Thursday, June 30, 2005

Ward Churchill's pie-hole oozings

Once again, this disgrace to humanity is spewing forth bile, and people are reporting it. I saw this two days ago, and thought "Maybe if I ignore him, he'll die". No such luck. So I check Michelle Malkin and The Empire today, and they both have articles about his stupidity. So of course, I need to chime in, as they're probably my two favorite sites.
Will SOMEONE please take this idiot out and give him a frontal labotomy? At least then he'd have an excuse for being such a complete and total jackass.
Mr. Churchill, did your parents have any children that actually lived? That they'd CLAIM? Doubtful. And who in the hell is paying to see this ass-pirate actually speak? What kind of moron would put forward their own money to hear the blatherings of someone who has been shown to be a complete and total fraud?

Oh yeah, I forgot the box office success of fat-boyMoore's movie Lieaboutit 9/11. But the worse thing is, it's YOUR tax dollars that are funding this jackass's tour of the US. Seems most of his statements are being made at college campuses, where he's being invited to speak, and being paid out of the college's budget. Yep, that same budget that comes out of your tax dollars.

Here's what ass-hat had to say:
"Conscientious objection removes a given piece of the cannon fodder from the fray," he said. "Fragging an officer has a much more impactful effect."
Pirate Ballerina was one of the first to report this, and it's been confirmed by a number of people who were there, along with video at Trey Jacksons site.

Barack Obama <> 2nd coming

Thanks to Ex-Donkey for this.
Apparently in the recent Time magazine fawnfest over Barack Obama, in between the photographer slobbering all over himself to make sure and get Obama's face in just the right light in the pictures, and the interviewer prostituting himself, tossing softball questions, Obama compared his struggles in life to Abraham Lincoln.

No stranger to irony, the GENIUS of Peggy Noonan had this to say:

Actually Lincoln's life is a lot like Mr. Obama's. Lincoln came from a lean-to in the backwoods. His mother died when he was 9. The Lincolns had no money, no standing. Lincoln educated himself, reading law on his own, working as a field hand, a store clerk and a raft hand on the Mississippi. He also split some rails. He entered politics, knew more defeat than victory, and went on to lead the nation through its greatest trauma, the Civil War, and past its greatest sin, slavery.

Barack Obama, the son of two University of Hawaii students, went to Columbia and Harvard Law after attending a private academy that taught the children of the Hawaiian royal family. He made his name in politics as an aggressive Chicago vote hustler in Bill Clinton's first campaign for the presidency.

You see the similarities.

As is the case with many of the Democratic leadership, Obama loves to crow about how Republicans have been born with the silver spoons in their mouths (Or in Ann Richards case 'silver foot'), but their beloved whores in the mainstream media neglects to point out that the majority of the DemoncRat leadership was part of the lucky sperm club. Examples:
  • Howard Dean- Parents raised him blocks from Central Park in VERY expensive area, sent to private academies and schools, paid for by his parents
  • Al Gore- Son of a US Senator. Need I say more?
  • Ted Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy Jr, and the rest- Unlike us Republicans who actually tend to WORK to make our riches, these guys inherited theirs from their moonshining relatives
  • Jay Rockefeller - Rockefeller. Do the research. Duh?!
  • John F'ing Kerry - Oh yeah, he likes to marry well, but he's also been born with a very nice background, both parents from money, and he was raised in all the right schools.
Yes, there are a few Republicans who are part of the 'lucky sperm club' too, but I guarantee you that the numbers are fewer than Democrats. In addition, the Republicans don't go around bitching that the rich get richer blah blah, while sitting back counting their own inheritance.

Wednesday, June 29, 2005

The link between Iraq and 9/11

I read this about a year ago, when recommended by my friend Dr. Ken, but it seems that folks just have either forgotten it, or just didn't know about it yet.

Bottom line, while it's not a straight line, there can be connections made between the 9/11 terrorists and Sadaam Hussein's government in Iraq. If the MSM put half the effort into finding this connection as they did declaring President Bush a deserter, they would have been able to do a much better job of publicizing it. But of course, that wouldn't lead to the conclusions they want you to have.

Just some quick excerpts of unexplained connections in Andrew McCarthy's article:

  • Ahmed Hikmat Shakir — the Iraqi Intelligence operative who facilitated a 9/11 hijacker into Malaysia and was in attendance at the Kuala Lampur meeting with two of the hijackers, and other conspirators, at what is roundly acknowledged to be the initial 9/11 planning session in January 2000? Who was arrested after the 9/11 attacks in possession of contact information for several known terrorists? Who managed to make his way out of Jordanian custody over our objections after the 9/11 attacks because of special pleading by Saddam’s regime
  • Mohammed Atta's unexplained visits to Prague in 2000, and his alleged visit there in April 2001 which — notwithstanding the 9/11 Commission's dismissal of it (based on interviewing exactly zero relevant witnesses) — the Czechs have not retracted
  • Saddam’s official press lionizing bin Laden as “an Arab and Islamic hero” following the 1998 embassy bombing attacks
  • Top Clinton administration counterterrorism official Richard Clarke’s assertions, based on intelligence reports in 1999, that Saddam had offered bin Laden asylum after the embassy bombings, and Clarke’s memo to then-National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, advising him not to fly U-2 missions against bin Laden in Afghanistan because he might be tipped off by Pakistani Intelligence, and “[a]rmed with that knowledge, old wily Usama will likely boogie to Baghdad” (See 9/11 Commission Final Report, p. 134 & n.135.
Read it. Learn it. And next time you talk to an idiot liberal, torch them.

