apple. It is direct and to the point, and it is not platform-based.

It is OUTRAGEOUS that they are offering this as a free download.

They would notice immediately if there was a slack-off in sales.

I have already written to Steve Jobs and the iTunes crew about this.
samia | 09.09.06 - 6:38 pm |

Wow, but this is mild compared to:

It appears that the governments use of the MSM for propaganda distribution is becoming extremely transparent. If we, as Americans, cannot stop this from happening, or becoming any worse, then we have lost the control of our public servents, and more drastic actions must be taken. Boycotts/leaflets/emails/videos/ demonstations etc.
Joe Danger | Homepage | 09.09.06 - 6:43 pm |"

Joe Danger, what a nom-de-pixel that is. Ok lets see, the government controls the MSM enough to make it a propaganda arm of the Bushies. So, how did the NYTimes sneak by with those "expose's" of our efforts to listen in to Al Qaeda or monitor financial transactions? Hmmmmm?

OK, how about this one:

As well as an organized and long-term boycott of Disney and ABC, we should use this opportunity to call for reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine.
nervesofsteel | 09.09.06 - 6:50 pm |"

OK, now that really is scary. The fairness doctrine was less about fairness than it was a way to silence the broadcasters (radio and TV) from airing any "political" speech because the so called doctrine would allow opposing views time on air. General Managers would have a scheduling nightmare and we'd loose talk radio and have to go back to elevator music. No thanks! One more reason not to elect Democrats or liberal Republicans. Oh, and by the way, the above commenter's nom-de-pixel is "nervesofsteel" More like "nerves-of-tinfoil." What a frightened little bunny!

The latest (well, maybe not the absolute latest) lefty "talking point" (I'm being generous here you understand) is that this is NOT the same as Michael Moore's fatuous "Farenheit 9/11" which everyone now says was a "polemic." A polemic?

WordNet
po·lem·ic (p-lmk): adj : of or involving dispute or controversy [syn: polemical] n 1: a writer who argues in opposition to others (especially in theology) [syn: polemicist, polemist] 2: a controversy (especially over a belief or dogma)

Really, seems to me that at the time many on the left didn't see any controversy at all, it was truth and a terrific slam on the Bush Administration (note: Marc Cooper, always his own man, saw it different and the vast majority of his commenters agreed - at the time, not now; now it's just a polemic).

Again, I digress, the whole point of this little exercise is to point out the utter insanity of the left in regards to this docudrama. Reminds me of the "revised" words of the Bard: "The left doth protest too much, methinks."

Cross posted at The Real Ugly American

Update, I've only scratched the surface of the left's response to "The Pathway to 9-11" but James Joyner at Outside The Beltway has looked at how "The Left Remembers 9-11." It's an excellent read and I'm in awe of his article.

Lt. Col. Jerry Dickerson - In Memorium

A number of months ago I joined the 2996 project to memorialize one member of the two thousand ninehundred nintysix individuals who lost their lives on September 11, 2001. I selected Lt. Col Jerry Dickerson for a number of reasons, though I did not have the honor of knowing him. First, my dad was Army as was Lt. Col. Dickerson. Two, I had been to the Pentagon a number of times and had travled the corridor near where he died. Lastly, because I was in the Army and the United States Army still holds a special place in my heart as my dad, granddad and great grandad were all soldiers.

Then, last month I was contacted by "Roci" who writes Rocinante's Burdens. Roci was a personal friend of Lt. Col. Dickerson and asked if I was willing to swap names or transfer my choice to him so that he could memorialize his personal friend. How could I say no to that kind of request.

Unfortunately, by the time we made the swap, all 2996 names had been assigned and I decided that Roci would do a much better entry than I. So, Roci has done so and it is a great read, and following the links contained in his entry, a few tears welled up, a lump developed in my throat and I agree with Roci... "Here's to Jerry, a better man than I"

So, go read Roci's entry, say a prayer or two for Jerry Dickerson and may Almighty God grant that his family finds peace and strength through the coming years.

The Path to 9-11, Inaccurate?

