Sunday, March 30, 2003

Driving While Fisk

Silent Running has a hilarious piece on those halcyon days of yore, when a younger, but not wiser, Bobby Fisk roamed the countryside of Eire, during the Harsh Irish Winter (tm) no doubt, looking for terrorists for whom he could apologize. The more things change...

It seems people of all climes and times have the same allergic reaction to Wahhabi Bobby; i.e., the sudden urge to fisk the Fisk.

We also approve of S.R.'s recent call to move our military bases to Eastern Europe and re-name NATO the "Warsaw Pact".

I believe 'ol Soddy

is dead.

That would make V.P. Taha Yassin Ramadan the new (interim!) President of Iraq. The Pentagon should start calling him 'President Ramadan'. That would rattle 'em.

And No Ramadan Bombing Pause!

Saturday, March 29, 2003


there's nothing quite like quoting Federal Sedition statutes at your next wine-and-brie get-together to break the ice.

"Hey Bob; did you know that waving the enemy flag during wartime shall be punishable by a fine of not more than $10,000 and not more than 20 years in a Federal penitentiary?...say, is this a California Merlot?"

Party on!

U.S. Code, Title 18, Chapter 12, Section 231. Civil disorders

(a)(1) Whoever teaches or demonstrates to any other person the use, application, or making of any firearm or explosive or incendiary device, or technique capable of causing injury or death to persons, knowing or having reason to know or intending that the same will be unlawfully employed for use in, or in furtherance of, a civil disorder which may in any way or degree obstruct, delay, or adversely affect commerce or the movement of any article or commodity in commerce or the conduct or performance of any federally protected function; or

(2) Whoever transports or manufactures for transportation in commerce any firearm, or explosive or incendiary device, knowing or having reason to know or intending that the same will be used unlawfully in furtherance of a civil disorder; or

(3) Whoever commits or attempts to commit any act to obstruct, impede, or interfere with any fireman or law enforcement officer lawfully engaged in the lawful performance of his official duties incident to and during the commission of a civil disorder which in any way or degree obstructs, delays, or adversely affects commerce
or the movement of any article or commodity in commerce or the conduct or performance of any federally protected function - Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
(b) Nothing contained in this section shall make unlawful any act of any law enforcement officer which is performed in the lawful performance of his official duties.

PART I, CHAPTER 105 - SABOTAGE Section 2153

(a) Whoever, when the United States is at war, or in times of national emergency as declared by the President or by the Congress, with intent to injure, interfere with, or obstruct the United States or any associate nation in preparing for or carrying on the
war or defense activities, or, with reason to believe that his act may injure, interfere with, or obstruct the United States or any associate nation in preparing for or carrying on the war or defense activities, willfully injures, destroys, contaminates or infects,
or attempts to so injure, destroy, contaminate or infect any war material, war premises, or war utilities, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than thirty years, or both.

(b) If two or more persons conspire to violate this section, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be punished as provided in subsection (a) of this section.

Section 2154. Production of defective war material, war premises, or war utilities

(a) Whoever, when the United States is at war, or in times of national emergency as declared by the President or by the Congress, with intent to injure, interfere with, or obstruct the United States or any associate nation in preparing for or carrying on the
war or defense activities, or, with reason to believe that his act may injure, interfere with, or obstruct the United States or any associate nation in preparing for or carrying on the war or defense activities, willfully makes, constructs, or causes to be made or
constructed in a defective manner, or attempts to make, construct, or cause to be made or constructed in a defective manner any war material, war premises or war utilities, or any tool, implement, machine, utensil, or receptacle used or employed in making, producing, manufacturing, or repairing any such war material, war premises or war utilities, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than thirty years, or both.

(b) If two or more persons conspire to violate this section, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be punished as provided in subsection (a) of this section.

Section 2155. Destruction of national-defense materials, national-defense premises, or national-defense utilities

(a) Whoever, with intent to injure, interfere with, or obstruct the national defense of the United States, willfully injures, destroys, contaminates or infects, or attempts to so injure, destroy, contaminate or infect any national-defense material, national-defense premises, or national-defense utilities, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

(b) If two or more persons conspire to violate this section, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be punished as provided in subsection (a) of this section.

The U.S. Sedition Act

United States, Statutes at Large, Washington, D.C., 1918, Vol. XL, pp 553 ff. A portion of the amendment to Section 3 of the Espionage Act of June 15, 1917.SECTION 3.

Whoever, when the United States is at war, shall willfully make or convey false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States, or to promote the success of its enemies, or shall willfully make or convey false reports, or false statements, . . . or incite insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or shall willfully obstruct . . . the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States, or . . . shall willfully utter, print, write, or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States, or the Constitution of the United States, or the military or naval forces of the United States . . . or shall willfully display the flag of any foreign enemy, or shall willfully . . . urge, incite, or advocate any curtailment of production . . . or advocate, teach, defend, or suggest the doing of any of the acts or things in this section enumerated and whoever shall by word or act support or favor the cause of any country with which the United States is at war or by word or act oppose the cause of the United States therein, shall be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than twenty years, or both....

Some things are so stupid only a professor can say them

and other things are so outrageously treasonous that only a Columbia professor would.

Anthropology professor Nicholas De Genova's called for "a million Mogadishus", to the roaring approval of the thoughtful mob assembled for a 'Teach-in' .

Teach-in? Talk about a 'quagmire'; these idio-insects are trapped forever in the amber of the Summer of Love. Real anthropologists of the future will marvel at the perfectly preserved tie-dye and sandals.

"A million Mogadishus"...let's see; there were 18 Americans killed and 84 wounded there...times a million...check my math here, Prof, but I believe you just called for 18 million dead Americans and 84 million wounded.

That's 102 million American casualties.

As Stalin said "One death is a tragedy; 18 million is Anthropology."

at Columbia Teach-ins, anyway.

Friday, March 28, 2003

Thanks to Steve H.,

award-winning liar,

for getting me a lucrative gig at the Command Post, Alan & Michele's great 'news & views' warblog.

I've got a piece up on the Op-Ed page entitled "Support Your Protesters!"

Victory Now!

We're all Multi-lateralists now

Iraq's homeless Minister of Unquestioned Truth, Mr. Hussein H. Hussein, appeared on Iraqi State-Run Television (an ABC affiliate) today.

"In response to pressure from peace-loving peoples around the world, Iraq has joined a multi-national force to fight this war. We have missles from China, spare parts for our planes from France, bunkers built by the Germans, cloaking devices from the Russians and night-vision goggles from Syria. We thank the Security Council for their support."

"One ought never to turn one's back on a threatened danger and try to run away from it. If you do that, you will double the danger. But if you meet it promptly and without flinching, you will reduce the danger by half."- Winston Churchill

The name of peace is sweet, and the thing itself is beneficial, but there is a great difference between peace and servitude. Peace is freedom in tranquillity, servitude is the worst of all evils, to be resisted not only by war, but even by death.
Cicero (106 BC - 43 BC)

Thursday, March 27, 2003

18 Wheels and a Dozen Pansies

An antiwar rally was disrupted when a man drove his tractor-trailer rig toward about 40 protesters who were holding signs on the sidewalk of a freeway overpass, police said. He stopped 10 ft. away from the nearest anti-America protestor.

James Watters, 49, of Cincinnati, was charged with three counts of aggravated menacing, one count of inducing panic and one count of reckless operation of a vehicle, police said. He remained in the Hamilton County jail Monday night.

Watters said his 24-year-old son is a U.S. Marine Corps sergeant serving in Kuwait.
"I've got a couple of relatives over there," he said. "We've got soldiers over there in harm's way. We should back them."
The trucker said he plans to the fight the charges, and that co-workers have already raised $1,100 for his defense fund.
"I'm pleading not guilty," Watters said. "What I did was wrong. I did break a few laws, but I'm not guilty. I'm going to be a sacrificial lamb. I'm willing to stand up for that."

Where do we sign up for the Defense Fund?

Thanks, zee!

Was it only a year ago

that the Netanya Passover Massacre was perpetrated? God rest their souls.

Mark Steyn:

"...given the way Mr Patten’s ‘smart development assistance’ to Yasser Arafat appears to have wound up funding the intifada, America’s smart bombs now cause fewer deaths than the EU development budget."

When do we get to Gaza?

It's past Damascus.

On the way to Riyadh.

From Portugee Joe:

..."When I was getting back on the train there were protestors on the train platform handing out pamphlets on the evils of America. I politely declined to take one.