It's about the terrorism. That's why we're in Iraq. And 9/11 was just one of the many instances where terrorism was supported by the regime of Saddam Hussein.

What's going on in Iraq?

You want to know what REALLY is going on in Iraq? Go to a milbloggers site. Easily found, and I've linked to a couple here. But honestly, this is one of the best ones I've seen. Thanks to Michelle Malkin for the info.

Support your troops

Forgot to mention this earlier, from the speech last night by President Bush. Make sure you visit America Supports You and let someone know how much you appreciate what they're doing for our country. Fly your flag next week on the 4th, and show them that you're proud of them, and proud to be an American.

Impeach them, AND take their land

Got this from the Emperor at AntiIdiotarian Rottweiler. An amazing bit of poetic justice, in my eyes.

Wonder what will be next for justices Kennedy, Ginsberg, Stevens, and Breyer? I imagine that there will be SOME freedom loving groups, who have enough money to develop something like a mini-mall, or hotel, or whatever, that want to do it specifically on these particular justices property.

Can't wait to see more.

Tuesday, June 28, 2005

Democrats find no abuse @ Gitmo- DUH!

Despite the fact that Ben Nelson D-NE and Ron Wyden D-OR reported the fact that they saw no evidence of abuse during their tour of Guantanamo Bay Cuba, I'm willing to bet that Amnesty International will not post a public apology to the United States for besmirching the reputation of our men and women in uniform by calling it a 'gulag'.
The MSM will hide this in the back pages of their papers/magazines as a non-story, back with their corrections and obituaries.
But, facts are facts, even Democrats are now coming out and saying that to close Gitmo would actually make the US less safe and increase the probability that abuse happen, because these prisoners would be split amongst several, more difficult to monitor, locations. With Gitmo, only one location needs to be inspected.
But will you hear Howard Dean say that? Doubtful. He sees that there's political hay to be made with the 'gulag' accusation and he's running with it. And who can blame him, I mean we're only disrespecting our men and women in uniform. It's not like they vote Democrat.

Which should tell you something about the people who love this country enough to lay their lives down to protect it.

Monday, June 27, 2005

Where's the riots?

Private property rights suffered arguably their biggest defeat in the history of this country last week when the Supreme Court said that private property can be confiscated (for a 'fair' compensation), in order to hand it over to another private entity for commercial development, and yet, there are very few people who even realize what this means.
Where's the riots? Where's the blood in the streets?
Well, apparently it's summer time and the activists who like to protest against every single thing that would make sense are busy spending time at mummy and daddy's place in the Hamptons, or on Martha's Vineyard. Apparently once school is out, all the protesting is null/void.

The thing that amazes me the most is that every news station I saw this reported on, relegated it to the 4th or 5th story. If this would have been a case where the liberal judges voted in the minority and Clarence Thomas/Antonin Scalia/William Rehnquist would have been in the majority, I guarantee we would have been bombarded with news stories about how this is the end of the world as we know it, and how the conservatives/Republicans only care about big corporations. But since it's the liberal justices that pushed this decision through, we hear only the chirping of crickets from the MSM.

Hopefully it's their homes that are confiscated first to build a mini-mall.

I tend to agree with the California Conservative AND on this one, and I knew I could count on the Emperor for some good comments.

Saturday, June 25, 2005

Humor-Yep, I got it

One day a florist goes to a barber for a haircut. After the cut he asked about his bill and the barber replies: "I'm sorry, I cannot accept money from you; I'm doing community service this week."
The florist is pleased and leaves the shop.
Next morning when the barber goes to open there is a thank you card and a dozen roses waiting for him at his door.
Later, a cop comes in for a haircut, and when he goes to pay his bill the barber again replies: "I'm sorry, I cannot accept money from you; I'm doing community service this week."
The cop is happy and leaves the shop.
Next morning when the barber goes to open up there is a thank you card and a dozen donuts waiting for him at his door.
Later a Republican comes in for a haircut, and when he goes to pay his bill the barber again replies: "I'm sorry, I cannot accept money from you; I'm doing community service this week."
The Republican is very happy and leaves the shop.
Next morning when the barber goes to open, there is a thank you card and a dozen different books such as "How to improve your business” and “Becoming more successful".
Then a Democrat comes in for a haircut, and when he goes to pay his bill the barber again replies: "I'm sorry, I cannot accept money from you; I'm doing community service this week."
The Democrat is very happy and leaves the shop.
Next morning when the barber goes to open up, there are a dozen Democrats lined up waiting for a free haircut.

