Sunday, April 29, 2007

Presidential Hopefuls Sunny Side

This is a fun story on the website. My only comment is when the candidates are asked what they would be doing if they were not running for president. Ol' Hilary's comment is soooo loooonnnnggg wiiinnndddeeeddd!!!!!!! Note the short, succinct answers of the others. Not even the trial lawyer John Edwards gave such an answer!

read more digg story

Saturday, April 28, 2007

Today At The Los Angeles Times Festival Of Books

Today was the first of two days of the Los Angeles Times Festival Of Books and, I attended and have a lot of observation and comments, some of which may surprise you.
Yes, I know, many of you are mumbling, "The Left Angeles Times put this on?! Can't be good. They don't do anything right!"
Well, they have done right and while, like anything else there can be some improvement and I will address it, this is a fun event for anyone who likes to read any and all types of books.
My day started with a panel at 10am on "New Media, Blogging and Beyond" and it was very fascinating. On the panel was Hugh Hewitt, conservative blogger and radio talker, Kevin Roderick of the site LAobserved and Jill Leovy of the Times who writes on homicide at the Times website Mr. Roderick is a middle of the roader type and Miss Leovy is a lefty who let the cat out of the bag when she said that the reason she is a blogger is because of the plight of black men in America. Oh, Miss Leovy is white.
It was a civil discussion, yet lively. Poor Hugh got the mainstreamers in a tizzy when he said that NBC news made a critical error in airing the ranting video of Virginia Tech masaacrer Cho Seung-Hui. He was right, but the old guard stood by the "decision" of NBC news. Mr. Hewitt dissected what would have been the way to go with it, but Mr. Roderick did not totally disagree while Miss Leovy did not like where Mr. Hewitt was going. Other issues came up but all did agree about the importance of the blogging information medium and that much of today's newspaper will be online and that blogging will be part of that.
Afterwards the panel all had books to hawk and sign. I went and spoke with Mr. Hewitt and he was great and affirming about this blog. I also had him sign "A Mormon In The White House?" about Mitt Romney. Then it was off to the next panel.
That was "The Age Of Spin", as if spin just happened in our lifetimes. Now, there the fever swamp crowd was in near orgasmic ecstasy as the panel was led by John Powers, and featured Joe Conason, writer for all the usual leftist suspects whose latest tome is "It Can Happen Here: Authoritian Perils In The Age Of Bush", David Goodman, self styled "investigative" reporter who also has a wonderful tome, "Static: Government Liars, Media Cheerleaders, and The People Who Fight Back." Just an aside, I think he means liberals who fight back, not conservatives. Then finally, a voice of reason, Dr. Frank Luntz, author of "Words That Work" he was the token conservative. And there was the token moderate, Michael Isikoff of Newsweek magazine.
Poor Dr. Luntz. He could not get a word in edgewise, but when he did, he made sense. He is right, the center of America is shrinking. That is why most of the questioners were actually asking about the "conspiracy" of 9/11 like the "demolition" of World Trade Tower number seven and who was "really" behind it all. After a slew of questions on this line, Mr. Isikoff finally had enough, told the facts and he was booed and shouted down. Not even the most lefty of the bunch, Mr. Goodman, wanted to go there. Finally, the moderator had to ask the audience not to ask any more of those kind of questions.
After that wild exchange and leaving the hall with all the fringe handing out there propaganda on the "truth" of 9/11, it was off to the dogs.
I went to see Warren Eckstein, host of the Pet Show and author and pet psychologist. After that, went looking around, seeing a lot of cooking books, mystery, children's books, travel and as I say, a lot for anyone who likes to read.
But, here is a criticism.
When getting a panel together on current events and trends, it would be nice to include more than one conservative. Yes, it is Los Angeles, but if one is into diversity, there is more than one conservative out there for each of these panels.
Also, conservative publishers should have been there as well. I know it is not a huge book fair yet, but where was Regenery and other conservative publishing houses? Were they not asked? Did they just not participate? Very disappointing. The left was very well represented at the political/current event booths. Conservatives like book fairs too! We are also consumers and would like a one-stop place on a beautiful spring day to go and see books we like.
Also, there was one Christian area, Bibles For America, which were handing out free recovery bibles. Where are the other Christians? Were they asked? Did they not want to participate in a secular book fair? If that is the case, shame on them. We Christians also like books and would like the same chance that the New Agers and "Freethinker" types had to browse and buy.
But overall, it was a good event and I recommend that anyone in the Los Angeles area next year attend. Maybe some of my suggestions will be acted on but even if they are not, it is a lot of fun.

Friday, April 27, 2007

Too Bad We Won't See This Charecter In The Next Dem Debate

It had to happen. The people at CNN have no sense of humor as they will not allow former Democrat senator Mike Gravel (D-Alaska) to participate in their next Democrat presidential debate.Too bad. I hear he provided comic relief to an otherwise dreary performance by the other Seven Dwarfs, er Democrats. Oh well, I guess we will, however, have Dennis Kucinich to get some ha has from next time around!

read more | digg story

Thursday, April 26, 2007

Now For True Diversity, Put A Conservative In The Sports Room

In today's Los Angeles Times a sports writer by the name of Mike Penner wrote a beautiful tome about how when he comes back from his upcoming vacation, he is going to be, Christine Daniels.
I kind of wonder, what if he went from Christine Penner to Jack Daniels? I wonder, has he had way too many Jack Daniels?
Be it for me to say that it is not possible that some people really do believe that they are the opposite gender, but is it really necessary for Mr. Penner to write about the sports section?
Call me old fashioned, but I like to go to the sports section, read about the games the day before, check out the line scores and look at the horse races, entries and results. I really do not want to read about some staff member going through his mid life crisis.
I am sure that they are all high-fiving each other about the diversity in the sports room over at the Left Angeles Times, but here is one for them.
I wonder if a conservative sports writer, or worse, a believing Christian, can use the sports page to come out of the closet? Now, that would be diversity!

"Bush Is A Very Hard Person To Deal With?"

According to Sen. Hilary Clinton (D-New York), President Bush is a very hard person to deal with when it comes to pulling out the troops from Iraq.
Well, DUH!
What Sen. Clinton does not understand is that President Bush does not want to pull the troops out of Iraq using any artificial time lines that she and her Democrat colleagues want. Yes, some day they will come home, but not until the job is done.
So, Sen. Clinton spoke to the National Democratic Jewish Council yesterday and she told them "(Bush) is a very hard person to deal with on these issues" particularly for agreeing to Democrat tactics on getting out of Iraq.
I know that the Democrats think that their ascension back to the legislative branch in 2006 was due to the Iraq theatre in the War Against Terror, but at some point, unless they want to be blamed for American defeat, they will have to work with the president on winning the Iraq theatre.
But, they do not.
Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev) all but said that the Iraq war will get them more seats in the senate and house. But, at least he did not say how hard it is to deal with President Bush.
What it sounds like to me is that Sen. Clinton is on another Democrat whine.
"I'm not getting my way on Iraq! George W. Bush is sooo hard to deal with because we are not getting our way!"
Please, Sen. Clinton. Here is a clue for the Democrats. How about being for VICTORY ? How about putting aside the political considerations and put the interests of the United States first?
Well, that is not going to happen and what does that mean? Does that mean President Bush should say how hard it is to deal with the Democrats?
The terrorists who want to kill us must be rolling in laughter around the caves in the mountains of Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Wednesday, April 25, 2007

Memo To Democrat Presidential Candidates-STOP Whinning!