Footage NOT from ABC

This may not be the full story, but isn't it interesting given the looney left's almost rabid denial. Then too, if the LL and the Dems don't shut up, maybe more and more people will be looking. Wouldn't that be a hoot?

Jason Coleman Swings, And Knocks It Out Of The Park

My friend Jason at Jason Coleman has a terrific post up on "Burning Man" and its link to global warming. That and his post on the GW end temp in 2100 being lowered by half make for some really great reading. Take a gander then come back and tell me what you think.

Time To Get The Old Jalopy Overhauled

A Review of the efforts of Pork Busters, policy and who is doing what to whom in congress and a few other imponderables

She's smokin', she rattles, she couldn't pass an arthritic snail. Yep, time for an overhaul. No, not my car, my congress! The latest is that the majority Republicans can't find the huevos to stop the practice of Secret Holds or even allow some transparancy in the process of passing out our money! No sooner does Pork Busters ferret out Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) and Robert Byrd (Octogenarian-W. Virginia) than some other slimy senator puts a Secret Hold on the Coburn-Obama bill (Senate Bill 2590) introduced back in April and reportedly Stevens put his hold back in place. Interesting that the democrats have all, but Byrd, denied having a hold in place. Don't know if they have "reneged" on that but it wouldn't surprise me in the least. But I digress, the Republicans, who are in the majority (do I need to say that again?) should be in control of the Senate and should be able to force through a bill despite entrenched opposition. Oh, wait, Stevens is a Republican and we don't want to hurt his feelings do we? After all, he may gasp...shudder resign from the Senate.

I don't get it, each senator takes an oath of office and each was elected on the premise (that they admittedly put forth) that they could do the best for their state and for the country. So, what's with secret holds? Anti-democratic crap if you ask me.

Then too, no one is working on reforming Social Security, no one is inclined to tackle immigration reform, indeed all some good Senators do is announce that they hate Bush, or love the republic, will ernestly work on this or that or plan on doing something (shades of John "Do You Know Who I Am" Kerry) and the rest of us are left holding the bag.

What will it take for members of Congress to realize that their first responsibility is to appropriately manage the Legislative branch of government? Perhaps its time to crank out that old idea of mine and form a "Vote The Bastards Out" Party with the premise being that everyone vote for someone of a different party than the one that currently represents them. Then, to keep the Democrats from getting swelled heads and thinking the voters love them (they don't, the Democrats have shown that they are no longer the party of ideas) repeat the process two years away in 2008. Then maybe, the members of congress will get the idea that they work for us.

The only thing that keeps me from that is that the Democrats would be a disaster if they controled the congress for two years. If you think spending is bad now, just wait till the Democrats get in - oh, they say they woud be better stewards, but they've always said that and have always been just the opposite!
Too, the Democrats would more than likely botch the war on terror worse than Bush is botching it now; multi-culti apologists would be rampant with no cognizance of who the enemy is (hint, it's not Southern Baptists, little old ladies from Peoria, or Congressional Medal of Honor awardees from Arizona) and taxes would go through the roof.

Nope, the only thing I can think of is to hold my nose, vote Republican (or conservative at the very least) and start a campaign to get these idjits to understand who they really work for.

Come to think of it, overhauling the old jalopy would be simpler, cheaper and prove far more satisfying.

Update: Welcome Instapundit Readers, Thanks Glenn.... now, where did I put that extra bandwidth?

One More Time! (Well, not as long as the GW true-believers are still around)

One of my favorite blogs, The Volokh Conspiracy takes down some global warming hysteria with some serious looking into their own data. A sample:

A 2005 Science article co-authored by the same group as the BAMS paper--Webster, Holland, Curry, & Chang, "Changes in Tropical Cyclone Number, Duration, and Intensity in a Warming Environment"--does look at Northern Atlantic hurricanes 1970-2004 separately from Pacific ones, but lumps category-4 and category-5 storms together, showing an increase for the combination, not reporting anything on category-5 hurricanes alone. I went to the data source cited in the 2005 Science paper and this is what I found for 1960-2004 hurricanes (the Science study covered 1970-2004, excluding the first two rows below and the 4 category-5 hurricanes that occurred after the period of their data, in 2005):