Friday, June 24, 2005

The Supreme Court needs an enema

In a decision that completely baffles me, the Supreme Court decided in 'Kelo et al v. City of New London' that governmental entities may use eminent domain to grab property from private owners for development by other private entities.
In the past, it's been accepted that eminent domain was usable when developing something for governmental purposes, an airport, train station, etc., but the property owners were expected to receive 'reasonable compensation' for the property from the government.
But in Kelo, Pfizer was wanting to develop a research lab at the site, and these homeowners wouldn't sell. The argument was made that the lab is for the overall best interests of the community and thus eminent domain was proper.
Didn't we fight a WAR over this stuff about 200-something years ago? Wasn't that a huge portion of the argument with England, that the King had the right to take private property for his own use or the use of people of his choosing?
Sandra Day O'Connor, whose decisions usually tend toward the liberal side of the spectrum wrote the dissent in this case and it was a scathing dissent. The rest of the usually conservative justices sided with her, but the 'usual suspects' of liberal, 'government loving' scumbag justices (Ginsberg, Kennedy, et al) sided with the developers/corporations. The interesting thing is that libs are always slamming conservatives for being in bed with corporations. Go figure.

I'll post more about this later after I read the entire decision, but this cannot stand. We cannot be a country where private property rights mean nothing when faced with some bureaucratic decision.

Tuesday, June 21, 2005

Durbin's 'apology'

If you truly think that DICK Durbin apologized for his comments comparing our troops to Nazi's, Communists, and the killing fields of Cambodia, you better think again. From

"I am sorry if anything I said caused any offense or pain to those who have such bitter memories of the Holocaust, the greatest moral tragedy of our time. Nothing, nothing should ever be said to demean or diminish that moral tragedy. I am also sorry if anything I said cast a negative light on our fine men and women in the military ... I never ever intended any disrespect for them. Some may believe that my remarks crossed the line to them I extend my heartfelt apology," Durbin said,
choking on his words.

Let me re-quote, just in case you didn't get it. "Some may believe that my remarks crossed the line....". So which part are you not understanding that it was not an apology, but more an explanation of the what he meant? He is NOT apologizing here. He's basically blaming the people who took offense as the idiots, but apologizing to them because they're not smart enough to really know what he meant.

DICK Durbin is a aging anti-war protestor who is feeling the heat of the loss of any sort of power. He knows that if they don't succeed in running down the image of the US during this conflict, his movement will lose all credibility. He's a male Jane Fonda. He is the guy who hopefully when this is all over, we can point to and say "he's a traitor, and he was dealt with by the citizens of Illinois".

If you truly believe that DICK Durbin is sorry, you're right. He's the sorriest sack of shit in the in the Senate. As sorry a human being as you'd ever let into the leadership of the Democratic party.

Other sites with info on this:
California Conservative
Anti-idiotarian Rottweiler
Jacksons Junction
Michelle Malkin
Bright and Early
My Pet Jawa


Powerline has John Kerry's form SF-180. What I find interesting is that the liberals were clamoring for full disclosure of all President Bush's National Guard records, including ones that had to be forged to be disclosed. But these three releases, Boston Globe, Associated Press, and a media outlet which has been whited out, allows only the biased reporters who have written the man's biography access to the records. These are the same people who have created the myth that John Kerry is a war hero. Who is the third outlet? Bet it's not Fox News,, or anyone else who would be critical of Senator Kerry's record.

I don't trust them with his records, you shouldn't either.

Oh, and where the hell is John Kerry in this whole DICK Durbin issue? He loved to talk about how he served his country during the entire election but now, he's conspicuously quiet when that idiot criticized our troops and compared them to the Khmer Rouge, Nazi's, and Communist killers.

Sunday, June 19, 2005

Pacifist/appeasment supporters = Retards

How can someone actually think that giving in to people who want to kill you, or take your land from you is an intelligent thing to do? What sort of actual brainwave activity happens when you think "Hey, these guys want to blow up buses in my country to get what they want, so I'm going to give them what they want, and they'll probably stop blowing up buses"? How does someone of average intelligence (or above average intelligence) get from A to B on that particular line of thinking? Do they really think that the attacks are going to stop merely because they've given the people who are attacking what they want? Do they not realize that by appeasing them, they're only providing reinforcement that their attacks work? Basic psychology 101. Hell, even my kids know that if they want something, and they get it by behaving a certain way, they continue to use that activity to get what they want.

So, how is it that a group of Israeli citizens are actually FOR giving in to the Palestinians and letting them run the asylum? They think that they're colonialists because of the 1948 act that created the state of Israel, and that the land should be given back to the Palestinians. Not sure how that would happen, since it never BELONGED to the Palestinians in the first damn place.

Appeasement never works. Annihilation works. Neville Chamberlain found this out in Europe during WWII. Tojo found out that the US will not appease them the hard way in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Osama and the boys are finding this out the hard way now. But we still have idiots in our country, who like the idiots at think that if we just give in to these animals, they'll go away and leave us alone.

Just ask the 3000 something folks at the WTC.....oh wait. You can't, they're dead. Bill Clinton appeased Osama bin Laden and the rest of the islamofacists and cost US lives.

No more appeasement. I vote for annihilation.

Friday, June 17, 2005

DICK Durbin- Seditionist (Warning-Graphic photos)

Seditionist- 1. Conduct or language inciting rebellion against the authority
of a state. 2. Insurrection; rebellion.

You can argue that debate is part of a Senators job, and to an extent, I agree with you. But there is a line, a line that DICK Durbin (D-IL) crossed when he accused our troops in Guantanamo Bay of being Nazi's, or the equivalent of the leaders of a Soviet gulag (or worse) in the following quote:

On one occasion, the air conditioning had been turned down so far and the
temperature was so cold in the room, that the barefooted detainee was shaking
with cold. ..... On another occasion, the [air conditioner] had been turned off,
making the temperature in the unventilated room well over 100 degrees. The
detainee was almost unconscious on the floor, with a pile of hair next to him.
He had apparently been literally pulling his hair out throughout the night. On
another occasion, not only was the temperature unbearably hot, but extremely
loud rap music was being played in the room, and had been since the day before,
with the detainee chained hand and foot in the fetal position on the tile floor.