Here is a short, simple memo to the Democratic candidates seeking their party's nomination for president in 2008.
STOP whining about Republicans "questioning" your patriotism!
The latest is Sen. Barack Obama lashing out at GOPer Rudy Giuliani for questioning his patriotism, which Mr. Giuliani never did.
To quote Sen. Obama, "America's mayor should know that when it comes to 9/11 and fighting terror, America is united. We know we can win this war based on shared purpose, not the same divisive politics that question you patriotism when you dare to question failed policies that have made us less secure." No, Sen Obama, Mr. Guiliani simply said that the United States would be less safe under a Democrat administration.
Those of us that support the present policy of the Bush administration and debate the way the Democrats want to end the war in the Iraq theatre in the War Against Terror do not question whether they are patriotic or not. It is what they want to do that makes us wonder what their strategy is on the War Against Terror. It is whether or not all of this is part of the Lefts general BDS-Bush Derangement Syndrome.
Democrats need to put out their long term stradgedy and let the chips fall where they may. If they want to cut off the funds and end the war, do it now. Explain what sending more troops to Afghanistan will do. Will they tire of that because that is also a civil war between the former Taliban regime and the government of Harmid Karzai?
Stop whining every time a conservative or Republican questions the Democrat policy now and get out in front. If you want to win the war, say so, get a policy that makes sense and run with it.
So, Sen Obama, et al, please do not whine about rightful criticism of what you and the Democrat party advocate in Iraq. Come up with a real policy, not just pullback and hope for the best. It is not a policy and expect a vigorous debate.

Mc Cain Is Officially In-I Was Wrong

In a post earlier this year, I predicted that Arizona senator John Mc Cain would not officially enter the Republican race for the presidential nomination.
Today, he announced officially that he is a candidate for the GOP bid and I am here to write, I was wrong.
But, I still do not think that he will be the GOP standard bearer. I think that it will probably be the former Massachusetts Governor, Mitt Romney.
Sen. Mc Cain has done way too much to alienate the very kind of voters that he will need to win the Republican nomination. He needs conservative GOP voters. There is a long laundry list of why he will not get those voters and I will go into them here. For the most part, they are well known, but that is another posting.
For the record, if he is the Republican nominee, it will be much easier for me to vote to Sen. Mc Cain than Rudy Giuliani. Whereas Sen. Mc Cain has gone out of his way to tick off conservatives, at his core he is a conservative. Mr. Giuliani is not at all and seems to not care to reach out to the majority of Republican voters, the ones that vote in primaries.
But, Sen. Mc Cain is officially in and now the official race gets really interesting.

Ding Dong, The -itch Is Dead!

Since this is a family blog, I can not write the whole -itch word, but as Barbara Bush once said it rhymes with witch.
Now, the good news. Rosie O'Donnell, the far-out co-host of the ABC daytime "women's" gabfest The View, is off the show as of June. She claims that ABC and her could not agree on the contract. I do not care, she will be gone and I think it is because ABC saw the writing on the wall. GO AWAY!
I believe the real reason was that Miss O'Donnell may have gone too far in all but accusing members of the supreme court as taking orders from the Pope in Rome in the recent partial birth abortion ruling. That really seemed to get under people skins. A mass e-mail and letter writing campaign started last Friday, so the timing of this announcement seems a little too convenient.
Let me say this. Miss O'Donnell is entitled to her opinions and no one is trying to shut her up. But, when the opinions are not well thought out, emotional and devoid of even a modicum of common sense, then something has to be done. And I think the people saw that and the suits at ABC may have made the "contract negotiations" so that she would turn them down. If that is what happened.
All I know is that reasonable, well thought out, thinking and opinion is what I look for, both on the right and left. When that does not happen, well just ask Don Imus. Also, mean-spirited vitriol, which has been her trademark of late is not becoming of someone who built her reputation as the "Queen of Nice."
So, ding dong, the -itch is dead! Huzzah! Huzzah!
A hat tip to radio talker Laura Ingraham for taking a leading role in the e-mail campaign to express our displeasure when Miss O'Donnell went on her anti-Catholic rant against the supreme court.

Tuesday, April 24, 2007

Thank You Mike Gallagher

Radio talk show host Mike Gallagher is going to give his whole four hour radio show to one of the wackos from the Westboro Baptist church so that they, led by the "Reverend" Fred Phelps, will not protest at any of the memorial or funerals of those killed last week in the massacre at Virginia Tech university.
So, who is the "Reverend" Fred Phelps? He is a bitter, hateful man who is an ordained minister that his whole ministry is saying how awful homosexuals are and no matter what they are going to go to hell, even if they change their ways.
I do not want to go into all the bizarre theology, but the Westboro Baptist church is in Topeka, Kansas and basically is members and extended members of the Phelps family. Some evangelization.
These people have protested at the funerals of soldiers killed in Iraq. Oh, they are not against the war like the left. They are protesting because they feel, I kid you not, that they deserved to die because they are fighting a war and justifying the "homosexual agenda." I would not know where to start and I will not.
The same essential reason is the rationale for protesting those killed at Virginia Tech. I mean, if they were not gay or lesbian, they must support that lifestyle by attending college.
So, Mr. Gallagher offered his whole show to Shirley Phelps-Roper, one of the "Reverend" Phelps daughters. That show was done today. In return, they will not protest at any of the memorials or funerals of the Virginia Tech victims.
Mr. Gallagher also gave two hours after the Amish school massacre as these "Christians" were going to protest at those victims funerals.
Now, many would say that he is just giving them a free platform to spew their hateful message. Maybe so, but what he is doing his protecting those attending the services so already grieving people do not have to confront these "Christians."
It is a tough call, but I think the right one. Most, and I mean most people in the United States have already marginalized this group and their "church." The only ones that have not is the DDBMSM who like to put these people on as the mainstream of thought on homosexuality and or issues about homosexuality. They are way off the mark. Many Christians that have strong views against homosexual behavior believe they are redeemable and in fact can change and those Christians actively try to help those that want to change. They, unlike the Phelps crowd, do not condemn them.
No matter where anyone stands on the issue of homosexuality, we can agree that the Fred Phelps crowd are nothing but hatemongers, and as I condemn those on the left like the "Reverends" Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, I will be in the front of the line to condemn "Reverend" Fred Phelps.
Mike Gallagher has done something courageous because I could not stand five minutes with any of these people. All I can say again is thank you Mike.

"The Real War On Terror"-NOT

In a great column by Debra Saunders today, she points out the folly of the Democrats who keep telling the biggest lie to Americans that the real War Against Terror is in Afghanistan, not Iraq.
The reality is that the Democrats need to look tough somewhere and they have tried to sell a snow job on the American people that if we just left Iraq and sent more troops to Afghanistan, the War Against Terror would be won and there would be peace on earth.
Unfortunately, once you read the column of Miss Saunders, you will realize that Afghanistan, on a lesser level, is already like Iraq. And, to follow the Democrat "logic", Iraq is in a civil war and we can not have our troops in the middle of a civil war.
Oh, here are some examples of civil wars that as of this writing, American troops are right in the middle of.
Bosnia & Herzegovina, Columbia and the big one of all, Korea. Korea?! Well, there is no peace treaty. Technically, there is a cease fire and no armistice. It can disintegrate at any time and our 37,000 troops there will be sitting ducks.
The Democrats need to come clean and be honest. They want out of the War Against Terror, period. If they got their way in Iraq, they will want out of Afghanistan, thus taking the United States out of actually fighting the War Against Terror.
Read the column, then comment.

