On the plane ride to Turkey last week I read newt Gingrich’s book “Winning the Future.” The book is compendium of the former Speaker’s ideas for setting America on a new course for greatness.
The one thing that really struck me was the section on the judiciary. The Speaker makes a strong case that our judiciary is out of control and out of step with the American people, as well as the executive and legislative branches of government. As a result, Libs are able to forego elections to advance their agenda and are instead able to pursue it through judicial fiat. Because Conservatives can read and understand what is written in our Constitution, an ever declining number of Libs in the Senate know that these Conservatives must be thwarted by the extra-Constitutional means of a senatorial filibuster. Failure to do so would cause the Libs to loose their last and easiest opportunity affect national policy.
Elections are expensive and messy. We the people can compare and contrast the positions of the candidates and vote for the one that best represents our views. Officials are held to account on a regular schedule. A doofus declaring “One nation under God” in our pledge unconstitutional could not hope to carry but one or two of the 435 congressional districts that make up America. Not a single candidate running for Senate could hope to be seated with such an out of step position. However, the unelected 9th Circus can make that determination and reasonable people simply shrug their shoulders and say, “Well, I guess that’s the law” as if the dopes that make up the 9th Circus are channeling God – oops, no doubt that would be unconstitutional – let’s say channeling Madison himself.
First, it’s important to remember that every judge is nothing more than a glorified ambulance chaser in a black robe - picture Johnny Edwards on the Supreme Court here. Judges, as the 9th Circus proves, in many cases are nothing more than Libs frustrated at the 20 plus year decline in the Democrat Party. Many are partisan hacks too ugly or out of touch to win an election. So they state their opinion and call it the law. In doing so, they ignore the will of the people and their supposedly co-equal branches of government.
Sadly, it is very difficult to unseat an unelected dope once elected dopes seat the unelected dope on a federal court. You are more likely to be struck by lightening – twice – while holding the winning mega bucks ticket at the pot of gold at the end of a rainbow than be impeached as a federal judge. Overriding a poor decision, such gay marriage, may require Constitutional amendment. That requires 290 representatives, 66 senators and 38 states. It is, by design, a long and tedious process. But five dopes in robes on the Supreme Court can say the Constitution requires a “separation of church and state” and it is so. Now that may be the will of the people or what the justices think the Constitution ought to say, but, in its current state, the Constitution doesn’t say that – like Dred Scott only the court says so. We cannot rely on a Constitutional amendment for every dopy idea the 9th Circus comes up with and the Supremes refuse to reverse.
The way to keep dopes off the bench is to turn every senatorial election into a referendum on the judiciary. Copy the letter one post below. Change the name, add a few of your own comments and e-mail it off to Dem senators running for re-election in ’06 in FL, NE, WV, NM, MI and WI. Dems will also defending an open seat in MN. Three pick ups in the mid-term may turn the tide and demonstrate to Dems that the far, far left is leading their Party into oblivion. Oops -way long.
Thursday, March 31, 2005
Wednesday, March 30, 2005
Poll in FL in '06
An open letter to Lex's Dem senator in FL. Copy it, change the name, and send it off to Dems vulnerable in the mid-term.
Dear Senator Nelson,
There is a big poll in FL in '06 on Democrat obstructionism with regard to the president's judicial nominations.
Can you please cite the Article and section of our constitution that allows 40 senators to block presidential judicial nominations?
Because there are so many extremist judges - all on the liberal side - making insane decisions with regard to the pledge, right to die, abortion, gay marriage, prayer, illegal immigration, the rights of terrorists etc. there is no way main stream America is going to come down on your side.
How about stepping up to the plate and leading your party away from its extra-constitutional positions on judicial nominations? This could be a win-win for you. You could become a voice of reason in party that has allowed Michael Moore to become its face and voice. At the same time, you can vote your conscience on the nominees.
Sincerely,
Doug Schumick
Dear Senator Nelson,
There is a big poll in FL in '06 on Democrat obstructionism with regard to the president's judicial nominations.
Can you please cite the Article and section of our constitution that allows 40 senators to block presidential judicial nominations?
Because there are so many extremist judges - all on the liberal side - making insane decisions with regard to the pledge, right to die, abortion, gay marriage, prayer, illegal immigration, the rights of terrorists etc. there is no way main stream America is going to come down on your side.
How about stepping up to the plate and leading your party away from its extra-constitutional positions on judicial nominations? This could be a win-win for you. You could become a voice of reason in party that has allowed Michael Moore to become its face and voice. At the same time, you can vote your conscience on the nominees.
Sincerely,
Doug Schumick
Friday, March 25, 2005
Don't let MSM tarnish John Paul II
John Paul II http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/
Pope John Paul II is said to know the time of his death. Yet, he continues in his duties with great grace and dignity. The end for this great man is, no doubt, near. His legacy should be one of great deeds - one-third of the triumvirate, along with Ronal Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, who brought down the Soviet Union. The MSM will never give him his due – you can count on that.
It has already started. Whenever John Paul is mentioned, there is some reference to sex scandals in the church. The MSM will never tout John Paul as the man who faced down the Soviets in Poland, or the man who faced death and met it on his own terms. Instead they will focus on scandal, not because scandal is typical of the Catholic Church, but rather because it is a way to destroy the church.
Statistics prove that your kids are safer from molestation going to confession or serving as an alter boy in a Catholic church than going to a public school, hanging out with Protestant clergy or staying home – where most molestations occur. So, if people quote the MSM and condemn Pope John Paul for condoning molestation, tell them that, as usual, the MSM is biased and misinformed. Direct them here for the truth.
The reason that the focus in these cases is on the Catholic Church is because the MSM takes great joy attacking anything with a religious tinge. Why go after a one teacher when you can assault the entire Catholic Church. Also, the “root of all evil” – money- plays a role. Why sue a single school board when you can go after the hundreds of millions available in the Catholic Church?
Sure the Catholic Church has had a problem, and several of its Bishops and Cardinals have been slow to act. But statistics do not bear out the MSM’s unrelenting assault on the church. More importantly, those statistics will not bear out the MSM’s demonizing John Paul II, after he departs this earth for his great reward.
Elections shape the courts
The good thing for the American people is that the U.S. Constitution can be read and understood by just about anyone who takes the time to look at it. The bad thing for politicians is that the U.S. Constitution can be read and understood by just about anyone who takes the time to look at it. That explains why our Liberal public schools ignore the document. They want the document to remain a mystery. If nobody knows what’s in the document, then blabbermouths with Harvard law degrees can tell us that the Constitution clearly provides for the federal right to get an abortion and demands every reference to God be removed from the public square. The first is not even remotely referred to in the Constitution and latter is turned on its head - 180 out of phase.
Article III. Section I.: The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.
Article III is clear and easy to read. The federal courts, save the Supreme Court, are created out of whole cloth by the Congress. Judges are not infallible gods – check out Dred Scott and scores of other bad decisions. Judges do not have the “last word” on anything – they can be overturned by other judges and/or the ELECTED representatives of the people. The idea is that the judiciary will be held in check by ELECTED officials.
Elected officials have asked a federal court, which Congress created, to take “a new” look at the case of Terri Schiavo. The federal courts have given a veneer of 5th and 14th Amendment legitimacy to Terri’s death, but they have treated the wishes of the ELECTED body of congress with utter contempt.
Blabbermouths all over the TV are saying, “Well, the courts have spoken. We have to respect the rule of law.” Well the court does not have the last word in America. The preamble of the Constitution does not open with, “The Courts of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union …” We the people have the last word. That word is voiced through elections. Reps should make the judiciary the key issue in the mid-term elections. Dems filibuster constructionist judges who can look at the Constitution and say, “Well, no there is nothing in there that says states have to recognize gay marriage.” Or “Well, the constitution is pretty clear about the right to keep and bear arms.” Or “Hmm, I’ll be danged, the words ‘separation of church and state are not in there.’”
Also, that which the legislative and executive branches create, the legislative and executive branches can wipe out. That would be the true “nuclear option”. Congress and the President could simply say, “OK, 9th circus, you’re completely out of touch with the people, the Constitution and the legislative and excecutive branches, we ordain that you cease to exist and revoke your authority.” This is not without prcedence. In 1802 President Jefferson and a newly elected Congress wiped out 18 court judgeships - and the Supreme Court upheld the action.
Reps should work hard for a mandate to get the courts back in line. If successful in the '06 elections, they should begin to drop the ax on run away judges.
Article III. Section I.: The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.
Article III is clear and easy to read. The federal courts, save the Supreme Court, are created out of whole cloth by the Congress. Judges are not infallible gods – check out Dred Scott and scores of other bad decisions. Judges do not have the “last word” on anything – they can be overturned by other judges and/or the ELECTED representatives of the people. The idea is that the judiciary will be held in check by ELECTED officials.
Elected officials have asked a federal court, which Congress created, to take “a new” look at the case of Terri Schiavo. The federal courts have given a veneer of 5th and 14th Amendment legitimacy to Terri’s death, but they have treated the wishes of the ELECTED body of congress with utter contempt.
Blabbermouths all over the TV are saying, “Well, the courts have spoken. We have to respect the rule of law.” Well the court does not have the last word in America. The preamble of the Constitution does not open with, “The Courts of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union …” We the people have the last word. That word is voiced through elections. Reps should make the judiciary the key issue in the mid-term elections. Dems filibuster constructionist judges who can look at the Constitution and say, “Well, no there is nothing in there that says states have to recognize gay marriage.” Or “Well, the constitution is pretty clear about the right to keep and bear arms.” Or “Hmm, I’ll be danged, the words ‘separation of church and state are not in there.’”