If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent
describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most
certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or
some mad regime--Pol Pot or others--that had no concern for human beings. Sadly,
that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their
Now, while I detest rap music, and would find that pretty torturing to have to listen to for a day, I don't think it falls into the specific definition of 'torture' per se. Back to for an answer:
1. Infliction of severe physical pain as a means of punishment or coercion.
2. An instrument or a method for inflicting such pain.
3. Excruciating
physical or mental pain; agony: the torture of waiting in suspense.
4. Something causing severe pain or anguish.
Just a note for you DICK, this isn't torture:

This is torture (warning- Graphic images follow):
(thanks to MyPetJawa for the pics)

Of course there are others, like the cases where Saddam's torture masters used to put a naked man in a cell. And while our guys merely put underwear on their heads, made dogs growl at them, or {gasp} made them pose in possibly gay looking poses, his ideas were a bit worse. He had a sprinkler system above each cell that would drip nitric acid down on the naked bodies of the prisoners.

The funny thing is, the liberal blogs are going nuts, defending this turd. The head of daily kos, which is a RABID anti-Bush, anti-Republican, anti-IQ, anti-common sense blog, has said that: "The torture that was so bad under Saddam, is equally bad under U.S. command. And Dick Durbin had the balls to say it so on the Senate floor. "
It doesn't take balls to say something like that. In fact, it's easy to criticize our troops. Especially when you haven't got the balls to stand up and do the right thing. When you don't have the balls to have served in the first place. Kos, you're a gutless, spineless, scumbag who by rights should have been sent to Iraq when it was under Saddam's rule to observe the torture methods first hand. Durbin, you're an idiot, bought and paid for by the New York Times editorial board, who is lucky enough to have been given the freedom to say such idiocy by the same people who you spew forth your vile crud out of your pie-hole. Do everyone a favor, and shut the hell up.

People of Illinois: Are you going to continue to let this schmuck just spout off this tripe, or are you going to let him know your opinions? To voice your opinion on his statement to Senator Durbin, here's his info:

Washington, DC - 332 Dirksen Senate Bldg.Washington, DC 20510(202) 224-2152(202) 228-0400 - fax
Chicago - 230 South Dearborn St.Suite 3892Chicago, IL 60604(312) 353-4952(312) 353-0150 - fax
Springfield - 525 South 8th St.Springfield, IL 62703(217 ) 492-4062(217) 492-4382 - fax
Marion - 701 N. Court St.Marion, IL 62959(618) 998-8812(618) 997-0176 - fax

You can also fill out a form on his website at or you could email him at

Wednesday, June 15, 2005

Get the special jacket, here comes another nutcase!

According to the Washington Times, a former Bush labor department chief economist, Morgan Reynolds, has come out and said what a lot of the people who hate America have been thinking: The demolition of World Trade Center, and Building 7 was actually a controlled demolition, not a result of the heat from the burning jet-fuel that softened the structural steel allowing the weight from the floors above the impact to collapse down, creating an accordian-like demolition of the building.
I guess since this economist now has returned to his job as a professor emeritus at Texas A&M, he's had time to go to engineering school and learn the whole thermodynamics of how this is impossible, OR when he had the chance to learn how demolition teams work and how a demolition job of this kind would be impossible to go forward unobserved by the people who actually WORK at the towers. Popular Mechanics has even gone to the trouble of debunking many of the urban myths that sprouted up shortly after 9/11 in this article.

The bad part is, this guy used to be relatively intelligent, judging from some of his past writings, but has apparently spent too much time in the sun, and it's softened his skull.

Just another case of the academic elite enlightening us all with their superior intellect.

Or another bonehead getting press because he doesn't have a clue, but allows his pie-hole to open and spew out stupidity that he thinks (and the MSM thinks) makes the Bush administration look bad.

Tuesday, June 14, 2005

Michael Crook update

The above link is NOT safe for work. However, it's an outstanding prank played on Michael Crook. You may remember him as the owner of, and He's been on Fox News (God knows why) and several other news stations because he's an overall prick, and a generally miserable human being.
You have to check this out though, since the guy seems to be easier to bait than an Ethiopian with a plate of gruel.
Funny, I bet he thought he'd get away with slamming our troops without a scratch.

Who's laughing now, dork-boy?

(Note: If for some reason the link goes down, let me know. I've saved the site locally and will post it somewhere)

Previous Posts:
Not only an idiot, but a racist idiot

Freedom of Speech

Not guilty? Are you kidding me?

