Chaos - thy name is the democrat convention

So it appears that Barack Obama is going to win the democrat (not capitalized on purpose) nomination and send Hillary into a tizzy that she may never recover from (God willing).

Why would this happen you might ask? Well because democrats are too busy looking at the snake-oil salesman from Illinois with lover's eyes for the past month or so.

What this has done is to kill any momentum that Hillary had and made her look irrelevant and old.

But more importantly, because Hillary had a lead and because too many of the democrat primaries allowed the candidates to actually split votes, this means that the democrat Super Delegates will play a part in the nomination at the democrat convention.

What are Super Delegates you might ask? They are bigwigs in the democrat party ( Congressmen, Part Leaders, etc...).

Why are they important? Because at the convention these Super Delegates get to vote...

ANY WAY THEY WANT !!!

(ed. "Pledged delegates reflect the preferences of the voters, but are not actually legally bound to vote for the candidate they are pledged for." -wiki- it's not just the supers that get to vote how they want ;) --LN)

This means that if Obama and Clinton are tied. Or more ironically, if Obama narrowly leads the POPULAR VOTE with not enough delegates to win outright, Hillary still could get the nomination by swaying enough Super Delegates to vote for her.

What THAT means is that this would be a VERY MESSY democrat Convention.

And THAT ... has me wishing Hillary does well enough to pull close.

Get yer popcorn ready folks !!

Single White Male Seeks Hot Babe

Thaiphoon and I figured that since our buddy Nazh was in a bit of a funk, we would do what we can to hook him up with some female companionship. If you feel that you will be interested in this fine piece of man meat, feel free to leave a comment and we'll try to get back to you. [PLEASE DO NOT leave personal phone numbers and other personal information where everyone and their grandmother can see it. EMB]

Hello. My name is Lord Nazh. I am a single white male in the 35 to 45 year old range. I live in the great state of Alabama. I currently make a living as a Right Wing Extremist, but enjoy several extra curricular activities.

I enjoy spending time with my family and playing with my daughter. In my free time I enjoy thumping the occasional Bible and thanking G-d for giving us the University of Tennessee and the United States of America. I like blogging and bowling but never at the same time. Always blog responsibly. Friends don't let friends blog and bowl. I love guns, video games and live D&D role playing. Although my favorite activities have to be Star Trek Conventions and dressing up as a 49th Level Elf Archer (female of course ;))

My dislikes are Liberal whackos, Environmentalist hippies, Islamic extremists, peacenik pansies and dressing as a 48th Level Elf Archer (I hate posers!)

I am looking for a meaningful, long term one night stand with a beautiful blond woman (wigs are acceptable). You must have at least 25% of your original teeth and mostly STD free. You must like to dress up like Wonder woman. Then tie me up with a golden lariat and force me to tell the truth!! I've been a very naughty Elf.

My picture is posted below. Please include a recent picture of yourself for future reference. [Keep it clean please. EMB]

I'll be waiting... XoXoXo

"Our Lives, Our Fortunes, Our Sacred Honor"

This is the day of the year where Americans the world over celebrate our Independence. We gather together, grill out, play games outside, drink lots of alcohol {and i had to work - LN}. Finally, as the day winds down, the sun slips below the horizon and the dark descends upon the revelers, we crane our necks skyward and proceed to be delighted by fireworks displays which light up the night.

There is a deeper meaning than this celebration. One that sometimes gets lost in our day of joy.

I'm speaking of the original 4^th of July, 1776. The day when our country's Forefathers declared our intentions to bring forth a new nation unto this world. The creators and signatories of the Declaration of Independence worked long and hard and pledged their lives, fortunes and their sacred honor to this new nation they were about to midwife.

It is this time of year that I bring out my copy of the Declaration of Independence and read it. You can find it pretty much anywhere online but here's one link to it (it appears each July 4^th in the Washington Times);

I also bring out a copy of a speech that was given many times by Rush H. Limbaugh Jr (yes, he's the father of the famous radio talk show host). This speech is exemplary and I thought I'd share excerpts of his speech with you.

It was a glorious morning. The sun was shining and the wind was from the southeast. Up especially early, a tall bony, redheaded young Virginian found time to buy a new thermometer, for which he paid three pounds, fifteen shillings. He also bought gloves for Martha, his wife, who was ill at home.

Thomas Jefferson arrived early at the statehouse. The temperature was 72.5 degrees and the horseflies weren't nearly so bad at that hour. It was a lovely room, very large, with gleaming white walls. The chairs were comfortable. Facing the single door were two brass fireplaces, but they would not be used today.

The moment the door was shut, and it was always kept locked, the room became an oven. The tall windows were shut, so that loud quarreling voices could not be heard by passersby. Small openings atop the windows allowed a slight stir of air, and also a large number of horseflies. Jefferson records that "the horseflies were dexterous in finding necks, and the silk of stockings was nothing to them." All discussing was punctuated by the slap of hands on necks.