An elderly woman was behind me getting off the escalator and a young (20ish) female protestor offered her a pamphlet, which she politely declined. The young protestor put her hand on the old woman's shoulder as a gesture of friendship and in a very soft voice said, "Ma'am, don't you care about the children of Iraq?"

The old woman looked up at her and said, "Honey, my first husband died in France during World War II so you could have the right to stand here and bad mouth your country. And if you touch me again, I'll stick this umbrella up your ass and open it."

I'm glad to report that loud applause broke out among the onlookers and the young protestor was at a total loss for words."

Rogue-fort Nation

France's Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin refused to answer the question: 'Who do you want to win the war?'

Answer: He wants France to win the war. Like they did in WW2. They contributed nothing (except for the brave few who I will not forget, even if they have), and got a Security Council seat.

France may well find itself fighting constant street battles with Islamists in the next decade. The Islamists will not thank them; and appeasement will only be taken as a sign of weakness. Which it is.

The French surrendered 44 days after the German invasion. The Iraqis will probably try to hold out 45. They have their pride, too.

PC failures

1. Wahabbi soldiers ( and Chaplains).
2. Women soldiers in combat zones.
3. American casualties resulting from 'no civilian casualties' rule.
4. War Crimes trials. Most should be executed in the field.

The Number 2 Stabil-o-crat

at our Mongolian Embassy resigned in protest over Iraq policy.

This is actually honorable.

If only others at State who feel the same way had the same honesty.

If only.

I like saying "Ulan Bator".

I'll agree to cutting the tax-cut in half

if you agree to doubling the size of the military.

I want a 3-war sized military. MWHAHAHAHA!

Just wondering

Does the break in the weather mean G-d changed His mind ?

the Tikrit Terrier

Capt. Scottie Ritter, ( US Girl Scouts, Ret.) evidently has lots of time (and various bodily fluids) on his hands since the schools are closed for spring break.

Cap'n Scottie abandoned his forward observation post, i.e.; slumped over in his Buick in the Polanski Jr. High parking lot, with his laptop, police scanner, binoculars, baby wipes and a stack of well-thumbed '15' Magazines, and he made his way to his second favorite place; in front of a camera.

Where Ritter said something about "tail" and "between their legs".

Isn't that a probation violation?

Tuesday, March 25, 2003

Following violent demonstrations

in Yemen, Gaza, Athens, Cairo and San Francisco, the people of Basra decided to hold their own violent demonstration today.

Unlike all the others however, their demonstration was anti-Saddam.

It's always the criticism from those who know you best that hurts the most, isn't it?

I was so proud

of the family of the downed Apache pilot. They didn't whine, but instead supported their son and his mission.

That's why we'll win.

Sunday, March 23, 2003

His real middle name is "Fidel"

His mother's name is "Koran".

And he cut the generator, rolled 4 grenades into 4 tents, shot his fellow troops as they fled and then tried to blend in with the rescuers.

Hasan Akbar, aka Mark Fidel Kools, you are a disgrace. Please execute this traitor-trash at once.

We've got an Islamist Fifth Column problem, folks.

The Junkyard Blog

is on it. Chris & Bryan are doing an excellent, excellent job and reporting many items I haven't seen elsewhere.

Such as:

France had 2 ricin incidents, not just one. The first one was hushed up during the UN debacle. It was inconvenient for the French to mention the ricin provided by al Qaeda operating freely in Baghdad while trying to prop Baghdad up.

The State Dept. stabil-o-crat who stifled the USS Cole investigation is slated to help run post-war Iraq!

China may soon have our 'Shock & Awe' JDAM technology AND factories unless we raise some hell...check it out!

If the Geneva Convention meant anything

to this regime, we wouldn't be there in the first place. Treaties are scraps of paper to these people; and that is one more reason why they must be killed.

All those POWs were beaten. The ones who weren't executed on the spot were paraded before the cameras.

Remember: Since they were not all executed, the Hans Blixs' of the world would call this "evidence of substantial compliance" with the Geneva Convention.

Saturday, March 22, 2003

Fresh from the Net

Uncle Wayne, USN,Ret. sent along a few choice pieces:


March 9, 2003. Today it was reported that severe earthquakes have occurred
in 10 different locations in France. The severity was measured in excess of
10 on the Richter Scale.
The cause was the 56,681 dead American soldiers buried in French soil
rolling over in their graves.

According to the American Battle Monuments Commission there are 26,255
Yankee dead from World War I buried in 4 cemeteries in France. There are
30,426 American dead from World War II buried in 6 cemeteries in France.
These 56,681 brave American heroes died in their youth to liberate a country
which is guilty of shameful unspeakable behavior in the 21st century.

May the United States of America never forget their sacrifice as we find
ways to forcefully deal with the Godforsaken, unappreciative, forgetful
country of France!

Who’s Smarter?
by Cindy Osborne

The Hollywood group is at it again. Holding anti-war rallies, screaming
about the Bush Administration, running ads in major newspapers, defaming
the President and his Cabinet every chance they get, to
anyone and everyone who will listen. They publicly defile them and call
them names like "stupid" , "morons", and "idiots". Jessica Lange
went so far as to tell a crowd in Spain that she hates President Bush
and is embarrassed to be an American.

So, just how ignorant are these people who are running the country?
Let's look at the biographies of these "stupid", "ignorant" , "moronic"
leaders, and then at the celebrities who are castigating them:

President George W. Bush: Received a Bachelors Degree from Yale
University and an MBA from Harvard Business School. He served as an
F-102 pilot for the Texas Air National Guard. He began his career
in the oil and gas business in Midland in 1975 and worked in the energy
industry until 1986. He was elected Governor on November 8, 1994, with
53.5 percent of the vote. In a historic re-election victory, he
became the first Texas Governor to be elected to consecutive four-year
terms on November 3, 1998 winning 68.6 percent of the vote. In 1998
Governor Bush won 49 percent of the Hispanic vote, 27 percent
of the African-American vote, 27 percent of Democrats and 65 percent of
women. He won more Texas counties, 240 of 254, than any modern
Republican other that Richard Nixon in 1972 and is the first
Republican gubernatorial candidate to win the heavily Hispanic and
Democratic border counties of El Paso, Cameron and Hidalgo. (Someone
began circulating a false story about his I.Q. being lower than any
other President. If you believed it, you might want to go to
URBANLEGENDS.COM and see the truth.)

Vice President Dick Cheney earned a B.A. in 1965 and a M.A. in 1966,
both in political science. Two years later, he won an American Political
Science Association congressional fellowship. One of Vice President Cheney's primary duties is to share with individuals, members of Congress and foreign leaders, President Bush's vision to strengthen
our economy, secure our homeland and win the War on
Terrorism. In his official role as President of the Senate, Vice
President Cheney regularly goes to Capital Hill to meet with Senators
and members of the House of Representatives to work on the
Administration's legislative goals. In his travels as Vice President, he
has seen first hand the great demands the war on terrorism is placing on
the men and women of our military, and he is proud of the
tremendous job they are doing for the United States of America.
{note: Cheney was also elected to the House, served as Sec. of Defense and was a sucessful businessman. He made 30 million dollars before becoming VP, half of which went to taxes and donated another 10 million to charity. Compare to Gore's 200 dollars & Clinton's donating his used underwear as a write-off.}

Secretary of State Colin Powell was educated in the New York City public
schools, graduating from the City College of New York (CCNY), where he
earned a Bachelor's Degree in geology. He also
participated in ROTC at CCNY and received a commission as an Army second
lieutenant upon graduation in June 1958. His further academic
achievements include a Master of Business Administration Degree
from George Washington University. Secretary Powell is the recipient of
numerous U.S. and foreign military awards and decorations. Secretary
Powell's civilian awards include two Presidential Medals of
Freedom, the President's Citizens Medal, the Congressional Gold Medal,
the Secretary of State Distinguished Service Medal, and the Secretary of
Energy Distinguished Service Medal. Several schools and
other institutions have been named in his honor and he holds honorary
degrees from universities and colleges across the country.

