Sunday, February 29, 2004



Our Little Miss Ann Thrope, Florence King:

"As citizens of the Republic of Nice we are so afraid of our dark side that hostile situations barely get started before somebody pops up and announces, "The healing has begun."'

"The best way to bottle up anger is to turn men into women. After years of consensus seeking, reaching out, coming together, building bridges, linking arms, and tying yellow ribbons, the feminization of America is now complete. American men have been turned into their own secret police, under orders to kick down their own doors in the middle of the night and arrest themselves for insensitivity."

Victor Davis Hanson:

"Despite the current vogue of questionable and therapeutic ideas like "zero tolerance" and "moral equivalence" that punish all who use force, whether in kindergarten or in the Middle East, striking first is a morally neutral concept. It takes on its ethical character from the landscape in which it takes place--the Israelis bombing the Iraqi reactor to avoid being blackmailed by a soon-to-be nuclear Saddam Hussein, or the French going into the Ivory Coast last year, despite the fact that that chaotic country posed no immediate danger to Paris."

"A Christian, southern-accented, conservative Republican president, coming off a disputed election, has chosen to preempt. And when you hit first in a therapeutic America, you are at least supposed to bite your lip and squeeze Hillary's hand on national television. You do not dare say, "Bring 'em on" and "Smoke 'em out"-- much less fly a jet out to an aircraft carrier."

Jonah Goldberg:

"The intention behind these laws was largely goody-goody, nice-nice. In fact, Marie Antoinette was something of a limousine liberal (gilded carriage liberal?) who offended her fellow nobles by disdaining royal excess."

"The problem was that since French bakers were denied the ability to make cheap bread at a profit, and forced to sell expensive bread at a loss, they did the only rational thing possible: They made very little bread at all. That's how we got bread riots and maybe even the French Revolution."

"Today, the loudest voices in the Democratic party want to regulate the economy based upon what's nice, not on what works. Yes, it would be nice if economic realities didn't make it necessary for some jobs to be sent overseas, and, sure, it'd be sweetness and light if life-saving drugs could cost a penny."

"But simply saying you're going to "stop" companies from outsourcing a fraction of their labor or that you're going to "make" drugs supercheap doesn't cut it. There's no way to do those things without inviting other, usually worse, problems."

"The moment you make a drug company sell its products at a loss is the moment that company stops making that product at all. If you tell a firm it can't hire a few people in India and lay off a few here to stay competitive you're saying you want that company to lose money."

"That's fine if you want the government to subsidize industry and force prices to go up for consumers or something else along those lines. But history tell us that it's not good for the poor or anybody else in the long run."

The logical result of this emotionalism uber alles?

J. Michael Waller:

"While the terrorists and their sponsors were plotting to hijack airliners and crash them into Manhattan skyscrapers and the Pentagon, senior CIA officials were compelling analysts and operations officers to attend sensitivity-training classes and sew diversity quilts. That is a fact."

"It also is a metaphor for why the United States, with its $30 billion annual intelligence budget, was unable to prevent the horrors of Sept. 11. And it reveals how completely U.S. political leaders had lost the will to defend their very homeland - even though they knew a large Middle East-based terrorist network had been operating in the United States since at least the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993."

The same Congress that foisted all these feel-good policies on us has just extended the inquiry into Sept. 11 by another two months. Not to protect this country, but merely to bash Pres. Bush.

How does that make you feel?

(Hat-tip: Country Store)

Saturday, February 28, 2004

Lawyers Sue Lawyers 


Hinds County, Mississippi, is one of the worst junk-lawsuit judicial hell-holes in the country, thanks to greedy jurors and greedier lawyers.

We need more of this.

Barry For Prez! 


Dave sez:

"Voters, I have the same values, morals, religious beliefs, ethnic background and number of children as you. We even have the same blood type! If I am elected president, and you ever need blood, or an organ, you just come to the White House, and I will immediately hang up the Hot Line phone, and, bam, I will give you a kidney, lung, pancreas, liver segment, whatever you need, no questions asked. Name me one other candidate, besides Dennis Kucinich, who has made that promise."

Well, as I recall, Bill Clinton was famous for his organ donations. It's a generous offer, Dave, but I'll be supporting that fine, fine American,
Mr. Ralph Nader...until election day.

A new look at Oklahoma City 


Intelwire has this report by John Solomon, Associated Press Writer:

"The Associated Press reported last week that agents in that white supremacist bank robbery case collected witness statements, blasting caps and even a driver's license that raised questions of whether the Aryan Republican Army bank robbery gang might have assisted McVeigh's plot. But they did not share all the information with their colleagues in Oklahoma City.

In a few instances, agents even allowed some evidence to be destroyed.

The disclosures shook the FBI veteran who oversaw the massive Oklahoma City investigation. For years, Dan Defenbaugh had insisted every legitimate lead was pursued.

But Defenbaugh says he did not know about some of the evidence unearthed by the AP in the robbery case and he no longer could say for sure his investigation saw everything it needed.

The FBI responded Friday by asking its inspection division to review some of that evidence and determine if more needs to be done. The inspection division is a unit of senior agents that routinely reviews the work of the bureau.

Ironically, the review will be conducted in the shadows of a related event -- the Oklahoma state murder trial of McVeigh conspirator Terry Nichols. It begins Monday and may also shine light on the question of other accomplices.

Nichols faces the death penalty if convicted. Any evidence of additional, unpunished conspirators could mitigate his fate.

For Oklahoma City residents, old wounds are certain to be reopened. But at least some welcome a second look at a case that has spawned countless rumors and theories of wider conspiracies.

"I have prayed and asked God this time let the truth come out," said Jannie Coverdale, whose two grandsons were killed in the bombing. "I did not believe what the federal government had said. I had talked to too many people that had seen Tim McVeigh in Oklahoma City that morning and not one saw Tim McVeigh by himself."

The initial FBI review will be narrow, officials say. It will be limited to a review of documents from the bank robbery investigation that both included references to Oklahoma City and were not shared with the original investigation."
McVeigh's greatest regret certainly wasn't killing children; by his own admission, it was that he took part in Desert Storm. hmmm...

Intelwire also reports that Nichols and Ramzi Yusef were on the same campus at the same time. Yusef, one of the bombers in the first WTC attack, had a passport identity looted from occupied Kuwait. hmmm...I hope the investigators look at this, too.

The Clinton response to these attacks? After WTC 1, he gave a speech lecturing Americans on racism; after OKC, he tried to blame Rush Limbaugh. In short, politics were his first response. The cases were then treated as law-enforcement issues--not war.

Call a thing what it is...not what it isn't.

(Hat-tip: Junkyard Blog)

Making Amends 

"I do not support amending the Constitution to address this issue. The Constitution is a sacred document and should not be used as a tool to divide the American people."

Thus spake the cloven-ankled One. She's lying, of course.

A quick quiz: what was the most recent amendment to the Constitution? tick...tick...tick...time's up.

That's right; the most recent amendment to our 'sacred' Constitution is the partial repeal of political free-speech protections in the Campaign Finance Reform Act. Thank you, all three branches and Big Media.

But the most recent AUTHENTIC amendment is...the 27th Amendment, originally proposed Sept. 25, 1789. Ratified May 7, 1992:

"No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of representatives shall have intervened."