Category 5 Hurricanes in the North Atlantic:
1960-64 . . 4
1965-69 . . 2
1970-74 . . 1
1975-79 . . 2
1980-84 . . 1
1985-89 . . 2
1990-94 . . 1
1995-99 . . 1
2000-04 . . 2

As you can see, in the data they claimed to have used in their Science article (as I counted the events), there is absolutely no trend in category-5 hurricanes in the period of their study: 1970-2004. Indeed, the 1990s showed insignificantly fewer hurricanes than either the 1970s or 1980s. Thus, all of the increase in the North Atlantic category 4-5 storms reported in the 2005 Science article must be due to an increase category-4, not category-5 storms.

Neither paper reports any data that would show a statistically significant increase in category-5 storms that would form the scientific basis for their public claim, made along with their release of the 2005 Science article: “The southeastern U.S needs to begin planning to match the increased risk of category-5 hurricanes.�

What increased risk?

If they have the data to support that claim, they should make it public. Anyone reading that claim would think that their Science paper showed such a significant increase. But it didn’t. Even after I added the 2005 data on category-5 hurricanes, which they did not use because the season wasn’t over yet, the quick regressions I ran didn't show any statistically significant increase in category-5 storms.

Did they just fabricate this claim of "increased risk" of category-5 storms?"

So, adding the above (and the rest of a really readable and delightful article) to what we already know about the true believers and global warming (GW) is:

Ahh yes, the increase in destructive hurricanes is due to................ GW
The decrease in destructive hurricanes is due to............................ GW

The increase in glaciers melting is due to.......................................GW
The decrease in glaciers melting is due to......................................GW

The increase in global mean temperature is due to.........................GW
The decrease in global mean temperature is due to........................GW

The increase in warm weather is due to........................................GW
The decrease in warm weather is due to.......................................GW

The increase in cold weather is due to..........................................GW
The decrease in cold weather is due to (oh, wait, there is no decrease in cold weather)

The increase in global temperature on Mars is due to....................GW
The.... well, you get the picture.

The decrease in believablity of the true believers is due to............ Al Gore!

Unverified but Heartwarming

Scrolling through the blogosphere this early am, reading Dr. Sanity which took me to Captain's Quarters which took me to... oh, hell, I forget, but somehow I ended up at Tim Blair which took me to the comments which took me to this:

From the daughter of a Soldier.

Last week I was in Melbourne attending a conference. While I was in the airport, returning home, I heard several people behind me beginning to clap and cheer.

I immediately turned around and witnessed one of the greatest acts of
patriotism I have ever seen.

Moving through the terminal was a group of soldiers in their uniforms, As they began heading to their gate everyone (well almost everyone) was abruptly to their feet with their hands waving and cheering. When I saw The soldiers, probably 30-40 of them, being applauded and cheered for, it hit me. I’m not alone. I’m not the only red blooded Australian who still loves this country and supports our Troops and their families.

Of course I immediately stopped and began clapping for these Young Unsung heroes who are putting their lives on the line everyday for us so we can go to school, work, and enjoy our home without fear or reprisal.

Just when I thought I could not be more proud of my country or of our service men and women a young girl, not more than 6 or 7 years old, ran up to one of the male soldiers. He knelt down and said “hi,� the little girl then asked him if he would Give something to her daddy for her. The young soldier didn’t look any older than maybe 22 himself, said he would try and what did she want to give to her daddy.

Suddenly the little girl grabbed the neck of this soldier, gave him the biggest hug she could muster and then kissed him on the cheek. The mother of the little girl, who said her daughters name was Courtney, told the young soldier that her husband was a Corporal and had been in Afghanistan for 11 months now. As the mum was explaining how much her daughter, Courtney, missed her father, the young soldier began to tear up.