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld: attended Princeton University on
Scholarship (AB, 1954) and served in the U.S. Navy (1954-57) as a Naval
aviator ; Congressional Assistant to Rep. Robert Griffin
(R-MI), 1957-59; U.S. Representative, Illinois, 1962-69; Assistant to
the President, Director of the Office of Economic Opportunity, Director
of the Cost of Living Council, 1969-74; U.S. Ambassador to
NATO, 1973-74; head of Presidential Transition Team, 1974; Assistant to
the President, Director of White House Office of Operations, White House
Chief of Staff, 1974-77; Secretary of Defense, 1975-77

Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge was raised in a working class
family in veterans' public housing in Erie. He earned a scholarship to
Harvard, graduating with honors in 1967. After his first year
at The Dickinson School of Law, he was drafted into the U.S. Army, where
he served as an infantry staff sergeant in Vietnam, earning the Bronze
Star for Valor. After returning to Pennsylvania, he earned
his Law Degree and was in private practice before becoming Assistant
District Attorney in Erie County. He was elected to Congress in 1982. He
was the first enlisted Vietnam combat veteran elected to the
U.S. House, and was overwhelmingly re-elected six times. {note: Then serving as Pa. Governor}

National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice earned her Bachelor's Degree in Political Science, Cum Laude and Phi Beta Kappa, from the University of Denver in 1974; her Master's from the University of Notre Dame in 1975; and her Ph.D. from the Graduate School of International Studies at the University of Denver in 1981.

(Note: Rice enrolled at the University of Denver at the age of 15,
graduating at 19 with a Bachelor's Degree in Political Science (Cum
Laude). She earned a Master's Degree at the University of Notre
Dame and a Doctorate from the University of Denver's Graduate School of
International Studies. Both of her advanced degrees are also in
Political Science.)
She is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and has
been awarded Honorary Doctorates from Morehouse College in 1991, the
University of Alabama in 1994, and the University of
Notre Dame in 1995. At Stanford, she has been a member of the Center for
International Security and Arms Control, a Senior Fellow of the
Institute for International Studies, and a Fellow (by courtesy) of the
Hoover Institution. Her books include Germany Unified and Europe
Transformed (1995) with Philip Zelikow, The Gorbachev Era (1986) with
Alexander Dallin, and Uncertain Allegiance: The Soviet Union and
the Czechoslovak Army (1984). She also has written numerous articles on
Soviet and East European foreign and defense policy, and has addressed
audiences in settings ranging from the U.S. Ambassador's
Residence in Moscow to the Commonwealth Club to the 1992 and 2000
Republican National Conventions. From 1989 through March 1991, the
period of German reunification and the final days of the Soviet
Union, she served in the Bush Administration as Director, and then
Senior Director, of Soviet and East European Affairs in the National
Security Council, and a Special Assistant to the President for National
Security Affairs. In 1986, while an international affairs fellow of the
Council on Foreign Relations, she served as Special Assistant to the
Director of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In 1997, she served on the
Federal Advisory Committee on Gender -- Integrated Training in the
Military. She was a member of the boards of directors for the Chevron
Corporation, the Charles Schwab Corporation, the William and
Flora Hewlett Foundation, the University of Notre Dame, the
International Advisory Council of J.P. Morgan and the San Francisco
Symphony Board of Governors. She was a Founding Board member of the
Center for a New Generation, an educational support fund for schools in
East Palo Alto and East Menlo Park, California and was Vice President of
the Boys and Girls Club of the Peninsula. In addition, her
past board service has encompassed such organizations as Transamerica
Corporation, Hewlett Packard, the Carnegie Corporation, Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace, The Rand Corporation, the
National Council for Soviet and East European Studies, the Mid-Peninsula
Urban Coalition and KQED, public broadcasting for San Francisco. Born
November 14, 1954 in Birmingham, Alabama, she earned
her bachelor's degree in political science, cum laude and Phi Beta
Kappa, from the University of Denver in 1974; her Master's from the
University of Notre Dame in 1975; and her Ph.D. from the Graduate
School of International Studies at the University of Denver in 1981. She
is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and has been
awarded Honorary Doctorates from Morehouse College in
1991, the University of Alabama in 1994, and the University of Notre
Dame in 1995. She resides in Washington, D.C.

So who are these celebrities?

Barbra Streisand : Completed high school
Career: Singing and acting

Cher: Dropped out of school in 9th grade.
Career: Singing and acting

Martin Sheen Flunked exam to enter University of Dayton.
Career: Acting

Jessica Lange Dropped out college mid-freshman year.
Career: Acting

Alec Baldwin Dropped out of George Washington U. after scandal
Career: Acting

Julia Roberts Completed high school
Career: Acting

Sean Penn Completed High school
Career: Acting

Susan Sarandon Degree in Drama from Catholic University of America
in Washington, D.C.
Career: Acting

Ed Asner Completed High school
Career: Acting

George Clooney Dropped out of University of Kentucky
Career: Acting

Michael Moore Dropped out first year University of Michigan.
Career: Movie Director

Sarah Jessica Parker: Completed High School
Career: Acting

Jennifer Anniston: Completed High School
Career: Acting

Mike Farrell Completed High school
Career: Acting

Janeane Garofelo Dropped out of College.
Career: Stand up comedienne

Larry Hagman Attended Bard College for one year.
Career: Acting

And finally:

Zell Miller on the Senate floor:

"Mr. President, I have signed on as an original co-sponsor of the Iraq resolution, and I'd like to tell you a story about why I think it is the right path to take:

A few weeks ago, we were doing some work on my back porch back home, tearing out a section of old stacked rocks, when all of a sudden I uncovered a nest of copperhead snakes.

Now, I'm not one to get alarmed at snakes. I know they perform some useful functions, like eating rats. And when I was a young lad, I kept snakes as pets. I had an indigo snake, a bull snake, a corn snake and many others. I must have had a dozen king snakes at one time or another.
They make great pets and you only had to feed them a mouse every 30 days.

I read all the books by Raymond C. Ditmars, who was the foremost herpetologist of his day. That's an expert on snakes.
For a while, I wanted to be a herpetologist, but the pull of being a big-league shortstop outran that childhood dream.

I reminisce this way to explain that snakes don't scare me like they do some people. And I guess the reason is that I know the difference between those that are harmless and those that will kill you.

In fact, I bet I may be the only senator in this body who can look at the last three inches of a snake's tail and tell you whether it's poisonous or not. I can also tell the sex of a snake, but that's another story.

A copperhead will kill you. It could kill one of my dogs. It could kill one of my grandchildren. It could kill any of my four great-grandchildren. They play all the time where I found these killers.

And you know, when I discovered these copperheads, I didn't call my wife Shirley and ask her advice, like I do on most things. I didn't yell for help from my neighbors or take it to the city council. I just took a hoe and knocked them in the head and killed them. Dead as a doorknob.

I guess you could call it a unilateral action. Or pre-emptive or even bellicose and reactive.

I took their poisonous heads off because they were a threat to me. And they were a threat to my home and my family. They were a threat to all I hold dear.

And isn't that what this is all about?"


To you

who are serving our country:

Be it on the USS Bunker Hill, or flying old B-52s or new B-2s.

Whether aboard the Coast Guard's little Aquidneck patrol boat or fighting terrorists in Northern Iraq.

Perhaps you are in the 7th Cav. or aboard the submarine Boise.

Wherever you are, whatever your unit, this American family thanks you from the bottom of our hearts.

You are in our prayers. You are not now, nor will you ever be, forgotten.

God Bless You All.

President George W. Bush

has proven himself to be a true leader.

He has earned our support and loyalty.

Thanks, Mr. President.

Some Excerpts

from yesterday's Press Conference. And it's not pretty. [Translation provided in brackets]

Ari: With that, I'm happy to take your questions. Helen. [What is she still doing here?]

Q Can you say whether Iraq is the end goal here? Some of the President's advisors have said they thought it would be good to go on to other countries in the region, to democratize or liberate. What is it? Can you clarify for the American people --[ George W. Bush wants to kill everyone & rule the World!]

MR. FLEISCHER: Who has suggested that? [ Besides the voices in your head?]

Q Perle, for one. Richard Perle.[ You know; the Killer Jews who run this place.]

MR. FLEISCHER: I'm not aware of anybody who works for the President who has said that. There may be outside people who have some thoughts. [ Note to self: must not let my eyes be drawn to the ugliest spectacle in the room again.]

Q But Iraq is the sole goal? [or will he stop at nothing until he is Emperor of the World?]

MR. FLEISCHER: The President has made repeatedly clear to the American people, as he said in his address to the nation the other night, that the purpose of this is the disarmament of the Iraqi regime.[ Thank God that's over!]


Q Ari, has the President watched any of this, the unfolding events in Baghdad, do you know? { Or is he hopelessly out of touch and indifferent to all the suffering?]

MR. FLEISCHER: Obviously, the President, having authorized the mission, was aware of the mission, knew when it would begin, et cetera. And I don't think he needs to watch TV to know what was about to unfold. [ In fact, I'd be scared if he WAS depending on TV news to get his information.]