Monday, April 23, 2007

The Case For Romney

As I have noted in many a post, I am leaning heavily for the candidacy of former Massachussets Governor, Mitt Romney to be the Republican nominee for the presidency in 2008. After reading Hugh Hewitt's "A Morman In The White House? 10 Things Everyone Should Know About Mitt Romney" I am more convinced that Gov. Romney would make a great nominee and President of the United States.
Yes, we should get out of the way all the Mormon stuff now. I am a traditional Christian. I believe that Jesus Christ is my Lord and savior and I have a personal, but certainly not perfect, relationship with Jesus. I have been baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit and accept the Nicene and Apostle's Creed as the sufficient statements of the faith. I believe that Gov. Romney does all of that, but clearly there are very strong differences between traditional Christians and Mormons that can not and will not be resolved. Yes, there is the silly undergarment question. For Mormons, it is seen as a spiritual garment. Then there is that baptizing the dead. I think one should actually be alive for that and I think that Mormons mean well, but I do not believe in it. Also don't believe in the Holy Trinity as three different, distinct people. But, we traditional Christians believe in the Trinity as three in one. Maybe the Mormons make that easier. Don't believe we are individual Gods that may or could populate other planets. But, here is the thing. We are not going to nominate or elect the theologian in chief. We are electing a president who would be the commander-in-chief. How he or she prays or believes in God is not as important to me as the face he or she is a person of faith, period.
Now that the Mormon stuff is out of the way, I suggest one look at the record of Gov. Romney.
On social issues, clearly he had to thread the needle. To win in Massachusetts, one can not run for office as one would run in say the south or Midwest. Emphasising social issues is without a doubt a no-starter in Massachusetts. Yet, he blocked many pieces of legislation that the overwhelmingly Democrat legislature sent to his desk by veto. Some of those dealt with making abortion even easier. All were vetoed and some passed, some didn't. When the Massachusetts high court redefined traditional marriage, he did all he could to reverse it. It is a very hard process to take a vote to the people, unlike California where we get a few hundred thousand verifiable signatures and poof, it is on the ballot.
As for the budget, Gov. Romney did not raise taxes, cut government and balanced all his budgets in four years. Keep in mind, the legislature in Massachusetts had a total in both houses of 29 Republicans against a total of 176 Democrats. You do the math and see how good any Republican could do. When you compare his record over his three Republican predecessors overall, he was the most conservative of the last four Republican governors to occupy the Governor's Mansion in Boston.
A big plus is that he has private sector experience at Bain & Company, an investment firm that later became Bain Capital. They are serious investment firms that made or broke companies. He became a very wealthy man. Also, provided many jobs throughout the country and the world. Real world experience does beat a lifetime of government service that many of the candidates in both parties bring to the table.
Lastly, he rescued the scandal-plagued Salt Lake City Winter Olympics 2002. When he took over in 1999, he dove in, made some serious decisions that turned the nearly bankrupt Olympics and it was a rousing success in the short months after the terrorist attacks of 9/11.
That is the resume. What does he say about the most pressing issue of the day, the War Against Terror?
Well, for one thing he is not politically correct. He calls our enemy Jihaddists. That is what they are, holy warriors. He wants to increase the size of the military by 100,000. He, like President Bush, wants to take the war to the enemy. He wants to win in Iraq and supports the Bush policy of the surge. He wants to be more aggressive in dealing with Iran. Not go to war, but definitely different than the way the Bush administration is dealing, or not, with the mullahs in Tehran.
I think he will move up in the polls and has a very good shot at the GOP nod. Republicans are now beginning to look at him seriously and poll numbers, although a bit early and irrelevant, are looking up.
I think this is someone from Massachusetts the United States can trust. I am leaning more in the Romney direction. I think the United States will too.

Reid vs. Bush-Reid Will Lose

Sen Harry Reid (D-Nev) seems to think that he will show President Bush the way on the war in the Iraq theatre on the War Against Terror. According to Fox News, Sen. Reid said that the Democrats will show him the way and that they are reaching out to Republican members of congress to forge some kind of bipartisan plan that would, essentially, set the artificial time table to withdraw all troops from Iraq and or stop funding of the war. On both counts, good luck.
Here is what probably will happen.
President Bush will veto the funding bill in the current form, the Democrat leadership will huff and puff but not be able to blow the house down. In other words, the Democrats will have to fund the war as is and not put in any artificial time table for withdrawal and there will be some time to show more progress.
What Sen. Reid is doing is basically keeping the Democrats on the offensive, as he sees it. But, he has made more than his fair share of moronic statements in less than a week and thus discrediting himself and the anti war Democrats. Last week, he said that the war is lost and he had to backtrack. So far, today's speech is too early to gauge the public and or Republican reaction. Sen. Reid also let it be known that the Democrats look to gain seats in the senate in next year's election at least due to the state of the war. So, run this for political gain? So typical of the power-hungry Democrats.
Sen. Reid may just be setting the race for next year between fringe anti war wackos and the rest of America, which at worse is very ambivalent about the war. A senate leader should never put party ahead of war aims, but that is what Sen. Reid is doing.
At the end of all this, Sen Reid will lose and President Bush will get the funding, at least for now, with no strings attached. This will have all been for naught and the Dems will once again look weak in the long term War Against Terror.

Friday, April 20, 2007

Romney Getting The Ca$h From The San Fernando Valley

Former Massachusetts Governor, Mitt Romney, is winning the money war for the GOP nomination-at least in the San Fernando Valley in California according to the Los Angeles Daily News
In an article in today's edition, Gov. Romney has raised $526,850 in the first quarter. Next is former New York City Mayor, Rudy Giuliani who has raised $379,335. Sen. John McCain came in third at $202,875.
I think this is a better indicator of support than the national polls showing Mr. Giuliani ahead usually around 30-35%. Although, according to Real Clear Politics Gov. Romney is now at a 10% overall average and moving up in polling data as well to match the money.
Also, this goes against the so-called conventional wisdom that Mr. Giuliani has so much wide support in California. That is important as when the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary are done, its here to California and even here organization and money will matter. Hence, if we look at these money figures, Gov. Romney is far ahead in cash and will be ahead in organization.
Gov. Romney is only going up while the other two so-called front runners are going down. It is going to be a very interesting primary season.

Sen. Harry Reid-No Profile In Courage And A Liar

Senate majority leader, Harry Reid (D-Nev) said Wednesday after meeting with President Bush that the war theatre in Iraq is lost and that Secretary of State Rice and Defense Secretary Gates agree with him.
First of all, Tom Bevan of Real Clear Politics wrote on his blog that he was interviewing Miss Rice while Sen. Reid made his treasonous comment and she told him that the war is far from lost. There has been no comment from Mr. Gates.
Second of all, does Sen. Reid really think that in a few short weeks, the surge will put down every bombing and or attempted bombing? No, he does not and he lies about it by insinuating that it would. Gen. David Petraeus has said that at the minimum that it could take on the short end six to nine months to get a total handle on the situation in and around Baghdad.
Third, why does the administration let this outright lie go essentially unchallenged? I think that many are buying into the DDBMSM beltway thinking that Pres. Bush and the administration are not getting anywhere trying to convince the Democrat congress or the majority of the American people on board with the surge and to give it a chance. That is wrong. If Pres. Bush and other administration officials go on the offensive they may be able to have just enough support from the American people to give the surge a chance. They must challenge and refute statements like that of Sen. Reid.
If Sen. Reid really believes that the war in the Iraq theatre in the War Against Terror is lost, why does he not just call for a vote to cut off all funding for the war and bring the troops out of Iraq? Because he does not really know where he stands, just like the majority of Democrats in congress.
I think that President John F. Kennedy must be rolling in his grave to think that this is what the Democrat party has become. Pres. Kennedy would not have backed out just because things are not going perfectly or the way we thought it would.
So called leader Mr. Reid is no Profile In Courage. He is a coward.