10 counts. 10 acquittals. Are you frigging kidding me? The guy has kiddie-porn(along with regular porn) all over his house, booze in his house where kids could easily access it (whether he gave it to them or not is immaterial), and invites gaggles of 9-13 year olds over to spend the night. And you're going to tell me that it's all innocent fun?
THE GUY IS 40-SOMETHING YEARS OLD!? I'm in my late 30's and guarantee if something like this happened to me, I'd be modelling sundresses for bubba in Jackson State Penitentiary for much of the rest of my life.
The jury didn't like the accusers mom, according to some reports so that was a big factor. One juror was quoted as saying "you don't snap your fingers at me", referencing some time during the testimony when the mother snapped her fingers at the jury.
So, apparently it's fine to be molested if your mom is a psycho hose-beast. Note to all you pervs out there, be careful to run a quick background check on your victims to ensure that their moms are nuts. Should get you off in a matter of minutes.
And what does this say about our judicial system? Nothing new, unfortunately. OJ, Robert Downey Junior, Jamal Lewis, Michael Jackson, Russell Crowe are all examples of the special treatment that stars get in our judicial system.
When will it stop? Never I'm sure. And anyone who says stars don't get special treatment, must live in a fantasy world...a 'Neverland' if you will.

Monday, June 13, 2005


Evidently Indra Nooyi, President/CFO of PepsiCO got our message loud and clear when we here at WTHIWWY announced a boycott of all things Pepsi. She announced her apology on the company website here.

That'll teach 'em to mess with us again.

Now if she could just get her countrymen to quit pissing on our flag and burning our flag, I won't have to declare a jihad on them. Otherwise, it's on.

Friday, June 10, 2005

Never liked Pepsi....

...and now I have a reason why. During an address to newly minted MBA's at the Columbia Business School, the CFO of Pepsi, Ms. Indra Nooyi launched into a diatribe about how the US is considered the 'middle finger of the world'. We're overbearing, insensitive, and disrespectful according to Ms. Nooyi, and completely ignored the fact that the US has saved the world from tyranny on at least two occasions and how the citizens of the US have contributed countless dollars to her homeland (India) to ensure that their people will remain fed in the past, even though her own government could care less.
I guess it's perfectly fine to come here, rise to power, and succeed, and then disrespect the very system that allowed you to do so.

So, I'll now be boycotting anything made by PepsiCo until she apologizes. This includes Fritos, Doritos (and that'll be tough), GatorAde, and Tropicana.

Anyone join me?

Is Howard Dean's idiocy orchestrated?

With all the stupid comments, I'm beginning to wonder something.

Did the DNC name Howard Dean as their chair in order to make their candidates look conservative/moderate? With a chairman who is making statements to cater to the far left wing, making them happy, and ensuring that the liberal base shows up to vote, that frees up the individual candidates to be able to distance themselves from the stupid statements that Dean makes like "I hate all Republicans", and "Republicans are nothing but white christians". Makes you wonder if Dean hates all white christians....(special thanks to Brian Wilson, FOXNews reporter for that leap of logic).

Just a thought....I mean, anyone who can make Hitlery look like a moderate, has GOT to have a place in the Democratic leadership.


Jihad has been declared on the authors of (a great site that I definitely recommend). The authors publicized the recent video of Islamic scumbags desecrating the American flag. According to the idiots who declared the jihad, the information that these guys publish is false and is intended to 'produce hatred amongst innocent and gullible American public to continue to support the desecration of the qu'ran'.
Well, I'm not sure exactly what they published that would be false, since they merely linked to the video, and let people make up their own minds. Like they say, a picture is worth a thousand words, and usually a video is worth 10,000.
And as for the 'gullible' American public, at least the American public doesn't support the destruction of entire groups because they disagree with us. Or the public flogging of people because they've done something that may have violated a minor religious tenet. Or a religious leader calling for the death of someone because they exposed the lies, fraud, and deceit of the leadership of that religion.
I agree with the position that most Muslims don't believe that a fatwa issued by some idiot mullah in Iran means that they have to act. Especially considering that a fatwa was issued by the Islamic Commission of Spain against the terrorists in Iraq and their supporters back several months ago for their actions in the train bombing there. Haven't seen a whole lot of suicide bombers targeting Osama, or any of the other idiot leaders that send other peoples kids on suicide missions. At least, when we send our military somewhere, we give them armament and expect that they come back alive and make sure the other guy gives his life for THEIR country/cause.
So, I'm issuing a fatwa right now. A Jihad of sorts. I say the people who truly believe that Islam is a religion of peace, and supposedly that's a majority of you, should step up, grow a pair of balls, and display that alleged peace by stopping their cohorts. Stopping their fellow muslims from assaulting innocents, whether it be bus riders in Israel, Iraqi citizens shopping in an open market in Baghdad, or innocents in the World Trade Center (ok, too late for that one, but you get the point). Otherwise, you're all just going to be labeled by the sweeping brush that paints these 3rd century animals.
Until I see some peace from muslims, I'm going to have to assume that you are all liars, and as such, you are subject to the penalty of having your tongue burned out with a red-hot poker. And I'm just the guy to do it.
Hey, if we're going 3rd century here, we may as well go all the way.