Also, that which the legislative and executive branches create, the legislative and executive branches can wipe out. That would be the true “nuclear option”. Congress and the President could simply say, “OK, 9th circus, you’re completely out of touch with the people, the Constitution and the legislative and excecutive branches, we ordain that you cease to exist and revoke your authority.” This is not without prcedence. In 1802 President Jefferson and a newly elected Congress wiped out 18 court judgeships - and the Supreme Court upheld the action.
Reps should work hard for a mandate to get the courts back in line. If successful in the '06 elections, they should begin to drop the ax on run away judges.
Thursday, March 24, 2005
Where will it end?
The Griffin’s interesting post below throws Dems in with Libs on the Terri case. This is probably true, but it must be pointed out that Senate Dems voted unanimously and House Dems split about 50/50 for the bill that was supposed to save Terri. The MSM and know-nothing blabbermouths that populate their news programs are ignoring this point. They do so because if they point to strong bi-partisanship on this issue, then they cannot use the phrase “pandering to the religious right” in their next breath.
What does this tell us about Dems – particularly Senate Dems? Are they truly concerned for Terri’s life? Some are, but the overwhelmingly majority are pandering to save their scurvy/ample backsides. Why don’t MSM blabber shows pit a pro-Terri Dem Senator against an anti-Terri House Dem? Why aren’t the pro-Terri Dems stepping up to the mic and speaking out for “that woman”…Ms. Schiavo? Well, the only answer is that it’s the Dems pandering and hiding in the tall grasses on this issue.
Then there’s this. Have you noticed that the creepy jabber boxes shilling for the death of Terri drone on and on about how the congress has no right to inject themselves into this “family issue” all the while the jabber boxes are injecting themselves into this “family issue”? If everyone’s supposed to shut up while Michael Schiavo murders his wife, why don’t the jabber boxes set the example and shut up first?
But there is some good in all of this. It’s heartening to see that the congress, America and indeed the world can be mobilized around the fate of a single woman. The thoughts of people of goodwill, for the most part, on both sides of this issue are focused on Terri’s life or merciful death.
What’s most disturbing to me about this is - what’s next? People say, well I wouldn’t want to live like that. So if a spouse decides that he doesn’t want to live Alzheimer’s can he kill his wife if she contracts Alzheimer’s? If parents wouldn’t want to live with Down’s syndrome, can they kill their 15 year old Down’s child? Most people wouldn’t want to live with Autism, so can they kill Autistic children? As we learn more about our genetic make up, will babies be aborted if they don’t have straight blond hair and blue eyes?
We’ve already reached the point where “good kids” “typical teens” will return to the prom dance as if nothing has happened after delivering a baby in the restroom then discarding it in the trash as if it were a McDonald’s hamburger wrapper. No strike that. They would have dropped the wrapper on the ground. They put the baby in the trash to hide it. Where does it end?
What does this tell us about Dems – particularly Senate Dems? Are they truly concerned for Terri’s life? Some are, but the overwhelmingly majority are pandering to save their scurvy/ample backsides. Why don’t MSM blabber shows pit a pro-Terri Dem Senator against an anti-Terri House Dem? Why aren’t the pro-Terri Dems stepping up to the mic and speaking out for “that woman”…Ms. Schiavo? Well, the only answer is that it’s the Dems pandering and hiding in the tall grasses on this issue.
Then there’s this. Have you noticed that the creepy jabber boxes shilling for the death of Terri drone on and on about how the congress has no right to inject themselves into this “family issue” all the while the jabber boxes are injecting themselves into this “family issue”? If everyone’s supposed to shut up while Michael Schiavo murders his wife, why don’t the jabber boxes set the example and shut up first?
But there is some good in all of this. It’s heartening to see that the congress, America and indeed the world can be mobilized around the fate of a single woman. The thoughts of people of goodwill, for the most part, on both sides of this issue are focused on Terri’s life or merciful death.
What’s most disturbing to me about this is - what’s next? People say, well I wouldn’t want to live like that. So if a spouse decides that he doesn’t want to live Alzheimer’s can he kill his wife if she contracts Alzheimer’s? If parents wouldn’t want to live with Down’s syndrome, can they kill their 15 year old Down’s child? Most people wouldn’t want to live with Autism, so can they kill Autistic children? As we learn more about our genetic make up, will babies be aborted if they don’t have straight blond hair and blue eyes?
We’ve already reached the point where “good kids” “typical teens” will return to the prom dance as if nothing has happened after delivering a baby in the restroom then discarding it in the trash as if it were a McDonald’s hamburger wrapper. No strike that. They would have dropped the wrapper on the ground. They put the baby in the trash to hide it. Where does it end?
The Griffin's sure-fire way to save Terri
"If Terri Shiavo was of sound mind and body and decided to go on a hunger strike to stop the harvesting of seals in the frozen north, would the dems and libs say let her die? They would be saying that the poor woman is a saint and must be [saved].
"My solution…? Put a sign in her hand that says "SAVE THE WHALES". The libs would demand intervention and a feeding tube installed.
"Also I keep hearing that if she cannot feed herself she will have no quality of life… She must be allowed to starve. This rational puts our infant children at great risk… Her husband has some major issues too. Her parents want to care for Terri - so let them. Why/how could he not allow this? What is the rational? Oh yes...life insurance!"
"My solution…? Put a sign in her hand that says "SAVE THE WHALES". The libs would demand intervention and a feeding tube installed.
"Also I keep hearing that if she cannot feed herself she will have no quality of life… She must be allowed to starve. This rational puts our infant children at great risk… Her husband has some major issues too. Her parents want to care for Terri - so let them. Why/how could he not allow this? What is the rational? Oh yes...life insurance!"
Wednesday, March 23, 2005
Bond's knee a mask for juice use
Barry Bonds has come up lame – his knee that is not his bovine excrement explanations about his steroid use. This is useful in that Barry will now have the perfect excuse, absent his juice, to become the incredible shrinking homerun king.
Last week I watched a pathetic and weepy Mark McGuire at a congressional hearing. At the time Mr. McGuire was smashing baseballs out of ball parks all across America, I thought he was great. Then the andro controversy was exposed. At the time andro was not a banned substance, so I thought what the hell, no worse than taking an aspirin - right. Besides I rationalized, he still has to put the bat on the ball. Then andro was banned and it now appears that andro might have been used to mask the use of illegal steroids. So my opinion of Mr. McGuire has been on a steady decline since his historic 62nd homerun.
It fell through the floor after his appearance before the congress. Instead of stepping up to the plate, so to speak, and admitting what he did – whatever that was – Mr. McGuire wept and took the 5th. What a pathetic figure. I hope my nephews were able to sell their McGuire rookie cards before the big crybaby showed up for his congressional hearing.
Speaking of rookie cards, any doubts that these guys are doing something unnatural to their bodies can be quickly erased by comparing their rookie cards to what they look like now. Then compare rookie cards of former greats like Mickey Mantle, Joe DiMaggio, Johnny Bench etc to their later cards. The difference cannot be explained away by modern weight training methods.
This is more than an issue about someone who wants to destroy themselves with drugs, illegal or otherwise. If Gorgeous George wants to pump himself up on drugs to impress the vacuous chicks on muscle beach, who cares? But these guys are cheating fans, teammates and the baseball record book. Goofy fans like Lex are duped into rooting for guys chasing records only to find out that they are cheaters. They cheat their teammates by denying them playing time and making it impossible for them to compete without engaging in the same dishonest behavior. They cheat the record book by claiming that their achievements are due to their God-given talent rather than chemicals they injected into their bodies.
however, there shouldn’t be any asterisks added to baseball’s record book. There should be an entirely new section added for the Bud Selig era of Major League Baseball. Put all the juicers in what can be called the “This Bud’s for you” section of the record book.
Last week I watched a pathetic and weepy Mark McGuire at a congressional hearing. At the time Mr. McGuire was smashing baseballs out of ball parks all across America, I thought he was great. Then the andro controversy was exposed. At the time andro was not a banned substance, so I thought what the hell, no worse than taking an aspirin - right. Besides I rationalized, he still has to put the bat on the ball. Then andro was banned and it now appears that andro might have been used to mask the use of illegal steroids. So my opinion of Mr. McGuire has been on a steady decline since his historic 62nd homerun.
It fell through the floor after his appearance before the congress. Instead of stepping up to the plate, so to speak, and admitting what he did – whatever that was – Mr. McGuire wept and took the 5th. What a pathetic figure. I hope my nephews were able to sell their McGuire rookie cards before the big crybaby showed up for his congressional hearing.
Speaking of rookie cards, any doubts that these guys are doing something unnatural to their bodies can be quickly erased by comparing their rookie cards to what they look like now. Then compare rookie cards of former greats like Mickey Mantle, Joe DiMaggio, Johnny Bench etc to their later cards. The difference cannot be explained away by modern weight training methods.
This is more than an issue about someone who wants to destroy themselves with drugs, illegal or otherwise. If Gorgeous George wants to pump himself up on drugs to impress the vacuous chicks on muscle beach, who cares? But these guys are cheating fans, teammates and the baseball record book. Goofy fans like Lex are duped into rooting for guys chasing records only to find out that they are cheaters. They cheat their teammates by denying them playing time and making it impossible for them to compete without engaging in the same dishonest behavior. They cheat the record book by claiming that their achievements are due to their God-given talent rather than chemicals they injected into their bodies.
however, there shouldn’t be any asterisks added to baseball’s record book. There should be an entirely new section added for the Bud Selig era of Major League Baseball. Put all the juicers in what can be called the “This Bud’s for you” section of the record book.