Q Just to clarify Terry's question. You said the President doesn't need to watch TV to know what's going on in Iraq, but you're telling me -- these are pretty astounding images -- he doesn't have a television on somewhere, he's not watching what's going on? [ God, I'm important. Bush doesn't watch TV??? He must be bowling while Rome burns! I think I can nail them on this!]

MR. FLEISCHER: The President, again, understands the implications of the actions that he has launched to secure the disarmament of the Iraqi regime to liberate the people.

Q Right, right, right. The question, though, is he watching TV, or not? [ He's out of touch! He's out of touch! I'll bet he's barbecueing right now!]

MR. FLEISCHER: The President may occasionally turn on the TV, but that's not how he gets his news or his information. [ Campbell, you're not fit to run a high-school newspaper. If it wasn't for that thing between your legs and some hairspray, you'd be a substitute gym teacher in Conneticutt right now.]

Q I'm not suggesting it is;[Of course I am] but we just want to try to get an image of-- [ I'll sugar-coat it and try again...]

MR. FLEISCHER: From time to time, he might.[ Nice try, bitch.]

Q Can I ask on a different subject. There was a humanitarian crisis in Iraq even before the bombing began, in terms of food shortages. After what we saw today, this massive attack on Baghdad, that situation is clearly going to be much, much worse beginning tomorrow. What, specifically, is the administration planning to do when the sun comes up? [Why do you want to starve little children?]

MR. FLEISCHER: Well, one, that's not necessarily true. The destruction of a palace of Saddam Hussein's, the destruction of a military facility may not have anything to do with the feeding of the Iraqi people. In all cases, the United States is leading the effort, and along with the military come massive waves of humanitarian relief in the form of food, in the form of medicine, in the form of everything that may be necessary to help protect and to feed the Iraqi people. [ Hussein has been the one starving the people, you idiot. We'll feed them.]

We will see if any of that is, indeed, necessary to the degree that has been anticipated and planned for. But you should not necessarily leap to that conclusion based on what you saw on TV today. [ You run along and watch your own little TV show...we get real intelligence reports.]

Q Just one final question. President Chirac, of France, said today that he would not support a U.N. resolution that would give the U.S. and Britain the authority to administrate in Iraq. What's your reaction? [ How come we refuse to be ruled by our French betters?]

MR. FLEISCHER: Well, as was said at the statement in the Azores, we will continue to work with the United Nations. The President does believe the United Nations has a role in the future of Iraq and the reconstruction of Iraq. The President would hope that nobody would stand in the way of the humanitarian reconstruction of Iraq. [Fuck France.]


Q Can I ask one additional question about Camp David this weekend. The President is going to be spending the weekend there. Can you describe what his plans are for the weekend? Will he be able to keep in touch? [Or will he be playing Lawn Darts while Richard Perle picks out targets?]

MR. FLEISCHER: There will be a meeting of the National Security Council tomorrow morning. The principals -- the Vice President, Secretary Powell, Secretary Rumsfeld, Director Tenet and others, of course, Dr. Rice -- will be joining the President at Camp David for participation in the NSC meeting. Camp David, as you can imagine, has every modern communication. It's a Marine facility. It has everything that anybody needs. [ Camp David isn't some day-camp, you morons!]

Q Let me first follow on Campbell's question. The resolution that --

MR. FLEISCHER: I thought you were going to ask about watching TV. [ I'm not going to let you live that one down, you self-important nit-wits!]

Q I may. The resolution that the U.S. would propose in the U.N. would do what? Would turn over the administration of Iraq's oil monies to the U.N., or to the U.S. and the U.K.? [ How can we possibly live without the UN?]

MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I think the exact form of any resolution is still a matter of discussion. The exact role of the United Nations is a matter that people have to talk about. [ The UN couldn't run a hamburger stand.]

Q My question really is, is he trying to avoid becoming too identified with the war? [ We want to be able to nail him if it goes badly.]

MR. FLEISCHER: I think that the American people will make their judgments about what role the President plays. And I think they understand very clearly that this is a President who has made the decision to disarm Saddam Hussein through the use of force, after having tried to do it through the United Nations. They watched that whole discussion play out for the last six months. He is the President, he's made his decisions and the American people are watching him. [ No, you want to nail him whether or not it goes badly.]

Q And can I ask one more question about television, just a very direct question? Did the President not see the pictures on television this morning, the very dramatic pictures of the bombs and the explosions over Baghdad? He did not see those? [ By God, we are going to prove Bush is out of touch and doesn't care what kind of damage his bombs do!]

MR. FLEISCHER: I was with the President just as the operation was beginning, at about 1:00 p.m., and he was not watching TV at that time. I wasn't with him for the duration of it, so I couldn't answer in all instances about it. I probably shouldn't answer a question like this in this room, but the President does not watch a lot of TV. [ And this very press conference explains why!]

Q No, but they were very, very dramatic pictures. It's hard to imagine the President of the United States who had ordered this attack did not see any evidence of it. [ He's Dr. Strangelove! He loves to bomb people and doesn't care what happens to them!]

MR. FLEISCHER: Elizabeth, I don't know that the President needed to watch TV to understand what it means to authorize military force and to know that the mission has begun and the mission is underway. [ He knows ten times more than you ankle-biting gnats!]

Q So the answer is unclear, we don't know if he saw them? [ What didn't the President know, and when didn't he know it?]

MR. FLEISCHER: I've just described to you where I was with him, but I wasn't with him for the entire duration of what you all saw on TV. [ I can't believe I have to pretend to take these people seriously!]

And on it goes:

Q Ari, how does the administration expect allied forces to be greeted in Baghdad?
[Ari: We expect them to rise up and demand to become a French colony.]

Q And may I ask if the administration expects the allied forces to find evidence or remnants of chemical or biological weapons, or a reconstituted nuclear program?
[Ari; No; that was just an excuse for us to take over the world.]

Q... has the United States seen any evidence that either Saddam Hussein or either of his two sons are issuing orders, in command of the government, in command of the military, actually in charge of the government?

MR. FLEISCHER: We don't know.

Q Is that a "no," you've seen no evidence? Or you don't know. Are you -- again, communications could be intercepted --
[ Ari: What is it about 'We don't know.' that you don't understand?]

Q Can you tell us now if we're at the point that we would have been without that target of opportunity on Wednesday? [ This is how we can second-guess the President!]

Q Ari, in the congressional leaders meeting this morning, how would you characterize the relations between Senator Daschle and the President? Did the subject of his criticism of the President come up? [ This is how we can turn this into a food-fight!]

Q And on another subject, back onto the television watching. You say President Bush doesn't watch much television. Is he not watching the "shock and awe" today because he's getting military video, U.S. video of the events there? [ We're not giving up on this!]

Q But isn't it understandable that as the American public is watching the bombardment, turning to nighttime sky into light and seeing the gravity of the situation, that he might need to understand what America is seeing and see it with them so he can speak effectively to the American public? [ Still not giving up!]

Q Has the U.S. government engaged in any disinformation this week in order to get the leaders of Iraq to move from one place to another? And what do you, personally, think about this information? { Admit it! The Administration is full of liars! How dare we try to fool an enemy in wartime!]

Q Ari, the President may not watch the war on TV, may not need to watch it on TV, but a lot of people around the world will. And is this the image that he wanted them to see, of the "shock and awe" campaign, of the war? And did he weigh the possible effect on public opinion that those images might have? [ STILL not giving up!]

Q But they are pictures that a lot of people will use to judge how the war is going, how it's being carried out.[ WE WILL PROVE THE PRESIDENT IS OUT OF TOUCH!!!]

Q Do you view as troubling at all President Chirac's statements today, though, that the U.S. and the UK should not be in charge of oversight of the post-war--[ We wish Chirac were President!]

Q And one last question, if you'd be so kind. Does the President feel the close resolution, the one that was approved by the Senate and the House, finally put an end to any political bickering on the war? [ So we can claim credit too!]

Q Ari, the administration made clear in Afghanistan that this was not -- that that war was not about one man, Osama bin Laden. But isn't it the case that this war is, in fact, about one man, Saddam Hussein? And is it possible for the U.S.-UK to declare victory if they can't account for a dead or exiled Saddam Hussein? [ So we can diminish the victory.]

Q Ari, you speak of Iraqis embracing us as liberators. But a recent poll by Zogby International of all the Arab world -- countries around there show a very negative perception of the United States -- 95 percent in Saudi Arabia have a negative view of the United States. Why would Iraqis be different? Why would they have such a more positive view? And with this "shock and awe" campaign, which could result in civilian deaths, why are they suddenly going to become enamored of -- [ Ari: Why would you take a poll of Saudis to find out how Iraqis feel about not being thrown into shredders anymore, dumbass?]

