Dionne’s Non-Intellect, Non-Accuracy, Non-Argument

Well, here we go again, one of my all-time Democrat Shills telling lies and distorting facts to suit his back-room buddies like Soros, and Reid. Once more one of the self-nominated “tellers of truths” seems not to know what the word even means. It is hard to fathom that anyone who has observed the “conversation” on Iraq over the past four years could lay the blame for “petty partisan squabble” at the feet of the President and Vice-President.A more laughable assertion can’t possibly be made. Certainly Mr. Dionne must have been laughing himself into hysterics when he wrote this article; either that or he is more than intellectually challenged.

Such hubris has become the routine fare served up by the Democrat shills (or poseurs) in the Paleo-media. Such blatently dishonest assertions are one of the prime reasons for the failing fortunes of those once bastions of jaded journalism. Liberals have always been Narcissistic and arrogant, but only recently have they become so blatent in their disregard for the truth, and so transparent in their motives.

Blaming President Bush for the “partisan nature” of the national political discourse, is like blaming the victim of an assassin’s bullet. The Democrats, from the very first day of this President’s first term in office, have been engaged in a never-ending full scale war against the President and any and all of his initiatives, his person, his family, and his administration.

Anyway, here’s Dionne latest pile of bovine manure:

Bush’s Non-Argument

By E. J. Dionne Jr.
Friday, April 27, 2007; Page A23

President Bush and Vice President Cheney cannot make the case that their Iraq policies have succeeded, so they are doing one thing they do very well: taking a serious argument over the future of American foreign policy and turning it into a petty partisan squabble.

This is not really an argument over the “surge” of troops into Iraq. It is a fight over whether we want to make an open-ended commitment to keeping combat forces in Iraq for many years or whether we anticipate pulling most of them out within a year or two.

Even if the surge succeeds in a narrow sense — by reducing the number of Iraqis killed in sectarian violence in Baghdad — there is no guarantee that the overall situation in Iraq will be any better, no guarantee that Iraqi leaders will take the political steps necessary to end the internecine killing and create a stable government, no guarantee that we will make progress against al-Qaeda.

Although he conveniently appeared in Washington as Congress was voting on war appropriations, Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, did not play politics Wednesday in assessing the situation there. He spoke, rightly, of progress in Anbar province, a Sunni stronghold, but added “The ability of al-Qaeda to conduct horrific, sensational attacks obviously has represented a setback and is an area in which we are focusing considerable attention.”

Mr. Dionne, at no time did General David Patraeus imply that “the ability of al-Qaeda to conduct horrific, sensationalist attacks” was insurmountable. Nor did he at anytime suggest in any way that we were “in trouble” or “failing,” or in anyway in difficulty or in danger of losing…provided Congress doesn’t surrender before we succeed, as they are desperate to do.

You are correct about one thing, “This is not really an argument over the “surge” of troops into Iraq.” This is a battle over whether or not America will live up to our commitments regardless of the cost. This is a battle over whether or not America will surrender to a force which is determined, not to stop at the borders of Iraq or Afghanistan, but determined to destroy America and all that for which it stands. This is a battle against those who would see us fighting (or more likely surrendering to radical Islam rather than fighting) on our own streets rather than stopping an oppressive, aggressive and determined enemy before they have the opportunity to build a base of operations from which they will most certainly attack our nation and our allies…as they have already done.

Mr. Dionne goes on to state:

What Bush and Cheney are doing is not just wrong. It’s dangerous. If they were interested in success in Iraq, they would have turned down the partisan rhetoric long ago. A substantial majority now opposes their policies. The last thing the administration needs is more polarization, which clearly has not worked in its favor.

He would be correct, if it was the administration who initiated the “partisan rhetoric,” oh yeah, “long ago” instead of liars and shills like him and his Democrat managers.

It has long been an obvious trait of the Left that they feel entitled to launch any attack, make any criticism, make any assertion, without feeling any remorse or responsibility. They are so arrogant that they naturally assume that whatever they say, no matter how absurd or insincere, should be automatically accepted without comment. They routinely drop little political bombs into even their most casual conversations and take it as given that no one will object or disagree. After all, they are alway correct in their assessments.

This is why they become so indignant when they encounter someone who refuses to passively sit back and allow them to spout off without contradiction. I have experienced this reaction personally, numerous times, in the course of a casual conversation with my Liberal acquaintances and even those I consider to be close personal friends.

How dare I disagree with their Liberal world view? Well frankly, I just got tired of acquiescing to their constant, inane, presumptive, babble. I got tired of being condescended to while listening in polite silence…apparently President Bush and Vice-President Chenney have as well…I hope so. I hope other Conservatives will as well.

It is well past time for the Conservatives to follow the lead of people like Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, and Rush Limbaugh. Stop being polite. Stop listening to their lies without objecting. Dare to contradict their propaganda. You’d be amazed how good it feels to assert your own beliefs and how often it will completely set them back on their heels. Just be prepare for the verbal assault and insulting laughter of their disdain for your opinion; after all who are you to question their wisdom and natural superiority?

Long Live This American Republic!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Traitors, Cowards, and Liars in Democrat Congressional Leadership? Imagine That.

It now seems that the words of our Generals, and their expertise in conducting the war are being brushed aside by those cowardly Democrats who, rather than seeking a means of winning the war, have now voted to surrender to Al Qaeda, and Iran.

Treason is defined as providing aid and comfort to the enemy. The Democrat’s bill does precisely that. It is a bill of surrender, it is a bill of cowardice, it is…a confession of treason.

Be certain the the voices of our Democrat Party leadership are being heard, and heeded…not so much by Americans, as by the very people we are trying to defeat. I’ve repeated that statement here many times, as have many Conservative pundits in many venues; General Patraeus has once again said so in no uncertain terms.

The likes of Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi should be already up on charges of treason. Both should be forced to step down from their positions as leaders for violating their oaths of office. Attorney General Gonzales should be investigating Congressional Treason rather than answering inane questions from hypocritical jackasses posing for the cameras and hoping to get their pictures on the nightly news.

Anyway, here’s the sad tale coming out to the Washington Post:

House Passes Iraq Pullout Timetable

Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, April 26, 2007; Page A01

The House last night brushed aside weeks of angry White House rhetoric and veto threats to narrowly approve a $124 billion war spending bill that requires troop withdrawal from Iraq to begin by Oct. 1, with a goal of ending combat operations there by next March.

The Senate is expected to follow the House’s 218 to 208 vote with final passage today, completing work on the rarest of bills: legislation to try to end a major war as fighting still rages. Democrats hope to send the measure to the White House on Monday, almost exactly four years after President Bush declared an end to major combat in a speech aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln. That would be a particularly pungent political anniversary for Bush to deliver only the second veto of his presidency.

Last night’s vote came after a fiery, partisan debate that has grown familiar after months of wrangling, first over a nonbinding resolution opposing Bush’s troop increase, then over the largest war spending bill in U.S. history.