...

A total of 86 alterations were made. Almost 500 words were eliminated, leaving 1,337. At last, after three days of wrangling, the document was put to a vote.

Here in this hall Patrick Henry had once thundered: "I am no longer a Virginian, sir, but an American." But today the loud, sometimes bitter argument stilled, and without fanfare the vote was taken from north to south by colonies, as was the custom. On July 4, 1776, the Declaration of Independence was adopted.

...

Even before the list was published, the British marked down every member of Congress suspected of having put his name to treason. All of them became the objects of vicious manhunts. Some were taken. Some, like Jefferson, had narrow escapes. All who had property or families near British strongholds suffered.

Francis Lewis, New York delegate saw his home plundered -- and his estates in what is now Harlem -- completely destroyed by British Soldiers. Mrs. Lewis was captured and treated with great brutality. Though she was later exchanged for two British prisoners through the efforts of Congress, she died from the effects of her abuse.

John Hart of Trenton, New Jersey, risked his life to return home to see his dying wife. Hessian soldiers rode after him, and he escaped in the woods. While his wife lay on her deathbed, the soldiers ruined his farm and wrecked his homestead. Hart, 65, slept in caves and woods as he was hunted across the countryside. When at long last, emaciated by hardship, he was able to sneak home, he found his wife had already been buried, and his 13 children taken away. He never saw them again. He died a broken man in 1779, without ever finding his family.

And, finally, there is the New Jersey signer, Abraham Clark.

He gave two sons to the officer corps in the Revolutionary Army. They were captured and sent to that infamous British prison hulk afloat in New York Harbor known as the hell ship Jersey, where 11,000 American captives were to die. The younger Clarks were treated with a special brutality because of their father. One was put in solitary and given no food. With the end almost in sight, with the war almost won, no one could have blamed Abraham Clark for acceding to the British request when they offered him his sons' lives if he would recant and come out for the King and Parliament. The utter despair in this man's heart, the anguish in his very soul, must reach out to each one of us down through 200 years with his answer: "No."

...

The 56 signers of the Declaration Of Independence proved by their every deed that they made no idle boast when they composed the most magnificent curtain line in history. "And for the support of this Declaration with a firm reliance on the protection of divine providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor."

Rush suggests (and I agree) that;

each of you take the time this month to read through the text of the Declaration, one of the most noble and beautiful political documents in human history.

There is no more profound sentence than this: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness..."

These are far more than mere poetic words. The underlying ideas that infuse every sentence of this treatise have sustained this nation for more than two centuries. They were forged in the crucible of great sacrifice. They are living words that spring from and satisfy the deepest cries for liberty in the human spirit.

"Sacred honor" isn't a phrase we use much these days, but every American life is touched by the bounty of this, the Founders' legacy. It is freedom, tested by blood, and watered with tears.

I have read and re-read both the Declaration of Independence and his father's speech more times than I can remember. When I need a reminder of how precious our liberty is and how unique the United States of America is in the annals of history, I simply pull out my hard-copy and receive a jolt of pride and humility up my spine.

Pride in the fact that I'm part of the legacy of those great men and women who have come before me and who have shaped the course of this nation.

Humility in recognizing that we cannot rest on their laurels and must continue to uphold the tenents that our Forefathers held forth.

I pledge to all of you on this day that I will continue to work, in both my private and public life, to make sure that this "American Experiment" will not disappear in the shifting sands of time.

God Bless you all...

HAPPY INDEPENDENCE DAY !!! -{great post Thai, happy 4^th to you and yours too - LN}

The Great Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming SCAM !!!

Ok - since I promised long ago to post the stuff I had on CAGW (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming) CAGW is just another way of saying that Man will cause catastrophic changes to the Earth by releasing CO2).

Let me give you a nice image ok??? This;

comes courtesy of Pete Du Pont, former governor of Delaware and Chairman of the National Center for Policy Analysis

I'll give you a nice quote from it;

When Eric the Red led the Norwegian Vikings to Greenland in the late 900s, it was an ice-free farm country--grass for sheep and cattle, open water for fishing, a livable climate--so good a colony that by 1100 there were 3,000 people living there. Then came the Ice Age. By 1400, average temperatures had declined by 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit, the glaciers had crushed southward across the farmlands and harbors, and the Vikings did not survive.

Such global temperature fluctuations are not surprising, for looking back in history we see a regular pattern of warming and cooling. From 200 B.C. to A.D. 600 saw the Roman Warming period; from 600 to 900, the cold period of the Dark Ages; from 900 to 1300 was the Medieval warming period; and 1300 to 1850, the Little Ice Age.