When this temporarily single mum was done explaining her situation, all of the soldiers huddled together for a brief second. Then one of the other servicemen pulled out a military looking walkie-talkie. They started playing with the device and talking back and forth on it. After about 10-15 seconds of this, the young soldier walked back over to Courtney, bent down and said this to her, “I spoke to your daddy and he told me to give this to you.� He then hugged this little girl that he had just met and gave her a kiss on the cheek. He finished by saying “Your daddy told me to tell you that he loves you more than anything and he is coming home very soon.�

The mum at this point was crying almost uncontrollably and as the young soldier stood to his feet he saluted Courtney and her mum. I was standing no more than 6 feet away as this entire event unfolded.

As the soldiers began to leave, heading towards their gate, People resumed their applause. As I stood there applauding and looked around, there were very few dry eyes, including my own.

That young soldier in one last act of moment turned around and blew a
kiss to Courtney with a tear rolling down his cheek.

We need to remember everyday all of our soldiers and their Families and
thank God for them and their sacrifices.

At the end of the day, it’s good to be an Australian.

This was sent by email from someone to someone to someone. I have no idea who initiated it, no idea who posted it at Tim Blair, nor do I expect to ever know, but I've seen applauding at airports, I've seen little girls run up to soldiers (maybe their own dads) and I've seen the tears. So, maybe this is true and even if it is total fiction, fiction has a place in the blogosphere when it expresses a point of view. Then there is this little factoid, warmhearted fiction from the right is labeled as ... wait for it... "mush" by the left, but they have their own fictions: Joe Wilson and the outing of his wife, Richard Clark giving Condaleeza Rice the lowdown on Al Q, Bush stealing the elections... so, oh yes, the left's fiction is not in the least heartwarming and is only damaging. But, that's politics I guess.

The Carnival of the Insanities is UP!

Doc Sanity has her usual grab-bag of delightful and sometimes disturbing reading up at the Carnival of the Insanities. Go Read and enjoy!

Genocide, Volkerenmoord, Genozid, Genocidio, Génocide

Regardless of the language, "Genocide" has a mind numbing connotation. One only has to look at some of the concentration camps in eastern Europe during World War II, or some of the mounds of skulls in Cambodia following the reign of Pol Pot to understand the anathema the word conjures.

Wikipedia:

Genocide is defined by the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) Article 2 as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such: Killing members of the group; Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; and forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."

In the last century alone (1901-2000) the following acts of genocide occurred:

Bosnia-Herzegovina: 1992-1995 - 200,000 Deaths
Rwanda: 1994 - 800,000 Deaths
Pol Pot in Cambodia: 1975-1979 - 2,000,000 Deaths
Nazi Holocaust: 1938-1945 - 6,000,000 Deaths
Rape of Nanking: 1937-1938 - 300,000 Deaths
Stalin's Forced Famine: 1932-1933 - 7,000,000 Deaths
Armenians in Turkey: 1915-1918 - 1,500,000 Deaths

The number of citations for "Never Again" are numerous, in fact, each word in this sentence is a separate link to a "Never Again" article.

Yet, here in this day and age, a group of folk are preaching genocide in at least two areas of the world.

First, Iran and it's madman president claims there was no genocide during WWII, (if he said that in Germany, would he be prosecuted? In Germany denial of the Holocaust is a crime) yet, he also says that Iran will wipe Israel off the face of the earth and kill all the Jews. Genocide is actively taking place, also in Darfur where the Janjaweed are activly killing as many African nativists and Christians as possible, while the world stands by. The United States, Russia, France, England, Germany, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, South Africa, Brazil, Japan all stand by, watching it happening in Darfur, and afraid to stop it in Iran, either because the Mullah's might unleash that monster or the riots in the arab street might start.

At this stage of the game, who gives a damn? Concepts such as "Never Again" have lost meaning if we don't collectively, as a people, step in and do something. Kofi Annan calls it genocide, but stands by while such stalwarts in human rights as Sudan and Saudi Arabia, Cuba and Ethiopia, are placed on the Commission On Human Rights of the United Nations. The Commission also has some real members such as Germany and England, the United States and Hungary and others, but don't expect any real action there. In spite of the ongoing genocide in Darfur, the commission voted overwhelmingly to censure Israel for essentially taking the war to it's attackers.

