Monument to Soviet Russians in Budapest's "Freedom Square" 

Irony in Budapest

One of the biggest ironies ever is located in Budapest, Hungary.

After the Soviets left Hungary in 1990, the Hungarians pulled down all of the Soviet style monuments…except one. The picture above is a monument to Soviet Russian troops for liberating the city from the Nazis during WWII. The monument is located in – get this – Freedom Square. No really, the monument to the Soviets is in Freedom Square. This is akin to having a statue of OJ in “Family Man Park”. A bit of a lesser irony is that the American Embassy is to right and across the street from the square.

As we strolled around this little park, all I could think of was a young nurse, in fear for life, being saved from the infamous Ted Bundy. Once the nurse is a safe distance from Bundy, she thanks her rescuer and asks how she could ever repay him. The man says, “Well I’d like to have you for dinner tonight about 8:00 pm, if you’re free.” “Sure. By the way, what’s you name?” “My name? Oh yes, my name is Hannibal Lectern.” Talk about out of the fire and into another fire, lose – lose, damned if you do – damned if you don’t. Why would any Hungarian want to leave this monument in place – particularly after the 1956 revolution? (1956 revolution is commemorated with a much smaller monument, an eternal flame, in Hossak Square next to Parliament.)

It seems to me one of two things ought to happen in this square in Budapest. One, the people ought to be encouraged to show up one Saturday morning to pull this monument down. The other is to rename it Imre Nagy Square. Nagy was the man who became Prime Minister through popular support during the 1956 uprising. The “freedom loving” Soviets rewarded his popularity among his people by murdering him in 1958.

Renaming the square after Nagy, of course, would create a whole new irony. A monument to the people who killed Nagy would exist in the very square that would bear his name. Maybe they should rename the square; let the irony set in; then, tear down the monument to the Evil Empire.

Does this look like Bill Frist? 

Go ahead, make my day

Hugh Hewitt is running Vox Blogoli 2.2: Does the Senate GOP Go McClellan or Grant if Harry Reid "Goes Gingrich?" "The Democratic leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, has said that if the Republicans made good on their threat and ruled filibusters out of order, he would see to it that Senate business came to a halt."

I am of the opinion that that the Republicans must be as relentless in pursuing the president’s agenda as U.S. Grant was in pursuing Lee’s army. As I noted in my November, 3 posting, President Bush needs to do the big things up front so that he can leverage mid-term elections against several vulnerable Democrats.

In the 2006 mid-term elections, Democrats will be defending senate seats in five red states (WV, Robert Byrd [Oh yes he is! He’s 88!]; FL, Bill Nelson; NB, Ben Nelson; NM Jeff Bingaham; and ND, Kent Conrad). No doubt Carl Rove has anonymously sent each of these senators news clipping of Tom Daschel’s demise in SD. Three other senators are running in states that, while not yet red, are moving in that direction (MI, Debbie Stabenow; MN, Brave Mark Dayton’s open seat; and WI, Herb Kohl). After the mid-terms, Bush knows he will have little leverage against any senator.

The Judicial nomination issue is the perfect hammer with which to crush the Democrat Party. It forces Pat Leahy, and Chuck Schumer into the open as the faces of the Democrat Party. They will be forced to defend a policy of not giving highly qualified judges, many of them minorities from “key states”, an up or down vote because they are Christians and/or pro-life. Perfect!

The idea that Harry Reid would choose to shut down the government is another win-win. Democrats would look like fools and government shutting down generally is a good thing.

The man came a callin' 

When the man comes to town

President Bush just passed through our neck of the woods on what the press kept insisting was a fence mending tour. Yet at every stop it seemed more like an, “I told you so” tour. I listened to and read most of what was said, publicly anyway. Seemed to me Bush was telling European leaders, “We know, and you know that you have been on the wrong side of things. It’s OK to change sides now that the heavy lifting is done.” Even the few socialist friends I know here were more concerned about the cost of the trip than anything the president said.

President Bush is a plain spoken guy. He lays problems in Iran squarely at the feet of the Iranians. He lays problems in Korea, squarely at the feet of the North Koreans. He lays problems in Iraq squarely at the feet of the Syrian backed terrorists. European leaders, perhaps because the gene pool here has been depleted from constant war and inbreeding, are quick to accept partial responsibility for all of the world’s problems. They offer concessions in every case. The president was having none of it.

While German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder was advocating appeasement on the Iranian problem Bush said, "They were caught enriching uranium after they had signed a treaty saying they wouldn't enrich uranium…They have breached a contract with the international community. They're the party that needs to be held to account, not any of us." Even us dopes can understand that.