“How many more suicide bombs must kill American soldiers before this president offers a timeline for our troops to come home?” asked Rep. Patrick J. Murphy (D-Pa.), a freshman Iraq war veteran who lost nine fellow paratroopers this week in one of the deadliest attacks of the war. “How many more military leaders must declare the war will not be won militarily before this president demands that the Iraqis stand up and fight for their country? How many more terrorists will President Bush’s foreign policy breed before he focuses a new strategy, a real strategy? This bill says enough is enough.”

Not since the Vietnam War have I seen such an array of sellouts. Patrick Murphy may have done his duty, and for that I salute him, but that duty doesn’t have any more right to his opinion than does any other American citizen, nor does, or should, his words carry any more weight and perhaps less, seeing as how his vote sends the very people who killed his “fellow paratroopers” the message-

“Keep on fighting, the end is in sight. Keep on killing American soldiers, their leaders lack the will to persevere. The American politicians are more interested in keeping their fat posteriors in office than they are in helping Iraq to become a free and democratic nation.”

That’s right Patrick, you are sending these murderers a simple and very clear message, “KILL MORE AMERICAN TROOPS.” For the sake of your party, you are betraying the very men with whom you served. You are no different from John “the Gigolo” Kerry-Heinz in his treasonous and poisonous statements made before Congress during the Vietnam War. Your words are guaranteed to do just as much damage to the morale and survival of our troops as did his words 35 years ago.

I have no doubt that your intentions are to save the lives you believe are being wasted in Iraq, but as has been said so often, “the road to Hell is paved with good intentions.”

There is not nice, easy, simple solution to the situation in Iraq. God and everyone knows that if there was, President Bush and the Generals on the ground would be moving Earth and sky to do it, but there is not. This war, however ill-conceived it may have been, now has only two possible results, victory-defined as a stable, self-supporting, democratic government, able to deal with its defense problems both internal and external, or defeat-with our troops returning once more, as they did following Vietnam, with their heads low, their morale low, their self-esteem shot, and their confidence in themselves, their government, and in their fellow citizens shaken. No matter how much false pomp and celebration they receive, no matter what kudo’s they are given they, and the people showering them with praise will know that such praise is hollow and, at least from Liberals, insincere.

Once again, we-the American People, citizens of the Greatest Nation in the History of Man, the most generous, the most successful, the most caring nation in history-will fall into the morass which followed our abandonment of the Vietnamese people.

Remember the morale of your fellow citizens during the administrations of Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter. The future was deemed over for our civilization, survivalist cults and groups sprang up all over the country, and the President-if you could call him that informed us that there was a “malaise” over the nation (okay, I know he never used that word, but his speech was forever called the “malaise speech”). There has, from the very outset of this war been nothing but talk of defeat from these same bad actors.

It took a strong, determined, ideologically committed Conservative to rescue America from that terminal fate. It’s time for Conservatives to step forward once again.

Long Live the American Republic!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Virginia Tech Killings: Oh Goody, Another Investigative Panel

It never fails folks, let some tragedy occur and our "beloved" bureaucrats first thought is, "We need a panel to investigate this." Somehow I seem to suspect that Congress, both the House of Representatives and the Senate can't be far behind.

Folks, go ahead, appoint some "Blue Ribbon Panel of Experts;" Hell make it a Platinum Ribbon Panel, it will add nothing to the solution of this tragedy.

Place the same "brilliant" bureaucrats who came up with the idea, mostly endorsed and pushed by the simple-minded Liberals like those at the ACLU and other equally asinine, "enlightened groups," that it was in society's best interest to allow individuals deemed mentally deranged to roam the streets rather than being indefinitely detained, on a panel and ask them to please tell us how to prevent a repeat of the Virginia Tech tragedy.

The most probable result of such a boondoggle buzz session will be to point fingers where they already have been pointed, suggest the same old tired restrictions on gun ownership, and blame those who believe that freedom is more valuable than life.

Anyway, here's an excerpt from the Post's article (follow the link to read the rest of it):

Kaine Gives Panel Latitude to Probe Campus Killings

By Bill Turque and Sari Horwitz
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, April 20, 2007; Page A12

RICHMOND, April 19 -- Gov. Timothy M. Kaine on Thursday created an eight-member independent panel, including former U.S. homeland security secretary Tom Ridge, to review all aspects of the Virginia Tech massacre, from shooter Cho Seung Hui's medical history to the school's widely criticized delay in warning students of danger.

Earlier in the day, the director of Virginia Tech's counseling center disclosed that school officials had not been told about Cho's release from a mental health facility in December 2005 with a court order to seek counseling. School officials said no students had formally complained about Cho's behavior in the 15 months after his release from the facility in nearby Radford.

In Richmond, Kaine (D) announced the appointment of Ridge and five experts from medicine, law enforcement and education to the group, which will be headed by retired Virginia State Police superintendent W. Gerald Massengill. Two other members, a judge and an expert in victim services, will be added soon, he said.

Kaine and Massengill made it clear that the inquiry was designed not to affix blame for Monday's catastrophe but to understand its causes and put in place safeguards to reduce the chances of a recurrence.

Liberals, who we all know have very short-term memories, like to place the "deinstitutionalization" of the mentally ill at the feet of President Ronald Reagan, but the truth is that it began far earlier.

Liberals, motivated by emotionally charged movies like "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest and other such movies and books led the charge to "free these poor oppressed individuals" who, though they may be disturbed, had the right to think and act as they chose. The inevitable result of this Left-wing "thought" process and movement is that approximately 70% of those who were formerly institutionalized for mental health problems, are now institutionalized in our prisons.

Once more we are witnesses to the results of the "do-gooder" mentality. These do-gooders rarely give any thought to the end results of their feel good solutions to whatever problem has captured their fancy at the time. They lack the gifts of foresight and insight, being captivated by the cause de jour.

The most obvious cause of this Virginia Tech tragedy was the failure of "the system" to confine and treat young Mr. Hui. The warning signs were all there, including temporary incarceration for "evaluation," following which came the inevitable decision to release him on his own recognizance under the condition that he attend out-patient treatment. No effort was made to ensure his attendance, or to compel his attendance. He was, as the sad and all too common phrase relates, "allowed to fall through the cracks in the system."

Secondarily however, and no less important is the fact that through the self-righteous actions of Liberal school administrators and legislators, students at VT were forbidden to carry or possess firearms on campus. This insane paranoia about guns needs to be derided and criticized until legislators are embarrassed to broach the subject of gun-control for fear of being laughed off stage.

We have again been treated to the inevitable result of having a large population of people made vulnerable by their inability to possess and carry firearms. Every law-abiding citizen should have the right and has the responsibility to possess and carry, if they feel comfortable with it, a firearm.

If you are among those who are so afraid of guns that the very thought causes you to lose sleep, then perhaps your need first to inform yourself about the subject, and then, horrible of horribles try firing one for yourself.