Tell ABC To Get Rid Of A Whole Lot Of Rosie

Yesterday on the infamous ABC daytime show, The View, the infamous Rosie O'Donnell said two, yes I know only two, dumbfounding comments.
Of course, she condemned the United States supreme court in the decision upholding the ban on partial birth abortion. That is fine, people have different opinions. But the following is just, well, you be the judge.
Miss O'Donnell asked, incredulously, how many of the supreme court justices were Roman Catholic. Why you may ask? Well because, by coincidence all the justices who voted to uphold the ban are Roman Catholic, and we all know that they must take their marching orders from the Pope, and we know the Roman Catholics are anti abortion. Then, Miss O'Donnell added a new branch to the federal government. She said, "The separation of church and state, the judicial, executive, legislative branch..." WOW! I did not see that separation of church and state branch in the constitution under the separation of powers. Well, I think Miss O'Donnell is clearly a product of public schools. For the record, I am too, but I actually paid attention in civics class. I am not sure that they teach civics any more. Back on track.
I know that people actually watch this show, thus they should at the very least not get open bigotry that someone like Miss O'Donnell claims to be against. Also, it should at the very least get accurate information about how the government works.
Please, let your feelings be heard as you can e-mail ABC at, go to ABC Contact at the bottom of the home page. I did and if more people do, then maybe we can do one of two things. Get Rosie a little educated so when she does mouth off, she knows what she is talking about or get her off the air.

Thursday, April 19, 2007

What More Is On The Cho Video We Did NOT See?

Today on the Laura Ingraham radio show, a point was raised to the fact the NBC news only released portions of the video rantings of mass murderer Cho Seung-Hui which raises the question as to what else is on that tape we do not know?
Not to sound conspiratorial, but the fact that we know the words "Ismail Ax" were on one of his arms in red and in the part of the video we were all treated to he railed against Christianity and even compared himself to Jesus Christ. Is it possible that there may be pro-Islamofacist terror messages on the tape? Will we ever know?
It is not a secret that in known criminal cases involving Islamics in the United States, the DDBMSM has downplayed that fact. Oh, no big deal that an Islamic specifically attacked a Jewish center in Seattle. No koinkidink that an Iranian Islamic plowed his car into people at the University of North Carolina. A young gunman who went on a shooting rampage at a mall in Salt Lake City just happened to be from Bosnia, and an Islamic.
Now that the trash is out for all to see in the ranting Cho video, we should be able to see if there is anything that would indicate potential that Mr. Cho may have converted to Islam or had pro-Islamofacist statements.
As noted, NBC made a bad decision, maybe they need to release just a little more to end this speculation.

Hooray For Fox!

A big HOORAY! for the Fox News Channel for making a right editorial decision to stop showing the video of mass murderer Cho Seung-Hui ranting about those he feels wronged him in life.
Shepherd Smith made the announcement just hours ago.
FNC is criticized for a lot, some rightfully some just because the left does not like FNC, but this is a right decision. It should not have been aired at this time, if at all.
Sometimes, ratings are not always worth the cost of dignity and grace, something that NBC news failed to show in this instance.

Remember, The Jihadists Watch TV Too

A random thought about the nauseating decision on the part of NBC news to show any portion of the video rantings of Virginia Tech massacreer Cho Seung-Hui.
Do they think that the majority of Americans want to see such garbage? Apparently so for according to the Drudge Report NBC news lead the ratings race on Wednesday evening according to the preliminary Nielsen ratings.
Are ratings that important if the network might have taken an even further look and realized that the Islamofacist terrorists also watch TV? I mean, they are looking at how this is covered in all ways. Some journalists refer to the massacre as a "tragedy" and others use such words as "massacre", as I do. Many of the same journalists also referred to the 9/11 attacks as a "tragedy". By airing the ranting video, NBC is saying, do something out of this world, make a video diatribe and we will "agonize" over it and put portions of it on the airwaves.
I think that when there is a next terrorist attack against the United States, the terrorists will learn from this and make their own video nonsense and one can only wonder if it will end.
NBC news could have at the very least waited until the first of the killed students bodies were buried to air any of the video, but ratings seemed more important. Decency never seems to get in the way of a buck.
It is a good thing that some of the victims families pulled out of an interview with NBC news. That will send a powerful message.
Unfortunately, another powerful message is, commit mass murder, make a video and send it to NBC. I am afraid the Islamofacists will next time.

Wednesday, April 18, 2007

Bad Move By NBC

I think the decision by NBC news to release the horrific video of the Virginia Tech mass murderer, Cho Seung-Hui, was a very serious mistake.
I have watched excerpts of it because there is no escaping it, especially in cable newsland. It is very disturbing. But worse, it shows what a dangerous cretin like Mr. Cho could do and still get his reward in the end. Who knows how many other people on the edge as clearly Mr. Cho was will watch this and get ideas?
Clearly from the video rantings and written "manifesto", Mr. Cho was a very mentally disturbed young man. But, we can not forget that not only did he have the presence of mind to begin the rampage on Monday, but when he went for the big take down after killing the two students in one building, he went to the second and made sure that there was no way for the victims to escape. Mr. Cho chained at least two exit doors shut from the inside. A total crazy would not have thought it out so clearly.
If what is coming out about Mr. Cho's run ins with the law and even being put in a mental facility at least twice, then the whole system let us down. There had to be a total breakdown not to have Mr. Cho permanently committed.
But for a once respected network to not use some editorial judgement as was the case with NBC news in airing the demented videos, we may only be waiting for the next massacre to occur. Sometimes, ratings are not as important as common sense.

Supremes Get One Right On Partial Birth Abortion

In a 5-4 ruling today, the United States supreme court upheld the partial birth abortion law passed by congress in 2003 and signed by President Bush. I say HOORAY!
This ruling may be the beginning of the end of the fateful Roe vs. Wade decision that made abortion a legal "right" that no state could change. The original ruling was flawed on many levels, but one of the most grievous is usurping the right of the states to determine these matters.
If by chance Roe vs. Wade is indeed overturned, here is a fact. It WILL NOT change most abortion laws in most of the states. All it will do is restore the right of the 50 individual states to determine what abortion laws should be. So, in a state such as California or New York, it will be more than likely the laws will be very liberal and abortion will be legal in those states. In Louisiana or Alabama, more than likely laws will be put in place to restrict abortion or outlaw it completely.
That is the way our founding fathers wanted it, like it or not. Those who feel strongly about abortion, one way or the other, would be on record if Roe vs. Wade is overturned. If those who feel strongly about having abortion legalized, then they can take the constitutional amendment route. Those who want abortion restricted or outright banned, they will have to put their money where their mouths are. All involved in the abortion debate have hidden around the courts, not taken a stand in the legislative process. That would change if Roe vs. Wade is overturned.
Let us hope that in fact, Roe vs. Wade is overturned eventually by the supreme court and constitutional government is restored. Hopefully today's supreme court decision will lead the court in that direction.

Where Is Ward Churchill?

I have a question regarding the Virginia Tech University massacre that took place this past Monday. Where is "Professor" Ward Churchill to offer his salient commentary?
You may remember ol' Ward as the "professor" from the University of Colorado who commented that the victims of the 9/11 terrorist attacks where "little Eichmans sitting at their desks" and other choice commentary. The "professor" implied that the victims where not victims at all.
So, Mr. Churchill, what are your thoughts on this matter? I mean is it too close to home-academia-that it is too overwhelming for you to comment? Do you think that those killed are victims or "little Eichmans?" What about the murderer, Cho Seung-Hui? He is a victim in the good "professor's" mind? I am waiting for his comments.
Somehow, I do not think we will be hearing anything from the "professor" as I think he has no words that will make sense. But, he sure shot off his mouth about those who died on 9/11. It is, I am afraid, typical of those on the left to slam what they do not understand or like but be silent when it hits home.
I am waiting for you Mr. Churchill.