While Bush and Blair were talking about NATO being the “cornerstone” of American policy in Europe and of its “fundamental importance”, Schroeder and French President Jacques Chirac were talking about the European Union taking over European defense. That’s sort of like letting the third string run out the clock at the end of a hard fought football game isn’t it? After 60 years of American protection and only after the bully has been pounded to dust do the Europeans grow a set and step up.

Here are a few sad facts about Europe:

- Their populations are shrinking. Birth rates are so low as to make it impossible for the culture to survive. As a result, the population is getting older and older. Immigrants are hired to do anything resembling real work.
- Even as the population base shrinks, the taxes go up to support extended vacations, never ending unemployment benefits and early retirement.
- Any of the several state National Guards in the United States, have more real combat capability than NATO minus the US and Great Britain. What little military power the EU has, they have no way of getting to the fight - No real air or military sea lift and no forced entry capability.

Gerhard and Jacques now talk as if they won the game, when all they really did was take a knee in the last two plays. Now, they talk as if they are ready to start the next game. And maybe they are, but that game better be against the school for octogenarian blind women with polio and nerve disorders requiring respirators.

Last, much was made of Chirac speaking only French at the president’s dinner. I can’t get too upset about a guy speaking in his native tongue – even if it is the language of retreat.

Maybe we haven't come so far

Bishop Gellert Hill

The Libertas family visited Budapest Hungary last week. It’s a great city. The people are very friendly – why not, it was your money. A couple of things struck me as toured around the city. First is Gellért Hill. It towers 754 ft. above the Danube offering a beautiful panorama of the city. The hill is named after the iron-fisted Italian Bishop Gellért, who assisted Hungary's first Christian king, Stephen I, in converting the Magyars. Gellért became a martyr when vengeful pagans killed him by rolling him down the side of the very hill that now bears his name - in a barrel – oh, and the barrel was full of nails. An enormous statue of Gellért now stands on the hill, with the bishop defiantly holding a cross in his outstretched hand.

What struck me was how far we – humans – have come. Except for the terrorists we are now locked in mortal combat with, half of the African continent, some remote South American tribes, voodoo practicing tribes in the Caribbean, devil worshipers, the few remaining communist governments and crazy sociopaths that dot every society, nobody would even consider rolling a human being down a long steep hill in a barrel of nails. Well now, wait a minute. That is a fairly long list come to think of it.

I guess it is an indication of how far the civilized world has come. But then wouldn’t civilized people always have been taken aback by such gruesome treatment of a fellow human being? Hmmm. It’s getting hard to come away believing we’re any better now than we were in the 11th century when the good Bishop met his demise.

Oh wait! We were aghast at Abu Grhaib. We are better now because we have condemned the frat boy actions of few soldiers who, in the heat of battle, misbehaved. Oh surely God will look down on us and bless us for condemning those we send to do our bidding when we think they go too far.

Look, I’m not happy about Abu Grhaib. But I’m not happy about it because of the obvious break down in military discipline and the damage it does to our just cause – not because a few terrorist murdering bastards had their pictures snapped naked. I’m less happy about the hand wringing and political posturing by certain Democrats and the MSM that think keeping Akmed the bomber up past his bedtime is torture.

I think the only lesson to take away from Bishop Gellért’s story is that it just might be the human condition to treat other humans badly. Only good training and discipline can overcome that condition.

Uncommon valor

Uncomon Valor was a Comon Virtue

That is the inscription on the Marine Corps War Memorial in Washington D.C. The memorial was sculpted by Felix DeWeldon in 1954 from Joe Rosenthal’s famous photograph above. That photo was snapped 60 years ago today. It depicts five Marines and a Navy Corpsman raising the flag on Iwo Jima’s Mount Suribachi seven days into the battle. A few days later, three of the flag raisers, Mike Strank, Harlon Block and Franklin Sousley were dead. They were only 3 of the over 7,000 Americans killed in action and 26,000 total allied casualties in just 39 days of vicious fighting.

If you study the picture, it truly is a metaphor for the time - six men working together in a mighty struggle. They struggle in total anonymity. Of the six men, the forms of only four and one unidentifiable facial profile are visible. This photo is a perfect example of what the “Greatest Generation” and America are all about. Six ordinary men from different walks of life and corners of the nation, led by an immigrant NCO, Sergeant Mike Strank, joining together against great odds to get the job done without fanfare.

The photo and what it represents – victory - stormed the nation. It soon became the most reproduced photo ever. For the next two months everyone in America would see this picture over and over. One couldn't avoid it. It hung in:
- One million Retail Store windows.
- 16,000 Movie Theaters.
- 15,000 Banks.
- 200,000 Factories.
- 30,000 Railroad Stations.
- 5,000 Large Billboards.

The three survivors, Ira Hayes, Rene Gagnon and John Bradley were enlisted to head the 7th and most successful War Bond Tour. That tour raised $24 Billion (1945 Dollars) for the US Treasury. To put this into perspective, the total US Budget in 1946 was $56 Billion.