Q Ari, some former Presidents have come to the West Wing, like, in the middle of the night when they've been conducting wars. You said yesterday that President Bush does not feel like he should be micromanaging this war. Can you expand on that a little bit and tell us why he feels that way? [ Ari: Yeah; micro-managing worked really well for Johnson & Carter, didn't it?]

Helen Thomas mentioned that Bush had never seen a battlefeild in one of her thinly-disguised insults. I thought she should be kept there as a museum piece, but her time is up. These times are too serious for Mad Cow disease displays.

The rest of the Press Corps should get off their lazy pampered butts and ask some real questions, not just parrot DNC talking points.

Here's an example: Why don't we have a true '2 War' capability anymore and what is it going to take to get one?

Thursday, March 20, 2003

Press on

"Embedding" reporters in the military units is a great idea. I think it may give these reporters a greater appreciation of this struggle and the brave citizen-soldiers who are fighting for us.

I heard one reporter at Headquarters complain that she was being kept in the dark, and 'embedding' was a Pentagon plot to keep reporters from seeing the "big picture". Whatever, lady.

Also heard reports that "a Jordanian" was killed in the bombing of Saddam's bunker last night. Is that "Jordanian" this guy...a Palestinian Liberation Front terrorist?

Wednesday, March 19, 2003

Time's up.

War has begun, at long, long last.

America is defending herself, defending civilization itself and liberating the oppressed.

Let's Roll!

God Bless America.

Tuesday, March 18, 2003

The Time: 20 hours, 45 minutes and counting

The Date: Sept 11, Day 558

The Message: Support our Troops.
Support their Officers.
Support the Mission.
Support our President.
Support Your Country.

True Lies

Steve H. pokes holes in Hussein's full-body condom.

The World's Only Amish Rabbi extends sympathy to the family of the bulldozer and wonders why Blix is leaving just when the inspections were beginning to work.

The Dept. of Stability just can't stop itself, reports Joel Mowbray. This time it's Libya. Just what is the Statute of Limitations on purposefully blasting an airliner full of our citizens out of the air?

"Ensure Victory"

I was glad to hear the President use that phrase in his speech last night.

I'm 2 chapters into "We Were Soldiers Once...And Young" (by Lt. Gen Hal Moore & Joe Galloway) and LBJ & the Pentagon have escalated without declaring a national emergency, rotated out many experienced officers, limited the tours of the troops, thereby losing more experienced soldiers, circumscribed the Air Force's area of operation, put Thailand off the table, dismissed an aggressive commander and failed to pursue a fleeing enemy, etc.

In other words, "Don't Win...Don't Lose".

BTW, Joe Galloway is the journalist in the film who is given a rifle...and the author of this:

"Ramblings of an Old Man"

Is there anyone else out there who's sick and tired of all the polls being taken in foreign countries as to whether or not they "like" us? The last time I looked, the word "like" had nothing to do with foreign policy. I prefer 'respect' or 'fear.' They worked for Rome, which civilized and kept the peace in the known world a hell of a lot longer than our puny two centuries-plus.

I see a left-wing German got elected to office recently by campaigning against the foreign policy of the United States.

Yeah, that's what I want, to be lectured about war and being a "good neighbor" by a German.

Their head honcho said they wouldn't take part in a war against Iraq. Kind of nice to see them taking a pass on a war once in while. Perhaps we needed to have the word "World" in front of War. I think it's time to bring our boys home from Germany.

Outside of the money we'd save, we'd make the Germans "like" us a lot more, after they started paying the bills for their own defense.

Last time I checked, France isn't too fond of us either. They sort of liked us back on June 6th, 1944, though, didn't they? If you don't think so, see how nicely they take care of the enormous cemeteries up above the Normandy beaches. For those of you who've studied history, we also have a few cemeteries in places like Belleau Woods and Chateau Thierry also.

For those of you who haven't studied it, that was from World War One, the first time Europe screwed up, and we bailed out the French. That's where the US Marines got the title "Devil Dogs" or, if you still care about what the Germans think, "Teufelhunde." I hope I spelled that right; sure wouldn't want to offend anyone, least of all a German.

Come to think of it, when Europe couldn't take care of their Bosnian problem recently, guess who had to help out there also. Last time I checked, our kids are still there. I sort of remember they said they would be out in a year. Gee, how time flies when you're having fun.

Now we hear that the South Koreans aren't too happy with us either. They "liked" us a lot better, of course, in June 1950. It took more than 50,000 Americans killed in Korea to help give them the lifestyle they currently enjoy, but then who's counting? I think it's also time to bring the boys home from there. There are about 37,000 young Americans on the DMZ separating the South Koreans from their "brothers" up north. Maybe if we leave, they can begin to participate in the "good life" that North Korea currently enjoys. Uh huh. Sure.

I also understand that a good portion of the Arab/Moslem world now doesn't "like" us either. Did anyone ever sit down and determine what we would have to do to get them to like us? Ask them what they would like us to do. Die? Commit ritual suicide? Bend over?

Maybe we should follow the advice of our dimwitted, dullest knife in the drawer, Senator Patty Murray, and build more roads, hospitals, day care centers, and orphanages like Osama bin Laden does. What with all the orphans Osama has created, the least he can do is build some places to put them. Senator Stupid says if we would only "emulate" Osama, the Arab world would love us.

Sorry Patty, in addition to the fact that we already do all of those things around the world and have been doing them for over sixty years, I don't take public transportation, and I certainly wouldn't take it with a bomb strapped to the guy next to me. Don't get me wrong: I'm not in favor of going to war. Been there, done that. Several times, in fact. But I think we ought to have some polls in this country about other countries, and see if we "like" THEM. Problem is, if you listed the countries, not only wouldn't the average American know if he liked them or not, he wouldn't be able to find them. If we're supposed to worry about them, how about them worrying about us?

We were nice to the North Koreans in 1994, as we followed the policies of Neville Clinton. And it seemed to work; they didn't restart nuclear weapons program for a whole year or so. In the meantime, we fed them when they were starving, and put oil in their stoves when they were freezing.

In a recent visit to Norway, I engaged in a really fun debate with my cousin's son, a student at a Norwegian University. I was lectured to by this thankless squirt about the "American Empire," and scolded about dropping the atomic bomb on the Japanese. I reminded him that empires usually keep the stuff they take; we don't, and back in 1945 most Norwegians thought dropping ANY kind of bomb on Germany or Japan was a good idea. I also reminded him that my uncle, his grandfather, and others in our family spent a significant time in Sachsenhausen concentration camp, courtesy of the Germans, and they didn't all survive. I further reminded him that if it weren't for the "American Empire" he would probably be speaking German or Russian.

Sorry about the rambling, but I just took an unofficial poll here at our house, and we don't seem to like anyone.

by Joe Galloway.

Ensure Victory. Now.

Wedding Bell Blues

This is hilarious! And this ties in nicely.

I think I'm in like.

Monday, March 17, 2003

You can talk to the North Koreans

if you want to.

But keep in mind that 'talking' got them oil supplies to prop up the regime, food for their troops...and their nuclear program. And their 'word' is shit. But you can talk to them.

Or, you can do what the Europeans do.

They invited the President of Taiwan to speak at Brussels, then changed their minds, denying him a visa.

He was democratically elected and threatens no one (except the Chicoms, by his example).

Now, should he became a dictator with dangerous weapons, they would find a way to chat for years on end...

(via The Corner)

Eighteen Is Enough

UN Resolutions, that is.

Even the word 'Resolution' is wrong, because the UN is not 'resolved' to do anything.
Although 'resolved' does, fittingly, bring to mind a powerless campus debating society, as in "Resolved; This house condemns blahblahblah." I hope this marks the dimunition of that suckweasel institution; I'll not miss it.

However, our President IS resolute.

Some excerpts:

"The United States of America has the sovereign authority to use force in assuring its own national security. That duty falls to me as commander of chief by the oath I have sworn, by the oath I will keep. Recognizing the threat to our country, the United States Congress voted overwhelmingly last year to support the use of force against Iraq."

"Many nations, however, do have the resolve and fortitude to act against this threat to peace, and a broad coalition is now gathering to enforce the just demands of the world."

"These governments share our assessment of the danger, but not our resolve to meet it."

"The United Nations Security Council has not lived up to its responsibilities, so we will rise to ours."

"All the decades of deceit and cruelty have now reached an end."

"The tyrant will soon be gone. The day of your liberation is near."