Tuesday, March 22, 2005
Vegatables don't care if they live
There are a few peculiar things about the Terri Schiavo case:
First, let’s assume that everything that Michael Schiavo says about Terri is true. She is vegetable incapable of feeling, knowing or understanding. If that is truly the case then it makes no difference to her at this point if she lives or dies. That being the case, then shouldn’t we next consider Terri’s loved ones? Terri, being nothing more than a carrot at this point could care less if she lives or dies. Her parents however want desperately that she live. Her life brings them great pleasure and joy. Conversely, her slow and painful death will bring them great anguish and pain. So, if Michael is right and Terri is just a cabbage, shouldn’t our next concern for the well being of the living? If Terri’s parents are comforted by the presence of the cabbage, why must the cabbage be thrown away?
Next, why has the MSM, talking dopes (AKA talking heads), Michael Schiavo and the usual mob laid Sunday’s votes by the senate and house at the feet of Republicans? Well yes, Republicans as group are generally more tolerant of babies, the elderly, the infirm, the handicapped, and those with mental defects and their right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness - but both the Senate and the house passed the Terri bill in a bi-partisan manner. The Senate passed their bill in a voice vote – Scary Harry Reid called for no filibuster so it’s really all his fault. The house vote was 156 Rep and 47 Dems for and 5 Reps and 58 Dems against. That is fairly bi-partisan in today’s world. But no Dem has come under the withering fire of blowhards like Chrissy Matthews.
And, what’s with the rallies for allowing this woman to starve to death? I can understand people believing that Terri might want to die under the circumstances, but I can’t understand screaming hysterical people taking to the streets demanding her slow painful death from starvation. These are people who would bitch if they were forced to skip lunch demanding that Terri be starved to death over a week or two. This is akin to the crazies that show up to counter-protest death penalty protestors at a prison execution shouting “Fry Him! Fry Him! Fry Him!” It’s sickening.
Last, the more I see Michael Schiavo, the less I like him. There is something odd about a guy that obsesses over killing his wife for 15 years. Most people who believe what Michael believes would have long ago granted the loving parents legal guardianship to their daughter; expressed their deep sorrow, and informed them, that under the circumstances, we intend to get on with our lives.
Prediction: Sadly, the Clinton appointed federal judge will err on the side of death.
First, let’s assume that everything that Michael Schiavo says about Terri is true. She is vegetable incapable of feeling, knowing or understanding. If that is truly the case then it makes no difference to her at this point if she lives or dies. That being the case, then shouldn’t we next consider Terri’s loved ones? Terri, being nothing more than a carrot at this point could care less if she lives or dies. Her parents however want desperately that she live. Her life brings them great pleasure and joy. Conversely, her slow and painful death will bring them great anguish and pain. So, if Michael is right and Terri is just a cabbage, shouldn’t our next concern for the well being of the living? If Terri’s parents are comforted by the presence of the cabbage, why must the cabbage be thrown away?
Next, why has the MSM, talking dopes (AKA talking heads), Michael Schiavo and the usual mob laid Sunday’s votes by the senate and house at the feet of Republicans? Well yes, Republicans as group are generally more tolerant of babies, the elderly, the infirm, the handicapped, and those with mental defects and their right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness - but both the Senate and the house passed the Terri bill in a bi-partisan manner. The Senate passed their bill in a voice vote – Scary Harry Reid called for no filibuster so it’s really all his fault. The house vote was 156 Rep and 47 Dems for and 5 Reps and 58 Dems against. That is fairly bi-partisan in today’s world. But no Dem has come under the withering fire of blowhards like Chrissy Matthews.
And, what’s with the rallies for allowing this woman to starve to death? I can understand people believing that Terri might want to die under the circumstances, but I can’t understand screaming hysterical people taking to the streets demanding her slow painful death from starvation. These are people who would bitch if they were forced to skip lunch demanding that Terri be starved to death over a week or two. This is akin to the crazies that show up to counter-protest death penalty protestors at a prison execution shouting “Fry Him! Fry Him! Fry Him!” It’s sickening.
Last, the more I see Michael Schiavo, the less I like him. There is something odd about a guy that obsesses over killing his wife for 15 years. Most people who believe what Michael believes would have long ago granted the loving parents legal guardianship to their daughter; expressed their deep sorrow, and informed them, that under the circumstances, we intend to get on with our lives.
Prediction: Sadly, the Clinton appointed federal judge will err on the side of death.
Monday, March 21, 2005
Body counts are poor strategic metrics
Lex noted below that it is not so easy to track Iraqi Security Force (ISF) casualties. For some reason – probably because it demonstrates that America is winning - the media are ignoring the mounting ISF role in defending Iraq. That role includes mounting casualties among the ISF.
What’s even more interesting is the media’s willingness to ignore terrorist casualties in Iraq. In fact, going one better than just ignoring terrorist’s casualties, it seems that the MSM is lumping the terrorist body count in with what they call “Iraqi dead.” This might explain why the media and other know-nothings keep harping on the figure of 100,000 dead Iraqi civilians. Two-thirds of that number are probably terrorists. Half of the remaining one-third are probably terrorist’s victims.
Contrary to George S. Patton’s famous quote, the way to win a war is not always by making “the other poor bastard die for his country”. After Vietnam, the American military got away from the body count method of deciding who is winning a war. Even in Lex’s posts below, he notes that the metric for whether or not we’re winning in Iraq is the not the number of terrorists casualties, but rather the number of ISF casualties. Strategic goals are not always achieved by racking up the highest body count.
In Iraq our strategic goals are going to be achieved by:
1. The creation an effective ISF.
2. Formation of a representative Iraqi government.
3. Restoration of basic services throughout the country.
4. A referendum on an Iraqi constitution.
5. Formation of a free and fair Iraqi judiciary.
Iraq seems to be moving apace in the first three categories. A vote on number four is scheduled at the end of the year and trials are slated to begin soon for Saddam and his Baathist murderers. So, in spite of the MSM’s doom and gloom forecasts, the hard work in Iraq is paying off – not only in Iraq but throughout the region.
What’s even more interesting is the media’s willingness to ignore terrorist casualties in Iraq. In fact, going one better than just ignoring terrorist’s casualties, it seems that the MSM is lumping the terrorist body count in with what they call “Iraqi dead.” This might explain why the media and other know-nothings keep harping on the figure of 100,000 dead Iraqi civilians. Two-thirds of that number are probably terrorists. Half of the remaining one-third are probably terrorist’s victims.
Contrary to George S. Patton’s famous quote, the way to win a war is not always by making “the other poor bastard die for his country”. After Vietnam, the American military got away from the body count method of deciding who is winning a war. Even in Lex’s posts below, he notes that the metric for whether or not we’re winning in Iraq is the not the number of terrorists casualties, but rather the number of ISF casualties. Strategic goals are not always achieved by racking up the highest body count.
In Iraq our strategic goals are going to be achieved by:
1. The creation an effective ISF.
2. Formation of a representative Iraqi government.
3. Restoration of basic services throughout the country.
4. A referendum on an Iraqi constitution.
5. Formation of a free and fair Iraqi judiciary.
Iraq seems to be moving apace in the first three categories. A vote on number four is scheduled at the end of the year and trials are slated to begin soon for Saddam and his Baathist murderers. So, in spite of the MSM’s doom and gloom forecasts, the hard work in Iraq is paying off – not only in Iraq but throughout the region.
Friday, March 18, 2005
The week in review
In Detroit, the UAW revoked parking privileges of Marine Reservists because some drive foreign cars and, Gasp! have Bush bumper stickers attached to their transportation. The Marine Commander, LtCol Joe Rutledge, correctly told the UAW to shove it. The UAW, no longer able to blackmail auto companies for unreasonably high pay and benefits, has seen its membership and work opportunities shrink over the years due to NAFTA and automation. If the petty UAW doesn’t want to support the Marines, and thereby the Nation, in a time of war screw ‘em. They can only expect further declines in membership with this kind of silliness. Except for an 87 BMW I bought in Germany last year to cruise the local strassen, I have never owned a foreign car and don’t plan to start because some dope at the UAW has booted the Marines out of his parking lot – others will. This is proof positive the only thing Libs are truly pro choice about is killing babies. Otherwise you cannot chose to own a gun especially a handgun, drive a large SUV – even an American made one, smoke in the restaurant that you own, build a house on your own private property or wear a fur coat. Yes, Libs are truly a tolerant crowd. Later, dopes at the UAW, under a hail of criticism, tried to backtrack when they allowed the Marines back in their parking lot. Too late, LtCol Rutledge has made other arrangements for his Leathernecks.
As noted several posts below, President Bush’s trip to Europe was opportunity for “Old” Europe to grow a backbone and get on board with restoring order in the chaotic Middle East. Others in the MSM characterized the trip as “fence mending” or “conciliatory”. Well proof positive that Lex was right and media bigs were WRONG are the appointments of fire-breathing, UN-bashing John Bolton as UN Ambassador and “neocon” Paul Wolfowitz to the World Bank. These are two of the most corrupt organizations in the world. They need to be taken up by the boot heel and shaken vigorously. Wails from the Libs, both foreign and domestic, indicate that Lex’s take on the President’s Euro tour was the correct one.
A FL court, a seedy husband and others for some mysterious reason want to starve Terri Schiavo to death. I don’t get it. This woman has loving family that is willing to care for her. Volunteer organizations have offered to bankroll the expense of sustaining her. I’m not sure I’d want to live like Terri. But I don’t know what’s in her mind and I sure as hell don’t want to be starved to death – ever. I would hope that the husband would simply cede his legal status to Terri’s family and get on with his life. Oh, and where are the candlelight vigils we see outside prisons when some piece of human debris is being sent to his maker? Shouldn’t these death penalty protesters be outside the hospital where Terri is? Criminals seem to get a more humane death than the one that the FL court is imposing on Terri.