How would today’s media cover an event such as the battle of Iwo Jima? First, by about the second hour of the battle, the New York Times would declare it an un-winnable quagmire. At D+2, Peter Jennings would be asking, “Why do the Japanese hate us?” At D+5, pasty Chris Matthews would be telling his audience that the Japanese people really don’t want democracy. At D+7, when Rosenthal’s photo would have come out, Dan Rather would be tossing softball questions to Tojo in an exclusive interview. At D+8, networks would cover a news conference held by NOW, the NAACP and Act UP to discuss the lack of minority representation in the photo. The 6:00 pm news readers would demand the photo be airbrushed to reflect "our diversity". At D+10 or so, when three of the men who raised the flag were dead, CNN would be holding a 24 hour vigil outside their homes hoping for a grieving family member to trash the president’s war policy and complaining about the lack of body armor. At D+20, when it’s apparent that we’re in for “a long hard slog”, the media bigs would be asking for an exit strategy. At D+25, Bob Schiefer would be asking Thomas L. Friedman, “Is it all worth it?” At D+39, when the island was declared secure, Democrats would be holding hearings declaring that “The president ordered the premature flag raising for political purposes”.

After the battle, the press would ignore the fact that securing the island made it possible for over 2,400 B-29s to make emergency landings at Iwo Jima, saving the over 27,000 men who crewed the aircraft. Instead, they’d be bellyaching about the cost of the war, long deployments and low taxes. Thank God it was our moms and dads, grandmas and grandpas shouldering the load back then.

Could we muster the courage and character to do it today?

UPDATE: Going, going, g...

"'Print is dead,' Sports Illustrated President John Squires told a room full of newspaper and magazine circulation executives at a conference in Toronto in November." - from an article in Saturday's Washington Post on the decline of newspapers, "Hard News."

Hey maybe they’ve been reading Lex and know that the cancer is growing and it’s only a matter of time. They being the media bigs whistling past the blogs and the 24 hour news cycle. Well if they do know, they are not reacting as if they have a fighting chance. Like the cancer patient who gets the bad news from his doctor and chooses to forego the pain and expense of a series of, in the end, useless operations and radiation therapy and instead opts for a good bottle of whiskey and a carton of cigarettes.

In one sense the media has come full circle. There was a time in America where every big city had several large newspapers. They came out morning noon and night. They even printed “EXTRAS” - the print equivalent of the Fox News ALERT. Today most major cities have a single newspaper. Like the post office that used to deliver mail twice a day, the newspapers’ only answer to falling circulation is to reduce service and raise rates. We grew up with the three big networks that reported the same news every night which eerily matched what the New York Times was covering.

We’ve come full circle now because the internet allows us to check news headlines and most of our personal mail at our convenience. Cell phones, palm devices etc. allow the same access. Text devices keep us appraised of everything our group of friends are interested in 24-7, as in, “U heer ‘bout J-Lo? C Fox. C U l8er dude:)” You can even get up to the minute run downs on sporting events, but because sports broadcasters are, in the main, still apolitical, we’d rather watch live. So we’re back where we started with access to multiple sources of news morning, noon and night.

What’s going to happen when broadband goes satellite and wi-fi world-wide? Is that the sound of a trumpeter warming up for Taps for the old media? I think it is.

The indispensable American

Happy Washington’s Birthday! No, I’m not mired in the past. That is still what the Federal Calendar says today is – Washington’s Birthday. It, for some odd reason, has become popular to refer to today as “President’s Day”. I don’t know why. Of the 43 presidents only George Washington has been described as “the indispensable American”.

He was described as indispensable because he refused to be made king. How many of today’s politicians would refuse unlimited power - sadly, not many. He has been described as indispensable because he had the good sense and grace to leave office after two terms a custom adhered to by presidents until FDR. After FDR, congress imposed Washington’s wisdom and grace on the office of president with the Twentieth Amendment limiting presidents and vice-presidents to two terms. Last, Washington was indispensable because he had no off-spring that could claim a right to the presidency in his father’s name. This seems wholly natural to us now, but at the founding it would have been just as natural for the son to assume the father’s office upon the father’s death.

Washington led a fledgling America to victory against the world’s super power. He shepherded a struggling democracy through the Second Constitutional Convention. He asserted federal power with a velvet fist. As our first president, Washington set the highest examples of statesmanship, political decency and leadership. He was “the indispensable American”, and though he’d probably argue otherwise, he deserves his own day. So, Happy Washington’s Birthday!