"...we cannot live under the threat of blackmail. The terrorist threat to America and the world will be diminished the moment that Saddam Hussein is disarmed...Just as we are preparing to ensure victory in Iraq, we are taking further actions to protect our homeland."

"Free nations have a duty to defend our people by uniting against the violent, and tonight, as we have done before, America and our allies accept that responsibility."

"Good night, and may God continue to bless America."

That's what 'resolution' really looks like.

Sunday, March 16, 2003

"All Four Stanzas"

By Isaac Asimov.

I have a weakness--I am crazy, absolutely nuts, about our national anthem.

The words are difficult and the tune is almost impossible, but frequently when I'm taking a shower I sing it with as much power and emotion as I can. It shakes me up every time.

I was once asked to speak at a luncheon. Taking my life in my hands, I announced I was going to sing our national anthem--all four stanzas.

This was greeted with loud groans. One man closed the door to the kitchen, where the noise of dishes and cutlery was loud and distracting. "Thanks, Herb," I said.

"That's all right," he said. "It was at the request of the kitchen staff."

I explained the background of the anthem and then sang all four stanzas.

Let me tell you, those people had never heard it before--or had never really listened. I got a standing ovation. But it was not me; it was the anthem.

More recently, while conducting a seminar, I told my students the story of the anthem and sang all four stanzas. Again there was a wild ovation and prolonged applause. And again, it was the anthem and not me.

So now let me tell you how it came to be written.

In 1812, the United States went to war with Great Britain, primarily over freedom of the seas. We were in the right. For two years, we held off the British, even though we were still a rather weak country. Great Britain was in a life and death struggle with Napoleon. In fact, just as the United States declared war, Napoleon marched off to invade Russia. If he won, as everyone expected, he would control Europe, and Great Britain would be isolated. It was no time for her to be involved in an American war.

At first, our seamen proved better than the British. After we won a battle on Lake Erie in 1813, the American commander, Oliver Hazard Perry, sent the message "We have met the enemy and they are ours." However, the weight of the British navy beat down our ships eventually. New England, hard-hit by a tightening blockade, threatened secession.

Meanwhile, Napoleon was beaten in Russia and in 1814 was forced to abdicate. Great Britain now turned its attention to the United States, launching a three-pronged attack. The northern prong was to come down Lake Champlain toward New York and seize parts of New England. The southern prong was to go up the Mississippi, take New Orleans and paralyze the west. The central prong was to head for the mid-Atlantic states and then attack Baltimore, the greatest port south of New York. If Baltimore was taken, the nation, which still hugged the Atlantic coast, could be split in two. The fate of the United States, then, rested to a large extent on the success or failure of the central prong.

The British reached the American coast, and on August 24, 1814, took Washington, D. C. Then they moved up the Chesapeake Bay toward Baltimore. On September 12, they arrived and found 1000 men in Fort McHenry, whose guns controlled the harbor. If the British wished to take Baltimore, they would have to take the fort.

On one of the British ships was an aged physician, William Beanes, who had been arrested in Maryland and brought along as a prisoner. Francis Scott Key, a lawyer and friend of the physician, had come to the ship to negotiate his release. The British captain was willing, but the two Americans would have to wait. It was now the night of September 13, and the bombardment of Fort McHenry was about to start.

As twilight deepened, Key and Beanes saw the American flag flying over Fort McHenry. Through the night, they heard bombs bursting and saw the red glare of rockets. They knew the fort was resisting and the American flag was still flying. But toward morning the bombardment ceased, and a dread silence fell. Either Fort McHenry had surrendered and the British flag flew above it, or the bombardment had failed and the American flag still flew.

As dawn began to brighten the eastern sky, Key and Beanes stared out at the fort, tyring to see which flag flew over it. He and the physician must have asked each other over and over, "Can you see the flag?"

After it was all finished, Key wrote a four stanza poem telling the events of the night. Called "The Defence of Fort M'Henry," it was published in newspapers and swept the nation. Someone noted that the words fit an old English tune called "To Anacreon in Heaven" --a difficult melody with an uncomfortably large vocal range. For obvious reasons, Key's work became known as "The Star Spangled Banner," and in 1931 Congress declared it the official anthem of the United States.

Now that you know the story, here are the words. Presumably, the old doctor is speaking. This is what he asks Key:

Oh! say, can you see, by the dawn's early light,
What so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming?
Whose broad stripes and bright stars, through the perilous fight,
O'er the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming?

And the rocket's red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof thro' the night that our flag was still there.
Oh! say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave,
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

"Ramparts," in case you don't know, are the protective walls or other elevations that surround a fort. The first stanza asks a question. The second gives an answer:

On the shore, dimly seen thro' the mist of the deep,
Where the foe's haughty host in dread silence reposes,
What is that which the breeze, o'er the towering steep.
As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses?

Now it catches the gleam of the morning's first beam,
In full glory reflected, now shines on the stream
'Tis the star-spangled banner. Oh! long may it wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

"The towering steep" is again, the ramparts. The bombardment has failed, and the British can do nothing more but sail away, their mission a failure.

In the third stanza, I feel Key allows himself to gloat over the American triumph. In the aftermath of the bombardment, Key probably was in no mood to act otherwise.

During World War II, when the British were our staunchest allies, this third stanza was not sung. However, I know it, so here it is:

And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion
A home and a country should leave us no more?
Their blood has washed out their foul footstep's pollution.

No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave,
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

The fourth stanza, a pious hope for the future, should be sung more slowly than the other three and with even deeper feeling.

Oh! thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand
Between their loved homes and the war's desolation,
Blest with vict'ry and peace, may the Heav'n - rescued land
Praise the Pow'r that hath made and preserved us a nation.

Then conquer we must, for our cause is just,
And this be our motto--"In God is our trust."
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

I hope you will look at the national anthem with new eyes. Listen to it, the next time you have a chance, with new ears.

And don't let them ever take it away.

--by Isaac Asimov, March 1991

(via Mike at Halcyon Media).

Common Sense & Wonder

relays reports of Iraqi defiance and sabotage against the Baathist police state. John H. points out how quickly the formerly unanimous voters of Iraq have changed their minds.

This reminds me of something. The French once had a word for this many years ago. A word almost forgotten through disuse and lost to history...what was it?...Re...Resistance! Yes, that's it!

Saturday, March 15, 2003

and the cure...

"Military power wins battles, but spiritual power wins wars."
-- General George C. Marshall

Dept. of "Let us know how that works out for you."

"We should seek by all means in our power to avoid war, by analysing possible causes, by trying to remove them, by discussion in a spirit of collaboration and good will. I cannot believe that such a programme would be rejected by the people of this country, even if it does mean the establishment of personal contact with the dictators."
-- Neville Chamberlain

"We need to be creating a world that we would like to live in when we're not the biggest power on the block."

This is why I'm a 'Clinton' partisan in the "Who is worse...Clinton or Carter?" debate.

Beel-ze Bubba said this the other night at the 92nd Street Y in New York.

Let's examine this statement.

First, it assumes we aren't creating a world we'd like to live in; yet that's exactly what this struggle is about.

Second, it assumes that someday we won't be the strongest power. And notice it doesn't say "God forbid" or even "if someday"; it is meant to make the average American listener cower, and accept as a given that we will one day be weak. Therefore, we had better meekly submit today.

Even the phrase "power on the block" is meant to evoke "bully on the block". In other words, we cannot be trusted with power. As I recall, Sec. Albright used this same phrase in justifying the transfer of nuclear missile technology to China, saying it was bad for there to be only one super-power. Staggering, isn't it? ; arming one's enemies because one's own country can't be trusted.

Which is exactly what fellow traveller Chirac thinks. He just said in a TIME interview that we were "dangerous" and hoped for China and Europe to counter us.

Of course, Clinton didn't just hope for a weakened USA; he actively worked for it, and does to this very hour. He is quite correct that the United States, as constituted, even under a Democrat administration, is a bulwark for freedom and against submersion in a soulless trans-national World Government.

He claimed Bush had messed up the political situation by putting troops nearby, thereby showing Bush wasn't serious about inspections. Yet there would be no inspections at all, joke that they are, without the troops.

Clinton went on to say that we should be strengthening the UN (i.e., weakening the US), and "mechanisms of co-operation" (i.e.,"'isms' of co-option" is more like it).

And in a display of that famous Clinton loyalty, he took a shot at Tony Blair.

Now, what is wrong with this picture?

One: Clinton should not even be speaking publicly. Bush, Reagan & Ford all held their tongues during his Maladministration. That we have forgotten this is due to the Clintonization of our politics.