A CA court has found that the state cannot prohibit gay marriage. Shocking! Shocking! Reps should be able to juxtapose this decision against Dems refusal to pass the President’s judicial nominations. I hate to see the current crop of Pols, on either sides of the aisle, mess with the Constitution. I don’t think any of them are capable of improving upon the founder’s original work. The answer is not an amendment to the Constitution. The answer is getting rid of activist judges. You cannot amend the Constitution fast enough to keep up with activist judges. If you did, the current 11 page document would have to be thousands of pages long. Bovine excrement judges/courts who consistently hand down bovine excrement decisions need to be held accountable by ELECTED officials. The only good thing about the current situation is that the Dems are threatening to shut down the government, which is what the conservatives have tried to do for 40 years - finally some bi-partisanship!
As noted several posts below, President Bush’s trip to Europe was opportunity for “Old” Europe to grow a backbone and get on board with restoring order in the chaotic Middle East. Others in the MSM characterized the trip as “fence mending” or “conciliatory”. Well proof positive that Lex was right and media bigs were WRONG are the appointments of fire-breathing, UN-bashing John Bolton as UN Ambassador and “neocon” Paul Wolfowitz to the World Bank. These are two of the most corrupt organizations in the world. They need to be taken up by the boot heel and shaken vigorously. Wails from the Libs, both foreign and domestic, indicate that Lex’s take on the President’s Euro tour was the correct one.
A FL court, a seedy husband and others for some mysterious reason want to starve Terri Schiavo to death. I don’t get it. This woman has loving family that is willing to care for her. Volunteer organizations have offered to bankroll the expense of sustaining her. I’m not sure I’d want to live like Terri. But I don’t know what’s in her mind and I sure as hell don’t want to be starved to death – ever. I would hope that the husband would simply cede his legal status to Terri’s family and get on with his life. Oh, and where are the candlelight vigils we see outside prisons when some piece of human debris is being sent to his maker? Shouldn’t these death penalty protesters be outside the hospital where Terri is? Criminals seem to get a more humane death than the one that the FL court is imposing on Terri.
A CA court has found that the state cannot prohibit gay marriage. Shocking! Shocking! Reps should be able to juxtapose this decision against Dems refusal to pass the President’s judicial nominations. I hate to see the current crop of Pols, on either sides of the aisle, mess with the Constitution. I don’t think any of them are capable of improving upon the founder’s original work. The answer is not an amendment to the Constitution. The answer is getting rid of activist judges. You cannot amend the Constitution fast enough to keep up with activist judges. If you did, the current 11 page document would have to be thousands of pages long. Bovine excrement judges/courts who consistently hand down bovine excrement decisions need to be held accountable by ELECTED officials. The only good thing about the current situation is that the Dems are threatening to shut down the government, which is what the conservatives have tried to do for 40 years - finally some bi-partisanship!
Thursday, March 17, 2005
Media ignores Iraqi Security Forces' sacrifice
Well, the nearly foot of snow that blanked the countryside here a few days ago is mostly gone except for where a snow plow or an industrious shoveler piled the snow high. The birds have returned, and we are awakened by sunlight through the window, rather than a rude alarm clock – all sure signs that spring has finally sprung. Several weeks ago, when Joe Biden was blathering on about how we hadn’t trained a single Iraqi security person, Lex opined that if the Iraqi Security Forces hadn’t stepped up by spring, we might be in for a long haul in Iraq.
Yesterday I spent 40 minutes Googleing Iraqi casualties in the hope of finding that the Iraqis were in fact stepping up. What I found is interesting. When I used “Iraq war casualties” as the search, I got a plethora of references to American casualties, by name, location, circumstance, home town and state, which is as it should be. Next were coalition casualty lists with same information to include National origin. Next were Iraqi civilian casualties numbers with much less detail, most stating as a simple fact - with no real that proof - that there have been over 100,000 Iraqi civilians killed in the war. So I changed to what I thought was a more specific search “Iraqi war casualties”. I got much the same list. Finally, I changed my search to “Iraqi Security Forces Casualties” I got… you guessed it the same list – with exception of some references to Presidential and Vice Presidential Debates where Bush – Cheney had to remind Kerry - Edwards that the Iraqis were part of the coalition and were sustaining the highest percentage of the casualties.
Were this my real job, I’d have stuck with my research until I found what I was looking for. But, it’s a hobby, and rather silly one at that. So, I didn’t feel it necessary to waste too much time for the ten or so people a day that might stumble onto this page.
Besides, what I didn’t find was reveling. Why aren’t there scores of stories heralding the sacrifice of the Iraqi Security Forces? Why aren’t the Iraqi Security Force casualties included with the coalition casualties? I think it is because our defeatist left leaning media know what Lex knows. That is - that the Iraqis are stepping up and as a result are taking brunt of the casualties. This tells me that the Iraqis are willing to fight and die for a chance at Democracy. This is a sign that we are winning.
Never ones to put the things America does in positive light, the media just ignore this story. Instead, they dwell on the number of bombs going off rather than the fact that the bombers were stopped short of their intended target by Iraqi Security Forces. Anyone with a gripe about the US in Iraq is given full coverage. The young Iraqi widow whose husband died stopping a garbage truck full of explosives short of its target is ignored – unless she condemns the coalition.
Well Joe there are a lot Iraqi Security Force personnel dying in the line of duty. Instead of ridiculing them and their mentors, how about giving them a little praise for their noble efforts.
Yesterday I spent 40 minutes Googleing Iraqi casualties in the hope of finding that the Iraqis were in fact stepping up. What I found is interesting. When I used “Iraq war casualties” as the search, I got a plethora of references to American casualties, by name, location, circumstance, home town and state, which is as it should be. Next were coalition casualty lists with same information to include National origin. Next were Iraqi civilian casualties numbers with much less detail, most stating as a simple fact - with no real that proof - that there have been over 100,000 Iraqi civilians killed in the war. So I changed to what I thought was a more specific search “Iraqi war casualties”. I got much the same list. Finally, I changed my search to “Iraqi Security Forces Casualties” I got… you guessed it the same list – with exception of some references to Presidential and Vice Presidential Debates where Bush – Cheney had to remind Kerry - Edwards that the Iraqis were part of the coalition and were sustaining the highest percentage of the casualties.
Were this my real job, I’d have stuck with my research until I found what I was looking for. But, it’s a hobby, and rather silly one at that. So, I didn’t feel it necessary to waste too much time for the ten or so people a day that might stumble onto this page.
Besides, what I didn’t find was reveling. Why aren’t there scores of stories heralding the sacrifice of the Iraqi Security Forces? Why aren’t the Iraqi Security Force casualties included with the coalition casualties? I think it is because our defeatist left leaning media know what Lex knows. That is - that the Iraqis are stepping up and as a result are taking brunt of the casualties. This tells me that the Iraqis are willing to fight and die for a chance at Democracy. This is a sign that we are winning.
Never ones to put the things America does in positive light, the media just ignore this story. Instead, they dwell on the number of bombs going off rather than the fact that the bombers were stopped short of their intended target by Iraqi Security Forces. Anyone with a gripe about the US in Iraq is given full coverage. The young Iraqi widow whose husband died stopping a garbage truck full of explosives short of its target is ignored – unless she condemns the coalition.
Well Joe there are a lot Iraqi Security Force personnel dying in the line of duty. Instead of ridiculing them and their mentors, how about giving them a little praise for their noble efforts.
Wednesday, March 16, 2005
Just keep killin' 'em
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi - a man notorious for his ruthlessness - has been tasked by Osama bin Laden to attack the United States. Many see this as a widening, deepening of the war on terrorism and as proof we are losing in Iraq. I think it shows the opposite.
While our failure to catch these two madmen is certainly a failure, it is a failure of our intelligence agencies. These agencies, as we know, were gutted by the likes of Robert Toricelli. Toricelli was concerned that we might get our hands dirty trying to infiltrate terror and drug gangs; that a few US dollars might be slipped into the hands of unsavory characters for information. Toricelli and his ilk thought that we could use Donny Osmond to infiltrate al Qaeda. You know, a couple of free concerts and he’s in. Well, we are where we are. It’ll be years, maybe decades before we grow the kind of undercover operatives necessary to get close to kind of rascals we are trying to kill.
That said what does it say when they want to turn their terror efforts toward the US homeland? It means they are failing in Iraq. The military principal of mass dictates that you have only one main effort. That effort is where you place the overwhelming portion of your assets money, men and material. That Osama is asking Zarqawi to redirect his efforts toward the US homeland indicates that he is tired of beating his head against well armed, well trained and led forces at the ready. Instead, he prefers the Besaln type attacks that garner huge headlines at a relatively low cost.
The list of “soft” targets in the US is endless. Short of arming every able-bodied man, it is impossible to protect them all. The corollary to the principle of mass is to try to be strong everywhere is to be strong nowhere. The answer is to stay on the hunt. Find the weasels where they live and kill them. Find them where they play and kill them. Find where they eat and kill them. Keep killing them no matter what the New York Times and Libs say. Just keep killing the bastards.
Watch what the Lib reaction is when a movie theater or mall is attacked. First, they will blame the president. Had he just stayed out of Iraq we wouldn’t have had this. Next, rather than arming responsible citizens, Libs will call for the complete ban of the sale of fire arms. Last, they will turn to UN authority, abrogating American sovereignty, in order to try to strike a deal with the responsible terrorists.
While our failure to catch these two madmen is certainly a failure, it is a failure of our intelligence agencies. These agencies, as we know, were gutted by the likes of Robert Toricelli. Toricelli was concerned that we might get our hands dirty trying to infiltrate terror and drug gangs; that a few US dollars might be slipped into the hands of unsavory characters for information. Toricelli and his ilk thought that we could use Donny Osmond to infiltrate al Qaeda. You know, a couple of free concerts and he’s in. Well, we are where we are. It’ll be years, maybe decades before we grow the kind of undercover operatives necessary to get close to kind of rascals we are trying to kill.