Tuesday, April 17, 2007

Thoughts About The Virginia Tech Carnage

I have some random thoughts about the massacre of 32 students yesterday at Virginia Tech University in Blacksburg, VA. I waited until today until there was more substantiated information rather than the conjecture that often occurs in the minutes and hours after an event of this magnitude.
Firstly, this is NOT a tragedy. A tragedy is a natural disaster. When a clearly unstable individual takes guns and murders 32 people and then, cowardly, takes said gun and blows his head off, it is murder, pure, plain and simple. Someone needs to get that through the many correspondents of the DDBMSM that keep calling this a tragedy. It was a massacre.
Secondly, there will be plenty of time to debate the merits, or lack thereof, of gun control. Now is not that time as the emotions of those involved and not directly involved are all over the place. Rightly or wrongly, the mass murderer, a South Korean born Cho Seung-Hui, apparently bought the guns used in the carnage legally. Authorities are clearly doing a through investigation and it seems that Mr. Cho did buy his weapons of death legally. Let us wait until all of our emotions are in a better state to make the gun control debate.
Thirdly, people like Michael Daly who write clearly insensitive columns trying to link guns purchased in Virginia to crime in New York need to cool it. People are rightfully grieving and your horribly insulting column is why average people are turned off from the DDBMSM who have nothing better to do than to kick people when they are done. How would Mr. Daly have liked if someone in the immediacy of 9/11 wrote a column about how maybe New York City brought on the terrorist attacks? We do not need vindictiveness like that of Mr. Daly and how dare the New York Daily News print such garbage.
Forth, there are clearly a lot of young people and even professors who were heroes yesterday. Those people I personally salute and hope they are honored in some way.
Which leads to this. There are many who criticize the campus police and school administration as to how this happened. Let us remember, Virginia Tech is a small city with as many as 26,000 students and university staff. The campus police is not that large and while they were investigating the original murder of the two in a separate dorm hall, realize that was probably a diversion by the murderer Mr. Cho. It worked. Campus police are clearly not prepared for an event of this magnitude. Let the overall investigation take its course before slamming the police and administrators.
If there is any moment to pray to almighty God for guidance, now is it. I know that God is crying now to think one of his creation would do something this evil. But out of this will, and already has, come some good.
This is clearly the worst mass murder in United States history and we will be talking about this for days to come.

More Imus Flap-Sorry

I know, I said that I would not comment anymore on the Don Imus fiasco, but there is something to say about what Mr. Imus said before the infamous comment that got him thrown off the air.
In yesterday's New York Post, sports columnist Phil Mushnick had some interesting information regarding one of the recruits of now hero Rutgers women's basketball coach C. Vivian Stringer.
Ever heard of Shalicia Hurns? Well, she is a real winner. Miss Hurns had been thrown out of two other colleges and in one instance, she was arrested for drugs and a hit-and-runs accident. So, of course Miss Stringer went after this stellar athlete. Well, Miss Hurns did not even finish the season. She was arrested, again, this time for holding a girlfriend as a hostage. And to boot, the hostage was bound. As if that was not enough, the coach was not apologetic at all.
Miss Stringer told USA Today at the time, "I am not calling it a mistake. I don't apologize for anything."
WOW! Maybe Mr. Imus should have taken this approach when ol' "Reverend" Al went after his job. If the I-team did a little research, maybe this would not have deteriorated into the fiasco that it became.
One lesson about this mess. We should not make heroes out of those that are not all that clean. Miss Stringer should not have been so elevated. But it does not excuse Mr. Imus for the outrageous comments.
I wish that all of this was on the table before everyone had their say and it may have put the overall comments in a different light.

Friday, April 13, 2007

rel="me"> Technorati Profile

You Thought I Was Kidding About Imus Being A Friend Of The Left

If you thought that I was exaggerating or outright lying about former radio talk show host Don Imus being a friend of the left, see this article in today's Los Angeles Times
Now, where do Democrats have to go to hawk their wares? I suppose any of the other friendly outfits like, oh NBC, ABC, CBS, PBS, CNN, MSNBC, NPR, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times.

Tattoo Culture

In the Don Imus flap, one thing that seems to have escaped everyone is the fact that he referenced that some of the Rutgers women's basketball team members had tattoos. Then, as Paul Harvey/Fred Thompson might say, you know the rest of the story.
I think that the real issue should be the fact that young women as well as young men feel that it is cool to have a body full of tattoos and even piercings.
The truth is that tattoos and piercings are disgusting and show that these predominantly young people really do not care about their bodies.
The reason I have such a harsh view about this so-called body art is for one thing, most of it is not art. It is intentionally putting a design on a part of the body to have people look at you. Why then do men have tattoos all up and down their arms and legs? Or young girls who put tattoos on their backs right above the butt crack and wear tops that expose it? Or on their legs and even now a days, their feet? Men seem to put piercings everywhere, but women have special spots. Most predominate these days is the belly button. So, a young girl can have a two-for-0ne, a belly button piercing and that goes with the tattoo right above the butt crack.
Clearly, tattoos and piercings are a sign of immaturity. It shows a lack of self control which is rampant in the modern culture. It is also a sign of young people wanting to draw attention to themselves and then crying when someone does, particularly young girls that are ogled by young boys.
All that is true. But where does this come from?
When I was growing up not to long ago, there were several signs that were, rightfully, negative about tatts and piercings:
* Tattoos were usually on criminals or gangbangers.
* Tattoos were also on members who served in the armed forces, got drunk and many years later wish they never had gotten it or them in the first place.
* Tattoos were usually on people who were in the lower echelons of society.
Now I know that the last one is a harsh assessment, but it is accurate.
Now, if a young person DOES NOT have a tatt or a variety of piercings, they are seen as outcasts.
One of the reasons that young people will offer as to why they got the tatt or piercings in the first place is free and self expression. Well, once a slew of people do the same thing, it is no longer free and self expression but a matter of trying to fit in.
I also admit, I do not look at someone with a tatt or slew of piercings in a positive light. Usually they are tough and angry looking. Not all, but many.
One positive thing that happened recently is the Marines now have guidelines as to how far a tatt can go. There was some criticism, but they are right. The Marines have standards and this is where they apply them and if you don't like it, then you should not have joined in the first place.
That leads to employment. If a company has a certain dress code, what if they say no tatts or piercings can be showing? That is and should be their right. But of course, activists would say that there should be no standards in the first place. Some business, like being a lawyer or doctor require and certain look. Having your lawyer come to see you in a slew of tatts and piercings may make you think twice. And, you should.
Parents, the religious community and others must impress on young people to treat their bodies with respect. They will then treat others with respect and there may not be as much hostility between young and old.
Maybe this can be talked about and that would be a good thing about the side story of the Don Imus controversy.

More On Imus If You Can't Get Enough

If you are not tired of the Don Imus controversy, go over to Townhall There is a slew of columns over this controversy.
I have said all I can for now. There is another aspect of this that I will address in a later post. The issue of tattoos and piercings in today's culture. I think that is the most overlooked aspect of this story.