This law was originally intended to give voters a chance to voice their displeasure over congressional pay increases. However, since Congress has stuck it's nose under ten thousand different tents, not one voter in a thousand bases his vote on pay raises. As P.J. O'Rourke put it:

"What is this oozing behemoth, this fibrous tumor, this monster of power and expense hatched from the simple human desire for civic order? How did an allegedly free people spawn a vast, rampant cuttlefish of dominion with its tentacles in every orifice of the body politic?"

Therefore, the 27th Amendment has become little more than political cover to legitimize lavish congressional pay & perks...and it protects the Elect from having their paychecks slashed for at least two years, as well!

'Sacred' Constitution, indeed.

Besides, both HILLARY! and Kerry have ALREADY supported a constitutional amendment that is being used to dictate same-sex 'marriage'...the Equal Rights Amendment, the state version of which is cited by the Massachusetts Supremes.

George Neumayr:

"Wasn't ERA a wedge issue, a "divisive and controversial Constitutional Amendment," to borrow the Democratic National Committee's description of the Federal Marriage Amendment? Kerry's talk about wedge issues can only derive from his own history with them.'

"As an advocate for ERA, Kerry must have known that his cohorts were using it to advance, among other things, the cause of same-sex marriage. The ERA proposed: "Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.""

..."Rita Hauser, United States representative to the United Nations Human Rights Commission, stated in her address on ERA to the American Bar Association Annual Meeting St. Louis in August 1970: 'I also believe that the proposed Amendment, if adopted, would void the legal requirement or practice of the states' limiting marriage, which is a legal right, to partners of different sexes.' An article in the Yale Law Journal candidly stated the case..."

" So if Kerry, as he says today, is opposed to constitutional amendments which touch on marriage, why did he support ERA as it threatened to upend marital laws? Kerry is opposed to Bush's support for a marriage amendment not because he finds the amendment process dubious or that marriage is a matter for the states but because its goal of protecting marriage is one he does not support. Kerry's stated opposition to same-sex marriage is a sham."...

As Professor Volokh noted, Phyllis Schlafly was right. In my view, the law doesn't discriminate on 'sex', as both sexes may marry. But it has proven true that judges can make words mean anything & everything...and therefore, nothing.

Amending the Constitution--the right way, that is--will be hard work.Take a look at this history of the ERA by the NAGS. God bless you, Phyllis; we'd do well to seek your counsel in this effort.

You might want to familiarize yourself with Article V.:

"The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; ... and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate."

Although not found in the text, Congress imposed a 7-yr. time limit on the ratification of the ERA, which was upheld by the Court. This time, who knows? Like so much of our jurisprudence, it largely depends on what Sandra Day O'Connor had for lunch.

And that's the problem.


David Frum 

"With marriage, to adapt Lincoln’s words, the country will soon be all one thing or all the other. “Letting the states decide” is code for submitting to a process whereby a few unelected, hyper-liberal judges force their personal preferences upon an entire continental nation. In that one sense, I suppose, Edwards and Kerry are consistent. They are for the rule of judges. With abortion, the most effective way to ensure that the judges rule is to federalize the issue. With same-sex marriage, the most effective way to achieve that same end is to “let the states decide.” In both cases, however, the Democrats’ true allegiance is to the snobbish values of an unelected few – and the unvarying target of their hostility is the democratic many."

More here.

Friday, February 27, 2004

Why the long face, John? 


The estimable George Will recently posed 'The 1st 28 Questions for John Kerry'. My favorite:

"On Jan. 22, 1991, responding to a constituent opposed to the Persian Gulf War, you wrote "I share your concerns" and would have given sanctions more time. Nine days later, responding to a voter who favored the war, you wrote, "I have strongly and unequivocally supported President Bush's response to the crisis." Did you have a third position?"

As the Kerry campaign lurches forward, (the Lurch campaign carries forward?), Sharp Knife has questions, too. Disturbing questions. Troubling, useless, French questions:

Senator Kerry, did you serve your country in Vietnam? Was that country America? And just how does a man get to be a war hero in both America and North Vietnam?

Senator, you're famous for cutting in line at airports, restaurants and other venues, brushing aside ordinary Americans with the phrase "Do You Know Who I Am?" Have you found out who you are yet? And is it fair to ask untrained bystanders to help you sort out your identity issues?

You claim your 88 days in 'Nam qualify you to be president. Do your three-month Tuscany vacations qualify you to run Italy?

Does your forehead set off the bio-weapons detectors in the Senate?

Can I touch it?

Rumor has it that you used to invite actresses such as Morgan Fairchild over to your pad...and tried to set the mood by showing them home-movies of yourself in Vietnam. Do you still wear "Brut"?

You rail against 'Benedict Arnold' corporations who out-source. Yet your wife profits from those same companies and they contribute heavily to your campaign; why are you attacking Benedict Arnold's patriotism?

And why is the out-sourcing of American jobs to foreign countries more important than the out-sourcing of American national security to foreign countries at the U.N.?

Under CFR, wouldn't re-runs of "How To Marry A Millionaire" shown 30 days before the election constitute an illegal in-kind contribution to your campaign ? How 'bout 'The Addams Family'?

You recently told Arabs that the Israeli fence was a barrier to peace. Then you told Jews that it was a legitimate act of self-defense. Is it your position that the fence should be built...but should only be 2-ft. tall?

You've campaigned against special interest money...yet you've collected more of it than any other Senator in history. Where exactly is the slot where the coins go in? And does it give change? Correct change?

Right after you gave Vietnam a clean bill-of-health on POWs, your cousin, C. Stewart Forbes, was awarded multi-million dollar contracts with Vietnam. Did you propose marriage to your cousin?

Since Jaques Chirac is ineligible, will you choose HILLARY! as your running-mate? Or hasn't she told you yet?

You oppose same-sex 'marriage' (*wink*wink*)...yet you oppose any measure that would prevent it. How is this any different than your position on, say, terrorism? Or unemployment? Or anything else, for that matter?

Do you even have any core beliefs? Besides 'John Kerry should be President!", I mean. And is there anything
you won't say to try to become President?

Don't answer that.

Tuesday, February 24, 2004

A Russian Immigrant 


Excerpts from 'Hate America Poetry Class' by Tatiana Menaker at Front Page:

..."Clearly understanding that I was heading toward an F in this class, I took off on a suicide mission. I approached the lit stage where these “poets” sat warmed by applause and proudly waiting for more compliments."

"“Don’t you think,” I asked, “it is pathetic to perform in this anti-war circus now that Saddam has been captured? How do you feel about his capture?”"

"“It’s great that they got him,” one of the guys on the stage answered."

"“But how,” I asked, “could it have happened without a war?”"

"The instructor flew at me like a vulture, “Tatiana! Stop this immediately!”"

"He already knew my ways; I had had a few words with him regarding his anti-American attitude."

"“Don’t try to shut me up! You guys are such conformists. No courage to be dissidents even for a change. Go and study accounting! Your poetry sucks!”"

"Later, registering for the spring semester, I realized that almost all the “poets” on the auditorium stage were the Creative Writing department’s poetry teachers. While nothing at SFSU surprises me anymore, I exploded, and I need to explain why. The “My [Hate For] America” poetry parade overcame my ability to restrain myself."

"Throughout the fall semester the “Writers on Writing” class desecrated two things I hold dear: literature and America. It was a constant assault on my dedication to literature and my literary taste, and an insult to my love for this country. Not only were we forced to buy a bag of crappy books (except a few) with a price tag of around $200, but almost all these “writers” and “poets” presented on the lighted stage of the huge auditorium week after week used the opportunity to express their hate and contempt for America. Throughout the semester only a few talented exceptions abstained from expressing their political opinions."