That said what does it say when they want to turn their terror efforts toward the US homeland? It means they are failing in Iraq. The military principal of mass dictates that you have only one main effort. That effort is where you place the overwhelming portion of your assets money, men and material. That Osama is asking Zarqawi to redirect his efforts toward the US homeland indicates that he is tired of beating his head against well armed, well trained and led forces at the ready. Instead, he prefers the Besaln type attacks that garner huge headlines at a relatively low cost.
The list of “soft” targets in the US is endless. Short of arming every able-bodied man, it is impossible to protect them all. The corollary to the principle of mass is to try to be strong everywhere is to be strong nowhere. The answer is to stay on the hunt. Find the weasels where they live and kill them. Find them where they play and kill them. Find where they eat and kill them. Keep killing them no matter what the New York Times and Libs say. Just keep killing the bastards.
Watch what the Lib reaction is when a movie theater or mall is attacked. First, they will blame the president. Had he just stayed out of Iraq we wouldn’t have had this. Next, rather than arming responsible citizens, Libs will call for the complete ban of the sale of fire arms. Last, they will turn to UN authority, abrogating American sovereignty, in order to try to strike a deal with the responsible terrorists.
Tuesday, March 15, 2005
A little thing called life
I got an e-mail from a friend the other day. The subject was, “Wisdom for today”. The message was supposedly written by George Carlin, which I don’t believe. The reason I don’t is explained near the end of this post along with my reply to my friend.
THE MESSAGE:
A wonderful Message by George Carlin:
The paradox of our time in history is that we have taller buildings but shorter tempers, wider freeways, but narrower viewpoints.
We spend more, but have less, we buy more, but enjoy less.
We have bigger houses and smaller families, more conveniences, but less time.
We have more degrees but less sense, more knowledge, but less judgment, more experts, yet more problems, more medicine, but less wellness.
We drink too much, smoke too much, spend too recklessly, laugh too little, drive too fast, get too angry, stay up too late, get up too tired, read too little, watch TV too much, and pray too seldom.
We have multiplied our possessions, but reduced our values.
We talk too much, love too seldom, and hate too often.
We've learned how to make a living, but not a life. We've added years to life not life to years.
We've been all the way to the moon and back, but have trouble crossing the street to meet a new neighbor. We conquered outer space but not inner space.
We've done larger things, but not better things.
We've cleaned up the air, but polluted the soul.
We've conquered the atom, but not our prejudice.
We write more, but learn less.
We plan more, but accomplish less.
We've learned to rush, but not to wait.
We build more computers to hold more information, to produce more copies than ever, but we communicate less and less.
These are the times of fast foods and slow digestion, big men and small character, steep profits and shallow relationships.
These are the days of two incomes but more divorce, fancier houses, but broken homes.
These are days of quick trips, disposable diapers, throwaway morality, one night stands, overweight bodies, and pills that do everything from cheer, to quiet, to kill.
It is a time when there is much in the showroom window and nothing in the stockroom.
NOTE: The message was followed here with the usual send this message to ten people you love or the world will end type crap, which is why I don’t believe George Carlin wrote it. To such a proposal, the true author of the above piece might have written, “We send our friends inspiring and uplifting e-mails then condemn them, demoralize them and make them feel guilty if they don’t forward it to ten friends.”
MY REPLY:
Dear XXXXX,
When I saw the subject line, I thought you were sending me the winning lotto numbers. All of those points are well made but in the rush-a-day world, we think too little about our "big picture" outlook on life changes. The boss still needs the project completed on time, the bills still need to be paid, the people we are thrown into this thing called life have their own competing ideas, interests and needs. So we remain focused on the here and now rather than how to make the next five years better.
That is why one of the favorite words used in describing ones life is the word "trapped". I really believe that you have to set your own conditions within the box that you have been placed. I read a book on POWs. Some would make their hell-hole living conditions personal in some respect. One guy would even greet the guards at the door, as he would guests visiting his home, and ask if they'd like to come in! Yea it's all a mind game. But like most things, life's 90% mental. Take care.
Doug
Please copy this post and e-mail it to ten friends or the world, as we know it, will end on 13 Jan, 2006, when Lex turns 50.
THE MESSAGE:
A wonderful Message by George Carlin:
The paradox of our time in history is that we have taller buildings but shorter tempers, wider freeways, but narrower viewpoints.
We spend more, but have less, we buy more, but enjoy less.
We have bigger houses and smaller families, more conveniences, but less time.
We have more degrees but less sense, more knowledge, but less judgment, more experts, yet more problems, more medicine, but less wellness.
We drink too much, smoke too much, spend too recklessly, laugh too little, drive too fast, get too angry, stay up too late, get up too tired, read too little, watch TV too much, and pray too seldom.
We have multiplied our possessions, but reduced our values.
We talk too much, love too seldom, and hate too often.
We've learned how to make a living, but not a life. We've added years to life not life to years.
We've been all the way to the moon and back, but have trouble crossing the street to meet a new neighbor. We conquered outer space but not inner space.
We've done larger things, but not better things.
We've cleaned up the air, but polluted the soul.
We've conquered the atom, but not our prejudice.
We write more, but learn less.
We plan more, but accomplish less.
We've learned to rush, but not to wait.
We build more computers to hold more information, to produce more copies than ever, but we communicate less and less.
These are the times of fast foods and slow digestion, big men and small character, steep profits and shallow relationships.
These are the days of two incomes but more divorce, fancier houses, but broken homes.
These are days of quick trips, disposable diapers, throwaway morality, one night stands, overweight bodies, and pills that do everything from cheer, to quiet, to kill.
It is a time when there is much in the showroom window and nothing in the stockroom.
NOTE: The message was followed here with the usual send this message to ten people you love or the world will end type crap, which is why I don’t believe George Carlin wrote it. To such a proposal, the true author of the above piece might have written, “We send our friends inspiring and uplifting e-mails then condemn them, demoralize them and make them feel guilty if they don’t forward it to ten friends.”
MY REPLY:
Dear XXXXX,
When I saw the subject line, I thought you were sending me the winning lotto numbers. All of those points are well made but in the rush-a-day world, we think too little about our "big picture" outlook on life changes. The boss still needs the project completed on time, the bills still need to be paid, the people we are thrown into this thing called life have their own competing ideas, interests and needs. So we remain focused on the here and now rather than how to make the next five years better.
That is why one of the favorite words used in describing ones life is the word "trapped". I really believe that you have to set your own conditions within the box that you have been placed. I read a book on POWs. Some would make their hell-hole living conditions personal in some respect. One guy would even greet the guards at the door, as he would guests visiting his home, and ask if they'd like to come in! Yea it's all a mind game. But like most things, life's 90% mental. Take care.
Doug
Please copy this post and e-mail it to ten friends or the world, as we know it, will end on 13 Jan, 2006, when Lex turns 50.
Saturday, March 12, 2005
Dems want the Brian Nichols vote
Contingent upon her ability to pass her felons voting rights bill, Hillary has just wrapped up one more vote for the 2008. Brian Nichols stole a deputy's gun, killed the judge and two other people and carjacked a reporter's vehicle to escape. Nichols was at the courthouse in the first place to answer rape and sodomy charges. So, yes there is no doubt, in the hope of receiving a pardon, that Nichols will register as a Democrat and cast his vote for Hillary from whatever maximum security prison death row he ends up on.
A few things about this story jump out:
Political correctness led the security service to put a female guard in charge of the 6’1” 200 lbs Nichols. We know from 20+ years of indoctrination, that women can do anything a man can. That’s why women are taking over Olympic wrestling and weightlifting, the NFL and NASCAR. All women have ever needed in these areas is to compete on a level playing field and whaala – women achieve their natural 51% dominance of every activity. That is why over half of the firefighters killed in the World Trade Centers on 9-11 were women. Wait a minute, I just Googled the above and, amazingly, women don’t compete against men in Olympic wrestling and weight lifting; there is not a single woman listed on any players roster in the NFL; there is only one third-rate woman NASCAR drive and, how can this be, not a single woman firefighter was among 334 that died on 9-11. Have we been lied to? Are men and women actually different? Should we have different roles for men and women in society? I guess only if you do not want to be shot dead by a powerful criminal with female security officer’s gun in an Atlanta courthouse.
Next, under our current penal policies, if ever there ever was a case for the death penalty, this is it. Nichols is no doubt the murderer. He killed a judge and two others in plain view of several witnesses. He went on to assault a woman and steel her car and is likely a rapist. So yes, under our current system, fry him - the sooner the better. However, under the current system, Nichols is likely to live a long relatively comfortable life in prison as an endless appeals process plays out. What should happen is that Nichols be immediately sent to the Federal Maximum Security Prison between the towns of Rice and Cadiz, CA. Look it up. That area is in the middle of nowhere. It is in the CA desert. It’s 120 degrees in the summer and, due to a howling wind, blistering cold in the winter. There is no prison there. But, there should be. It should be built by the prisoners under the supervision of the Corps of Engineers. Prisoners sent there should be the same type of criminals as Nichols. They should have an 18 hour day digging salt from the ground with nothing more than a spade and a pick; No TV; No radio; No phone; Lights-out at 9:30 pm; Revile at 4:30 am; For life. That, of course will never happen. So the government is forced to kill human garbage such as Nichols – 20+ years after the crime. That is bull excrement.
Last, the FBI is interested in more gun control laws to, get this, keep people on the terrorist watch-list from buying guns. Never mind that it’d make more sense to keep terrorists from buying cars since the car bomb seem to be their weapon of choice. But the obvious question is, why not just arrest or deport them? Then you ask, how do you get on the list? Can’t tell you, it’s classified. Who’s currently on the list? Can’t tell you, it’s classified. How do you get off the list? Can’t tell you, it’s classified? Does this strike anyone else as sort of like the double-secret probation imposed on the Animal House by Dean Wormer? So what does this have to do with Nichols? Simple – what gun control law would have prevented Nichols from doing what he did in Atlanta? The plain truth is gun laws don’t work.