Two: The venue is New York City, no less; whose largest buildings might still be standing, were it not for the President who used the occasion of the first WTC bombing to lecture Americans about their 'racism'. And who, in effect, granted Osama bin-Laden a pardon when he was offered up on a silver platter by the Sudanese.

Three: Speaking of pardons, there should have been no audience. Even Democrats should have recoiled from a President of the United States who sold pardons like some corrupt, petty Southern Governor...oops. He even pardoned unrepentant Puerto Rican terrorist bombers to get votes for Hillary. The terrorists hadn't even asked and started setting conditions. The Clintons had to beg them to accept pardons and made excuses for their murders.
Even Democrats claimed they were through with him. Remember?

There should have been no speaker, no venue and no audience.

Not to mention the content of the speech.

None dare call it Treason.

And why not?

Because we've grown used to it. There is a very real effort to breed patriotism and love of freedom out of us. And here is what it sounds like:

"We need to be creating a world that we would like to live in when we're not the biggest power on the block."

And that, my friends, is the evil of banalities.

I'm glad Elizabeth Smart was returned safely

but her father's outburst against Rep. Sensenbrenner was bizarre.

The Congressman is trying to pass a package of tough laws that include " a 20-year mandatory minimum sentence of imprisonment for abductions of a child under the age of 18, lifetime supervision of child abductors and sex offenders, mandatory life imprisonment for second-time offenders, removes any statute of limitations for child abductions and sex offenses, denies pre-trial release for those who rape or kidnap children, allows local law enforcement agencies to receive funding to establish Sex Offender Apprehension Programs, and doubles the authorization for the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children to $20 million per year." All in addition to a Federal Amber Alert system.

Mr. Smart lashed out, demanding that the Amber Alert be voted on separately & immediately. But why not demand the whole package, and force liberals to back the entire package if your goal is to protect children?

Now I have some Federalism & double jeopardy issues with Congress federalizing everything. It sometimes seems that they would pick out paint colors for Homeowner's Associations and settle zoning disputes if there was some good publicity in it for them. But that's not the issue here.

The real issue is something else entirely.

Why would the Smarts repeatedly expose their children to danger by bringing whacked-out criminal drifters to their home? I don't think it was for the cheap labor. My guess is some kind of misplaced Christian charity.

We've seen this play out on the world stage as well. We've let one-eyed Saudi clerics into our national home despite their open advocacy of our destruction. The Pope just met with Tariq Aziz, an unrepentant gangster, and let him pray at St. Francis'. Clerics of all stripes have given sermons equating standing up to evil with evil itself.

I pray for our enemies to have a change of heart. But I don't kid myself: if they don't change, we'll have to kill them, neutralize them or be killed or be conquered ourselves. If necessary, I'll give my last breath to keep that evil from my children.

And no misplaced Christian charity will stop me from protecting them from madmen, foreign or domestic.

Hans Blix

has adopted the Al Gore position that the internal combustion engine & global warming, not terrorists with nukes or ricin, are the greatest threats we face. Shouldn't he get a job as an auto emissions inspector in Denver?

The French manage to combine the worst of both worlds, as usual, by polluting the air with atmospheric nuke testing and Vichy diplo-speak.

Farts, repeated as Farce.

Friday, March 14, 2003

Some day,

in the not too distant future, historians will have to decide;

"Who was worse...Clinton or Carter?"

This has been kicked around some by the patrons at Miami Marv's Micro-Brewery (dining, dancing & gunplay 'til 5 am nightly!), and will someday take it's place with Hamilton vs. Jefferson, Lincoln vs. Douglas, or at least chiggers vs. hemorrhoids in the pantheon of American political discourse.

A side-by-side comparison, using an elaborate grading scale (mostly 'bad' & 'worse') will help us decide.

Clinton: A perpetual adolescent. bad.
Carter: Old enough to know better. worse.

Carter: Vice-President Walter Mondale, a forgettable mediocrity. bad.
Clinton: Vice-President Al Gore, a forgettable mediocrity with Delusional Cyborg Zealot Disorder. worse.

Clinton: Left a nuclear North Korea for a real President to deal with.
Carter: Left a nuclear Iran for a real President to deal with. This one is almost to close to call. Advantage: Carter.

Carter: wife, Rosalyn. ok.
Clinton: wife, Sen. Hillary Clinton. Beelzebub Incarnate, The Locus of Evil in the Modern World.

Carter: Hired Warren Christopher & Madeleine Albright. bad.
Clinton: Promoted Warren Christopher & Madeleine Albright. worse.

Carter: took National Security advice from daughter Amy. bad.
Clinton: took National Security advice from Beijing. worse.

Carter: brother Billy Carter. bad.
Clinton: brother Roger Clinton. worse.

Carter: scared of rabbits. bad.
Clinton: scared of Hillary. understandable.

Carter: wore a cardigan while fiddling with thermostat. bad.
Clinton: told us about his underwear while diddling Monica. worse.

Carter: 4 long years of undermining American security. bad.
Clinton: 8 long years of undermining American security. worse.

Clinton: would sell out his country for a Nobel Peace Prize. bad.
Carter: been there; done that. worse.

Carter: won't shut-up. bad.
Clinton: can't shut-up. worse.

Clinton: writes letters to Penthouse. bad letters.
Carter : writes speeches for Arafat. worse.

Carter: Willie Nelson fan. uhhh...ok.
Clinton: R. Kelly fan. worse.

Carter: lusted in his heart. whatever.
Clinton: lusted on the upholstery, drapes, carpet and the help... and then stole the furniture. worse.

Cast your ballot and aspersions early and often!

Thursday, March 13, 2003

How much

of the world's wealth does the USA have?

The answer is none. We have 100% of ours, and the rest of the world has 100% of theirs. Should they adopt the rule of law, enforceable contracts, honest courts and free & fair markets, their 100% will enlarge.

Remember this when the lefties start in on their "fair share" gobbledygook.

Pete Townsend

was cleared by British police, who examined his computer records and said his story holds up.

I was glad to hear this. Pete is one of the few rockers who understood that he was free to pursue his art only because others fought the Cold War. Or, as another British author, George Orwell, once said:

"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."

Hey Pete; Don't get fooled again!

Heard David Gergen & Chris Matthews

accusing us, the great unwashed, of xenephobia and foreigner-bashing in our treatment of the French.

They don't get it. It gives me no great pleasure to bash the French or Germans.

We are in a struggle for our lives and for civilization. This is not hyperbole. And the French act like kidnapping victims, imbued with Stockholm Syndrome, pleading the case of the kidnappers and keeping us from getting a clean shot at the abductors.

Yes, Chirac was the first leader to come to America after 9-11, and said "We are all Americans now." But he prefers his Americans like he prefers his Jews; as victims. When we fight back, we are "dangerous" bullies.

What Chirac is practicing goes beyond realpolitik. It rises to the level of a spiritual disease. Many in Europe (and in our intelligensia) no longer believe in Western Civilization, broadly defined. Having lost faith in their own civilization, they now believe in everything. and nothing. Where there is no vision the people perish.

It is they, not us, who are fighting a desperate rear-guard battle.

Now get out of the way.

Sunday, March 09, 2003

Pacifism Kills

All you peaceniks have nothing on the British college students of the 30's.

Their pacifism, though still misguided, was somewhat more justified by the enormous casualties of WWI. You don't have that excuse.

Even the isolationism of the Republicans before WWII sprang from a misguided, short-sighted patriotism. But the curious isolationism of the left today springs from a loathing of America and is nothing more than a nihlistic suicide wish.

Even the calls for 'multi-lateralism' are dishonest; If the entire world agreed with Bush, they would still oppose America defending herself.

Collabocrats should remember Wendell Wilkie, the Republican candidate in 1940, who put patriotism above politics. Most of you have become so Clintonized that I might as well be speaking another language; but try to remember.

Speaking of, do you remember how Truman spoke out against Eisenhower? Eisenhower blasting Kennedy & Johnson? Johnson attacking Nixon? Nixon & Ford ambushing Carter or Reagan & Bush 41 blasting Clinton?
No, you don't. Because they had the class not to do something that low and crass, especially in wartime. Please tell Clinton & Carter to shut the fuck up.

Awaken from your sleepwalk, lefties. We're not going over the cliff with you.

Not in my name.

and more lies.

If Bush were doing this 'for Daddy', wouldn't he take the Scowcroft line and say Hussein was contained?

Gen. Wesley Clark recently claimed this was an 'elective' war ( and neglected to call his own truly elective Balkan campaign the same). Hang it up, General. The Vichycrat Party will NEVER choose a career military man as a nominee, even Hillary's favorite General.