The Democrat solution: Sell AmWay

Imagine, if you can, that there is no Social Security system. That’s right, FDR’s effort to enact Social Security as part of the New Deal failed. Maybe some bright politician took to floor and said, “Look this will never work. The primary reason that it will never work is that politicians like us will not be able to leave our grubby mitts off of the money. The next reason it won’t work is, because we can’t keep our hands off the people’s money, we’re going to have to take what right now is an insignificant sum of money - 2% - from about 42 workers to pay one retiree. By 1950 we’ll be taking 3% from 16 workers for every retiree. By 1993 we’ll be at 12.4% from 4 workers for every retiree. By 2070 there will only be 2 workers for every retiree. Somewhere along the way people are going to figure out that we have looted their accounts to fund our pet projects. And they will despise all politicians for generations.”

So there never was any Social Security and we still love politicians. Now in 2005 the Democrats are proposing Social Security as means to recover their lost greatness. Ted Kennedy waddles to the well of the Senate to outline the Democrat plan. What he and the Democrats propose is that every American be forced to sell AmWay products for their retirement. That’s right we all have to sell soap to our bridge club, friends and family. But the real money comes in when we recruit five others to sell the soap for us. And they recruit five. And they recruit five and so on. Every dime raised in the giant forced Ponzi scheme goes into the general fund so that Kennedy and others can fund the next Piss Christ, Big Dig or other government wasteful boondoggle.

This sounds far fetched, but except for AmWay that is exactly what we have today. We have a giant forced Ponzi scheme. And the reason that it’s a Ponzi scheme is that politicians have not been able to keep their mitts off of the Social Security money. Social Security has been such a successful rip-off that Mr. Ponzi would surely admit that the government under the authority of law has so far out done anything he could have possibly imagine and that these schemes should now be called Social Security schemes. As in, Mr. Ponzi was arrested for running a Social Security scheme out of the corner liquor store.

The president wants to get out of the current Ponzi debacle by allowing a small voluntary investment into individual accounts. Ponzi, Kennedy and other are howling at the thought of us controlling the money that they have proven they can’t keep their hands off of. They are reeling at the thought of a spouse or loved one getting our money if we die before retirement - instead of the government. They cannot bear the thought of Americans being responsible in some small way for themselves. While Ponzi, Kennedy and the libs search the Capitol Hill ladies rooms for fainting couchs, remember it’s your money; it’s 1% and it’s voluntary.

War, or something like it

After the attack on Pear Harbor, America assumed a clear war footing which included every citizen, every industry, business, and walk of life. There were bond sales, rationing of key wartime commodities and daily sacrifices by the American people who knew exactly what was at stake. Movies were made depicting heroic Americans in combat. Pop music reflected the mood of a nation sure of victory. Politicians of both parties were concerned about winning the war rather than developing an “exit strategy”.

As September 11, 2001 fades from memory, America remains locked in a life and death struggle with trans-national Islamo terror fascist. As our collective memories of the 9-11 attacks fade and the economy hums along, life seems normal, except for the constant din of doom, gloom and defeatism from the MSM and Liberals, there is scarcely a hint of the real and present threat to the republic. WWII was like a fire in the kitchen. You could see it, smell it, hear it and immediately appreciate the danger. The war on terror is like a furnace leaking Co2 gas. Colorless, odorless and deadly, the house owners go about life without appreciating the danger they are in until tragedy strikes.

Democrats are calling for sacrifice from the American people in the war against terror. In effort to recreate a sense of the sacrifice of WWII, Democrats want to wipe out the president’s tax cuts. As if Ted Kennedy giving more of your hard earned money to a dopey “artist” to take photos of a crucifix in a jar of urine is going to make Americans feel better and help catch Osama. Others claim that the money can be used to make us safer. Playing defense in the war on terror is a fool’s errand. There simply is no way to defend every target against every kind of attack every hour of every day. If you have rats in basement you cannot get rid of them by boarding the basement door shut. You have to go into the basement and kill them. That is what we are doing in Afghanistan, Iraq and other places we don’t yet know about. The kind of sacrifice (higher taxes) that Democrats propose will result in a stagnating economy, higher unemployment, lower wages and a rise in cost for nearly every good and service is exactly what we don’t need.

The sacrifice, it seems to me, that is required is for the Democrat Party to forego cheap political attacks on the president. That Democrats like Ted Kennedy and John Kerry will oppose the president’s policies is a given, but they should confine their criticisms to American soil and deliver them in a civil tone. The Democrat Party can sacrifice the millions of dollars they get from the likes of Michael Moore and George Soros and expose them for what they are – blame America first extremists. The Democrat rank and file can demand a civil tone and an end to defeatist comments from their leaders. America is, after all, at war or something like it for its very survival. If Democrats want sacrifice they can sacrifice their political ambitions. Instead of talking about quitting they can start talking about how to win.