During the 20th century the earth did indeed warm--by 1 degree Fahrenheit. But a look at the data shows that within the century temperatures varied with time: from 1900 to 1910 the world cooled; from 1910 to 1940 it warmed; from 1940 to the late 1970s it cooled again, and since then it has been warming. Today our climate is 1/20th of a degree Fahrenheit warmer than it was in 2001.

That Little Ice Age (which is a matter of GEOLOGIC RECORD), was conveniently ignored when some "scientists" produced the "Hockey Stick" a few years ago which purported to show an alarming spike in global temperatures. Well the Hockey stick was a result of a flawed study that was done. Go here and read al lthe articles on the site which will show how flawed the "Hockey Stick" is here;

Interestingly enough, the Climate Porn people pounced on it to prove their own statements that the debate was settled.

So, the Climate Porn people state that the science is "settled". They states that Man is warming the Earth through his release of CO2 into the atmosphere. Now, these people obviously ignore(d) that the Earth has been warming and cooling in cycles for millenia now but why bother to actually pay attention to the geologic record when you have a fantastic story to sell...hmmm? I mean after all, no news story leads with "A Plane Landed Safely today at Heathrow airport". Since it isn't sensational, it is therefore not newsworthy.

Same with climate science. I'll explain below...

The Science is "settled" they say... Really ?????!!!!!!!

Thats news to ...

--The IPCC Report - the first chapter of IPCC AR4 deals with the historical overview of climate change science. In that overview, cloud modeling is discussed. On page 114 we are treated to the following statement;

The strong effect of cloud processes on model sensitivities to greenhouse gases was emphasized further through a now-classic set of General Circulation Model (GCM) experiments, carried out by Senior and Mitchell (1993). They produced global surface temperature changes (due to doubled atmospheric CO2 concentration) ranging from 1.9°C to 5.4°C, simply by altering the way that cloud radiative properties were treated in the model. It is somewhat unsettling that the results of a complex climate model can be so drastically altered by substituting one reasonable cloud parameterization for another, thereby approximately replicating the overall inter-model range of sensitivities.

On Page 116 it reveals the next surprise;

The scientific community realized long ago that using adequate data to constrain models was the only way to solve this problem. However, existing data have not yet brought about any reduction in the existing range of simulated cloud feedbacks

Seems like the only thing that is settled here is how little we know about clouds.

--Saying the science is settled and or that Al Gore's movie is fact is also news to;

Marlo Lewis, Jr. (Senior Fellow, Competitive Enterprise Institute) who states the following about Al Gore's fictional movie:

In Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth, the only facts and studies considered are those convenient to Gore's scare-them-green agenda. And in many instances, he distorts the evidence he cites. In fact, nearly every significant statement Gore makes regarding climate science and climate policy is either one sided, misleading, exaggerated, speculative, or wrong.

Al Gore poo-pooed him on Oprah's show so Marlo responded here (YouTube link);

The CEI has put together a series of response videos on Gore's movie here;

Go here to read CEI's the Skeptics Guide to An Inconvenient Truth here;

--Going on...

Here's another voice who doubts that the science is "settled";

In it, you will see this money quote;

To be sure, the IPCC does an impressive job of mobilizing experts to
produce a report it hopes will be of service to the world. No one should
trivialize this achievement. But let's not make the error of allowing a
glossy summary to trivialize the complexities and uncertainties in
climate change. After all, if the issues were so simple, you wouldn't
need 3,700 experts to write the report. It is a paradox that some of the
strongest claims of unanimity in science are made on a subject involving some of the deepest intellectual disagreements and uncertainties.

--Its not settled for...

Fred Singer (Distinguished Research Professor at George Mason University and Professor Emeritus of environmental science at the University of Virginia) and Dennis Avery, who write about it in their book titled Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1500 years which can be obtained here;

--Nor is is settled for

David Bromwich, Professor of Atmospheric Sciences in the Department of Geography, and researcher with the Byrd Polar Research Center at Ohio State University, who reported the following;

A new report on climate over the world's southernmost continent shows that temperatures during the late 20th century did not climb as had been predicted by many global climate models

...in this press release;

--Nor is it settled science for Doug Hoyt who put together a climate model scorecard to show how accurate those models, that the Climate Porn researches use, really are...

The scorecard can be found here;

Go see it for yourself as it will lead you to more in-depth debunking of some of the models predictions. But for the lazy here is the final tally;

The final score is 1-27-4. One confirmed prediction, 27 disconfirmed, and 4 undetermined.