"If I have expertise in anything in this life, it is literature. I came from the Soviet Union, where literature, especially poetry, was a serious and deadly business. The second national prize for poetry in the USSR was five years in prison. The first prize was a death sentence, as seen by the fates of Nikolai Gumilev (execution by firing squad) and Osip Mandelshtam (a hungry death in the Gulag)."

"Night after night we typed for Samizdat (underground press) on primitive typewriters the smuggled poems of my friend Igor Guberman, who had been sentenced to five years in a prison camp. Kneeling on all fours (I was so pregnant at the time that I couldn’t sit), I read a book by Nadezhda Mandelshtam—the widow of the executed poet—that was brought into the country as contraband by some brave foreign visitors. The possession of this book was an offense punishable by law. The hostess begged me to leave, scared that I would go into labor right there in her apartment, but I finished that book understanding that this was my only chance to touch this dangerous copy."

"My Leningrad neighbor Joseph Brodsky, a literary genius and one of the best Russian poets of the 20th century, was, like Solzhenitsyn, thrown out of the country. At the age of 33, Brodsky came to the US, struggling with every English sentence he attempted to write. But by 1987, after only fifteen years in the US, he had been awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature for his essays in English. He also served as Poet Laureate of the United States in 1991 and 1992. When I asked him about the tragedy of the émigré writer who is deprived of his mother tongue, he answered acidly, “Who told you that you can write only in Cyrillic?”

"Brodsky died a premature death a few years ago. His heart just gave up: while living in the US, he still was tortured by the KGB, who made him helpless to prevent the suffering of his elderly parents left behind in Russia. The Soviet government took away their meager pensions, earned by forty years of work. Then the officials sadistically announced that his parents would never see their only son again. The Soviets kept their word and Brodsky started to hate even the Russian language because it became the language in which his parents had been subjected to persecution."

"Joseph Brodsky knew the value of freedom as only a former slave could."...

"In a commencement address given by Brodsky in 1984 at Williams College, he pronounced: “No matter how daring or cautious you may choose to be in the course of your life you are bound to come into direct physical contact with what’s known as Evil…For the most interesting thing about Evil is that it is wholly human. To put it mildly, nothing can be turned and worn inside out with greater ease than one’s notion of social justice, civic conscience, a better future, etc.”"

"This country gave him refuge and freedom, as it did for many less talented people, including me. For people like us, the name of America is sacred."

"In those dark Soviet decades, cramped in the dusty communal apartments, surrounded by distorted mirrors of socialist propaganda, we knew that America existed. The smuggled pair of American jeans or the Simon and Garfunkel record was, for us, a symbol of civilization and freedom. We would go to suburban forests to listen to the “Voice of America” on short wave radios. The Soviets jammed it in the cities and spent more money on suppressing American radio than they spent on all their own broadcasting."

"The mere existence of America gave us the courage to fight. Some people who just wanted to leave the Soviet Union paid with prison sentences just for declaring a desire to leave the paradise surrounded by barbed wire and armed guards shooting escapees in the back. The escapees didn’t want to take anything with them. They just dreamed of departing, even naked, with their children on their shoulders. They hijacked airplanes, invented air balloons which evaded radar, swam at night from the beaches of the Black Sea or jumped from the stage during concert tours as Baryshnikov and Makarova did. The Socialist empire didn’t want to lose its main property: its slaves. (Listen, you “poets,” dreaming about socialism!)"

"Finally, it was America that paid our way out. The Jackson-Vanik amendment forced the Soviets to allow some groups to emigrate in exchange for a cheap grain trade agreement. Jews were the bargaining chip when the USSR was on the edge of starvation."

"Divided by the number of people they finally let go, how many kilos of grain were paid for me? Or my mother? What was the price in grain for the Moscow boy who became a student at Stanford and invented Google? Or another boy, who became the managing editor of this magazine? Or for the Russian taxi driver? Or for the elderly Jew, who worked all his life for the Soviets and was allowed, like everyone else, to take with him only $90 after paying five months’ salary for renouncing his Soviet citizenship?"

"America, this great and generous country not only gave all of us refuge; it even paid to buy us out of slavery."

"When I see these Lilliputians attacking the noble and generous Gulliver called America, I lose my breath with fury. The attacks of these literary dwarfs on this country feel personal, against me and my safety."...

"At least once a year every immigrant from the Soviet Union has the same nightmare: he or she is trapped back in the old country and can’t escape. Ironically enough, mine takes place at San Francisco State. I am walking down the empty hall of the Humanities building. The doors of the stuffy rooms are open, and from all the classes, the same words can be heard:"

"“Colonialism, imperialism, capitalism, exploitation of the working class.”"

"And again:"

"“Colonialism, imperialism, capitalism, exploitation of the working class.”"

"I see the trusting faces of the young students."

"“What class is this?” I ask."

"“Philosophy,” they answer."

"Please, tell me I am not back in the Soviet Union again and this is just a nightmare!"

Gay Tyranny 


I'm a little tired of seeing people who oppose same-sex 'marriage' labeled as 'bigots'...by those who are themselves intolerant bigots. It is not 'fundamentalist' or 'theocratic' to support marriage as it has always existed--the word is 'normal'. And it matters not a whit whether a person has arrived at their conclusions through religious belief, a lifetime of experience or merely by flipping a coin; in our system, that individual is as entitled to advocate as any other.

In 1976, Massachusetts passed an Equal Rights amendment to their state constitution preventing discrimination based on sex. The Supreme Court of Massachusetts fraudulently used this amendment to dictate same-sex 'marriage'. Had they followed the actual text, they would have struck down gender preferences for women instead. And in an added touch of arrogance, they ordered the legislature to craft a law reflecting their personal policy preference. The Supreme Court didn't even do that in 'Roe'.

But let's, for a moment, accept their ruling based on the state's Equal Rights Amendment; that means this country has already rejected same-sex marriage when we refused to ratify the national Equal Rights Amendment.

This has gone beyond Massachusetts and even San Francisco, where local officials are ignoring the law recently passed by the voters...and in criminal violation of a law against issuing illegal licenses.

I support a Federal Marriage Amendment, but only because it is going to be amended either by a handful of judges or by an authentic act of the people. And I also support impeaching tyrannical judges and arresting scofflaw officials. If they get away with enforcing this radical agenda on an unwilling public, there will be no stopping them.

Here, sir, the people rule.

Saturday, February 21, 2004

Wary Kerry v. Hari Kerry 


From the Seattle Times:

Kerry in January, 2004 :"I voted not specifically to go to war. I voted for a process."

Which is why it was called 'The Use of Process Resolution', right?

Kerry in Oct., 2002: "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force--if necessary--to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."

I vote you seek treatment for schizophrenia before
you run for the presidency.

Just a thought.

Or two.

Naughty Barry v. Haughty Kerry 


Via Back of the Envelope, Dave Barry's announcement from September:

"People often ask me: "Dave, as a leading candidate for President yourself, can you be unbiased when you write about the other candidates?""

"Yes. When I believe my opponents are wrong, I will point that out. But, by the same token, when I believe that my opponents are having carnal relations with livestock, I will point that out, too. "Fair and balanced," that is my legally trademarked motto."

(Carnal Relations with Livestock would make a good name for a rock band...if Mike hasn't already used it .)