Fear is based in part on inexperience and lack of knowledge. Most of those who favor some sort of "gun control" have absolutely no experience with firearms beyond the fantasies they have seen on television and movies...

It is time for Conservatives to step forward and end this nonsense once and for all.

The inevitable push by the Paleo-media and the malignant Leftist idealoques who haunt the halls of Congress like Dianne Feinstein, Chuck Schumer, and Hillary Clinton is coming folks, and it will be a wholesale offensive. This specter of lunacy needs to be driven to ground and a stake driven through its heart once and for all. Conservative legislators must have the will and the "guts" to stand up and call this anti-constitutional idea down for the lie and evil that it is.

Long Live This American Republic!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

SCOTUS Strikes One Small Blow for Life

Well, well, strike one small blow for the return of sanity to the American justice system, the Supreme Court ruled that the infanticide of fully developed, almost born babies can be outlawed; how amazing. Seems that some folks still believe in the sanctity of human life.

I'm certain that the folks at Planned Infanticide...excuse me Parenthood are apoplectic over this ruling. Imagine someone daring to tell women that they are not allowed to kill their unborn babies. Why next thing you know they'll be calling for the incarceration of women who murder their completely born babies...strike that, apparently that is already against the law in some states (not so sure about Massachusetts or Kalifornia).

Data Lacking on Abortion Method
Statistics on Late-Term Procedure Among Most Contested

By David Brown
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, April 19, 2007; Page A08

The abortion procedure whose ban was upheld yesterday by the Supreme Court accounts for a few thousand of the roughly 1.3 million such procedures done each year in the United States, according to the best available estimates.

Data on abortions -- particularly the types of procedures physicians use -- are among the more incomplete and contested health statistics in the United States. The prevalence of a late-term procedure that opponents call "partial birth" abortion is made murkier by arguments about how to define it.

In the government's most recent estimate of abortion rates, California, New Hampshire and West Virginia reported no data, resulting in a significant undercount. It appears that only one state, Kansas, specifically lists "partial birth procedure" in its survey of practitioners.

The best estimate appears to be by the nonprofit Guttmacher Institute in New York, which researches reproductive health issues. In 2000, the last time it studied the question, the institute estimated there were 1.31 million abortions performed in the United States each year. Of that total, about 2,200, or 0.17 percent, were by "intact dilation and extraction," which is the medical term for the same procedure.

How sad abortion rightists must be not to be able to murder those 2200 babies each year. I mean, after all, their only a drop in the bucket of the millions they already eagerly sacrifice in the name of selfish hedonism. Don't believe me? How about this little statement from the Post article...

"There is definitely a concern that this ruling could come down and really affect procedures done as early as 12 weeks," said Amy Hagstrom Miller, board chairman of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers. "The providers want to know that what we do is okay. We are the kind of people that comply with laws."

Awww, those poor baby killers, now they might have to exercise some care and judgment before they choose to murder an unborn human being. My heart just aches for their unfortunate and overly burdened lives. I mean they should be free to murder at will...not that they haven't done a pretty good job of it already. I would definitely say 1.3 million dead babies each year (assuming those numbers are correct) is a pretty good death toll even by today's standards.

Damn folks! This whole nation just went into and are still in outpourings of anguish over the unacceptable murder of 32 students at Virginia Tech this week...32! Each year we lose 1.3 million new lives to the knives of butchers in our "abortion clinics" and we are concerned over the loss of 32 lives? Yes those lives were precious beyond price. Those families will suffer over their losses for the remainder of their lives. We justly grieve; I grieve for those relatives and friends of those who were lost, but aren't we a little out of perspective here?

Imagine the potential of those 1.3 million lives 30 years down the road. This cost is immeasurable and the loss irretrievable. Thank God for this small move back up the road of sanity by our SCOTUS, or atleast those who still retain some measure of their humanity (Conservatives).

Darth Vader Ginsberg's opposing opinion took issue with the Justice Kennedy's wording in his majority opinion. She stated:

"Throughout, the opinion refers to obstetrician-gynecologists and surgeons who perform abortions not by the titles of their medical specialties, but by the pejorative label `abortion doctor,'" wrote Ginsburg. "A fetus is described as an 'unborn child,' and as a 'baby;' second-trimester, previability abortions are referred to as 'late-term.'"

According to this hag, it is perfectly acceptable to de-humanize an unborn baby with the clinically cold term of "fetus," but she bridles at the use of the term "abortion doctor" to describe her pet genocidal "surgeons and ob-gyn's." Funny how beauty, (or "un-beauty" in this case) is in the eye of the beholder. Hey Ruthy, I'm sure you would prefer that we on the right use the euphemisms that you on the Left use to de-humanize and objectify the targets of your malevolent will, but sorry you old harpy, that just ain't gonna happen.

There is little doubt that this is going to play really big in the upcoming months and as we approach the next election, the Left is going to be vicious in their campaigns. This one small correction of a monsterous evil will galvanize the Left like nothing else can possibly do.

The SCOTUS has gored (however slightly) the most sacred of Liberal oxen. There is no higher calling on the Left than the right to kill the unborn.

God Bless the Supreme Court of the United States!

Long Live the American Republic!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Virginia Tech Shootings: Same Sad Tale, Same Discounted Symptoms, Same Accusatory Fingers

I don't know how many times we are going to have to see this same sad story on the frontpage of the newspapers and as the lead story on the Paleo-media before those charged with the responsibility of caring for our children begin to pay attention to the warning signs.

This time one of the professors at Virginia Tech, Lucinda Roy, became alarmed at the writings of her student, Cho Seung Hui, the unfortunate soul who launched his solitary killing spree Monday that she brought his case to the attention of Virginia Tech officials.

Once more, under the guise of protecting his rights, those who might have prevented this tragedy chose the far easier course of ignoring the problem. Fine, show regard for the students' rights, but let's show concern for all of the students rights.

The Post reports that the class following one of Cho's poetry recitations, only 7 of the 70 students showed up to class, not because they wanted to play "hookie," but because he had frightened them. Sounds like time for action to me.

Student Wrote About Death and Spoke in Whispers, But No One Imagined What Cho Seung Hui Would Do

By Ian Shapira and Michael E. Ruane
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, April 18, 2007; Page A01

BLACKSBURG, Va., April 17 -- They met across the professor's desk. One on one. The chairman of the English department and the silent, brooding student who never took his sunglasses off.

He had so upset other instructors that Virginia Tech officials asked whether the professor wanted protection. Lucinda Roy declined. She thought Cho Seung Hui exuded loneliness, and she volunteered to teach him by herself, to spare her colleagues. The subject of the class was poetry.

Roy, other officials, investigators, acquaintances and neighbors helped fill in a dark portrait Tuesday of the bespectacled young South Korean citizen who had sought bizarre expression in literature and then massacred 32 fellow students and teachers here Monday in the worst shooting rampage in U.S. history. As police closed in, he shot himself and was found on the floor of a classroom building with his weapons nearby.