Dean can't be worse than McAuliffe

What, me worry? EEEEEEEAAAHHHAAGH

The main mission of a political party’s national committee is to advocate the party’s ideas in order to win elections. In his four year tenure as the Chairman of the DNC Terry McAuliffe was able to advocate the ideas, albeit in a ham-handed way, but he was never able to translate those ideas into election wins. He hammered Enron as if we all didn’t know he made his own millions looting Global Crossings before it went under leaving thousands, Democrats among them, holding the bag. He talked big. “George Bush’s little brother is going down – guaranteed.” “2002 Mid-term is going to be a great victory for the Democrats.” “Not only will John Kerry win the presidency but we’ll gain in the house, senate and state houses as well.” All Terry McAuliffe and his acid tongue accomplished in his main mission was to lose and lose big. In this regard if you’re a Republican, you have to hate to see him go.

McAuliffe’s big contribution to the Democrat party was to take them financially into the black and build a new DNC headquarters. He also brought the party organization into the 21st century. So for the last two election cycles the Democrats have had a funding advantage and, as always, the MSM in their back pockets and all they have to show for it is a new building. Now Democrats have lost their last reason for complaining about losing elections. Democrats could always be counted on to complain that the Republican Party was the party of big money and special interests. Thanks to McAuliffe’s fund raising prowess, they can’t say that anymore. The Democrats spent 36% more in Ohio and lost by120,000 votes. Can’t blame that on the usual funding chasm that, pre-McAuliffe, favored the Republicans. What’s left to blame - maybe hate or Michael Moore, George Soros, Moveon, Ted Kennedy – but I repeat maybe hate? Or is it that mainstream Democrats have turned the party or at least the voice of the party over to its extreme left fringe?

Now Howard Dean has replaced McAuliffe. While it may be too early to “scream” for joy - I’m reminded of the adage “careful what you wish for” – it seems the Democrat Party is acting like a spoiled child that, when disciplined for screaming, screams louder.

Update: Going, going...

Several posts below, Lex explains why the MSM is going, going and soon to be gone. As the new media continues to cut into the MSM’s market share the Liberal MSM’s only reaction has been to raise their ad rates for ever declining circulation and rating numbers. There is nothing the MSM can do stop the slide. Technology is going to have its way. But the MSM can speed the process along. Take for example the lying Eason Jordan story. MSM ignored the story a la Dan Rather. Bloggers were unrelenting. The result was Jordan’s resignation from CNN.

Washington Post scribbler Howard Kurtz reports the lack of media coverage on the Jordan story making Jordan's resignation a bit difficult to explain to media customers by the MSM that failed to report the story in the first place:

“Blogs operated by National Review Online, radio talk-show host Hugh Hewitt and commentator Michelle Malkin were among those that began slamming Jordan last week after a Davos attendee posted an online account, but the establishment press was slow to pick up on the controversy. The Washington Post and Boston Globe published stories Tuesday and the Miami Herald ran one Thursday. Also on Thursday, Wall Street Journal editorial board member Bret Stephens, who was at Davos, published an account accusing Jordan of "defamatory innuendo," and the Associated Press moved a story. As of yesterday, the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune and USA Today had not carried a staff-written story, and the CBS, NBC and ABC nightly news programs had not reported the matter. It was discussed on several talk shows on Fox News, MSNBC and CNBC.”

So what are the MSM bigs to do now? Here is what the story of Jordan’s resignation might sound like;

CNN heavy Eason Jordan resigned today. He has been under fire from right-wing nuts called bloggers. (Insert trite MSM definition of blogger here, as if there is anyone outside the MSM that doesn’t know what a blogger really does.) Jordan was attacked after criticizing the Bush administration’s policies in Iraq. We have ignored this story because we felt it was baseless. As a result we now appear to have been caught flatfooted on the story. Let me assure you, we were all over this story and chose not report it because…well…we just don’t report bad news about ourselves. Trust us that we are providing the correct spin on all of the day’s top stories.

How else could they report the story? The truth – naah.

More on Mattis

Terrence Lauerman, no doubt from the safety of his basement, uses the words of Marine Lieutenant General James Mattis as evidence that; John Kerry was right about the American fighting man’s criminal actions in Vietnam (Something even Kerry tried to walk back during the campaign); that pro-lifers are some how hypocritical if they happen to support the military; that President Bush and church leaders remain silent on moral issues and that America fights unfair because we have better forces and equipment. All of that from the off-the-cuff remarks of an American fighting hero.

First, Mattis, faced with a firestorm of criticism, acknowledged that his comments were bit over the top. I don’t think that they were. How many of us would not take certain delight in getting Osama bin Laden in our sights? How many of us would hesitate to squeeze off the round? I think about 98% of would squeeze the trigger and the only thing we’d feel afterward is joy and the recoil of the weapon. So if the average American would take delight in being the one who “whacked” a piece of human garbage that killed 3,000 of our fellow citizens, why shouldn’t an American fighting man delight in killing people who were responsible for deaths his friends?