..."In conclusion, I want to extend my best wishes to my opponents and to state that, in the unlikely event I am not elected, I will support whoever it is, even if it is Sen. John Kerry, who once came, with his entourage, into a ski-rental shop in Ketchum, Idaho, where I was waiting patiently with my family to rent snowboards. Kerry used one of his lackeys to flagrantly barge in line ahead of us and everybody else, as if he had some urgent senatorial NEED for a snowboard, like there was about to be an emergency meeting on the slopes of the Joint Halfpipe Committee."

"I say it's time for us, as a nation, to put this unpleasant incident behind us. I know that I, for one, have forgotten all about it. That is how fair and balanced I am."

Read the rest here, including Mr. Barry's amazingly accurate prognosis of Mad Howard Syndrome.

Like thousands of others, Mr. Barry had a John Kerry DYKWIA (Do You Know Who I Am?!!) moment. The Aristocrat-in-a-hurry has a long history of brushing aside lesser mortals and butting in line at concerts, theatres, retailers, sporting events, restaraunts, even commandeering other patrons' haughty-cuisine take-out orders. Lowly voters may get their own 'Who The Hell Do You Think You Are?!!" (WTHDYTYA) moment in November.

In contrast to the total media blackout of Dave Barry's surging Presidential campaign, John Kerry gets this:

"Kerry's remarks lasted three minutes, yet it left TV reporters without a soundbite until one CBS News producer asked the Massachusetts senator to try again."

Oh, please, fellas; get a room. It's getting embarrassing.

Pithy bon mots, anyone? 


Denis Boyles' Euro-Press Report serves up these tasty morsels:

"Brussels is the Skywalker Ranch of European politics, full of money and equipment, but empty of vision and imagination for more than a decade now. The grand plan at the moment is to make a bureaucratic Jabba the Hutt which will sit atop the continent issuing protocols until everyone in Europe is on the same e-mail routing telling you when to brush and when to turn out the lights."

"France is losing jobs the way they used to lose wars — fast, but with regret."

Monday, February 16, 2004

Gas up the Corvair 


Unsane At Any Speed: Run, Ralph, Run!

Art from the Heart...of Iraq. Take a look over at Curmudgeonly & Skeptical.

Dr. Bob Arnot diagnosed as pro-American and quarantined by NBC, via Opinions Galore.

This is your dictator. This is your dictator on drugs. Chaos Central has the dope.

For those of you who were foolish enough to name a star after your Valentine instead of bringing flowers and candy, Clayton Cramer has the perfect make-up gift.

Not just any Spider Monkey...A BIG Spider Monkey! Right you are, Maripat.

Happy Washington's Birthday! 


You can honor Buchanan, Carter and Co-presidents Ma & Pa Barker if you want, but I'll pass. Does Rev. King get lumped into a 'Civil Rights Leaders' Day', where we honor Jesse Jackson, too? No. And neither should we treat the Father of our Country in that manner.

Washington was born on Feb. 11, 1731, under the old calendar, which was changed 1752, moving his birthday to Feb. 22.

Dr. Matthew Spalding at Heritage:

"February 22 is the birthday of George Washington, the man who, more than any other, made possible our republican form of government. The third Monday in February has come to be known - wrongly - as President's Day. America's political leaders should take this occasion to remember Washington's deeds, recollect his advice, and once again call the holiday celebrating him by its legal name: Washington's Birthday."

"James Flexner, George Washington's greatest biographer, called him the "indispensable man" of the American Founding. Without Washington, America would never have won our War of Independence. He played the central role in the Constitutional Convention and, as our first President, set the precedents that define what it means to be a constitutional executive: strong and energetic, aware of the limits of authority but guarding the prerogatives of office. Washington not only rejected offers to make him king, but was one of the first leaders in world history to relinquish power voluntarily. His peaceful transfer of the presidency to John Adams in 1797 inaugurated one of America's greatest democratic traditions."

In a letter to Pierre Auguste Adet, January 1, 1796: "My anxious recollections, my sympathetic feeling, and my best wishes are irresistibly excited whensoever, in any country, I see an oppressed nation unfurl the banners of freedom."

His Farewell Address, September 19, 1796: "The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their Constitutions of Government. But the Constitution which at any time exists, 'till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole People is sacredly obligatory upon all."

"First in War, first in Peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen, he was second to none in humble and enduring scenes of private life. Pious, just, humane, temperate, and sincere; uniform, digified, and commanding; his example was as edifying to all around him as were the effects of that example lasting. . . . Correct throughout, vice shuddered in his presence and virtue always felt his fostering hand. The purity of his private character gave effulgence to his public virtues." --Official eulogy of Washington, written by John Marshall,
delivered by Rep. Richard Henry Lee, December 26, 1799.

He could have been king. He could have let this country break up into several nations. He could have failed to free his own slaves and ignore the rightness of abolition. Instead, he set this nation on a path of expanding liberty and, yes, greatness.

Power corrupts? Perhaps.

But it didn't corrupt George Washington.

Breaking News! 


Broadcasting giant, ABC, has refused to respond to allegations that staff meetings at the News division are begun with genuflections before an image of North Korean dictator Kim Jung-Il. It is also alleged that News division employees perform a ceremonial Jennings-style arching-of-the-eyebrow while biting off the heads of hamsters.

We here at the (other) Manufactured News Network call on ABC News to stop arrogantly ignoring this alleged scandal, release all relevant records at once and give the American people the answers to which they are entitled. And we especially call on Peter Jennings to stop flossing with the black ferret Hanan Ashrawi wears on her upper lip. That's just wrong.

We now return to our regularly scheduled blogcast.

GIAP Genes 


Steven Den Beste has questions:

"Me, I only have one question for the Democrats: How do you intend to win this war?"

"Actually, I must confess I have a second question, which has to be asked before that one: Do you intend to win this war?"

"Update: Both Tom and Peg point out that there's yet another question which must be asked before either of those: Do you believe we are in a war?"

John Kerry answered last night:

GILBERT: Senator Kerry, President Bush a week ago on "Meet the Press" described himself as a war president. He said he's got war on his mind as he considers these policies and decisions he has to make. If you were elected, would you see yourself as a war president?

KERRY: I'd see myself first of all as a jobs president, as a health care president, as an education president and also an environmental president. And add them all together, you can't be safe at home today unless you are also safe abroad.

KERRY: So I would see myself as a very different kind of global leader than George Bush.

Does he believe we are in a War on Terrorism? No. He believes we are in a Law-Enforcement Action Against The Root Causes of the Poor People That America Has Oppressed. Just like in 'Nam. And only the U.N. can save us. Just like in 'Nam. And John Kerry will be on both sides of the issue. Just like in 'Nam.

And that's the problem. The Lesson of Viet Nam that Liberals learned was that America Is a Rogue Power That Must be Restrained by the U.N. and Communism Isn't Really So Bad. But the lesson for Conservatives is Do Not Fight a War With One Hand Tied Behind Your Back.

Mark Steyn captures the Radiant Futurism of the Dems:

"Unfortunately, most politicians who say ''this election is about the future'' haven't given it a moment's thought. Say what you like about us right-wing war mongers, but after Sept. 11 we abandoned our long-cherished theories of realpolitik -- find your local strongman and shovel millions of dollars at him -- as inadequate, and indeed part of the problem. Sentimental liberal internationalism -- everything has to be done through the U.N., no matter how stinkingly corrupt and ineffectual it is -- is just as inadequate to the challenges of the age. Yet Kerry, John Edwards, Howard Dean and the rest of the left cling to it like a security blanket. Ask them anything about foreign policy, and they sing like the Von Trapp children, ''We need to get the U.N. in there.'' As Sam Goldwyn said, ''I'm sick of the old cliches. Bring me some new cliches.''"