He was echoed by historian Micheal Bechloss on Imus, who said "Everybody agrees this is an elective war."
Uhh...the President doesn't agree. Nor millions of other Americans. To me, it is elective only in the sense that all wars are; we could have chosen to remain British subjects or live with a Confederate States of America and slavery. We could have elected to let the Nazis and Japanese & Soviets carve up the world. Who knows what language we'd be speaking today...but we could have chosen not to fight. I'm glad we didn't.

A lot of protestors wouldn't change their minds if Hussein came out and admitted helping the hi-jackers and promised to do it again. I'm reminded of a child whose father has hurt, abused, neglected and totally abandoned his family; yet the child clings romantically to the bastard, while putting the mother who stayed through hell.
Leftists cling to their Blame-America leftism, even tho' America has given billions freedom and prosperity, yet they long for a deadbeat philosophy that has wrought only Death & Misery. Pathetic, really.

But it's hard to get mad at Europeans when so many of our fellow citizens are infected with the same disease. Out here in fly-over country, one of our school administrators put Noam Chomsky's screed in a time capsule at the dedication of the new school building. I noticed the gym teacher has a 'Bush, Ashcroft & Cheney- The Real Axis of Evil' bumper sticker. It's staggering, really; Kim Jong Il is threatening to nuke Seoul, but I should be afraid of...Dick Cheney?

We've got a lot of muck in the barn, my friends.

"A Line in the Sand; The Alamo in Blood and Memory"

by Randy Roberts & James S. Olson (Free Press, 2001)

is a good, brief history of the Alamo and how it came to be an American icon.

It presents a balanced view of the circumstances leading to the battle, and the struggle of the flawed, yet heroic defenders, both Anglo Texan & Hispanic Tejano; all fighting to wrest freedom from the dictator Santa Anna.

Interestingly, when Col. Travis, author of the "VICTORY or DEATH" letter, drew a line in the sand, all the men stepped over to stay and fight, except one, who went over the wall. He was...French! Imagine that.

The book continues into the present, telling the battle for preservation of the site. Boomers will enjoy the Walt Disney "Davy Crockett" link and John Wayne's "Alamo" project, both with Cold War overtones. JFK retreated inside the Alamo to escape the crowds after a speech, and made the mistake of asking for the rear exit. He was icily informed that there were no back doors at the Alamo. Zing! LBJ, John Tower and George W. Bush all have Alamo connections; even Ozzie Osbourne gets arrested for inappropriate peeing (Attn. Miami office: you're not alone!).

The book closes with several excellent passages, including this one by historian T. R. Fehrenbach:

...any "age that does not exalt courage will be confounded by the Alamo, and baffled by the men who stayed in it.
Any age that fears war more than servitude, or death more than honor, must denigrate the Alamo.
Ages that do not honor the concept of "Liberty or Death" will fight no Alamos.
Ages that do not cling to the great values of Love, Honor, Courage & Sacrifice, the soldier values, will not only fail to 'Remember the Alamo'; they may not long endure."

The Alamo does indeed confound the the PC revisionists. It does not fit easily into their childish people-of-color-ing book view of the world, where, always, 'white'=bad oppressor and 'brown'=good victims. Leftists, in the abstract, love little brown people. Oh yes. But individually, in reality, in-the-flesh brown people are more problematic for them. As P.J. O'Rourke says, "We care!; We care so much we just can't sleep at night!". Uh-huh. That is, as long as the 'victims' co-operate with the leftist's 'Blame America' agenda. to wit;

A successful Hispanic American family comes to the Alamo. The father, a CPA with a degree from Wharton, poses his family in front of the Alamo for pictures, and tells his girls of the integrity and courage that were displayed there, and the need to emulate those qualities in their own lives.

He is promptly set upon by a white grad student, brimming with PC platitudes, who aggressively hectors the father. Failing to be put off politely, the sophomoric Sandanista rudely continues:

"You shouldn't be teaching your kids this stuff." The CPA stopped short. "Escucheme, bolillo (Listen to me, white bread)," he said sharply. "If Santa Anna would have won the war, this whole city would be a shithole just like Reynosa. Soy tejano (I'm a Texan). Mind your own goddamned business. It's my Alamo too."

And so it is. Well said, mi amigo. How...American.

They close with a story of 2 Marines visiting the Alamo...but, for that, you'll have to read the book yourself.

Go ahead.

Soy tejano!

"I often wonder whether we do not rest our hopes too much upon constitutions, upon laws and upon courts. These are false hopes; believe me, these are false hopes. Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it..."
-- Judge Learned Hand

Friday, March 07, 2003

There are street gangs in New York

with more moral authority than the UN.

Just thinking about the 'Lysistrata' campaign

by Danish women to withhold sex from their war-like men makes me blue.
But at least you Danish women have a choice; the women of Baghdad do not have a choice when Hussein's secret police take them to the palace for rape.
Nor would you have that option under Islamic Law. You gals might want to rethink your Dane-gelding.

Until then, I have decided to withhold Sharpknife's Blade of Love from the love-starved women of the world until they assume a suitably pro-war position.

What's that?...Mrs. Sharpknife just informed me I'd damned well better withold my attentions to the women of world, or wake up singing the Franki Valli part from "Walk Like a Man, Sing Like a Girl".
Yes, dear....What's that, Hon?....You say let's get those Palestinians who danced in the street as soon as we're finished with Hussein?
My campaign is working! I'd better go keep my end of the bargain.

Gotta go!

Thursday, March 06, 2003

Still sinking...

With a quarter of a million servicemen in harm's way, as soon as the bombs start flying, the Traitorcrats will introduce an impeachment resolution for Pres. Bush.


Happy Alamo Day

To all Texans and spiritual Texans everywhere.

167 years ago, a brave group of Texans gave their all for freedom. No, they were not perfect by our standards today. But they made our standards possible.

They fought against a Mexican dictator who had shredded the liberal Constitution of 1824. He enslaved peasants and Indians, press-ganging them into service on his way to the battlefield.

While the Texans emulated & admired the Founding Fathers, Santa Anna's hero was...you guessed it...French dictator Napolean.

Incidentally, Cinco de Mayo celebrates the victory of the Mexicans over the French Army at the Battle of Puebla.
Yes; even the Mexicans have defeated France. They finally threw the French out...with help from the United States!

Shine on, Lone Star!

Everytime I think they've sunk to the bottom,

they manage to sink lower.

I mean the "Democrats", of course. I think we need a new name for them. 'Democrat' implies 'one man, one vote' and they believe in massive voter fraud and rule by unelected judges & faceless beauracrats. 'Democrats' they're not.

"Liberal" won't do. Conservatives are the only ones defending the classical liberal tradition.

"Leftists" is fairly accurate, yet incomplete. I'm thinking French here...Vichycrats. Or Collabocrats. Oui!

The latest outrage is their racist filibuster of Miguel Estrada. It's not racist because they hate brown people, but because they insist that "real" minorities can only think one way. You see, White people are allowed to be liberal...oops! Vichycrats, Moderates or Conservatives. But if you have any other pigmentation, you are only allowed to think one way. That's their vaunted "diversity"; all 12 flavors of leftism.

Not to mention how we approve their nominees, such as ACLU lawyer Ruth Bader-Meinhoff, but ours are somehow disqualified if they've ever watched FOXNews.

The good news is Bill Frist looks like he has a spine. Thanks for opening your big fat trap, Trent. It was worth all the chicken jokes.

Time to play hardball with these slimy, low-life pukes.

Screw 'em.

Tuesday, March 04, 2003

And Condolences

to Leftists, who are mourning the 50th anniversary of their Uncle Joe Stalin's passing into the Netherworld.

Oh well; you'll always have HILLARY!'04. Yes, I predict she will run this time; delayed gratification is not exactly a Clinton strong suit.

Congratulations and thanks

to all those in the Intell bidness on the brilliant work in Pakistan. Excellent work! Sharp Knife extends the thanks of a Grateful Nation!

Monday, March 03, 2003

In 1933

there was an assasination attempt on President-elect Roosevelt in Miami. The assailant was an unemployed anarchist who had been drinking and lost all his money at the racetrack.

He shot 6 people, killing the mayor of Chicago, but failed to hurt Roosevelt. 3 weeks later he was eletrocuted. 3 weeks!

Moral of the story: Must keep Steve H. away from Hialeah dogtrack.

Dear Dan,

You forgot to ask me "Mr. Exalted President, what is your favorite color?", as we had agreed.

I prefer pastels, by the way.

Your pal, Saddam

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Weblog Commenting by HaloScan.com Site Meter