Thursday, April 12, 2007

The Plight Of Lebanese Christians

An issue that seems to be lost in all the news of the Mideast and the War Against Terror is the seemingly successful driving of Christians out of Lebanon.
In a recent article in the Washington Times National Edition, it is estimated that the Christian population of Lebanon is now 22%. as recently as 1970, the Christian population was well over 50%. The significance is what was the only majority Christian Arab nation in the Mideast is on its way to oblivion and that is a blow in fighting the Jihadists.
The drama all started when the Palestine Liberation Organization, which was kicked out of Jordan in 1970 set up shop in Beirut. They brought along many Islamic, so-called Palestinians and began changing the population of Lebanon. This is a direct cause of the Lebanese civil war of 1974-90. The tragedy of that is that the West abandoned its natural ally, the Christian Lebanese and tried, again and again to broker a "peace deal." The eventual result was Syria, which has always thought of Lebanon the way Red China thinks of the Republic of China (Taiwan)-a renegade province, came in with 25,000 troops and brought eventual order to chaos.
In the meantime, radical Shi'ites rallied around the Hezbollah banner and eventually, it became a state within a state. In the meantime, during and after the civil war, thousands of Christians fled Lebanon, which of course began to give Islamic Arabs an advantage. Since Syria has supposedly left Lebanon, some well thought political leaders, including a popular Sunni prime minister and another Christian cabinet member were assassinated. This has led to more and more Christians fleeing, worrying about a new civil war between Sunnis and Shi'ite Islamics.
The world seems to not care about the plight of Christians in Lebanon. As the celebrity class tells us that the slaughter in Darfur in the Sudan is what we should be worrying about, they are very silent about the systematic destabilizing of the only civilized group in Lebanon. Of course these same celebrities were very silent when the same Sudanese were fighting Christians in southern Sudan for almost 30 years. I do not mean to downplay Darfur, but this is just as much something we should worry about because if the Lebanese Christians are put in the same fate as the Coptic Christians in Egypt, there will be no strong Western presence in the Mideast.
The United States needs to stop this bleeding of the Christians from Lebanon. It must begin by recognizing that Hezbollah needs to be destroyed and new leadership must occur that recognizes all religious groups as equal and a strong central government must be installed. After all, it would be the second democracy in the Mideast and possibly a bulwark against Syria and yes Iran.
If Christians are forced from the cradle of the faith, we will have to share some of the blame.

I'm Glad Imus Got His-Sort Of

Today, the final nail has been shut on the Don Imus broadcast coffin as CBS Radio fired him, effective immediately.
To be honest, I am very surprised this happened. My feelings are mixed. As noted, he is a friend of the left, so in that respect, I am glad one of their own was finally nailed. But, because Mr. Imus has said so much worse and never called on the carpet, this should have been another par for the course.
Does anyone remember when he emceed the White House Broadcasters Dinner towards the end of Bill Clinton's presidency? He made some very inappropriate comments about the president and impeachment and the "sex" scandal. Even though I did find them funny, it was the wrong place at the wrong time. What happened? Nothing. Mr. Imus went on his merry way.
In any given Imus In The Morning show, he would mock anyone, including Bill Clinton, Mike Tyson, General George S. Patton, and an endless list.
But now, suddenly, he went to far. He insulted the Rutgers University women's basketball team.
One thing should be noted. Not all those on the team were Black. But, that is not what is important. What is important is that Mr. Imus should have NEVER said what he said. PERIOD!
But I do not think that he should have been fired. This is pointless because he can now go on satellite radio and call these women much worse than, well you know.
A longer suspension would have been right.
One thing on the women basketball players. I think anyone who says that this scars them for life are in for a rude awakening. Life is sometimes very hard and worse, unfair. If any of these women sign on to the WNBA, they will be treated worse on an ongoing basis by fans and sports writers and broadcasters.
Where Mr. Imus went wrong was bowing to kiss the feet of the "Reverend" Al Sharpton. That I believe was the beginning of the end.
Now, maybe we can really use this as a learning experience and talk seriously about racism, sexism, misogyny and things are pervasive in our society. I guess we should thank Don Imus for that.

Wednesday, April 11, 2007

Romney Calls For 100,000 More Troops

Mitt Romney is calling for an increase in the size of the armed forces by 100,000 and increasing overall defense spending. That is good news.
It shows that Mr. Romney is serious about using the military to continue the War Against Terror. Also, there are many other threats that mean our armed forces must be at top strength to meet the challenges of the 21st century.
If this is not a Reagan like call to arms to meet our threats, I do not know what is.

A Friend Of The Left Finally Gets His

Well, now MSNBC is dropping its live simulcast of the beleaguered Don Imus radio show. It was on Monday through Friday 3-6am, Pacific Time. I guess it is just a matter of time before he loses his radio gig with CBS.
Two things that should put this to rest.
First, it is about time that a liberal-leaning sycophant finally got nailed for making moronic comments on air. Rush Limbaugh and Michael Savage must be laughing at this. They should. They were victims of the PC police. Until now, the PC police radar was only aimed at conservatives. Now a friend of the left got his. It is about time. However, I think this is just a once in a lifetime event. I think that when ABC drops Rosie O'Donnell from The View, then fairness will have prevailed.
Secondly, if Mr. Imus is sacked by CBS radio, all he will do is take the Howard Stern route and go on satellite radio where there are no speech restrictions. He may end up coming out ahead in this mess. I think that he did himself no favors by grovelling at the feet of "Reverend" Al Sharpton for forgiveness.
Maybe those on the left who love political correctness when it is against conservatives will come on our side and go after those like Rosie O'Donnell. But I will not hold my breath.

Republican Presidential Straw Poll Results

The voting is closed and here are the results of the first 2007 Republican Presidential Straw Poll:
Mitt Romney 3
John Mc Cain 2
Rudy Giuliani 1
Ron Paul 1
Undecided 1
Thank you to all that participated and next time I hope more of you participate.

Liberal Journalists Will Never Give Reagan Credit For Ending Cold War

Yesterday on Hugh Hewitt's radio program, Hugh spoke with Washington Post columnist E. J. Dionne, a unrepentant liberal.
In a portion of the interview, when talking about the Cold War, Mr. Dionne gives a lot of credit to President Truman, and rightfully so, for beginning the policy of containment against the then Soviet Union. But, he gives no credit to President Reagan for instituting a then new paradigm of defeating the Soviet Union. It is that policy that led to the end of the Soviet Union and the communist iron curtain over eastern Europe. It is not as Mr. Dionne put it containment and President Nixon's horrible policy of detente that led to the expanse of the Soviet empire.
That is the way liberal America looks at how the Soviet Union fell. No credit to Ronald Reagan whatsoever. In fact, liberals will argue that Mr. Reagan did nothing to end Soviet communism.
Here are the facts.
Under Ronald Reagan, the Soviet Union did not gain access to one inch of land beyond what they already controlled. The invasion of Greneda in the Caribbean to stop communist Cuba from exerting further power as a client state to the Soviet Union. Under Ronald Reagan, there was support of freedom fighters everywhere in the world. Even to the extent of his near impeachment over the so-called Iran-Contra affair. The United States built up our military to counter the Soviet threat. The military build up showed that a free market economy, ours, could bankrupt a state-planned economy, the Soviet Union. And during the build up, the United States economy bloomed.
Do people like Mr. Dionne not see the facts or are they blinded by their ideology so much, they can not give at least some credit to Mr. Reagan for the true beginning of the end of Soviet communism?
Here is a clue. Mr. Dionne told Mr. Hewitt that the only Republican candidate for president he considered, note considered, voting for was Gerald Ford. Mr. Ford was a nice guy, became president at the right time and was the right man for the job at the time.
All this is in context to how the liberals-really socialists today-want to deal with the threat of radical Islamofacists that are not really interested in negotiating the demise of the West, Christianity and democracy.
People like Mr. Dionne, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and the like think that we really can negotiate our way to peace with these groups. Mrs. Pelosi has said she would go to Iran ASAP if it would lead to "dialogue", what ever that means.
I think that Mr. Dionne is probably a nice fellow, but wrong about the Cold War and needs to give some credit to Ronald Reagan and the policy of defeating the Soviet Union rather than containment and detente.