While he keeps saying ''this election is about the future", one almost expects Kerry to establish a Dept. of Bell-bottoms and vow to get to the bottom of Kent State. It's true he was an American war hero--but according to Gen. Giap, he was a North Vietnamese war hero, too.

It's Time to Stop The Madness.

Just like in 'Nam.

Saturday, February 14, 2004

A Few Moments 


"The dons, the bashaws, the grandees, the patricians, the sachems, the nabobs, call them by what names you please, sigh and groan and fret, and sometimes stamp and foam and curse, but all in vain. The decree is gone forth, and it cannot be recalled, that a more equal liberty than has prevailed in other parts of the earth must be established in America."

"The blackest billingsgate, the most ungentlemanly insolence, the most yahooist brutality, is patently endured, countenanced, propagated, and applauded. But touch a solemn truth in collision with the dogma of a sect, though capable of the clearest proof, and you will soon find you have disturbed a nest, and the hornets will swarm about your eyes and hand, and fly into your face and eyes."

"It has ever been my hobby-horse to see rising in America an empire of liberty, and a prospect of two or three hundred millions of freemen, without one noble or one king among them. You say it is impossible. If I should agree with you in this, I would still say, let us try the experiment, and preserve our equality as long as we can. A better system of education for the common people might preserve them long from such artificial inequalities as are prejudicial to society, by confounding the natural distinctions of right and wrong, virtue and vice."

"The foundation of national morality must be laid in private families.... How is it possible that Children can have any just Sense of the sacred Obligations of Morality or Religion if, from their earliest Infancy, they learn their Mothers live in habitual Infidelity to their fathers, and their fathers in as constant Infidelity to their Mothers?"

"It should be your care, therefore, and mine, to elevate the minds of our children and exalt their courage; to accelerate and animate their industry and activity; to excite in them an habitual contempt of meanness, abhorrence of injustice and inhumanity, and an ambition to excel in every capacity, faculty, and virtue. If we suffer their minds to grovel and creep in infancy, they will grovel all their lives."

"We ought to consider what is the end of government before we determine which is the best form. Upon this point all speculative politicians will agree that the happiness of society is the end of government, as all divines and moral philosophers will agree that the happiness of the individual is the end of man....All sober inquirers after truth, ancient and modern, pagan and Christian, have declared that the happiness of man, as well as his dignity, consists in virtue."

"You are afraid of the one--I, of the few. We agree perfectly that the many should have a full fair and perfect Representation. You are Apprehensive of Monarchy; I, of Aristocracy. I would therefore have given more Power to the President and less to the Senate."--to Thomas Jefferson.

"The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If `Thou shalt not covet' and `Thou shalt not steal' were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society before it can be civilized or made free."

"The right of a nation to kill a tyrant in case of necessity can no more be doubted than to hang a robber, or kill a flea."

"I have accepted a seat in the (Massachusetts) House of Representatives, and thereby have consented to my own ruin, to your ruin, and to the ruin of our children. I give you this warning that you may prepare your mind for your fate."--to Abigail Adams

"The Hebrews have done more to civilize men than any other nation. If I were an atheist, and believed blind eternal fate, I should still believe that fate had ordained the Jews to be the most essential instrument for civilizing the nations."

"Without wishing to damp the ardor of curiosity or influence the freedom of inquiry, I will hazard a prediction that, after the most industrious and impartial researchers, the longest liver of you all will find no principles, institutions or systems of education more fit in general to be transmitted to your posterity than those you have received from your ancestors."

"...Arms in the hands of citizens [may] be used at individual discretion... in private self-defense. ...The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws."

"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

"The Second Day of July 1776, will be the most memorable Epocha, in the History of America. I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated, by succeeding Generations, as the great anniversary Festival. It ought to be commemorated, as the Day of Deliverance by solemn Acts of Devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with Pomp and Parade, with Shews, Games, Sports, Guns, Bells, Bonfires and Illuminations from one End of this Continent to the other from this Time forward forever more. You will think me transported with Enthusiasm but I am not. I am well aware of the Toil and Blood and Treasure, that it will cost Us to maintain this Declaration, and support and defend these States. Yet through all the Gloom I can see the Rays of ravishing Light and Glory. I can see that the End is more than worth all the Means. And that Posterity will tryumph in that Days Transaction, even altho We should rue it, which I trust in God We shall not."
[Congress approved the Declaration on the 2nd, and promulgated it on the 4th.]

And his last public words to us, a toast at the celebration of the fiftieth anniversary of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1826...

"Independence forever!"

Fruition...and Nuts 


"For all the most recent invective about his lack of spontaneous televised eloquence, almost every necessary and dangerous initiative Mr. Bush has undertaken since 9/11--protect American shores, destroy the Taliban, scatter al Qaeda, take out Saddam Hussein, promote democracy in the Middle East, put rogue regimes with weapons of mass destruction on notice--has worked or is in the process of coming to fruition."

"In response to that success often we have met dissimulation, pretext, and rhetoric of those who have much to lose and very little to gain by seeing the old way of business--status quo alliances, deductive anti-Americanism, corrupt Middle East policies, and bankrupt ideologies such as moral equivalence, utopian pacifism, and multiculturalism--go by the wayside."

"And so we get fantasy in place of reality."

Professor Hanson, of course.

Friday, February 13, 2004

So I'm listening to the radio 

and ABC News informs me that the Bush AWOL story is really important.

Then they tell me that, if the White House hasn't manufactured any of the documents that prove Bush's claim, the story is probably winding down.

'If they haven't manufactured any of the documents'? What a cheap shot from a shoddy bunch of hacks. It doesn't assert fraud as a fact, but insinuates the idea without any basis whatsoever.

How gutless.

But how about the day's other big story; ABC's reporters and editors might begin each staff meeting by bowing before a picture of Kim Jong-Il, arching an eyebrow and biting the heads off of small furry animals.

Now, I'm not saying that they do this...but they haven't denied it, have they?

Bismark said "Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made." But sometimes we see 'journalism' manufactured before our very eyes, without even realizing it.

Say; did I just see Jennings pull some hamster hair out of his teeth?

Thursday, February 12, 2004

The French Lieutenant's Woman 


Jean Kerry, the haughty, French-behaving Senator, reportedly assured party leaders he could 'handle' it.

And who are the party's leaders?

Nine Score and Fifteen Years Ago 


and went on to become, after George Washington, our greatest president.

His Second Inaugural Address:

"At this second appearing to take the oath of the presidential office, there is less occasion for an extended address than there was at the first. Then a statement, somewhat in detail, of a course to be pursued, seemed fitting and proper. Now, at the expiration of four years, during which public declarations have been constantly called forth on every point and phase of the great contest which still absorbs the attention, and engrosses the energies of the nation, little that is new could be presented. The progress of our arms, upon which all else chiefly depends, is as well known to the public as to myself; and it is, I trust, reasonably satisfactory and encouraging to all. With high hope for the future, no prediction in regard to it is ventured."

"On the occasion corresponding to this four years ago, all thoughts were anxiously directed to an impending civil war. All dreaded it--all sought to avert it. While the inaugeral [sic] address was being delivered from this place, devoted altogether to saving the Union without war, insurgent agents were in the city seeking to destroy it without war--seeking to dissole [sic] the Union, and divide effects, by negotiation. Both parties deprecated war; but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive; and the other would accept war rather than let it perish. And the war came."