Cho, of Centreville, the son of immigrants who run a dry cleaning business and the brother of a State Department contractor who graduated from Princeton, was described by those who encountered him over the years as at times angry, menacing, disturbed and so depressed that he seemed near tears.

This case is not even one which should have surprised anyone had they been paying attention. Cho was "withdrawn" to the point of complete isolation, refusing to respond to instructors, refusing to acknowledge classmates, and basically just being a hole in space.

His poetry was laced with thoughts of death and killing, and once more we find another mass murderer being described as "strange," "odd," "quiet," "friendless," "alienated," you name it, the descriptive words we all regularly hear whenever these sad events occur had been used to describe Mr. Hui. So the question must be asked, where were the people, the questions, and the concern that campuses seem so ready to show when some Conservative group begins to hand out flyers attacking some Liberal icon? Where were the "do-gooders" who seek to promote the anti-business, anti-military, anti-Bush agenda all in the name of "protecting our students?"

I know this may sound a bit cold blooded at a time like this and I am not in any way attempting to diminish the monumental scale of this tragedy, but I feel compelled to point out the inconsistencies that led to this tragedy.

School officials have no problem enforcing their will over the students' rights of free speech when it comes to one of their Sacred Politically Correct Cows. Let a student dare to attempt to hand-out pamphlets decrying affirmative action initiatives, or a students' bill of rights, or attempt to promote a Christian activity, and the administration will fall on them with all the weight a administrative bureaucracy can muster, but here, under the guise of protecting his rights of privacy and free speech, a child possessing all the symptoms routinely observed in a potentially dangerous psycopath was completely ignored inspite of the dire warnings of one of his instructors.

Then, of course, come the finger pointers. The Campus Police "didn't respond properly," or "quickly enough." The local police "failed to respond in a timely manner," or "the warnings weren't given so that students could avoid exposure," or "the students should have been placed in lock-down immediately." Certainly all of these are probably true to one extent or another, but the truth is, the University failed both Mr. Hui, and their student body.

And then of course there is the paramount of Liberal claims, which immediately followed this tragedy, again knowing Liberal mentality, not unexpected, "We need tighter gun control legislation." Once more, those who shirk their own duty immediately blame an inanimate object for the actions and results of an event which should never have been able to occur.

This Post article says one former neighbor described Cho,

"If you walk and you come close to him, he'd walk away," Shash said. "I have kids, and he never talked to them.""Nobody knows him really," Shash said. "He's always quiet. When I talk to him, there's no response."

One of his suitemates at Virginia Tech told the Post that:

"In August, when Grewal, Cho and four others moved in, Cho's suitemates tried to talk to him but never got a word in return...'He never looked anyone in the eye. If you even say hi, he'd keep walking straight past you.'"

Folks, if you run across someone fitting the above descriptions, let someone know. Don't ignore them, Please! The life you save may be mine.

The failing here was of an institute, like all institutes of higher learning, that is more concerned with their agenda of political correctness than they are in serving the needs of the students. There is no guarantee that even timely intervention by those in authority could have prevented this tragedy, but there is a very good chance that it would have.

Mr. Hui is such a textbook case for a mass murderer, that I'm certain that even now some college professor is feverishly working on a case study and/or a book to proclaim his wisdom and expertise in understanding tragic young Mr. Cho. The sad part is, if some of those administrators and professors had listened to the seemingly dire warnings of Professor Lucinda Roy, 33 students who are dead might still be alive and attending classes this morning and the heartbroken parents and relatives of these lovely children would be cheering on their accomplishments in school rather than grieving over the loss.

It is time for universities, schools, and all of academia to cease pushing their political agenda and take care of their true responsibility, the care and feeding of young minds.

May God Bless those families and children, including Cho Seung Hui and his family.

This is a truly sad occurrence for all of us.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Here We Go Again...More Gun Laws Will Solve Nothing

I continually hear about the rest of the worlds "contempt" for America, for our "Overly Agressive Foreign Policies," for our "Culture of Consumption," and our "Gun Culture;" what I don't hear is the cessation of the patter of little alien feet rushing to enter our "evil" society and indulge in our "decadent" culture.

Seems these snooty, self-righteous, "feriners" aren't above prostituting their values in their mad rush to become American citizens...Funny how that works isn't it?

As for the now numbered 33 dead students, this is a great shame and sad event, but it is not the result of any "culture of guns." It is the result of a culture which has lost its soul. It is a culture which has abandoned itself, not to God, but to Mammon.

Any society which places man above God, which places the material above the spiritual is doomed in the same way that Romans doomed themselves. It was self-seeking, the devaluation of life which ultimately doomed Rome and which if not reversed in this society, will doom America.

As the Bible says in Mathew (6:24):

"No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.

As for the British, the following shows their opinion and mentality.

Shock, Sympathy And Denunciation Of U.S. Gun Laws
British Newspaper Asks, 'What Price the Right to Bear Arms?'

By Kevin Sullivan
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, April 17, 2007; Page A11

LONDON, April 16 -- The Virginia Tech shootings received extensive news coverage around the world Monday, leading many to question how such violence could keep happening in the United States.

In Britain, there was shock at the scale of the killings, but many people said they were not surprised, seeing the United States as a nation obsessed with guns, where firearms are easy to obtain.

"I think the reason it happens in America is there's access to weapons -- you can go into a supermarket and get powerful automatic weapons," Keith Ashcroft, a psychologist, told the Press Association. Ashcroft said he believed such access, along with a culture that makes gun ownership seem normal, increases the likelihood of such attacks in the United States.

"When you look at these cases, someone is depressed and they have access to weapons, they're going to be using that method to kill," Ashcroft said. "It's just simple opportunity."

As is typical of the elite of the Left, particularly idiots like Ashcroft who probably obtained his degree because he needed therapy more than those he claims to help, he gets it completely wrong. I am not aware of any "supermarket" which you can "go into and get a powerful automatic weapon." For that matter, I am not aware of any gun store in America into which you can go and obtain a "powerful automatic weapon" without filling out all sorts of paperwork paying exorbitant fees and undergoing a long and very thorough background investigation.

"Powerful automatic weapons" have been illegal to possess for a very long time in America without proper licenses; more's the shame. The Second Amendment, and the "Natural Rights" of all men, with which we are "endowed by our Creator" dictate that the possession of firearms should, for law abiding citizens, be an unrestricted right

First, it is not the laws of man that will ever stop this kind of tragedy from occurring, it is only the Laws of God that can accomplish such a miracle.

Second, no law passed by any body of lawmakers will prevent an event like this from occurring. Even in the most oppressive of regimes mass killing by the disaffected will and have occurred. I find it most interesting that those in Britain who have such a high opinion of their own culture and its increasingly oppressive laws, extending now to the possession of "large knives," could not prevent the tragic killing of 52 citizens by terrorists in the London Underground July 7, 2005.