Thursday, June 09, 2005

Mexican police chief killed-after 9 hours on the job

The new chief of police in Nuevo Laredo, a city just across the border from Laredo, Texas, was chief for approximately 9 hours before he was gunned down by masked gunmen yesterday. Apparently the job went unfilled for some period of time prior to Alejandro Dominguez taking it, and will probably go unfilled for a while longer now. Dominguez said prior to taking the job that he wasn't afraid of anything, despite the history of the position. Bravado, that has come to a violent end.
So, let's recap. We should be allowing the people who allow this sort of action, and PARTICIPATE in this sort of action, to cross our borders unfettered and to consume our social services without uttering a word in argument?
I think not. It's things like this, where the government can't even police their own streets, that continue to make Mexico the 3rd world backwater country that it is. This isn't anything the US has done to Mexico, it's done it to itself.
Recently the US ambassador to Mexico came under some intense pressure from Mexican officials after issuing a travel warning to Americans who wish to go to Mexico because they said it wasn't necessary. While I agree that there are some plenty violent areas in the US, we tend to warn tourists to stay the hell out of Watts, or Compton, Cabrini Green, some areas of Miami, or any of the other areas that people shouldn't be in who don't want trouble. The warning was intended to make sure our citizens know that Mexico is indeed a 3rd world backwater, sphincter-nation that should clean up their own act prior to telling the US what we should do with our borders.

Wednesday, June 08, 2005

Not so dumb after all

With Kerry now signed the SF-180 for release of SOME of his records, it's now discovered why it is that he didn't want them released in the first place.
With all his fellow libs ranting and raving about how stupid W is, there's no way he could let it be known that W's grades were actually BETTER than Kerrys. Kerry had a cumulative score of 76, while President Bush had a cumulative score of 77. Neither are rocket scientist-like scores, I'll grant you, but all those people who have been so critical of W being so 'stupid' now are being typically shown that they were wrong. Of course they won't acknowledge that.

And take a look at the pictures:
(courtesy Boston Globe)

Yikes! Who do you trust more? Lurch? or Unibrow? At least that bad boy can be taken care of with tweezers.

Bottom line: At the end of the day, once again, the libs and their idiot leaders are proven to be the liars we all knew they were.

Tuesday, June 07, 2005

Howard Dean- Brainiac got slapped down by members of your own party in your run for president. When you campaigned for your own candidate, you pretty much were the fourth or fifth story IF you made the news. When you'd say something, people ignored you. So what do you do if you're Howard Dean? Go after chairman of the DNC of course, so people HAVE to listen to you. And man are the Republicans loving what they're hearing:

-"You think people can work all day and then pick up their kids at child care or wherever and get home and still manage to sandwich in an eight-hour vote? Well Republicans, I guess can do that. Because a lot of them have never made an honest living in their lives."(says the guy who's mommy and daddy raised him on 5th Avenue and paid for his college/med school so that he could 'make an honest living)
-"You think the Republican National Committee could get this many people of color in a single room? Only if they had the hotel staff in here."(Guess he forgot about Alberto Gonzalez, Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell, Allan Keyes, JC Watts, Clarence Thomas, etc...)
-"There is a war going on in the Middle East, and members of Hamas are soldiers in that war" (Uh, soldiers don't target innocent civilians, idiot, only terrorists do)

Seems like the man has political Tourettes syndrome. It seems like he's become the Cliff Claven of politics. He's always got to get his $.02 in, even if it makes him sound like a complete idiot. Which apparently helps the Republicans at every turn. So far fundraising is way down, as well as the desire of most true Republicans to see Dean embarrassed in any way possible. RNC chairman Ken Mehlman offered probably the best advice for Dean:
I'm not sure the best way to win support in the red states is to insult the folks who live there. I think that a better approach might be to talk about the issues you're for
I certainly hope that he doesn't take that advice to heart. Although, I doubt he can, even if he tried.

Awww...poor baby

Read this article. Now, by judging your reaction to it, you will be able to tell whether you are a liberal or a conservative.

A liberal will look at it and say "Aw, those poor girls. I can't believe that they were treated so badly. Some nameless government agency should step up and help them, and the foundation that made this promise should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, and be sentenced to more time in a federal penitentiary than a drug dealer. Look at the affects of this foundations broken promises, kids in prison and pregnant. America is a horrible country if we don't fix this with tax money."

A conservative will look at it and say "This is an amazing story of perserverence and the American spirit. Despite the fact that they had hardships, they still made it through a difficult environment growing up and still attended college and now have a future ahead of them. A great argument for why it is that America is still the greatest country in the world and why it is true that if you truly want to do something, there's nothing that can hold you back".

Which one are you?

Just a note: No one promised me a free college tuition if I stayed in school. No one promised me jack. I came from an extremely poor family. But I perservered, worked through high school, and worked through college, joined the Marines to help pay for college, and now am a successful professional, making more money than I ever thought I would. But no one gave me a damn thing. These girls should be thankful they learned a valuable lesson. Something you work for is infinitely more valuable than something that is given to you.