"One eighth of the whole population were colored slaves, not distributed generally over the Union, but localized in the Southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was, somehow, the cause of the war. To strengthen, perpetuate, and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union, even by war; while the government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it. Neither party expected for the war, the magnitude, or the duration, which it has already attained. Neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with, or even before, the conflict itself should cease. Each looked for an easier triumph, and a result less fundamental and astounding. Both read the same Bible, and pray to the same God; and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces; but let us judge not that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered; that of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has his own purposes. "Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!" If we shall suppose that American Slavery is one of those offences which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South, this terrible war, as the woe due to those by whom the offence came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a Living God always ascribe to Him? Fondly do we hope--fervently do we pray--that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue, until all the wealth piled by the bond-man's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash, shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord, are true and righteous altogether.""

"With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation's wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan--to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace, among ourselves, and with all nations."

Play "Dixie" for me, too.

Sunday, February 08, 2004

Usually, They Wait 'Til After the Elections 


David Carr of Samizdata has the scoop;

Tony Martin may run for a seat in Parliament!

Mr. Carr: "The joyous spectacle of the bien-pensant convulsing in a fit of bug-eyed, brain-melting horror as Tony Martin steps up to take his seat in the House of Commons would make the whole exercise worth it. A thousand times worth it."

At least.

Speaking Truth to Power Tools 


Jay Nordlinger tells the story of "Meghan Howard, the Harvard kid who stood up to the Chinese Number One when he appeared at that school. Miss Howard is a supporter of the Tibetan cause. And the Harvard administration has come down on her for her disruption."

Her Dad: "I am the father of Meghan C. Howard, the Harvard undergraduate who displayed a Tibetan flag while China's premier spoke at the Harvard Business School. You may be interested to know that Harvard's Administrative Board, after a hearing, admonished my daughter and will place a letter in her file."

"I am so proud of her."... So are we, Dad. That letter in her file is a badge of honor.

Invasion. Occupation. Repression. and Cultural Genocide. But Meghan is the one who is "disruptive"?

Harvard gives extra credit when a student burns Rumsfeld in effigy, but Meghan gets a 'letter in her file'?

J. Edgar Hoover would be proud.

Kerry/Clinton in '04? 


"Bring. It. On."? Nope.

Fort. Marcy. Park.

" " 



"Critics say he missed required drills during that time and that his “honorable” discharge on Oct. 1, 1973, shows that Bush completed five years and four months of service — less than the obligatory six years — before entering graduate school."

Why are there sneer quotes around the word 'honorable'?

Everyone "knows" that MSNBC is an "unbiased", "professional" "news organization".

How "odd".

It's Official: 


Noted Rocker, Mark Steyn:

"Did you know that a couple of weeks ago the president signed an $820 billion appropriations bill that, among other boondoggles, puts the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in Cleveland on the public dime? That's right: rock 'n' roll -- the most ruthlessly corporate industry in the world -- apparently requires the tax dollars of America's widows and spinsters. If every rock star donated just 1 percent of what he's spent on drugs since 1966, you could have the most lavish Hall of Fame in the world. But he won't, so you have to pay up instead. One day you'll swing by and in the Jackson Family exhibit there'll be an animatronic recreation of Janet's dancing breast: your tax dollars at work."

"If rock 'n' roll requires federal funding, we might as well give up. A government with its fingers in every pie is unlikely to have enough left over for the handful of pies it should have its fingers in. It was summed up by Americans' only glimpse of the president on the morning of 9/11: the commander-in-chief being informed of the first attack on the American mainland in nearly 200 years while he was speaking to grade-schoolers in Florida. That image encapsulates everything that's wrong with both parties' approach to government."

"As we learned in the days after, because of incompatible computers, the FBI was unable to e-mail pictures of the 9/11 killers to local offices. Yet there's money for rock 'n' roll nostalgia, and an "indoor rain forest" in Iowa. The president should not be the National School Superintendent, the Pharmacist-in-Chief, the Curator of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, or the Inspector-General of Janet Jackson's Breasts. And, if neither politicians nor the electorate understands that at a time of war, then republican government is doomed."

'Republican Government Is Doomed' would make a good name for a taxpayer-funded rock band. It's catchier than 'Shamelessly Plagiarizing Dave B.', anyway.

We should have known 'The Era of Big Government' wasn't over. How? Bill Clinton said that it was. Although I'm glad the FCC is rapping some knuckles; does that make me this guy? I don't think so.

But Rock 'n Roll? Well, it was just a matter of time after this, wasn't it?

Remember the King.

Friday, February 06, 2004

"I committed...atrocities..."  

Cash-and-Kerry, Part Two
By Lowell Ponte
FrontPageMagazine.com | January 28, 2004

""I committed the same kinds of atrocities as thousands of others," said Kerry as an anti-war activist guest on NBC's Meet the Press (quoted in Brinkley's book, page 362) after he returned stateside, in that I shot in free fire zones, fired .50-caliber machine [gun] bullets, used harass-and-interdiction fire, joined in search-and-destroy missions, and burned villages. All of these acts are contrary to the laws of the Geneva Convention, and all were ordered as written, established policies from the top down, and the men who ordered this are war criminals.""

"But Kerry was an officer in Vietnam who gave such orders to his men. Kerry has therefore confessed to being a war criminal himself. Was he saying that he was "merely following orders" from above, like a good German? Or does he accept his share of legal and moral responsibility for the illegal orders he said he gave? Either way, this is proof that John Kerry is, by his own yardstick, unfit ever to be President of the United States."

"John Kerry has told audiences that he "once refused a direct order from a far-away commander to open fire on a group of Vietnamese civilians standing alongside a riverbank in the Mekong," wrote unabashed Kerry supporter Joe Shea in the January 21, 2004, issue of The American Reporter."

""When [Kerry] got back to base, facing the threat of a court martial," writes Shea, "he defended himself with a tattered copy of the Rules of Engagement he kept handy in his hip pocket. He knew the rules, and he won the day.""

"Put aside the fact that these Rules of Engagement were always changing, and that many believe these often-bizarre and arbitrary bureaucratic restrictions on where, when and how our troops could fight were the reason America lost in Vietnam."

"If we take Kerry's story as true, we then face questions Shea neglected to raise. Did not these rules that Kerry knew by heart also require a soldier to report war crimes, or attempted war crimes, by others? Did Kerry report this officer's illegal order to kill civilians to superiors? Or did Kerry remain silent, thereby becoming this officer's ally and enabler, if not accomplice?"

"If this story is true, then I hereby ask Senator Kerry to name the officer who issued this illegal order and the officers before whom he defended with that tattered rule book his refusal to obey it. Surely a memory so indelible as to play a role in young Kerry's anti-war speeches can also recall the name of this officer who ordered him to slaughter innocent civilians. (If 60-year-old Kerry's memory is now failing, of course, this is evidence that he may have lost the mental acuity to be President.)"

"The same questions could be asked about all the other routine atrocities young Kerry alleged before a Senate committee. If he had firsthand knowledge from witnessing who did these illegal things, why did Kerry fail to turn in the criminals in accord with the Rules of Engagement? If he shielded those whose war crimes he witnessed, Kerry is an accomplice after the fact to these atrocities."