Surely if laws and awareness of risks were all that was necessary to prevent such a tragedy, then Britain, with almost 4 full years of warning since the attacks of 9/11 could have easily prevented such an occurrence. That they didn't-couldn't-speaks volumes as to the value of such foolish if well-meant efforts to pass some law.

I knew that as surely as the sun would rise today, the anti-gun forces would be out in droves following this massacre, as they are following every tragedy involving a firearm in an effort to take advantage of the sorrow and sympathy we all naturally feel for the victims in this mass killing.

Once again we see that, for the Left, political agenda trumps humanity. Their first reactions appear to be, "Oh! How tragic. How can we take advantage of this situation?" We have witnessed this kind of cold-blooded calculation by those on the Left numerous times, including their willingness to exploit the suffering of the families and loved ones of our troops killed in battle.

The fact is, had some of those students been allowed to carry concealed firearms rather than being banned from campus, this tragic event would most certainly have been far less tragic. Again and again we see situations in which it is the absence of a ready firearm, not the presence of too many firearms which exacerbates such a massacre. One shot from a sure and steady hand would have ended this mad-man's rampage and far fewer deaths would have resulted.

If Americans don't wake up and realize the folly of the bilge that people like Ted Kennedy, Chuck Schumer, and Dianne Feinstein are selling threatens rather than strengthens their safety, this society can only expect more of these events.

It took police a substantial amount of time to find and end this killer. The presence of a couple of armed and well trained students with CCL's (and I have no doubt that in Virginia there are more than a few so qualified) would have ended this rampage, or at the least stopped his progress long enough for the police to get there and put an end to it.

Long Live Our American Republic-and Our Right to Keep and Bear Arms!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Wishful Thinking Will Not End the Violence

Alright, here's the conundrum; how do you trust a faction of people who have made your eventual elimination the very foundation of their existence for 5 decades, when they tell you that "Now!" "This time, we really, really mean it?"

For decades, the Palestinian people and the surrounding Arab states have sought by both diplomatic and military means to bring about the demise of the nation of Israel. Over that same period, there have been numerous attempts by the Israeli Government to enter into an agreement with those hostile factions which would above all else guarantee their right to exist as a nation and a people.

Numerous times those same agreements have been broken or rejected by those same people who look on Israel with bad intent.

After a thorough drubbing through 3 wars, Egypt and Jordan finally recognized the futility of their aims, and entered into an initially uneasy, but increasingly strong accord with Israel, which has brought about a more peaceful and economically profitable existence for all three parties.

The problem, however remains the same. The Palestinian people have yet to adhere to any proferred agreement or treaty guaranteeing Israel's right to exist. Now we are once more told by one of the most radical and violent groups in the conflict..."Trust us, we only want peace."

What if the offer is genuine? If you refuse it, then you lose a chance for a lasting and stable peace. If you accept the offer, you run the risk of being betrayed once again.

Olive Branch From Hamas

By Robert D. Novak
Monday, April 16, 2007; Page A17

On April 7, ending a seven-day visit to Israel, I finally got an interview I had sought for a year. I sat down in a Palestinian Authority office in Ramallah with a leader of Hamas, the extremist organization that won last year's elections. This leader pushed a two-state Israeli-Palestinian solution and deplored suicide bombers. But officials in Washington seem not to want to hear Hamas calling for peace.

No fringe character, this was Naser al-Shaer: education minister and deputy prime minister in the new coalition government. Shaer signaled that the regime recognizes Israel's right to exist and forgoes violence -- conditions essential for talks about a viable Palestinian state adjoining Israel -- even if Hamas does not. "We hope that it is going to be a matter of time," Shaer told me. "But there is a big chance now."

When I returned to Washington last week, I sought the reaction of Bush administration officials (who refuse to have any contact with Hamas). I asked to talk to Elliott Abrams, the deputy national security adviser who is most influential in policy on Israel. Abrams was once a fellow Cold Warrior and friend whom I have defended, but an aide let me know on Thursday that Abrams would not talk to me about Hamas. A senior State Department official also showed no interest in what Shaer said.

U.S. policy is not just adherence to the economic boycott that has devastated the Palestinian Authority since Hamas won elections in January 2006. U.S. government officials and contract workers in the Israeli-occupied territories must leave when someone from Hamas enters a room. Because the State Department lists Hamas as a terrorist organization, Americans not employed by the government fear that contacting a Hamas member of the Palestinian government would violate the USA Patriot Act.

I don't know if Novak has just gone soft, or if he is on to something here. I have my suspicions, that like most in the West, his desire for a final settlement has betrayed his better judgment.

We in the West are prone to expect the best from others because we ourselves are generally motivated by goodness and honesty. We want to trust them because we want to be trusted. We want to be well thought of.

Our enemies know this about us and they use it to their advantage. So trust becomes a very big problem in these negotiations.

I suspect that the best we can do is to follow the admonishment of Ronald Reagan in dealing with the Soviet Union..."Trust, but verify."

Long Live the American Republic!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Will The Next Conservative: Please Stand Up

History has shown and Reagan reaffirmed that the best way for a Conservative to win an election is by sticking to his guns. Ronald Reagan's stand on the important issues of the day were not nuanced. He made no bones about being tough with the Soviet Union, he made no bones about his stand against abortion, and he made no bones about his belief in and undying love for this nation and it's people.

Because he was genuine, he won. Because he did what he said he would do he destroyed his opponent in the election for his second term. Gun owners never had to fear that their 2nd Amendment rights would be taken away, Christians never had to fear that he would abandon their belief in the sanctity of life even in an unborn child. Americans and patriots never had to fear that he would negotiate away those things which made America the great nation it was and is.

President Bush had an opportunity to acheive the same in his administration. He started out with good credentials, he is and was an affable sort of fellow that people generally tended to like. He has a strong moral compass which leads him more or less in the right direction. His failing comes from an apparent lack of vision for this nation and its people.

President Bush was unfortunately seduced by the Siren Song of the Left's "Compassion." He even adopted that inane phrase for his presidential campaign. He was going to be the "Compassionate Conservative." The term is predicated on a lie, that to be a true Conservative is to be uncompassionate. It proves a total lack of understanding of what it means to be a Conservative and what Conservatism stands for.

It mistakes the paternalistic, gift-giving, strings attached, dependence on the state principles of socialism and Marxism as being the true form of compassion rather than the ultimate form of dominance and control.

This has always been the flaw in the Bush administration. President Bush expected to be able to deal with his political opponents in good faith. He expected them to be true to their words. What he got as a result of his naivete has been repeated snubs, insults, and hatred for who and what he is.

Republicans will not win an election until they learn the lessons of Ronald Reagan and George Bush. The Republicans need to find an unflinching Conservative. A man of strength and character who will not back down in the face of opposition, but who can do it without looking the fool, and who can still do it with a sense of humor.