If They Would Only Do This Today

Here is a blurb from a 2007 calendar entry for April 9, 2007:
April 7, 1807:
New York City passed a bill that the mayor can be paid no more than $500 a year.
Oh, do I wish that our legislators would do this today!
Instead, they look to being in government as a career and how to line their pockets with cash and other goodies. And worse, they try to tell us that they need the pay and goodies because they can not survive on the salary and benefits accorded to them.
Here is a clue. One should get some experience in the private sector, put some of that money away for the future and then run for office out of doing a public service, not a public fleecing. We would get better government from people that have actual real world experience.
Won't happen in my lifetime!

Tuesday, April 10, 2007

Surprised Imus Got ANY Punishment

I have to admit, I am very surprised that radio talker Don Imus got ANY punishment for his racist remarks regarding the Rutgers women's basketball team.
I will not rehash the remarks but allude to the dead giveaway as to why Mr. Imus was suspended for two weeks. Mr. Imus went to beg forgiveness from the "Reverend" Al Sharpton.
Essentially, the "Reverend" Al did not give him forgiveness. After two hours on the air, "Reverend" Sharpton said that Mr. Imus should still be fired.
Well, the powers that be on CBS Radio and MSNBC had to do something. If they did nothing, the outrage among the race hucksters would grow and even his friends in the DDBMSM would not be able to cover him.
So, they give him a slap on the wrist. There is no indication if the suspension is with or without pay.
Again, I do not think this rises to level above any of the numerous remarks he has made about many groups over the years that Mr. Imus has said on his broadcast. But, the fair thing to do would be to fire him. Because by not firing Mr. Imus, the DDBMSM is covering because he is one of them.
And that is where all this lies. Mr. Imus will get to go to his ranch for children with cancer in New Mexico, beg more forgiveness and will keep his job. Again, I ask, have you seen Rush Limbaugh on Monday Night Football? Or Michael Savage on MSNBC? Because they made bad comments and are on the right.

Monday, April 09, 2007

Wrong About Imus-Somewhat

I guess I am wrong about the reaction to the tasteless Don Imus joke about the Rutgers women's basketball team.
I will not rehash it all, see my earlier post on the subject.
But, it is the usual race hucksters like the "Reverend" Al Sharpton-who should be in jail for lying about Tawana Brawley-and the "Reverend" Jesse Jackson are commenting on it. And today, Mr. Imus is going on Mr. Sharpton's radio show to beg forgiveness for being racially insensitive.
I for one kind of like Don Imus. Yea, he is pretty much a liberal. After all, to regurgitate an Imus phrase, he was Sen. John Kerry's (D-Ma) "butt boy" during the 2004 election. Sen. Kerry could have opened up a campaign office in the Imus studio. But, he says outrageous things. What he did and said during the aforementioned broadcast was what he and his crew do any given morning. To be honest, I have heard much worse on any given morning when we used to get the broadcast in the Los Angeles market.
I am not totally sold on the criticism of Mr. Imus. Until the rest of the mainstream media jumps on the Imus should be fired bandwagon, then it is the usual suspects. And thus, somehow this will be swept under the rug. Why after all, Mr. Imus is going to beg for Mr. Sharpton's forgivness. He should tell Mr. Sharpton that he belongs in jail for perjury for knowingly ruining the lives of numerous New York City police officers regarding the "rape" of Tawany Brawley. Something we now know never happened. But that will not happen. Mr. Imus will go on, beg forgiveness and the media will pat him on the head like a dog and he will go on.
Too bad that would not be the case for any given conservative talk show host who may have done the same thing.

Saturday, April 07, 2007

Nappy Headed Hoes And Double Standards

I am fascinated that radio talk show host Don Imus said something outrageous, nothing unusual there, that he apologized for and our friends in the DDBMSM (that is for the Dinosaur, Drive-by, mainstream media) want to let it go.
But I will not.
Substitute Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, Laura Ingraham, Michael Medved, or any of the other conservative radio talkers for Mr. Imus and you would get "righteous" indignation and calls to remove them from the air and among the wild eyed radicals prosecute under hate speech laws.
So, what did Mr. Imus say?
He referred to the Rutgers women's basketball team as "Nappy headed hoes" while being eked on by his producer. Before that he said that they looked rough because they had tattoos and were being compared to the NBA Toronto Raptors who have eight black players.
Wow! Where do we start?
To be fair, a radical black group of journalists did call for Mr. Imus to be fired.
But, again, if it were any of the aforementioned conservatives, this would be front page news and the lead story on the nightly news programs.
But, the DDBMSM covers for each other. Oh, its Imus they will say. He says a lot worse on a daily basis.
Maybe true, but that is not an excuse for double standard.
Do you see Rush on Monday Night Football anymore? Of course not because he made a serious analysis of Philadelphia Eagle quarterback Donovan McNab being black and he eventually got shoved aside. Serious analysis gets you thrown off the air. Outright racial slurs get an "I'm sorry" and a pat on the back by the DDBMSM.
We do live in a society full of double standards and many apply to conservatives, but in reality they are on all sides and in all aspects of life. That is why when there are those double standards, they need to be exposed. This is a case of one needing to be exposed.
To be honest, if it is done in humor, I have no problem with it. Most humor is done in fact at someone's expense. But, if it is a pattern of racially based slams, it is not funny and there should be some kind of punishment that takes place.
Don Imus is kind of out there anyway, but he does not get a pass on this one. You can't call black, female basketball players as "Nappy headed hoes" and a lot of guffaws and no accountability. It sure would happen to a conservative host. Ask Michael Savage and Rush Limbaugh.

Friday, April 06, 2007

And Being A Prisoner of War Is NOT An International Incident?

I am grateful that the 15 British sailors and marines who were taken prisoners by the Iranian navy were released. But, why were they captured in the first place?
Well, the sailors basically said today in a press conference that they had no choice. Their main ship, the HMS Cornwall took off and hung them out to dry.
But what really makes me perplexed is the comment of British Royal Marine, Capt. Chris Air. He said the following,
We were completely surrounded, and in addition to loss of life, and attempt to fight back would have caused a major international incident and an escalation of tension within the region.
So, Capt. Air, does giving in and being taken as, essentially, a prisoner of war NOT constitute an international incident?
Of course it does. I think that the problem was that the British navy and the rest of the British armed forces are under bizarre rules of engagement that allowed this to happen in the first place.
Why did the Cornwell not go up against these Iranian naval pirates? They would have in a different time and place.
There is why these sailors and marines were taken in the first place.
Also, for a marine to make that astonishing statement is really bizarre. I mean, marines are the fiercest fighters in any nation's armed forces. In this case, they folded.
I don't actually blame them. I mean, when you are not even backed up by the big boys, so to speak, why should they risk their lives and fight back? And if the rules of engagement are to fold under these circumstances, will this not happen again?
That is the real question. I don't have a definitive answer.
But, I know this. We can not fight a serious war with the Islamofacists and their allies-and do not believe that Iran does not side with the Jihadists against the West-then we will see this happen again and yes, it is humiliating and yes it is a green light to the enemy.
Let us be clear, whether they chose to fight or not, being taken a prisoner by a hostile regime does constitute an international incident.

Thursday, April 05, 2007

Why Do We Not Hear Of The Democrat Congress Abysmal Ratings?