"On the other hand, if his knowledge was only secondhand gossip, rumor or intoxicated tales told by bored soldiers around jungle campfires," what the law calls hearsay evidence," then Kerry was reckless, irresponsible and almost treasonous to make such outrageous claims under oath before the Senate, the press and the American people."

The Torch 


money for Kerry.

(via Brothers Judd)

If he's as brave as he often says he is, 


to reveal his true position on same-sex 'marriage'?

"I'm against gay marriage. Everybody knows that."

Not everybody.

Prisoners of a War-Profiteer 


"...no one in the United States Senate pushed harder to bury the POW/MIA issue, the last obstacle preventing normalization of relations with Hanoi, than John Forbes Kerry."

"...Kerry, rather than embarass Vietnam by demanding the truth, launched a highly publicized diversionary investigation of the POW/MIA families and activists, who were demanding an honest accounting.
Kerry labeled them "professional malcontents, conspiracy mongers, con artists, and dime-store Rambos" who were only involved in the POW/MIA issue for money."

Ah, yes; the highly lucrative POW/MIA industry. In truth, any living POWs stood in the way of this:

"C. Stewart Forbes, Chief Executive Officer of Colliers International (Kerry's cousin), was awarded a contract worth billions designating Colliers International as the exclusive real estate agent representing Vietnam." Including a $905,000,000 deal to develop a deep-sea port at Vung Tau.

At today's exchange rate, that's about, oh...

30 pieces of silver.

Once Again, A Time For Choosing 


..."We had a choice: either take the word of a madman, or take action to defend the American people. Faced with that choice, I will defend America every time. September the 11th, 2001 was a lesson for America, a lesson I will never forget, and a lesson this nation must never forget. We cannot wait to confront the threats of the world, the threats of terror networks and terror states, until those threats arrive in our own cities. I made a pledge to this country; I will not stand by and hope for the best while dangers gather. I will not take risks with the lives and security of the American people. I will protect and defend this country by taking the fight to the enemy.

When you're the Commander-in-Chief, you have to be willing to make the tough calls and to see your decisions through. America is safer when our commitments are clear, our word is good, and our will is strong. And that is the only way I know how to lead.

If some politicians in Washington had their way, Saddam Hussein would still be in power. All of the Security Council resolutions and condemnations would still be issued and still be ignored, scraps of paper amounting to nothing. Other regimes and terror networks, had we not acted, would have concluded that America backs down when things get tough. Saddam would still have his weapons capabilities, and life would sure be different for the Iraqi people. The secret police would still be making arrests in the middle of the night. Prisons and torture chambers would still be filled with victims. More innocent Iraqis would have been sent to mass graves. Because we acted, Iraq's nightmare is over. Their country, our country and the entire world are better off because the regime of Saddam Hussein is gone, and gone forever.

Because of American leadership, the world is changing for the better. Other dictators have seen and noted our resolve. Colonel Ghadafi in Libya got the message, and is now voluntarily disclosing and eliminating his weapons of mass destruction programs.

These are historic times, times of change. In Afghanistan and Iraq, more than 50 million people once lived under tyranny. And now they live in free societies, societies that are moving toward democracy; societies that will set an example for all of the Middle East. And that's important. That's important for our own security. Free societies do not attack their neighbors. Free societies do not develop weapons of mass terror. Freedom and peace go hand-in-hand.

These are great and hopeful events. And they came about because America and our allies acted bravely in the cause of freedom. We know there are challenges ahead. We know that freedom still has enemies in Iraq and Afghanistan -- surviving Baathists, the Taliban, suicide bombers and foreign terrorists. All these enemies have one goal: They want to stop the advance of freedom and to shake the will of the United States of America. But they don't understand us. They don't understand the nature of the American people. We will never be intimidated by thugs or assassins. The killers will fail, and the people of Iraq and Afghanistan will live in freedom.

And that's important to us in America, because we understand freedom is not America's gift to the world; we understand freedom is the Almighty God's gift to each man and woman in this world.
I made a commitment to the men and women of our military: America is asking a lot of you, and you deserve a lot in return. You deserve our praise and our thanks, and we will give you the resources you need to fight and win the war on terror.

So we depend on our military; our people in uniform depend on their families. These are challenging times for military families. Some of them have experienced great loss. We ask for God's blessings. We ask God to give them strength in their time of grief. Our nation will never take their sacrifice for granted. All of us are grateful to the families of the men and women who wear the uniform of the United States.

By the unselfish dedication of Americans in uniform, people in our own country and in lands far away can live in freedom, and know-- the peace that freedom brings. America has been given great responsibilities, and those responsibilities have come to the right country. By our actions we have shown what kind of nation we are -- good and just and generous people. We don't shrink from any challenge. We're rising to the call of history. Now and in the future, this great land will lead the cause of freedom and peace.

May God bless you all. (Applause.) Thank you for coming. Thank you all."

I think Ronnie would approve.

But it's your choice.

A Time For Choosing  


'I am going to talk of controversial things. I make no apology for this.

It's time we asked ourselves if we still know the freedoms intended for us by the Founding Fathers. James Madison said, "We base all our experiments on the capacity of mankind for self government."

This idea? that government was beholden to the people, that it had no other source of power is still the newest, most unique idea in all the long history of man's relation to man. This is the issue of this election: Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American Revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capital can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.

You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down. Up to man's age-old dream-the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. Regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would sacrifice freedom for security have embarked on this downward path. Plutarch warned, "The real destroyer of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits."

The Founding Fathers knew a government can't control the economy without controlling people. And they knew when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. So we have come to a time for choosing.

Public servants say, always with the best of intentions, "What greater service we could render if only we had a little more money and a little more power." But the truth is that outside of its legitimate function, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector.

Yet any time you and I question the schemes of the do-gooders, we're denounced as being opposed to their humanitarian goals. It seems impossible to legitimately debate their solutions with the assumption that all of us share the desire to help the less fortunate. They tell us we're always "against," never "for" anything.

We are for a provision that destitution should not follow unemployment by reason of old age, and to that end we have accepted Social Security as a step toward meeting the problem. However, we are against those entrusted with this program when they practice deception regarding its fiscal shortcomings, when they charge that any criticism of the program means that we want to end payments....

We are for aiding our allies by sharing our material blessings with nations which share our fundamental beliefs, but we are against doling out money government to government, creating bureaucracy, if not socialism, all over the world.

We need true tax reform that will at least make a start toward I restoring for our children the American Dream that wealth is denied to no one, that each individual has the right to fly as high as his strength and ability will take him.... But we can not have such reform while our tax policy is engineered by people who view the tax as a means of achieving changes in our social structure....

Have we the courage and the will to face up to the immorality and discrimination of the progressive tax, and demand a return to traditional proportionate taxation? . . . Today in our country the tax collector's share is 37 cents of -very dollar earned. Freedom has never been so fragile, so close to slipping from our grasp.

Are you willing to spend time studying the issues, making yourself aware, and then conveying that information to family and friends? Will you resist the temptation to get a government handout for your community? Realize that the doctor's fight against socialized medicine is your fight. We can't socialize the doctors without socializing the patients. Recognize that government invasion of public power is eventually an assault upon your own business. If some among you fear taking a stand because you are afraid of reprisals from customers, clients, or even government, recognize that you are just feeding the crocodile hoping he'll eat you last.