Oops. A bit long we just paged over. Well you get the point. Common sense could have prevented this. The death penalty is poor substitute for a lifetime of truly hard labor. Lib’s will use every and any event as a subterfuge to get your guns. What if 8-10, trained, law abiding citizens were carrying guns in that Atlanta Courthouse? There probably would be no need for a Nichols trial, because he’d be dead right now.
A few things about this story jump out:
Political correctness led the security service to put a female guard in charge of the 6’1” 200 lbs Nichols. We know from 20+ years of indoctrination, that women can do anything a man can. That’s why women are taking over Olympic wrestling and weightlifting, the NFL and NASCAR. All women have ever needed in these areas is to compete on a level playing field and whaala – women achieve their natural 51% dominance of every activity. That is why over half of the firefighters killed in the World Trade Centers on 9-11 were women. Wait a minute, I just Googled the above and, amazingly, women don’t compete against men in Olympic wrestling and weight lifting; there is not a single woman listed on any players roster in the NFL; there is only one third-rate woman NASCAR drive and, how can this be, not a single woman firefighter was among 334 that died on 9-11. Have we been lied to? Are men and women actually different? Should we have different roles for men and women in society? I guess only if you do not want to be shot dead by a powerful criminal with female security officer’s gun in an Atlanta courthouse.
Next, under our current penal policies, if ever there ever was a case for the death penalty, this is it. Nichols is no doubt the murderer. He killed a judge and two others in plain view of several witnesses. He went on to assault a woman and steel her car and is likely a rapist. So yes, under our current system, fry him - the sooner the better. However, under the current system, Nichols is likely to live a long relatively comfortable life in prison as an endless appeals process plays out. What should happen is that Nichols be immediately sent to the Federal Maximum Security Prison between the towns of Rice and Cadiz, CA. Look it up. That area is in the middle of nowhere. It is in the CA desert. It’s 120 degrees in the summer and, due to a howling wind, blistering cold in the winter. There is no prison there. But, there should be. It should be built by the prisoners under the supervision of the Corps of Engineers. Prisoners sent there should be the same type of criminals as Nichols. They should have an 18 hour day digging salt from the ground with nothing more than a spade and a pick; No TV; No radio; No phone; Lights-out at 9:30 pm; Revile at 4:30 am; For life. That, of course will never happen. So the government is forced to kill human garbage such as Nichols – 20+ years after the crime. That is bull excrement.
Last, the FBI is interested in more gun control laws to, get this, keep people on the terrorist watch-list from buying guns. Never mind that it’d make more sense to keep terrorists from buying cars since the car bomb seem to be their weapon of choice. But the obvious question is, why not just arrest or deport them? Then you ask, how do you get on the list? Can’t tell you, it’s classified. Who’s currently on the list? Can’t tell you, it’s classified. How do you get off the list? Can’t tell you, it’s classified? Does this strike anyone else as sort of like the double-secret probation imposed on the Animal House by Dean Wormer? So what does this have to do with Nichols? Simple – what gun control law would have prevented Nichols from doing what he did in Atlanta? The plain truth is gun laws don’t work.
Oops. A bit long we just paged over. Well you get the point. Common sense could have prevented this. The death penalty is poor substitute for a lifetime of truly hard labor. Lib’s will use every and any event as a subterfuge to get your guns. What if 8-10, trained, law abiding citizens were carrying guns in that Atlanta Courthouse? There probably would be no need for a Nichols trial, because he’d be dead right now.
Friday, March 11, 2005
Getting a college education
I was watching Fox when they ran a story about college protesters disrupting a jobs fair being held on some campus. The reason for the protest was two-fold - A) Jobs were being offered - an obvious affront to any college student going to school on Daddy’s dime who has time to spend at a protest and B) One of the potential employers was the US Air Force. The protesters were the usual bunch - loud, either grossly over-weight or anorexic, dirty, unattractive with scraggly beards and long stringy hair…and the boys weren’t much better. They were ostensibly protesting the Air Force because the US armed services discriminate against women and gays.
There’s a news flash. “EXTRA! EXTRA! MILITARY DISCRIMINATES! - Blind quadriplegics need not apply. Read all about it!” Of course the military discriminates by height, weight, age, physical fitness, mental aptitude – the list goes on and on. After all it’s the military’s job to defend the nation, which often involves combat. For goodness sake, they’d better discriminate.
So our protesters for tolerance, in a fit of intolerance, shut the jobs fair down. Due to what must have been an overwhelming BO stench emanating from the protesters, few job hunters were able to, dare I say, tolerate the conditions in the building. So, most of the would-be employers packed it in. None of the protester’s peers were hired by the Air Force…or any of the other employers. Ironically, the brave Air Force recruiters, used to loud aircraft noises and bad petrochemical smells, stayed until near the scheduled end; said they respected the protester’s right to be there peaceably and then packed it in as the been-nowhere, done-nothing, do-nothing, be-nothing, know-nothing mob chanted (because none knew how to sing) Steam’s famous Na, Na, Hey, Hey, Hey, Good Bye.
Ain’t America great! - A free country where even the dopiest have the right to shut down a jobs fair on campus. My advise is for the Air Force recruiters is show up at the campus Gay Lesbian Transgendered Cross Dressing Metrosexual Queer Anything Goes Pride rally and shut it down.
There’s a news flash. “EXTRA! EXTRA! MILITARY DISCRIMINATES! - Blind quadriplegics need not apply. Read all about it!” Of course the military discriminates by height, weight, age, physical fitness, mental aptitude – the list goes on and on. After all it’s the military’s job to defend the nation, which often involves combat. For goodness sake, they’d better discriminate.
So our protesters for tolerance, in a fit of intolerance, shut the jobs fair down. Due to what must have been an overwhelming BO stench emanating from the protesters, few job hunters were able to, dare I say, tolerate the conditions in the building. So, most of the would-be employers packed it in. None of the protester’s peers were hired by the Air Force…or any of the other employers. Ironically, the brave Air Force recruiters, used to loud aircraft noises and bad petrochemical smells, stayed until near the scheduled end; said they respected the protester’s right to be there peaceably and then packed it in as the been-nowhere, done-nothing, do-nothing, be-nothing, know-nothing mob chanted (because none knew how to sing) Steam’s famous Na, Na, Hey, Hey, Hey, Good Bye.
Ain’t America great! - A free country where even the dopiest have the right to shut down a jobs fair on campus. My advise is for the Air Force recruiters is show up at the campus Gay Lesbian Transgendered Cross Dressing Metrosexual Queer Anything Goes Pride rally and shut it down.
Thursday, March 10, 2005
The beginning of the end of Islamo-Terror-Fascists?
The massacre at Big Bottom marked the beginning of the end of Ohio Indian tribes
On January 2, 1791 25 Wyandot and Delaware Indians massacred 14 white Ohio Company settlers at Big Bottom located on the broad Muskingum River flood plain. The violence at Big Bottom caused a certain amount of shock, not only because of the wanton violence, but because the Wyandot and Delaware were thought to be “friendly” because they were signatories of a treaty signed at Fort Harmar in 1789.
The Indian “thrill of victory” was short lived. The massacre marked the beginning of the end for the Ohio Indian tribes. After the massacre, whites mobilized and opened a four year savage war that ended with Indians’ defeat at the hands of Major General “Mad” Anthony Wayne. After the crushing defeat, the Indians were forced to sign the Treaty of Greenville.
The reason that the Treaty at Fort Harmar failed, among other things, was the white man’s failure to understand Indian society. While certain Indians did fix their signatures to the Harmar treaty, those who signed, by no means, represented all Indian factions. In fact, today’s historians, for the most part, agree that the Indian Wars were inevitable. No treaty or compromise could accommodate the competing interests of both red and white men. War was the only answer.
That is were we stand in the Middle East. Two competing, irreconcilable views of the area – and the world – have collided. On the one side you have Islamo-terror-fascists. These terrorists would impress on everyone their worldview of 12th century Islamic law. There is no room for negotiation. There is no compromise. There is only their way or a beheading. On the other side is modernity and democracy in the Middle East. A world view of toleration toward all views as long as disagreements do not lead to beheadings, car bombs and suicide bombings of busses and cafes – the very tactics popular among the first group.
After years of low-level violence, similar to early Indian violence on settlers, Islamo-terror-fascists have finally gotten our attention. Our Ohio Indian wars teach us that the only answer to uncompromising violence is the destruction of those engaged in it. That is what is going on in the Middle East right now. We’re hunting Hamas, al Quiada and other terrorists that can only be dealt with at the point of a gun. Hopefully, just as the Big Bottom massacre marked the beginning of the end for the Ohio Indians, 9-11 marks the beginning of the end for the Islamo-terror fascists.
Tuesday, March 08, 2005
Criminals: A natural Dem voting block
Just when you think that the Dems have gotten as dumb as is humanly possible, Sens. Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Barbara Boxer, Barbara Mikulski and others --would mandate felon voting across the country, regardless of state law. Lex has noted, tongue-in-cheek, that criminals are a natural Democrat constituency. Like Dems, criminals have no regard for individual rights; they endorse restrictive gun laws so that they will be the only ones with guns; they could care less about private property; they loath jail and hard labor and believe anything that they might do out of the main is society’s fault and begs for a government program.