President Bush commented early during Abu Ghraib that it “sickened” him. So Mr. Lauerman sees and hears only what he wants to see and hear. Besides, when a list of man’s inhumanity to man is compiled, Abu Ghraib is going to be near the bottom just ahead of fraternity initiations.

Lauerman, in what can only be described as extreme irony, described Mattis’ comments as “vulgar and gruesome” then uses the comments to attack pro-lifers. I challenge Lauerman to find something, anything, more vulgar and gruesome than pulling a baby, feet first, from its mother’s womb until the base of the baby’s skull is exposed. Then, puncture the baby’s skull and suck its brains out. That is vulgar and gruesome, vial and grotesque.

Last, if Mr. Lauerman is ever engaged in a struggle for his life, he will instantly know that there is no such thing as a fair fight. America has an obligation use its military might and technologically to annihilate our enemies with the lowest possible cost in American lives.

Dayton to stay in his bunker in 06

Brave, Brave, Brave Sir Robin, a.k.a Minnesota Senator Mark Dayton has done America and the Democrats a favor. He’s not going to seek reelection in ’06. That’s bad news for the Republicans because a dead man would be harder to beat than Dayton. Oh wait, Democrats have already run a dead man and won in Missouri. OK, Dayton would be easier to beat than nearly any living person.

Now there will be a real race. Given the fading Democrat nature of MN, Dems may hold it for one more cycle now that Dayton has indicated that he will be, ehem, retreating to private life and no doubt into a deep, deep bunker. But what is almost certain, with Dayton gone to hide, there will be at least one better senator in D.C. after the mid-term.

Kraft made me a Pats fan

I should have blogged about the Super Bowl on Sunday. But, I just didn’t care on Sunday. So now I probably will appear to be jumping on the Patriot bandwagon. First, in Germany the game didn’t come on until midnight or 1:00 am. Danny had school Monday. So, I had to get him up at 6:30 and off to the bus by 7:00 am. So when I woke in my chair at midnight with a stiff neck and the tv tuned to something, I thought, hey it’s not as if it’s Daytona or something important and I went to bed.

I got up and was only half pleased to find out that New England won. I say half pleased because of the way I pick my favorite teams. My first rule is to root for the team with the fewest showboats. In that regard, I’d have rooted for the Pats. My second rule is to root for the underdog. In that regard, I’d have favored the Eagles. Since the game was over and I had no passion for either team, I thought why type about the Super Bowl?

Then I was watching some sports show. When hiring Head Coach Bill Belichick, Patriot’s Owner Robert Kraft reportedly told Belichick, “If I have to hire criminals and thugs to win, I’ll sell the team.” So, I’m now a belated Pats fan. So much so, that I am ordering a hat. Kraft’s comment should be widely publicized – particularly among NBA owners and players.

Swift Vets aren't running for office John

Can a man that got 47% of the vote for president of the United States be this dumb? In an interview with the Boston Globe the dour one said, ''Let me make this clear: My full military record has been made public," Kerry said. ''All of my medical records and all of my fitness reports, every fitness report involving each place I served, is public. Where are George Bush's still? Where are his military records? End of issue."
Well, no they are not John. The Navy says they are not. They claim that they have a hundred or so pages that have not been made public. Who are we to believe, the US Navy or John “Christmas in Cambodia” Kerry? Hmm, I think the Navy.

Also, the president has ordered all of his records made public. He don’t need no stinkin’ form 180. He is the Commander in Chief. The scary looking one, has also challenged the Swift Vets to sign a form 180. Nice try weasel boy. They, last time I looked, were not running for anything. They are private citizens. I could care less what is their private records. Also, they are not running around telling everyone how great they are. You on the other hand couldn’t go two syllables without mentioning what a great guy you were for having done your duty – which it appears might be a lie. The Swift Vet, on the other hand have gone about living their live in quiet anonymity until Blowhard Johnny four months shows up running for president. Only when it appeared that the country might be saddled with lying, self-worshiping, gold digging, enemy sympathizer, did the Swift Vets force themselves into the limelight.

Require Churchhill to speak

University of Colorado Police arrest Shareef Aleem after he and other students brought a halt to a Board of Regents meeting in Aurora, Colo., on Thursday, Feb. 3, 2005. The special meeting was called by the Regents over the controversy of Professor Ward Churchill and a paper he wrote comparing the victims in the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center as Nazis. Protesting students brought a halt to the meeting by shouting their demands to speak at the meeting. (AP Photo/Ed Andrieski) CO Governor Owens wants Churchill fired. While I think it's a shame that taxpayer dollars are going to this fool, maybe a better solution is to REQUIRE him talk openly and publicly so that Americans can see what we're up against.