If all of this seems like a great deal of trouble, think what's at stake. We are faced with the most evil enemy mankind has known in his long climb from the swamp to the stars. There can be no security anywhere in the free world if there is no fiscal and economic stability within the United States. Those who ask us to trade our freedom for the soup kitchen of the welfare state are architects of a policy of accommodation.

They say the world has become too complex for simple answers. They are wrong. There are no easy answers, but there are simple answers. We must have the courage to do what we know is morally right. Winston Churchill said that "the destiny of man is not measured by material computation. When great forces are on the move in the world, we learn we are spirits-not animals." And he said, "There is something going on in time and space, and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty."

You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. If we fail, at least let our children and our children's children say of us we justified our brief moment here. We did all that could be done."

Happy Birthday, Mr. President.

Forty years on, and now it's our Time For Choosing.

Thursday, February 05, 2004

"See No Evil" 


"I repeatedly asked for a speaker of Dari or Pashtun...to debrief the flood of refugees...They were a goldmine of information. We could have recruited some and sent them back across the border to report on Afghanistan. I was told there were no Dari or Pashtun speakers anywhere. I was told the CIA no longer collected on Afghanistan, so those languages weren't needed. Headquarters instead offered to send out a four-person sexual-harrasment briefing team."

Politcal Correctness Kills.

Support Your Local President! 

George Orwell:

"Pacifism is objectively pro-fascist. This is elementary common sense. If you hamper the war effort of one side, you automatically help out that of the other. Nor is there any real way of remaining outside such a war as the present one. In practice, 'he that is not with me is against me'."

This quote was widely bandied about in the blogosphere during the run-up to the war in Iraq & Afghanistan. It rang true.

But as a different kind of contest approaches, does this principle still ring true?

Like many conservatives, I've been troubled by some of the President's policies. Because I take the Constitution seriously, the recent speech restrictions in Campaign Finance law are particularly offensive to me. And most of you know the rest of the list.

But the President has done well on the single most important issue of our times; the War on Terrorism. Here, he has often performed magnificently.

While I get frustrated at times, this is not even a close call for me. I will support this President.

His opponents cannot be trusted to defend this country. They simply can't. Everything else pales in comparison. The President believes that WMDs in the hands of terrorists are the greatest danger we face. Democrats think it's John Ashcroft finding out that they once checked out the Kama Sutra from the library. As if he were even trying.

So call the President out when he's wrong. I will. But I will also remember that on every signifigant issue, his opponents are worse--often much, much worse. Higher taxes. More regulation. Judicial tyranny. More racialism. Human cloning. Unlimited taxpayer-funded abortions. Loss of national sovereignty. Assaults on the family. and Appeasement.

Churchill once said "If Hitler invaded Hell, I would make at least a favourable reference to the Devil in the House of Commons." If Winston Churchill could do that, I think we can spare a few kind words--and votes--for a President who is trying to keep us all alive.

In this election, to be 'anti-Bush' is to be objectively 'pro-Democrat'. I don't see another way to slice it. And I'm not going there again. EVER.

This President has cut taxes. He has appointed good judges and will continue to do so. He has gotten pro-life measures passed. He supports a new effort in space. He opposes the judicially-dictated redefinition of marriage. He hopes to privatize Social Security and pass tort reforms. And when it comes to defending this country, he 'gets it'.

George W. Bush deserves our support.

He's got mine.

Wednesday, February 04, 2004


at Dartmouth:

"Kerry voted to threaten Iraq with force, but he thought that actually using force is wrong," O'Rourke said. "The technical political term for this is, of course, 'bullsh*t.'"

Tuesday, February 03, 2004

Call Me Crazy 

but shouldn't parents be able to watch a football game with their children?

I mean without seeing rappers grab their crotches, hearing explicit lyrics, seeing simulated sex-acts and gold nipple clamps. You see, I think that they should.

We live in a time when Abercrombie & Fitch try to sell thongs to seven year-olds. Little girls' pants come labeled with slogans like "Serve Piping Hot!". Prize-winning books advocate 'adult-child sex'--musn't use that judgemental 'p'-word. And the entertainment industry thinks nothing of putting on a show like the Super-Bowl half-time, knowing full well that millions of children are watching.

Hey, perverts; leave those kids alone.

What the h*ll is the matter with you people?

Monday, February 02, 2004

Kerry, Kerry, Quite Contrary 


for a HILLARY!'04 run at a brokered convention? That's my theory.

Or, are they merely sabotaging the other candidates for a HILLARY!'08 run, as the conventional wisdom has it?

We'll see. Predictions are fun; if you're right, you're a genius, and if you're wrong, well, it's because of global warming.

The vast left-thigh conspiracy may be getting out of hand, though; The Clintons seem to have enlisted Mark Steyn:

"Kerry the soldier was a brave man in Vietnam. But Kerry the politician uses his military record as cover for his public service record, which boils down to a quarter-century of finger-in-the-windiness passed off as bold and courageous. How typical the senator is of Vietnam veterans I leave for others to judge. But he's an all too apt embodiment of the Vietnam era: of the fatal lack of resolution that damaged America's standing in the world and emboldened its enemies."...

"No doubt he has some convoluted answer to explain that when he sneers that Blair and Australia's John Howard are ''fraudulent'' allies it is in fact a sign of his great respect for them. That seems to be his standard explanation -- that all his big votes mean the exact opposite of what they appear to. His vote against the first Gulf War was, he says, a sign of his support for the first Gulf War. Whereas his vote in favor of the Iraq war was a sign of his opposition to the Iraq war. And his vote against funding America's troops in Iraq is a sign of his support for America's men and women in uniform."

Read it, punch-line and all, here.

Steyn nails it; Kerry's entire career is schizophrenic.

He enlists for Vietnam, where he fights to win and prevent his men from being taken prisoner.
He comes home and fights for a Communist victory, backing the Tom Hayden/East German 'People's Peace Plan' that would leave POWs' fates to be negotiated after an American surrender.
He throws 'someone else's' medals but 'his own' service ribbons over the White House fence???
He becomes a 'tough-on-crime' prosecutor--then supports Dukakis' 'Weekend Passes for Violent Felons' program.
He backs conservative issues occasionally--only to lose interest as soon as the press clippings dry.
He consistently votes to defund and minimize our intelligence capability...and then complains when it fails us.
Steyn mentioned the national security flop-flips already...and here's another little turn of the worm:

Remember when the President taunted the terrorists and Saddamites, saying "Bring 'em on!" ? (shades of Churchill's "Do your worst--we'll do our best!" taunting of the 'Nartzis').

Kerry claimed that Bush was "big on bluster and short on action" and ""It is a long way from 'speak softly and carry a big stick' to a president who says 'bring 'em on'..."

"The President's comment yesterday regarding the continued attacks on American troops in Iraq was unwise, unworthy of the office and his role as commander in chief, and unhelpful..."

Ah, but that was July; now, Kerry coaches his listeners to chant along when he says "And if this president and the Republicans want to make this election about national security, then I have three words for them that they'll understand: Bring. It. On."

In other words, taunting our scum-of-the-earth enemies with 'Bring 'em on' is "unwise, unworthy and unhelpful"...but taunting an American president (who has tried hard to defend this country) with that same phrase, well, that's just business as usual.

In the War for America, sadly, John Kerry is permanently shell-shocked.

And all the Bo-tox in the world won't smooth over that wrinkle.

Sunday, February 01, 2004

Funky President Wanna-be  

(People It's Bad)

Bad Hair Day, that is.

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

Weblog Commenting by HaloScan.com Site Meter