Unless Fred Thompson or someone else with similar appeal steps in and has these qualities, I do not see a Republican victory ahead in the 2008 elections.

Candidates Still Take Cues From Their Base
Independents' Rise Presents Dilemma

By Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, April 16, 2007; Page A01

Five months after midterm elections that demonstrated the rising power of independent voters, conservative and liberal activists continue to drive the presidential campaign dialogue, deepening the red-blue divisions that have defined national politics for more than a decade.

The huge gulf between the two parties' candidates is most evident on Iraq -- a division reinforced last week by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who excoriated his Democratic rivals on the war. The top Republican contenders uniformly support President Bush's troop buildup strategy; Democrats just as forcefully argue for starting to withdraw U.S. troops and a timetable for eventual removal of virtually all combat forces.

But the war is not the only area in which the candidates are at opposing poles of the debate. On issues such as taxes and spending, health care, and education, candidates are mostly taking their cue from -- or trying to cozy up to -- their respective ideological bases. In doing so, they risk embracing positions that could complicate later efforts to win the support of independent voters, whose votes will be crucial in November 2008.

Right now, that problem appears more acute for Republicans. At this point, polling indicates that independents do not fall at some midpoint between the parties; rather, they are far closer in their views to Democrats than Republicans, particularly on the dominant issue, the Iraq war. Their shift away from Bush was critical in the Democrats' victories in November, and independents give no sign of moving back to the GOP.

Sorry Dan, shifting with the winds of politics may actually be a tactic that will win an election, Bill Clinton pretty much proved that you can be an empty suit with a good personality and a good line of BS and get elected, but that tactic and the men who follow it rarely make a good president.

It takes men of character and principle to make good leaders. The founding fathers were not men who shifted their stands with the shifting winds, they were inflexible as a rock and they won their freedom by standing firm and fighting back.

Had Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, John Adams, and James Madison triangulated their stands to gain maximum political advantage rather than standing up for what they knew was right, we might just be another Canada.

We are not, we are the original modern era democratic republic. Our nation is the one all others seek to emulate. Those who hate us do so because they envy us our wealth, our power, and our freedom.

Republicans, stand firm, be bold, or be defeated. It really is that simple.

Long Live this American Republic!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Democrats Desperately in Pursuit of a New Chimerical Watergate

Democrat Demagogues like Patrick "Leaky" Leahy and Harry "the Snout" Waxman imagine themselves basking in the Old "glory days" of Watergate. Dreams of celebrity and delusions of grandeur dance through their otherwise empty heads as they desperately search for their Holy Grail in hopes of bringing down another Republican President.

Such is the sad state of the Democrat Party. Their entire raison d'etre seems to rest solely on their dreams of creating another political crisis in our American government. They dream of the heady days of Sam Irvin and James Baker holding court before an adoring phalanx of cameras and reporters. The dream of bringing down a president supercede any thoughts of actually serving the needs of the people. Personal ambition trancends the needs of our nation. Thoughts of national security are "back benchers" to the trumped up charges of "interference," "obstruction," and "malfeasance" as Democrat leaders in Congress create out of whole cloth a scandal where none exists, mostly by projecting their own bad behaviors and motives onto their political opponents.

Check this Washington Pest...er...Post article out:

Rove E-Mail Sought by Congress May Be Missing
RNC Took Away His Access to Delete Files in 2005

By Michael Abramowitz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, April 13, 2007; Page A01

A lawyer for the Republican National Committee told congressional staff members yesterday that the RNC is missing at least four years' worth of e-mail from White House senior adviser Karl Rove that is being sought as part of investigations into the Bush administration, according to the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

GOP officials took issue with Rep. Henry Waxman's account of the briefing and said they still hope to find the e-mail as they conduct forensic work on their computer equipment. But they acknowledged that they took action to prevent Rove -- and Rove alone among the two dozen or so White House officials with RNC accounts -- from deleting his e-mails from the RNC server. Waxman (D-Calif.) said he was told the RNC made that move in 2005.

In a letter to Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, Waxman said the RNC lawyer, Rob Kelner, also raised the possibility that Rove had personally deleted the missing e-mails, all dating back to before 2005. GOP officials said Kelner was merely speaking hypothetically about why e-mail might be missing for any staffer and not referring to Rove in particular.

The disclosures helped fan the controversy over what the White House has acknowledged to be the improper use of political e-mail accounts to conduct official government business.

Yep, the notorious Karl Rove (starts with "K" just like Karl Marx), Rasputin of the Republicans has been at his alchemy again. This Legend of Legerdemain, the Master of the Mystical has cast his spell on the administrations computers.

Democrats just KNOW that something is "Rotten in Denmark" (or DC in this case) and by golly they're gonna find out what it is even if it destroys the nation in the process. The leaders of the Democrat Party have become a parody of Conspiracy Nutcases. They literally have no thoughts on their micro-brains beyond "Get Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, and George Bush." Their political aspirations have taken them out of the realm of public servant into the realm of public sewer rat.

This cadre of Looney Tunes, Leftist, Conspiracy Buffs care more about their own political futures and their political ascendency than whether American citizens die. They will leave our troops weaponless, our allies conquered, and out citizens terrorized as they pursue their selfish goals, as delusional as they are. For them, Osama bin Laden is less of an enemy than George W. Bush.

It's has become painfully obvious to any willing to observe that these Narcissists trust our enemies more than they trust our nation's freely elected leader. Just as Neville Chamberlain sold his nation and the entirety of free Europe down the river for the empty promises of a despot in pursuit of his delusional dreams of a negotiated agreement, so to are the Democrat leadership like Madamn Speaker Nancy "Bela" Pelosi so self-deluded that they willingly sell their souls to the devil of "peaceful settlement" in hopes of ending an economically inconvenient military involvement.

Those who fail to learn from the past are doomed to repeat it, and it appears that Democrats are headed down that same "Chamberlainian" path.

May God save our Republic from these idiots!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

George Will Joins the Battle Against Environmental Stalinists

It is far past time for our strong Conservative voices to take up the flag of common sense and join battle against the lunacy of Leftist Dogma on Human Caused Global Warming. George Will strikes a brilliant blow at the heart of this Leftist Sacred Cow in the post today.

It is insanity to destroy our own economy at the whimsical notion that mankind is so all powerful that we have the power to control the climate of this planet. Heck we can't even control Nancy Pelosi's mouth, what chance have we got at the climate.

Anyway, George has it right this time so I'm gonna excerpt his editorial:

Fuzzy Climate Math

By George F. Will
Thursday, April 12, 2007; Page A27

In a campaign without peacetime precedent, the media-entertainment-environmental complex is warning about global warming. Never, other than during the two world wars, has there been such a concerted effort by opinion-forming institutions to indoctrinate Americans, 83 percent of whom now call global warming a "serious problem." Indoctrination is supposed to be a predicate for action commensurate with professions of seriousness.