In a post last Thursday on the Democrat congress overall polling numbers not being much better than when the Republicans where in charge last year at this time, I noted we do not hear much about that.
It seems like last year at this time, there was not a day that went by and a new poll cropped up at how awful things were in the United States under the Republican control of both the executive and legislative branches of government. We were led to believe that life was so awful, the public could not wait to throw the Republicans out and give the Dems 50 plus seats in the House of Representatives, maybe even 10 in the Senate.
Of course, that did not happen and with not so great polling numbers, the Republicans did not do that badly, only losing 30 house seats and six senate seats.
But, where is the cry about the rising gas prices? How about the economy going down the toilet? The wild fluctuations of the stock market? The highest home foreclosure rates in years?
As I suspect, the media will not talk about any of these issues the Democrats brought up in last year's mid term election. That would hurt the Dems, and that can not happen now. The United States is simply counting down the seconds to rid us of the Bush era and coronate any Dem to the presidency.
As I write, don't hold your breath to get the truth about what the public thinks of the Democrats in control of congress. Oh yes, the latest poll from AP/Ipsos has a 40-57 percent positive/negative congressional rating.

I May Be Right About McCain

Before you read on, please see my post on the "candidacy" of Sen. John McCain for president. (See post under 02/27/07)
I predicted that Sen. McCain may not run for president.
Fast forward to today and look at National Review under "I'm not putting money on this."
Craig Crawford of the Hotline is now running that as speculation. But the fact is, Sen. McCain is just not doing all that well with money or polling data.
I still say that Sen. McCain will not run for president. I also do not think he will endorse a candidate.
I wonder where all the Senator's support will go? I think it will go to Mitt Romney. I don't think Sen. McCain wants to see his supporter back a loser in Rudy Guiliani or a second-tier candidate. We shall see.

Why I Can Not Support Rudy-Now

I must confess before I go on. If by some miracle, Rudy Giuliani is nominated by the Republican party for president, I will vote for him over any Democrat. Period. But, I do not or can not support him for the GOP nomination.
I am, at best, a nominal supporter of Mitt Romney. I see him as the best of the top tier in the race. Yea, I know it seems like he is suddenly supporting every social conservative cause known to man when as he ran for the senate in 1994 and governor in 2002 in Massachusetts, he ran as a social moderate at best. Has anyone thought that maybe, because he was running in his adopted home state that he would be an absolute loser running as a social conservative? Anyway, back to the point.
I think that Rudy was a great mayor of New York City. For New York City, he was about as conservative as one could be and run a respectable and even twice winning campaign. But he ran three times as a Republican (he lost in 1989 to David Dinkins) for mayor. So, when he won in 1993, what does he do? He endorses, very enthusiastically the reelection of...Mario Cuomo as governor. Yes, that Mario Cuomo, who was Democrat enemy number one in those days. Now, having seen what kind of governor Republican George Pataki was, Mr. Giuliani should not have endorsed anyone in the race in 1994. Yes, I know that Mr. Romney, who was a registered independent at the time and NOT an elected official, gave money to Democrat Paul Tsongas, a fellow Bay Stater but a Democrat, when he was running for president in 1992. But, again, Mr. Romney was not an elected Republican.
Rudy also supports gun control that goes beyond "assault weapons." He supports handgun control. After all, in states that have conceal carry laws, violent crime is lower. Most of those have handguns. He has not spoken much on that issue, but it will be something he will have to come to terms with as the campaign gets into full gear.
Rudy is "pro choice" on abortion. But it is not just that he is "pro choice" but said, as recently as yesterday, that he supports public-read taxpayer-funded abortions. Today, he said he wants to leave it up to the states and he will appoint strict constructionists to the federal courts. If Roe vs. Wade was overturned tomorrow, that is exactly what would happen. It would return the abortion issue to the states and they would get to decide abortion laws. The inconsistency on this issue makes it very hard to get the overwhelming pro life GOP primary voter to get a straight answer on this issue. It is like he is following one William Jefferson Blythe Clinton and trying a little triangulation on abortion. It won't work.
Rudy has not said he will CUT government, but make it run more efficiently. That is when a Republican says that they can run the welfare state more efficiently. When then congressman Newt Gingrich spoke of Sen. Bob Dole as the tax collector for the welfare state, all you have to do is put Mr. Guiliani's name for Mr. Dole.
Where there is agreement and why, if Mr. Guiliani is the GOP presidential nominee, is how he would fight the War Against Terror. He would fight it in the same manner as President Bush. He will go after the terrorists there in the Middle East and where ever they are trying to run there camps and the like.
Here is the thing. I don't think that because, even on the primary issue of the day, Republicans should turn their backs on all Ronald Reagan achieved in transforming the Republican party from moderate welfare staters and internationalist to a conservative, small government, nationalist party. Ronald Reagan was as and more conservative as President Bush (43) and won two national elections in landslides. Mr. Reagan showed by standing by principles, it can be done. The Republican party can not throw all that away in thinking with a moderate GOPer they can keep the White House. History proves that wrong.
That is why I tacitly support Mr. Romney. He actually cut government in blue as blue can get Massachusetts and when the State Supreme Court legislated same-sex marriage, he did all he could to get it on the ballot for the voters to decide. He has come around on abortion, as did Mr. Reagan. After all, Mr. Reagan was the most eloquent defender of life in the secular world. Mr. Reagan was ahead of his time.
But, compared to any Democrat, I would vote for Mr. Guiliani. I will do all I can to see that I won't have to make that choice.

Wednesday, April 04, 2007

Rosie O'Donnell, Queen Of The Whackjobs

You know Rosie O'Donnell, don't you?
She once was a funny comedienne. She once had her own daytime talk show on television and she was know as the "Queen of Nice"
Now, Miss O'Donnell is a co-host of ABC television's The View along with Joy Behar, Elisabeth Hasselback, wife of Seattle SeaHawk quarterback Matt Hasselback and occasionally Barbara Walters, the one who started this show aimed at stay at home mom types.
Miss O'Donnell has gone from the Queen of Nice to the Queen of the Whack jobs because, among the choicest of so many choice comments she has made in recent months, she actually believes that at least part of the 9/11 attacks may have not been committed by 19 Islamic radicals flying planes into buildings and killing nearly 3,000 people in New York City and Washington DC.
She has now joined about 30 percent of the American public that, if they do not believe in part but all of what happened on 9/11/01 was not a terrorist attack against the United States, but some kind of government/business conspiracy to begin the War Against Terror.
There are too many theories to go into, but it is what Miss O'Donnell refers to that is so, well appalling.
She claims that World Trade Center building seven, which eventually caught fire and burned to the ground could not have happened that way. She claims, with a straight face, that it is the first time in history that fire burned steel, thus causing the building to collapse. While she has no evidence as to any other reason, at least she does not pontificate publicly, here is a news flash. Steel becomes steel because of...FIRE! That is how the steel is MELTED down and formed.
There is a lot more, but what is troubling is that her claim goes unchecked. Yes, Mrs. Hasselback is a conservative Republican, but she is no match against lefty's Miss O'Donnell and Joy Behar.
And that, in America passes as fair and balanced on networks like ABC. Two liberal loudmouths with no facts against a sweet, nice conservative.
But, it is really sad that Miss O'Donnell has bought into the conspiracy theory of history.
I like a good conspiracy as the next guy, and it usually has a plausable possibility, but that is what makes the theory unrealistic. If there was this conspiracy, someone would come forward. Remember, this could be a government plot and if there is one group of people that can't keep a secret, it is the government.
Miss O'Donnell can be a socialist-lib all she wants, but it is when she joins the fever swamps of the left that she loses credibility. It all goes back to a serious fact about socialist-libs. They do not like facts. They like feeling. Thus, all her latest rants and raves are how she feels not driven by facts. She does not think things through. If she did, she would not be using The View to spread such vile. It sullies those who died on 9/11 through no fault of their own.
My advice to Rosie. Please come back to reality. Stop with going to the fever swamps. I think you are better than that.