DeVos to run for Governor in Michigan

It's official. Ending months of speculation, Dick Devos, son of Amway co-founder Richard DeVos has announced that he'll run for governor of Michigan. He is also the husband of former state Republican chair, Betsy DeVos, and has been involved heavily in the schools of choice and school voucher programs over the last several years. He worked with the city of Detroit schools after the state took them over due to mismanagement, and was even commended by several Democrat leaders for doing an impressive job leading the Detroit Public Schools, including mayor Kwame Kilpatrick. Not sure that's an endorsement I'd want if I were him, but you can be sure the Dem's will run screaming from their previous statement, denying any positive feelings toward DeVos.
DeVos has two things working against him: 1) He's rich and 2) He's from the west side of Michigan. As Dick Postumus proved three years ago, it's tough to run on the east side when you're not from there. He did a respectable job, and were it not for voter fatigue with John Engler and the media's constant hammering of him, Postumus probably would have won. He lost by a much smaller margin than the polls were running, suggesting that many undecided voters went to him rather than Jenny From the Block. But Democrats are to be sure to hammer the fact that Mr. DeVos is a billionaire, and, to take a phrase out of the Howard Dean book of quotes "that he's never had an honest days work in his life".
While DeVos can counter that by saying that yes, indeed, he is rich, and that has nothing to do with how he'd run the state, you can be guaranteed that Dem's won't give up, as well as their willing accomplices in the media.
What DeVos has going for him is a state that wants a change. Only 24% of voters in a recent poll said that they would vote for Granholm, and her job approval rating is in the 30's. Interestingly, her personal approval is around 50%. I guess people like her, they just don't like her being governor.

Hopefully with this announcement from Mr. Devos, they won't have to be concerned about that for much longer.

No appeal in Washington election

Apparently when you go to law school, they take away all common sense and replace it with a law-book. How else can you explain the finding in the state of Washington that no fraud took place when 1678 votes were cast illegally? F-R-A-U-D. But apparently the judge wanted video of the Democrats filling out the ballots in the names of felons, or stuffing the ballot boxes in King County when the counts came back in favor of Dino Rossi. "Write up some more ballots for Gregoire, Hank, we're still down by 200 votes!"
The idiocy of this decision (and yes, I've read the ENTIRE transcript) amazes me. It raises the bar so high as to have eliminated any possibility of ever having an election challenged in the state of Washington without having video, pictures, or some other sort of 100% evidence that voter fraud took place. Nevermind that more people voted than were registered in some areas. Or that felons voted and they are not allowed to in WA. Or that hundreds of absentee ballots were accepted without any proof that the person actually existed or that their addresses actually existed. Several people voted using the address of a vacant lot.
Nope. No fraud there.

Not only is justice blind. In the state of Washington, it's blind, deaf, and stupid.

Monday, June 06, 2005

True Government Oppression

As we fall over ourselves to accomodate everything from China, from our automobiles to our computers, let's not forget that they're still a communist nation, willing to do anything to oppress their own people to the bloodiest of extents. Sixteen years ago last week, the Red Army slaughtered thousands of their own people for merely protesting. The famous picture of the lone man standing in front of a column of tanks provides inspiration to people to stand up and speak out. However, the pictures that should be publicized are the ones that came shortly after that. When that tank and many others ran over, shot, and blew up thousands of their own, unarmed people. People who were doing nothing but protesting the governments' oppression of them. There was a protest in Hong Kong, which after 1997 reverted back to Chinese rule that drew 45,000 people. How many people in Beijing? 0. None. Security was tight in the area specifically to deny their people the right to remember their fellow citizens, slaughtered by their own government for merely wanting freedom.

One of the more interesting things I found while researching this post is how varied the numbers of casualties really are. See, journalists were forced to leave the area right before the slaughter began, so no one really knows (other than the government goons) how many were actually killed. The pro-China/pro-Communist New York Times estimates the deaths at merely 400-800, while the students who organized the protest and were involved put the number closer to 7000. The National Security Agency (NSA), who has satellites that can tell you your shirt size estimates the number of deaths close to 2000. Who's right? Who cares? Isn't the government killing 800 people offensive enough for people? Is that enough to get people pissed off at them? Apparently not. People are still buying crap made from China, probably some of which is made by those people who have been political prisoners.

But Guantanamo Bay is where the gulag's are, according to Amnesty International. Some estimates put China's political prisoner population at five figures. We have a few hundred in Guantanamo Bay, where they're allowed to worship at their leisure, exercise, and are fed a whole lot better than they were in Afghanistan or Iraq, and we're the bad guys because Amnesty International says so. First of all, AI lost most of their credibility when they've ignored such crises as Rwanda and the Sudan, not to mention supporting the UN human rights commision, which was populated by such humanitarian countries as Libya and Sudan, so I don't put much stock in their opinion, not to mention they're a left-wing bunch of freaks.

The International Red Cross, the FBI, and the international press are allowed to visit Guantanamo on a regular basis and none have found any major violations of human rights of the prisoners, despite the fact that they certainly deserve to have their rights violated. Minor violations such as yelling at the prisoners during interrogations have been reported, and a contract interrogator tore two pages out of a Koran, and was fired. But apparently, AI is just pissed because their donations probably went down after the typhoon in SE Asia, so they had to come up with something to bring them back into the limelight.

When people talk about government oppression, I just laugh, because most of the idiots who protest this government, who protest against George Bush, are the very same idiots who will talk about how glorious China is, and how they would love to visit, or who have already visited and pumped money into China's economy. The very same idiots who don't bother to look where something is made before buying it. The very same idiots who are supporting one of the most oppressive governments on earth.

Thanks idiots. May the fight live on and the spirit of those from Tiananmen Square live on in the people of China, and may they finally throw off the yoke of Communism for good soon.