Liberty for our "friends"

One of the least reported parts of the president’s SOTU speech was his calling out of Egypt and Saudi Arabia. "The government of Saudi Arabia can demonstrate its leadership in the region by expanding the role of its people in determining their future," Mr. Bush told a joint session of Congress. "And the great and proud nation of Egypt, which showed the way toward peace in the Middle East, can now show the way toward democracy in the Middle East," he added.

While the chattering class was deriding Mr. Bush for his inauguration speech which touted worldwide liberty, check out what Lex said on this on January 25th. Lex opined that the true measure of the president’s commitment to liberty would not be if he bombed Iran or North Korea, but rather if he held our “friends’” feet close to liberty’s fire.

In the SOTU address the president did just that. But the talkers who trashed Bush on his liberty speech and wailed that Bush was just looking to start another war in liberty’s name and about our “friends’” abysmal record on liberty are now oddly silent. Shouldn’t they be praising Bush for his call to Egypt and Saudi Arabia? No, that just won’t do. Praise Bush for something, anything? How absurd!

Well once again the president is showing America and the looniest Dems (Yes, alas it seems they are two different groups.) that he means what he says and says what he means. This is a completely alien concept to the party of Bill and Shrill. They only say what a poll says they should say and mean it only as long as the poll says they should.

The Griffin opines on Mattis

"My goodness, a trained killer that likes his work. We need people like Gen Mattis but you are right, some people just can't admit it. Later."

Please, don't tell the truth

Marine Lieutenant General James Mattis is in trouble for telling the truth. Thursday in San Diego Mattis said, "You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil…You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them."

Oh the humanity! How could he say such a thing? I could care less. I wish there were more straight shooters like Mattis in politics and in high places in our military. Mattis has been reigned in by the Marine Commandant and has said he should have chosen his words more carefully. Why - because clueless talkers are upset with Mattis. They don’t want the reality of war or any reality for that matter to intrude into their uptown politically correct party worlds.

They of course would all be in gulags somewhere were it not for men like Mattis who make it safe for the talker class who, between sips of expensive bottled water, turn up their high class noses and trash men like, drum roll please, Mattis. Killing terrorists for fun? Keeping prisoners awake and standing or kneeling naked for several hours? Oh my! How barbaric! I guess the truth is that the talker class needs and wants men like Mattis to do the dirty work they have no stomach for, but please don’t ever let them out in public. Do what we want and need you to do but please don’t come into our party world.

When the subject comes up on some Sunday talk show and the whining guest or network pretty boy starts to trash Mattis, just ask yourself, “Who do I trust with my son’s life, Gen. Mattis or (fill in the blank) Chris Matthews, Sen. Dope, Congressman Clueless etc.?

Bush targets red state Democrats

There is good news and bad news for the president in Alberto Gonzales’ 60-36 confirmation as the Attorney General yesterday. The bad news is…hmm, on second thought there is no bad news. I had thought that the 36 votes against Gonzales was the bad news. But in that Gonzales is highly qualified with a life story that is an inspiration to all, 36 votes against him only means that 36 Democrats have some splannin to do their fair-minded constituents. So that too is good news.

The better news is the Democrats who voted for Gonzales. Look at who voted for Gonzales, Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut (blue), Ken Salazar of Colorado (red), Mary Landrieu of Louisiana (red), Bill Nelson of Florida (red), Ben Nelson of Nebraska (red) and Mark Pryor of Arkansas (red). Red state Democrats are running scared and if this 60 vote coalition holds there will be little the Democrats can do but become more and more shrill.

And what did the president do yesterday? He took off to red states with Democrat senators to put their…hmm...necks in a vice. Check out Lex’s November 3 post when he predicted this. Breezing by the wholly owned subsidiary of the Democrat Party known as the Mainstream Media, the president took his message directly to the people. Meanwhile, Democrats crowed around a statue of FDR for a photo op for their propaganda arm. The president goes to the people while, the Democrats go to the media. That just about says it all.

Ted's not the only lunatic @ CNN

A CNN executive, Eason Jordan, has made several claims that coalition forces in general and the US military in particular are purposefully targeting and torturing reporters. The complete run down of what CQ has taken to calling Eason’s Fables can be found here and here.

I think Jordan is a liar, or as a politician might say disingenuous. I think he’s a liar for two main reasons:
1. After the lunatic ravings of Ted Turner on religion and the Nazis, anything that comes out of the executive suite at CNN cannot be taken seriously. Consequently, nothing that is aired on CNN should be taken seriously.
2. If the US military were targeting reporters, there would be no news reports from Baghdad, because all the reporters would be dead.

That is not say that Alberto Gonzales and the Justice Department couldn’t come up with good and sufficient reason to dispatch a few member of the terrorist’s propaganda arm know as the mainstream American media. But that would be like smothering your uncle with a pillow on his deathbed to get the golf clubs he promised you in his will. The cost benefit ratio is so out of line as to be ridiculous. As Jordan’s comments indicate, the mainstream media is dying of natural causes and needs no help from a professional American military to speed the process along.