For example, Democrats could demand that the president send the Kyoto Protocol to the Senate so they can embrace it. In 1997, the Senate voted 95 to 0 in opposition to any agreement that would, like the protocol, require significant reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in America and some other developed nations but that would involve no "specific scheduled commitments" for 129 "developing" countries, including the second-, fourth-, 10th-, 11th-, 13th- and 15th-largest economies (China, India, Brazil, South Korea, Mexico and Indonesia). Forty-two of the senators serving in 1997 are gone. Let's find out if the new senators disagree with the 1997 vote.

Do they also disagree with Bjorn Lomborg, author of "The Skeptical Environmentalist"? He says: Compliance with Kyoto would reduce global warming by an amount too small to measure. But the cost of compliance just to the United States would be higher than the cost of providing the entire world with clean drinking water and sanitation, which would prevent 2 million deaths (from diseases such as infant diarrhea) a year and prevent half a billion people from becoming seriously ill each year.

Nature designed us as carnivores, but what does nature know about nature? Meat has been designated a menace. Among the 51 exhortations in Time magazine's "Global Warming Survival Guide" (April 9), No. 22 says a BMW is less responsible than a Big Mac for "climate change," that conveniently imprecise name for our peril. This is because the world meat industry produces 18 percent of the world's greenhouse gas emissions, more than transportation produces. Nitrous oxide in manure (warming effect: 296 times greater than that of carbon) and methane from animal flatulence (23 times greater) mean that "a 16-oz. T-bone is like a Hummer on a plate."

The problem with Al Gore's pet theory/scam/ego trip is that it cannot bear any really close scrutiny. All of the so-called evidence is based on broad assumptions and computer modelling (which is itself based on the assumptions of a scientist who is already convinced that his theory is correct).

This is not science, it is job security. The reason that this dogma has resulted in so many naysaying scientists being threatened with job loss, reputation loss, or worse is that if you dare to rock the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) boat, you threaten the livelihood of thousands of climatologists, environmentalists, and catastrophe pimps.

These pseudo-scientists have allied themselves to the anti-American Stalinists in our own Paleo-media and the Democrat Party leadership to form an almost insurmountable movement aimed at the destruction of our way of life, and it is going to take considerable effort from men with great strength of character to stand up to this new Emporer and point out his complete lack of sartorial splendor. This Leftist Imperial Banner has no clothes.

There are a lot of scientists out there who know this, who see this, but are afraid to take a stand against the AGW tidal wave for fear of losing their livelihoods. There are a great many politicians who see the same glaring holes in this current politically correct dogma, but to stand up and deny the claims of those on the Left would require them to take a "courageous stand," and since when have politicians ever been inclined to take courageous stands? For most, that is considered to be political suicide.

Somewhere, somehow those of us with enough common sense and intellect to withstand the constant drumbeat of Leftist Religious Dogma on AGW coming from the likes of hypocrites like John Kerry-Heinz and Al Gore and their propaganda machine in the Paleo-media, and prevent America from committing economic suicide at the alters of the IPCC, the UN and the Democrat Party.

Long Live the American Republic!

(Sorry for the blue ink George, but I am usually quoting Democrats. I guess I need to figure out another color for quoting those with whom I agree.)

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Newt Wimps Out, Strikes Orthodox Propaganda Line

I kinda figured this woud be the result of this much over-hyped "debate." Newt has a penchant for crossing over the ideological lines at precisely the wrong time. This will kill any chance he had at becoming the Republican Presidential Candidate.

Anyone who buys into the Leftist Religion of Human Caused Global Warming has proven himself unworthy and gullible. He is a victim of his own "enlightened world view." Ultimately Newt, like most who consider themselves among the "intellectual elite" in this nation can't restrain themselves from having to appeal to the Liberal media.

Following his performances with Hillary Clinton on Healthcare, and his other so-called enlightened positions, this one was inevitable.

Kerry and Gingrich Hugging Trees -- and (Almost) Each Other
___

By Dana Milbank
Wednesday, April 11, 2007; Page A02

Yesterday's global-warming debate between John Kerry and Newt Gingrich was, as the moderator put it, "advertised as a smack-down and a prizefight." But those labels were too modest for Kerry.

"Welcome to our environmental version of the Lincoln-Douglas debates," the former Democratic presidential nominee told the crowd in the Russell Caucus Room. "We flipped a coin, and I picked Lincoln."

But something funny happened on the way to 1858. Gingrich, a former Republican House speaker, refused to play Douglas to Kerry's Lincoln, instead positioning himself as a tree-hugging green.

Before Kerry got a word in, Gingrich conceded that global warming is real, that humans have contributed to it and that "we should address it very actively." Gingrich held up Kerry's new book, "This Moment on Earth," and called it "a very interesting read." He then added a personal note about saving vulnerable species from climate change. "My name, Newt, actually comes from the Danish Knut, and there's been a major crisis in Germany over a polar bear named Knut," he confided.

Newt is afterall, and in the end...a politician and a self-obsessed intellectual. I am embarrassed that I ever considered him for President...with reservations of course.

It appears that we on the Right are still looking for someone to espouse our views who has a backbone, some intellectual integrity, and enough appeal to get elected.

Anthropogenic (that's man-made, for you in Austin) Global Warming is a myth based on incomplete, distorted, and created "facts." It is a multi-$billion industry fed by those who make their living from it, and unscrupulous politicians (yeah, I know that's redundant) who see political advantage in frightening little children and other Liberals.

Who among the Republicans is prepared to take up the flag of freedom and carry on the fight? Tom Tancredo has made some pretty good statements, but I fear he is an unlikely victor, as it Congressman Duncan Hunter. As good as these fine gentlemen are, they seem to lack the charisma and telegenicity to get elected.

Fred Thompson, where are you?

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Left's Neverending Hypocrisy and Don Imus

Please note I am not an Imus fan, I personally have no respect or admiration for the man. I believe that he is and always has been a grotesque, detestible lout. That having been said, I am once again amused as the Left eats one of its own for overstepping the allowed boundaries of political correctness.

So Don Imus called the girls of the Rutgers Women's Basketball Team a bunch of "nappy ho's" and "jiggaboo wannabes." As epithets go, this one is actually rather mild, but in this world of protected groups and political correctness, it is a mortal sin in the press and on the Left.

Nevermind that grotesque, fat, lesbo, loudmouth Rosie O'Donnell accusing President Bush of going to war for money, of being complicit in the murder of 3000 American citizens by plotting to blow up the World Trade Center. Nevermind Al "Bigmouth" Sharpton accusing Wappinger Falls, New York policemen of kidnapping, rape, and battery in the lies surrounding the Tawana Brawley case (you know he never did appologize for that), and inflamming the riots in Crown Heights. Nevermind the comments of Jesse "Heimytown" Jackson. They are among the "protected, preferred groups in America. We don't dare speak ill of them lest we be castigated and labeled as "racists," "bigots," or "homophobes" (I guess in her case I should say "lesbophobes" or perhaps "gross, loudmouthed, dumb, lesbo, phobes).