Never Again? Well, it's happening again in Sudan at the hands of the Janjaweed and will happen again in Israel at the hands of the insane Mullahs of Iran. And, of course, the UN says self defense is not a human right so, Israel, bend over and get ready.

UPDATE: My friend Gail at Crossing The Rubicon 2 has more including this sad little bit of anti-semitism.

Liberals: Crow and Frogs Legs for Plame Banquet

Regarding claims and investigations about Valerie Plame and "Smokn' Joe" Wilson (and, I'm not saying what he smokes), imagine, for a moment, that a Republican had made charges against the Democrats similar to those that Joe Wilson and the Democrats made against the Republicans. Well, we would expect that the major media would have buried the story in that case. So, I'm not surprised that major media is burying the revelation that, as many knew, Joe Wilson, himself, was the one most responsible for exposing his wife's role with the CIA--and, oh yes, lying about his Iraq report.

Liberals Imagined Sign of Guilt at White House

But, somewhere away from the front page, the Washington Post comes forward to set things straight.

We're reluctant to return to the subject of former CIA employee Valerie Plame because of our oft-stated belief that far too much attention and debate in Washington has been devoted to her story and that of her husband....

I bet. Just like all the liberal Democrats are reluctant to return to the subject now that they've been proved wrong. But, major media didn't thinik that too much attention was devoted to claims with no proof before.

Then, the Washington Post does offer this accurate summary after, naturally, suggesting that high level Republicans must still be guilty in some fashion even absent a conviction. Note that the summary rightly goes beyond the initial charge of who identified Ms. Plame and addresses the fact that Joe Wilson also lied about his report on Iraq shopping for uranium, for which Christopher Hitchens received flak (to put it mildly) with his evidence, as did I whenever I referenced Hitchens' columns.

Nevertheless, it now appears that the person most responsible for the end of Ms. Plame's CIA career is Mr. Wilson. Mr. Wilson chose to go public with an explosive charge, claiming -- falsely, as it turned out -- that he had debunked reports of Iraqi uranium-shopping in Niger and that his report had circulated to senior administration officials. He ought to have expected that both those officials and journalists such as Mr. Novak would ask why a retired ambassador would have been sent on such a mission and that the answer would point to his wife. He diverted responsibility from himself and his false charges by claiming that President Bush's closest aides had engaged in an illegal conspiracy.

Exactly. However, the paper doens't address who is supposed to reimburse taxpayers for the needless costs of the grand juries and the special prosecutor's investigations against our highest government officials. Would that be Joe Wilson or the Democratic Party--both who profited from the lies? Shouldn't the losers pay?

Then, the Washington Post offers this polite way to end the discussion on Joe Wilson:

It's unfortunate that so many people took him seriously.

Unfortunate, indeed.

And, just who might have been among those who were telling everyone to take this seriously during the Presidential election? Could it beeeeeee Satan?! No, but that's close. It might be the Washington Post, the New York Times, CNN, CBS, etc.--not to mention the Democrats, Moveon.org, and every left-wing blog. How "unfortunate" that they got this wrong. Perhaps, they will do a better job of helping to restore the good reputations of those damaged. Don't hold your breath.

May I suggest a better a more appropriate way to end this matter. If you're one of those liberal Democrats who made outrageous statements against Republicans on this matter, follow these instructions.
(1) Print out this post.
(2) Write the word "crow" boldly across it.
(3) Eat it.

I like my way better.

Oh, and if we really want justice on this matter, let's allow Joe Wilson to have his wish:

Wilson wants leak culprit 'frog-marched'

Whoever released the name, Wilson said, "potentially engaged in outing a national security asset. "If that was determined to have been a crime, I would love to see them frog-marched out of the White House," he said.

Joe Wilson, can you say "ribbet?" Those frog legs could be your own.

GM IS TIED UP IN KNOTS

Hi folks, over the next several days I have some things to do that will take up an awful lot of my time, I'll be tied up in paperwork projects (not knots, that was just to get your attention.) I'll be checking in, but not doing a lot of posting until maybe tuesday or wednesday, until then, enjoy Woody's postings and take care of yourselves.

GM
Cancer Sucks.