Sunday, June 05, 2005

Weekend funny

Two Middle East mothers are sitting in the cafe strip chatting over a cup of coffee. The older of the mothers pulls her bag out and starts flipping through pictures and they start reminiscing.
"This is my oldest son Mohammed. He's 24 years old now"
"Yes, I remember him as a baby" says the other mother cheerfully. "He's a martyr now though" mum confides. "Oh so sad dear" says the other. "And this is my second son Kalid. He's 21" "Oh, I remember him," says the other happily, "he had such curly hair when he was born".
"He's a martyr too " says mum quietly.
"Oh gracious me ...." says the other.
"And this is my third son. My baby. My beautiful Ahmed. He's 18", she whispers.
"Yes" says the friend enthusiastically, "I remember when he first started school".
"He's a martyr also," says mum, with tears in her eyes.
After a pause and a deep sigh, the second muslim mother looks wistfully at the photographs and says... "They blow up so fast, don't they?"

Friday, June 03, 2005

My letter to the FEC

The following is my letter to the FEC. Today is the deadline, if you're at all nervous about the infringement of your freedom of speech in the blogs you read every day, you're going to want to write them also at You have to include your snail mail address for them to accept your comment.

To whom it may concern:

I find the fact that the FEC is looking to regulate free speech amongst Web logs (Blogs) offensive and a violation of my freedom of speech. As shown in last election, blogs can be an incredibly reliable source of information and quite often break news prior to any mainstream media outlet. In addition, they often report on stories that aren't being played in the mainstream media for whatever reason.
People get involved thanks to blogs, and they stay involved thanks to those same blogs. People get information from them, get opinions from them, reshape their own opinions due to them, and find out they had opinions which they didn't even realize they had, all thanks to blogs.
For the FEC to think that this is nothing more than a natural extension of McCain/Feingold, is a mistake. In my personal opinion, the Supreme Court was wrong to rule that law constitutional. However, it's the law of the land, but it's intention was not to regulate free speech (despite the fact that it does overwhelmingly). It's intention was to regulate the financial contributions that influence political campaigns (which again it failed at horribly). Blogs are not financial contributions, they are speech. My blog is my speech. My speech is my thought. By regulating what I'm allowed to 'think' in public, the FEC oversteps some bounds that I would believe should have any American quaking in their beds.

I know several people from anecdotally that have become more involved in the political process thanks to the blogosphere. We had our best turnout in history in the last election, and I sincerely think that a lot of that can be attributed to the contributions of the Internet and the organizations that used it so effectively. People were more interested, more engaged, and more involved. If the FEC were to step in here, now, in the infancy of blogs, it would do more damage to free speech than the possibility of someone abusing the system would do.

You can take my blog when you can pry it from my cold dead electrons

It's not enough that he's beloved by DemoncRats, or that he was one of the traitorous seven. No, the McCain/Feingold Act, which was supposed to remove big money from the election process and in actuality had the complete opposite effect, strikes again. Now the FEC is looking into the Blogosphere to regulate it during elections.
Blogs are currently exempted from the regulatory restrictions of the law, since they were not in existence when the law was first written...or at least not in any form that the lawmakers would be intelligent enough to pick up on. However, since it's been written, and as displayed in the last election, blogs are hugely influential in politics. Looking at Michelle Malkin's site, Free Republic, or Red State, you see the numbers are impressive. Even liberal sites are just as active. While there's a pretty big dropoff from the 'Daily Kos' down to the number two trafficked site, Kos' site is one of the most popular political blogs on the net, followed shortly by Instapundit. I'd wager that most of Kos' hits are conservatives reading and laughing at how stupid liberals are.
But the real point here is now the FEC is looking into rules to govern the activities of blogs around elections. Technically it's looking into rules to govern advertising on the Internet during elections, but if you look at the other text, they're also talking about definitions of contributions and expenditures. If you pay to host your blog, and it's a political blog in support of a candidate (or in opposition), is that considered a contribution? RedState has letters from organizations which support both sides of the issue here

Here's where freedom of speech definitely is being violated, and I don't care WHAT the Supreme Court says. My blog is my speech. My speech is what I think(much to my chagrin somtimes). Governing my speech is governing my thought. McCain/Feingold in unconstitutional in any court with any common sense. Unfortunately, as the Supreme Court has displayed on many occasions of late, they are lacking severely in that fundamental trait.

If the FEC is going to try to regulate 10 million blogs, they're going to need a lot more staffing. In addition, to try to shut down, or fine the owners of those blogs, is going to take a tremendous enforcement arm, which in my opinion will cause an uproar, the likes of which we've not seen in some time.

Thursday, June 02, 2005

Equal rights?

Ok, I'm all for equality. But when is it that some people become more equal than others (Thanks George Orwell)?
When a person of color, or a female is a screwup, why is it that they get a much wider leeway than a single white male? Corporations are so desperate to force diversity into management and their workforce that they're willing to overlook the blunders that some of these people make.

Two examples: 1) There was a person who consistently missed deadlines, did a poor job when he finally did his work, and was only good at one thing, and I don't believe watching Jerry Springer was part of his job description. And this was reported repeatedly to the management of the company. However, did he get fired? No. He did leave the company, but at his own volition.
2) Female workers has absolutely no tact with other staff. Consistently pisses them off by changing expectations, changing scope of the projects, and talking down to them. Not bad enough? How about consistently pissing off clients? Having a client say "Is this because she doesn't understand the big words?" about an email she sends that just restates a previous email, but rewords it. Another project manager was asked by the client not to allow her back on site. But is she fired? Counselled? Suspended?

And people wonder why I have such a bad attitude.