So Imus gets suspended and the others, who are among the protected species of human beings, get away with saying anything they like. Well, like I said, as far as Imus goes, couldn't happen to a nicer guy. I'm just struck with the hypocrisy of the Left...once again.

Advertisers Pull Out of Imus Show
'I Don't Deserve to Be Fired,' Says the Shock Jock, Under Attack for Slur

By Paul Farhi and Frank Ahrens
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, April 11, 2007; Page A01

As skittish advertisers began to pull out and calls for his resignation reverberated, embattled shock jock Don Imus yesterday continued a campaign of contrition over racially and sexually insensitive remarks he made, even while insisting that he shouldn't lose his national television show and syndicated radio program.

Imus, who last week called the Rutgers University women's basketball players "nappy-headed hos," said on his morning show yesterday that he will seek a meeting with the team. His on-air slur has mushroomed into widespread condemnation, fueled round-the-clock news coverage and resulted in a two-week suspension of his show, carried on MSNBC and CBS Radio.

"I don't deserve to be fired," Imus, 67, said yesterday during his show. "So I should be punished, and I'm being punished, and not insignificantly, by the way. I'm not whining, because I don't feel as bad as those kids feel."

Imus's comments came a few hours before an emotional news conference by the Rutgers team. Her players seated next to her, their faces fixed with grim expressions, Rutgers Coach C. Vivian Stringer told the assembled reporters, "We have all been physically and emotionally spent and hurt" by Imus's remarks, which she called "deplorable, despicable and abominable and unconscionable." The team's players said they would meet with Imus.

Poor Donny, a victim of his own creators. His program would have been off the air a long time ago had he not been propt up artificially by his Lefty buddies. Like all Liberal political talk shows, this one can hardly compete in the open market...like Air America and MSNBC it has bee kept afloat because it serves a Left-wing propaganda purpose.

Ah but now, now that Imus has crossed the Rubicon of Left-wing, moonbat politics and used racially charged epithets, it is a real question whether or not his program will survive.

With any luck, it won't. It all depends on how much value the Libs put on having him available to pimp their latest worst seller books.

Long Live the American Republic!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Seymour Hersh: Malicious Idiot

Well I see that Seymour is at it again. Ever vigilant in his pursuit of his anti-American agenda, he is diseminating more of his half-truths, exaggerations and out right lies to the citizens of the world. And, of course, the unimaginative and gullible reporters of the Paleo-media are ever ready to believe anything and everything Mr. Hersch has to offer.

Pentagon is 'drawing up plan to bomb Iran'
By Laura Clout
Last Updated: 1:19am GMT 27/02/2007

Stand-off in Gulf with Iran 'a bit like Cold War'
The Pentagon is drawing up a contingency plan to bomb Iran that could be implemented within 24 hours, it was reported yesterday.

George W. Bush has ordered a special planning group, established in the offices of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to create a bombing strategy which could be set in motion immediately upon his orders.

Seymour Hersh, the investigative journalist, wrote in the New Yorker that the planning group has also been asked to identify targets in Iran that may be involved in supplying or aiding militants in Iraq.

This marks a shift in focus from the destruction of Iran’s nuclear facilities and possible regime change.

Oh Gee, do you really think so? My gosh imagine that, the President of the United States asking his military to draw up "contingency plans" for the attack against Iran. What a surprise!

Laura, are you really that stupid? How did you come by your stupidity, did you have to go to journalism school to get that way are do you come by it genetically?

Of course our military is making contingency plans to attack Iran, they make contingency plans to attack just about every nation on Earth. They also make contingency plans to repel attacks by just about every nation on Earth. There is nothing new of ominous about this "revelation" except the fact that idiots like you and Seymour consider it newsworthy.

It speaks very poorly for the future of Western Democracies that its citizens are so stupid (or at least its reporters are so stupid) that this kind of revelation is reported as something unexpected.

Certainly I understand Mr. Hersch's reasoning. He has always hated America and what it stands for and has always seen us as the bad actors on the world stage. What is amazing is how many people throughtout the world actually bother to pay attention to what he has to say.

It is the job of the military to be prepared for any and every eventuality that might occur and which threatens our national security. The only really bac thing about it is that they failed to anticipate the sort of attack which occurred on 9/11.

Perhaps is they had not been so weakened and undermined by 8 years of poor leadership by those idiots in the Clownton administration, they might have managed to do just that.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

The Politics of the Disinterested

It's beginning to look like America has become incapable of comprehending just what winning a war is all about. The American people seem to have their heads stuck so deep in the sand that they no longer are capable of understanding political realities.

Politics Collide With Iraq Realities
Commanders Seek Longer-Term Focus

By Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, April 8, 2007; Page A01

There are two Iraq wars being waged, according to military officers on the ground and defense experts: the one fought in the streets of Baghdad, and the war as it is perceived in Washington.

Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, who took over as the top U.S. commander in Iraq in February, cited the disparity last week. "The Washington clock is moving more rapidly than the Baghdad clock," he said in a television interview. "So we're obviously trying to speed up the Baghdad clock a bit and to produce some progress on the ground that can, perhaps . . . put a little more time on the Washington clock."

While Washington appears headed toward a political endgame on Iraq, with the White House and Congress sparring over benchmarks and pullout dates, the war on the ground is at an ebb tide. All sides -- including U.S. military strategists and Iraqi sectarian leaders and insurgents, as well as regional players such as Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and Turkey -- are waiting to see whether the new U.S. approach to make the Iraqi capital safer will work. Soldiers on the ground tend to see the Washington debate as irrelevant, and the perspective of many politicians in Washington is that the military schedule is simply too slow.

"The time scale to succeed is years," said John J. Hamre, a former deputy defense secretary, while "the time scale for tolerance here is 12 months for Democrats and 18 months for Republicans."

I blame this lunatic obsession with pulling out as fast as possible on two things.

First, the almost constant bombardment of the American public with negative reports coming back from Iraq by the anti-Bush Paleo-media, and the constant drumbeat of defeatism from the Democrat Party leadership as they attempt to regain power at any cost.

Second, the hyperactive, Sesame Street mentality of today's American Citizens. We are so addicted to the high octane video stimulation beaming out to us from our televisions, that we have become bored with the war. Reality has lost its fascination for much of America.

American would much rather get lost in the almost constant bloodshed and sexual content of today's television fare than pay attention to what is occurring in the world around them. They have become dependent upon the 30 second sound bite from the half-hour newscast for insight into what is occurring within their government and events around the world.

We have also become selfish. We are no longer interested in what is going on around us. We have become focused on our own petty existences.

The Left has done a magnificent job of destroying the glue which held our society together for so long. Programs like diversity rather than acculturation, schools which indoctrinate rather than teaching kids to think, and right-speak replacing freedom of speech have all done their job in dumbing down the American people.

May God help us.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below