How can they keep a straight face when proposing this stuff? When you hear these things, you have to check the calendar to make sure it’s not April Fools Day or something. The 14th Amendment of our Constitution grants each of the several states the latitude as to whether or not felons will be granted the right to vote. Even “The Rule of Five” (aka The Supreme Court) thought that the rule was obvious and well-established enough that it declined to hear two felon-voting cases from New York and Washington state in November. Then there’s also that pesky 10th Amendment - you know, the one that dopes in Washington D.C. pretend doesn’t exist. Let’s put it up the screen:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Rather than just quickly killing this idiocy, Republicans ought to play this out for as long as possible. The House and Senate ought to hold long and detailed hearings on the subject. During those proceedings Republicans should read into the record thousands of criminal acts and post pictures of the people the Dems want to re-enfranchise.
How can they keep a straight face when proposing this stuff? When you hear these things, you have to check the calendar to make sure it’s not April Fools Day or something. The 14th Amendment of our Constitution grants each of the several states the latitude as to whether or not felons will be granted the right to vote. Even “The Rule of Five” (aka The Supreme Court) thought that the rule was obvious and well-established enough that it declined to hear two felon-voting cases from New York and Washington state in November. Then there’s also that pesky 10th Amendment - you know, the one that dopes in Washington D.C. pretend doesn’t exist. Let’s put it up the screen:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Rather than just quickly killing this idiocy, Republicans ought to play this out for as long as possible. The House and Senate ought to hold long and detailed hearings on the subject. During those proceedings Republicans should read into the record thousands of criminal acts and post pictures of the people the Dems want to re-enfranchise.
Monday, March 07, 2005
Kennedy, as usual, wrong again
AP reports, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., told ABC's "This Week" that Social Security individual accounts would be "a great threat to seniors" because it would raise interest rates. Teddy! Save yourself! Come up for air!
Does that make any sense to anyone that isn’t out to torpedo the President’s proposal simply because it’s the President’s proposal? How do interest rates affect a class of Americans who are overwhelmingly outside their barrowing years? Young people with growing families are generally the people who barrow money to finance homes, appliances, furniture, cars, college etc. This continues up to about age 45 when all of the major purchases have been made; the family has grown and the children begin to hopefully, start out on their own journeys. Grandma and Grandpa are not the ones barrowing money. They are the ones beginning to save it.
This is a red herring anyway. Every politician knows that no plan will be approved or signed by the President that affects current senior benefits. What’s next from the Libs, “Any reform of the Social Security system will be a grave threat to seniors’ ability to enjoy an evening out at Chuck E. Cheeses.”
NOTE: If you want to know what side of this issue someone is on, listen to how they describe the accounts. Libs will refer to the accounts as “private accounts”. As in, this is a private country club only rich Republicans can belong to. Right thinking people will refer to them as individual accounts. As in, it’s the individuals’ money and THEY OUGHT HAVE SOME SAY ABOUT WHERE IT GOES.
Does that make any sense to anyone that isn’t out to torpedo the President’s proposal simply because it’s the President’s proposal? How do interest rates affect a class of Americans who are overwhelmingly outside their barrowing years? Young people with growing families are generally the people who barrow money to finance homes, appliances, furniture, cars, college etc. This continues up to about age 45 when all of the major purchases have been made; the family has grown and the children begin to hopefully, start out on their own journeys. Grandma and Grandpa are not the ones barrowing money. They are the ones beginning to save it.
This is a red herring anyway. Every politician knows that no plan will be approved or signed by the President that affects current senior benefits. What’s next from the Libs, “Any reform of the Social Security system will be a grave threat to seniors’ ability to enjoy an evening out at Chuck E. Cheeses.”
NOTE: If you want to know what side of this issue someone is on, listen to how they describe the accounts. Libs will refer to the accounts as “private accounts”. As in, this is a private country club only rich Republicans can belong to. Right thinking people will refer to them as individual accounts. As in, it’s the individuals’ money and THEY OUGHT HAVE SOME SAY ABOUT WHERE IT GOES.
Far Left Nazi hate machine
Senator Robert (a.k.a Sheets) Byrd took to the Senate floor Tuesday to compare the tactics of his Republican colleagues in the battles over judicial nominees to those employed by Hitler. Talk about going nuclear. After you’ve compared someone to Hitler for simply following the rules, what do you call them when they do something really outside main? How do you work with someone you’ve said is akin to Hitler? Would you work with Hitler for Social Security or tax reform? You’re really in corner once you’ve invoked the H word. There is nowhere to go and, outside a long and profuse apology, there’s no going back. The last I heard, Byrd and his office were spraying perfume on the pile of bull excrement Byrd dumped on the Senate floor, but other than that they really were not trying to clean it up.
So, Senator Byrd calls Republicans Hitler while Howard “The Scream” Dean covers all of the bases and just calls Republicans evil. Using the word “evil” allows the Lib rank file to fill in their own evil-doer with which to compare all Republicans – like Lex Luther, Mr. Freeze or Goldfinger. Meanwhile, level headed Democrats like Michael Moore are more specific and call the President of the United States a liar and deserter. Yes indeedee, with this kind of well researched and thought-out strategy, this is definitely a Party on rise.
Did you ever wonder why the MSM and Democrats always refer to dictatorial governments as right-wing? Right-wingers are, for the most part, opposed to all things government. Right-wingers support individual liberty and loath big government interference. Left-wingers, by contrast, worship all things government and the more government the better. According to the Libs, no individual can know better than a government committee what is good for him.
So, shouldn’t dictatorial Nazi type governments that run everything from the local grocery to national health care logically be referred to as Left-wing? After all, the government is running everything. Isn’t Communist China a perfect example of a far Left-wing government? The government is in charge of everything. China has a government policy and regulation for everything under the sun. And most important, not only is the Liberal religion of abortion legal, it is mandatory.
So, was Senator Byrd really offering Republicans a compliment when he used the H word? Maybe he meant that the Republicans were becoming more like the Left-wing government loving Democrats and aside from the Jew thing, WWII, Poland etc., the Big H made the trains run on time. That is a true testament to the type of big and all-powerful government Democrats love.
So, Senator Byrd calls Republicans Hitler while Howard “The Scream” Dean covers all of the bases and just calls Republicans evil. Using the word “evil” allows the Lib rank file to fill in their own evil-doer with which to compare all Republicans – like Lex Luther, Mr. Freeze or Goldfinger. Meanwhile, level headed Democrats like Michael Moore are more specific and call the President of the United States a liar and deserter. Yes indeedee, with this kind of well researched and thought-out strategy, this is definitely a Party on rise.
Did you ever wonder why the MSM and Democrats always refer to dictatorial governments as right-wing? Right-wingers are, for the most part, opposed to all things government. Right-wingers support individual liberty and loath big government interference. Left-wingers, by contrast, worship all things government and the more government the better. According to the Libs, no individual can know better than a government committee what is good for him.
So, shouldn’t dictatorial Nazi type governments that run everything from the local grocery to national health care logically be referred to as Left-wing? After all, the government is running everything. Isn’t Communist China a perfect example of a far Left-wing government? The government is in charge of everything. China has a government policy and regulation for everything under the sun. And most important, not only is the Liberal religion of abortion legal, it is mandatory.
So, was Senator Byrd really offering Republicans a compliment when he used the H word? Maybe he meant that the Republicans were becoming more like the Left-wing government loving Democrats and aside from the Jew thing, WWII, Poland etc., the Big H made the trains run on time. That is a true testament to the type of big and all-powerful government Democrats love.
Friday, March 04, 2005
Just between the girls
On Wednesday, Chris Matthews had an additional two women join the show, Stacy Bannerman, Karen Houppert. Bannerman is making a name for herself acting as if she didn’t know that her husband, who happens to be a National Guardsman, was eligible to go to Iraq. Houppert is pushing a new book “Home Fires Burning: Married to the Military for Better or Worse.”
Ms. Bannerman is of the mistaken opinion the National Guard’s primary mission is “to provide assistance to their state and local communities.” Well no Ms. Bannerman, the first mission of the National Guard is its National mission. Of course, Chris Matthews couldn’t have done to 30 seconds work it would have taken to look that up.
I have a few questions that were not asked by Mz. Hotshot hardballer:
Was your husband in the guard when you married him?
If he was why did you marry him knowing that he was in the military?
If wasn’t in when you married him, did he discuss the decision to join with you?
How many times since you’ve been married has your husband reenlisted?
Have you ever read or listened to the reenlistment oath?
Let me just put it up on the screen for every one to see:
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the president of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the uniform code of military justice. So help me God.
Do you see that bolded portion Ms. Bannerman?
What part of that don’t you understand?
Do you see anything in there that would exempt your husband because you don’t agree with the president’s decision?
Are you this clueless about everything?
Ms. Houppert has written a whole book about hapless women such as Bannerman. During this seven minute segment, Chris and the other two girls managed to set women’s rights back 20 years. Instead of “I am woman hear me roar” the three girls were singing “Daddy, I need my man.”
Perhaps, as a public service, Chris could get together with some of, what Chris and Houppert would have us believe are a minority of capable women that are coping better than Bannerman. That will never happen. Chris will only talk to girls like Chris.
Ms. Bannerman is of the mistaken opinion the National Guard’s primary mission is “to provide assistance to their state and local communities.” Well no Ms. Bannerman, the first mission of the National Guard is its National mission. Of course, Chris Matthews couldn’t have done to 30 seconds work it would have taken to look that up.
I have a few questions that were not asked by Mz. Hotshot hardballer:
Was your husband in the guard when you married him?
If he was why did you marry him knowing that he was in the military?
If wasn’t in when you married him, did he discuss the decision to join with you?
How many times since you’ve been married has your husband reenlisted?
Have you ever read or listened to the reenlistment oath?
Let me just put it up on the screen for every one to see:
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the president of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the uniform code of military justice. So help me God.
Do you see that bolded portion Ms. Bannerman?