Another indication that the mainstream media is headed for life support is their willingness to ignore this story because it places one of their own in the worst possible light. Had Jordan’s comments originated from one of the blog sites above, no doubt Pete, Brian and Dan would have closed their nightly news reads with a comment on how deplorable the comment was and an indication of why the blogosphere cannot be taken seriously.

Dems search for leader

Well, the SOTU and the Democrat response went exactly as predicted below with exception that I should have mentioned that the Democrats would attack the president personally as well as his ideas. I guess for the president the hug between the dead Marine’s mom and the Iraqi woman about said it all. For the Democrat response, the best part was when they stopped talking.

What do you suppose Joe six pack Democrat thinks. 40 minutes from a great man with great optimism and big bold ideas followed by 30 minutes from a couple of pygmies. Joe’s got to be thinking, is that it? Is there nobody in this party who can congratulate the president and America’s fighting forces for the Iraqi election, admit that changes are needed in some of the New Deal programs and make some bold proposals of our own? The answer, Joe, is no. There isn’t.

Dems can't stand a good example

Tonight, things will run true to form. President Bush will give an inspiring speech full of optimism and big ideas. Ken and Barbie (Plastic Harry Reid and Botox Nancy Pelosi) will drone on with the Democrat response that will paint a picture of hopelessness, will simply oppose everything the president says and offer nothing as a counter.

The president will get a five minute ovation when notes the success of Iraq’s election. Fat Teddy will sit on his hands and shake his bloated, oversized head in the negative causing his blubbery jowls to continue to jiggle long after his fat head stops shaking on his pencil thin neck. Like home team losers hoping for a rainout in the top of the 8th inning, Ken and Barbie will demand an Iraq exit strategy stopping just short of demanding an immediate withdrawal. Ken and Barbie will demand that Bush snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in Iraq by quitting early.

Bush will trumpet an ownership society. He will advocate allowing American citizens the opportunity to keep part of their earnings and invest them in accounts that will belong to them and their family if they die. It will be a voluntary program. If you’re happy with the current bankrupt system, you’ll be allowed to continue to pour your money down the government entitlement rat hole. Ken and Barbie will howl that society as we know it will end if the American people are permitted to manage more of the money that they earn.

To paraphrase the Griffin, "Mark Twain said, 'Nothing is quite so obnoxious as the constant presence of a good example'. That is what the Democrat Party is faced with today. How do you compete against a guy that is a straight shooter, church goer, baseball lover and lets little leaguers play on the white house lawn? His wife is a dedicated educator and an excellent example to children. You will never hear him say, 'It depends on what your definition of is 'is'.' This is the dilemma facing the dems. As hard as they try, they just cannot seem to make him a bad guy. For the current Democrat Party, Mark Twain was right."

Fat Teddy no JFK

For some odd reason JFK remains a hero to the American left. Odd because, JFK passed the largest one-time tax reduction of the marginal income tax rate in history. He proposed reducing the top marginal rate from 91% to 65% and capital gains from 25% to 19%. He used and threatened the use of unilateral and preemptive military action and brought the world to the brink of nuclear war when he felt that the security of the US was threatened (Cuba [missile crisis & Bay of Pigs], Vietnam and “Bear any burden” speech). He dreamt of an America where we asked what we could do for our country not what kind of free medical care America owed us.

How do liberals square their near idolization of JFK and his policies with all of their wackiness of today? Shouldn’t they be maligning JFK for a tax policy that turned its back on the poor while offering tax breaks only to the rich? Shouldn’t they be condemning JFK’s administration for its unilateral, preemptive and utterly inept attack of Cuba at the Bay of Pigs? Shouldn’t they be reeling at the thought of JFK nearly destroying the world just because the Soviet Union wanted to put some missiles in Cuba? Shouldn’t they be as critical of JFK’s “Bear any Burden” speech which was every bit as much outside the mainstream realpolitik at the time as President Bush’s liberty speech is today?

How do liberals of today hold JFK and his brother Fat Teddy simultaneously in such high esteem? They could not be more different. What would JFK say to Fat Teddy about supporting America’s enemies in a time of war? Would JFK have led the once great Democrat party away from policies and candidates that support abortion on demand including the gruesome practice of partial birth abortion? What would he have to say about gay marriage? Would JFK support the removal of every vestige of God from the public square? Would JFK have shared the presidential box at the Democrat Convention with a blame America first lunatic such as Michael Moore?

JFK’s advice to Fat Teddy, likely would be, “Aaah, Teddy you need to aaah, sobeah up and, aaah, shut up. Aaah, not necessarily in that owder.”