What part of that don’t you understand?
Do you see anything in there that would exempt your husband because you don’t agree with the president’s decision?
Are you this clueless about everything?
Ms. Houppert has written a whole book about hapless women such as Bannerman. During this seven minute segment, Chris and the other two girls managed to set women’s rights back 20 years. Instead of “I am woman hear me roar” the three girls were singing “Daddy, I need my man.”
Perhaps, as a public service, Chris could get together with some of, what Chris and Houppert would have us believe are a minority of capable women that are coping better than Bannerman. That will never happen. Chris will only talk to girls like Chris.
Thursday, March 03, 2005
The rule of 5 strikes again
I am not a big death penalty guy. I’d much prefer human debris like Christopher Simmons spend what seems like an eternity at hard labor before spending what will be an actual eternity in Hell. But alas, the ACLU and Libs are sure to raise a fuss if the prison cable goes out for more than 30 minutes, or the prison library is not stocked with latest and most disgusting pornography. And the same groups will howl “TORTURE” if anything resembling real work is required of one of their most reliable voting blocks.
No, I’m not even a little bit interested in rehabilitation. That’s a job for the Churches, if they can get the little darlings attention. I’m only interested in making criminals as uncomfortable as possible for as long as possible, commensurate with their crime. Violent criminals should spend 18 hours a day at hard, hard meaningless labor, in the worst conditions - the hotter or colder the weather the better.
That does not happen in the US. So, for me, the death penalty is fall-back position. As long as the prison system is more concerned with prisoner rights and comfort than extracting a full measure of retribution for victims, then there needs to be something else. That something is the death penalty. I am of the opinion that we need a death a penalty on the books. And, if you have it, you must occasionally use it. I’d kill 100 piss-ants like Christopher Simmons over 10 years to save one Shirley Crook.
The Supreme Court decided two days ago, that they’d kill 1,000,000 Shirley Cook’s before freeing the world of one piece of human garbage like Christopher Simmons. And if that weren’t bad enough, five dopes in robes based their decision on the fact that they believe 47% constitutes a majority. The dopes in black note, in the majority opinion, that a majority of Americans support their opinion in spite of the fact that only 18 states or 47% have laws prohibiting the execution of minors. And if a majority of Americans do believe as the 5 justices think they believe, wouldn't that belief be reflected in the jury pool? So why this decision? But wait, there’s more!
Because calling 47% a majority isn’t dumb enough for the five weasels in black, they go on to base their decision on international norms. That’s right the Constitution isn’t enough for these five craven lunatics, American rights and law are now going to be subject to international norms.
Republicans need to make this “The Issue” in the mid-terms and send Chuck Schumer and Pat Leahy into the 61-39 obscurity they deserve in the Senate.
No, I’m not even a little bit interested in rehabilitation. That’s a job for the Churches, if they can get the little darlings attention. I’m only interested in making criminals as uncomfortable as possible for as long as possible, commensurate with their crime. Violent criminals should spend 18 hours a day at hard, hard meaningless labor, in the worst conditions - the hotter or colder the weather the better.
That does not happen in the US. So, for me, the death penalty is fall-back position. As long as the prison system is more concerned with prisoner rights and comfort than extracting a full measure of retribution for victims, then there needs to be something else. That something is the death penalty. I am of the opinion that we need a death a penalty on the books. And, if you have it, you must occasionally use it. I’d kill 100 piss-ants like Christopher Simmons over 10 years to save one Shirley Crook.
The Supreme Court decided two days ago, that they’d kill 1,000,000 Shirley Cook’s before freeing the world of one piece of human garbage like Christopher Simmons. And if that weren’t bad enough, five dopes in robes based their decision on the fact that they believe 47% constitutes a majority. The dopes in black note, in the majority opinion, that a majority of Americans support their opinion in spite of the fact that only 18 states or 47% have laws prohibiting the execution of minors. And if a majority of Americans do believe as the 5 justices think they believe, wouldn't that belief be reflected in the jury pool? So why this decision? But wait, there’s more!
Because calling 47% a majority isn’t dumb enough for the five weasels in black, they go on to base their decision on international norms. That’s right the Constitution isn’t enough for these five craven lunatics, American rights and law are now going to be subject to international norms.
Republicans need to make this “The Issue” in the mid-terms and send Chuck Schumer and Pat Leahy into the 61-39 obscurity they deserve in the Senate.
Wednesday, March 02, 2005
Only Democrats have used Nukes
Rhetoric in the Senate lately seems to be over the top. Take for instance referring to rules changes to require an up or down vote on the president’s judicial nominations as the “Nuclear Option”. That’s absurd. According to the Constitution, it is absolutely within the rights of each house to determine its own procedural rules.
Art 1. Sec 5. Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.
Further, there is absolutely nothing in the U.S. Constitution requiring 60 votes for confirmation of presidential judicial nominations. Every incident requiring a House or Senate majority greater than a simple majority is specifically spelled out in the Constitution and its Amendments and include such things as:
- impeachment
- over-riding a veto
- amending the Constitution
- 25th Amendment if the president is “unable” to perform his duties
- a quorums of 2/3rds for conducting certain business
- Approving treaties
Outside the requirement of a 2/3rds quorum, which by the way makes my point about the Constitution spelling out specifically every instance where a simple majority won’t do, there is absolutely nothing in there requiring anything more than 51 votes for “Advice and Consent” of the Senate with regard to judicial nominations. See for yourself:
Art 2 Sec 2. He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
So why is the Senate making its own rules according to the Constitution with regard to judicial nominations also in accordance with the Constitution being referred to as the “Nuclear Option”? Only so that the MSM and Democrats can make the Republicans appear to be unreasonable. Oh MY GOD! The Republicans are going NUCLEAR! They’ll destroy the world! Never mind that only Democrats have used nuclear weapons and brought the world to the brink of nuclear war – Truman and JFK.
I’m all for the Republicans returning the rules of the Senate to reflect more what the framers envisioned. However, if Democrats want a filibuster rule on judicial nominations, make ‘em filibuster – the old fashion way. Before changing the rules, the Republicans ought to make the Democrats take to the floor and talk for two weeks straight, day and night, without stopping. Only after getting enough footage of Democrat obstructionism for the mid-term elections should the Republicans seek to change the rules. I doubt with that threat out there, the rules change would even be necessary.
Art 1. Sec 5. Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.
Further, there is absolutely nothing in the U.S. Constitution requiring 60 votes for confirmation of presidential judicial nominations. Every incident requiring a House or Senate majority greater than a simple majority is specifically spelled out in the Constitution and its Amendments and include such things as:
- impeachment
- over-riding a veto
- amending the Constitution
- 25th Amendment if the president is “unable” to perform his duties
- a quorums of 2/3rds for conducting certain business
- Approving treaties
Outside the requirement of a 2/3rds quorum, which by the way makes my point about the Constitution spelling out specifically every instance where a simple majority won’t do, there is absolutely nothing in there requiring anything more than 51 votes for “Advice and Consent” of the Senate with regard to judicial nominations. See for yourself:
Art 2 Sec 2. He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
So why is the Senate making its own rules according to the Constitution with regard to judicial nominations also in accordance with the Constitution being referred to as the “Nuclear Option”? Only so that the MSM and Democrats can make the Republicans appear to be unreasonable. Oh MY GOD! The Republicans are going NUCLEAR! They’ll destroy the world! Never mind that only Democrats have used nuclear weapons and brought the world to the brink of nuclear war – Truman and JFK.
I’m all for the Republicans returning the rules of the Senate to reflect more what the framers envisioned. However, if Democrats want a filibuster rule on judicial nominations, make ‘em filibuster – the old fashion way. Before changing the rules, the Republicans ought to make the Democrats take to the floor and talk for two weeks straight, day and night, without stopping. Only after getting enough footage of Democrat obstructionism for the mid-term elections should the Republicans seek to change the rules. I doubt with that threat out there, the rules change would even be necessary.
Tuesday, March 01, 2005
The "Arab Street"
The Arab Street finally shows up
Do you recall the pre-war doom and gloom that the “Arab-street” would rise up in hate against everything western? The usual class of chattering know-nothings, after predicting quagmires in Afghanistan and Iraq, would then somberly intone that something called the “Arab street” would rise up against us. These well known know it alls, who retain that title even when they have been proven wrong on just about everything, pontificate about the Arab mind-set as if all Arabs think alike. You know like all, blacks, Jews, Catholics and Latinos can be counted on to move in lock-step on any given issue.
Well, wait that would be a racist and bigoted observation – even if were/is true. In today’s PC world, you just can’t say that about a group of people. For some reason the PC rules do not apply when the point of the story is to project doom and gloom on America and this president.
How many times have you heard that the Europeans hate Americans and President Bush? Well after 19 months traveling around the “continent”, aside from one “Amiri go home” sign on a bus stop and some interesting graffiti (Kinda cool skulls in the distinctive American combat helmets atop of huge muscular bodies armed to teeth crushing everything in their path. I thought, yeah! That’s exactly what we want the enemy to think!) around Paris, I’ve seen nothing and more importantly experienced NOTHING but polite smiles and helpful Europeans even - gasp! - in France!!
Still the media concentrate on the European far-left media and the protester whackos that seem to turn up anywhere that more than three people who have showered, shaved and put on a coat and tie have gathered to talk business. What the world-wide elite media will be forced to admit is that freedom is on the march in the Middle East. But the MSM will give Bush the Reagan treatment, “These events were inevitable as the sunrise. This dope had nothing to do with freedom taking hold.”
So it turns out that the MSM is again wrong. There is no anti-Western “Arab street” but there is a pro freedom and by extension pro Bush, “Arab street”. Let’s give them all a raise and more air-time to pontificate about things which they know nothing about except, if Bush is for it; we’re against it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)