Hoyt has also published a book titled "The Role of the Sun in Climate Change" :

--Nor is it settled for Roy Spencer who asks questions based upon Richard Lindzen's work at MIT;

Here's a nice quote from this page;

The fact is, science doesn't understand why these natural climate variations occur, and can not reliably distinguish between natural and possible human influences on global temperatures. So, if scientists have no other natural explanation for a warming trend, they tend to assume that it is manmade

Here's his bio (lest you disbelieve based upon credentials)

Roy W. Spencer received his PhD in meteorology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 1981. He has been a Principal Research Scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville since 2001, before which we was a Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center where he received NASA's Exceptional Scientific Achievement Medal. Dr. Spencer is the U.S. Science Team leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA's Aqua satellite. His research has been entirely supported by U.S. government agencies: NASA, NOAA, and DOE

Going on...

--Lawrence Solomon has been publishing a series called "The Deniers" in the Canada's National Post. This series can be found here;

So thats more scientists who think that this debate is "settled"?? Clearly, some people have a peculiar definitions of the word "settled".

Here's the last one that Solomon did. It concerns French scientist Claude Allegre's recantation of his Climate Porn past. Like many of the deniers he is a prominent scientist. Unlike many of the deniers Monsieur Allegre he was on the Climate Porn side of this issue for many years. Here's someone with relevant expertise who changed his mind just when the evidence for human induced global warming became sacrosanct? What gives??? Well read about it here and find out why he's changed his tune;

--Climate Scientist Roger Pielke Sr who discovered a HUGE mistake in the IPCC summary;

Pielke also has this to say;

Recently the SPM of IPCC’s AR4 stated that it’s now very likely that most of the warming of the last 50 years is the result of anthropogenic CO2. Are Global Circulation Models crucial to ‘prove’ that AGW is already taking place the last 50 years? My answer is ‘no’. The primary aspect that GCM’s have claimed to be able to show skillfully is a globally averaged surface temperature trend (link). But the models do this without including all the forcings. The models are incomplete. What they have shown is that CO2 is just one important climate forcing, but the 2005 National Research Council report Radiative Forcing of Climate Change: Expanding the Concept and Addressing Uncertainties shows there are other first order climate forcings. Another problem is that our research suggests that the actual warming, particularly the minimum near surface-air temperatures on land, have been overstated. There is a warm bias in these data. So if the models agree with the temperature trends, they do this, at least in part, for the wrong reasons.

His comments can be found here;

-- Richard Lindzen (from some backwater university called MIT) wrote an article for Newsweek;

In it he concludes;

The alleged solutions have more potential for catastrophe than the putative problem. The conclusion of the late climate scientist Roger Revelle—Al Gore's supposed mentor—is worth pondering: the evidence for global warming thus far doesn't warrant any action unless it is justifiable on grounds that have nothing to do with climate.

You'll note that his bio states this;

Lindzen is the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. His research has always been funded exclusively by the U.S. government. He receives no funding from any energy companies

Now about that CONCENSUS of scientists that supposedly underpins the CAGW theory... here's what Lindzen has to say

It's not 2,500 people offering their consensus, I participated in that. Each person who is an author writes one or two pages in conjunction with someone else. They travel around the world several times a year for several years to write it and the summary for policymakers has the input of about 13 of the scientists, but ultimately, it is written by representatives of governments, of environmental organizations like the Union of Concerned Scientists, and industrial organizations, each seeking their own benefit

The link is here;

In other words - this supposed consensus only includes scientists having agreed on the one page to page-and-a-half that they were tasked with drafting (usually with one or two other scientists). No one is asked if they agree with the report as a whole, let alone the Summary drafted by bureaucrats, politicians and lobbyists.

--The Great Global Warming Swindle (which blows gore and CAGW theorists out of the water) is on Youtube and is in 9 different parts (had to be broken up into 9 parts due to Youtube restrictions)

Part 1:(youtube links 1-9) Part 2: Part 3: Part 4: Part 5: Part 6: Part 7: Part 8: Part 9:

This documentary exposes the lie behind the Climate Porn side of the debate. among that the lie that the CO2 emissions preceeded the rise in temperature. If that were thew case, then why did the Earth warm and cool before Man ever arrived?? Think also back to your physics class in school. A cold liquid retains more gas than a hotter liquid. Water contains not only H2O but also traps CO2 and O2 and other gases. When water is heated it releases these gases. The Earth's surface is mostly water. When the temperature rises, the CO2 then gets released into ther atmosphere. It is simple physics my friends. The Climate Porn people have the relationship exactly BACKWARDS and there are Artic Ice core studies that have shown this to be the case.

--- Winding this down (because this post is WAY too long) I'll leave you with the ramblings of a radio host that thinks the way I do...

His blog can be found here;

Look for his post on Global Warming which contains this really good synopsis of where we are;

First, let's identify the "Global Warming" fanatics for what they really are: radical Socialists hell bent on controlling everything people do in life, and delivering a mortal blow to capitalist economies worldwide. (Or, if nothing else, America's economy itself, will do.) It's true, the Earth has been on a warming TREND lately. And increased CO2 emissions surely account for SOME of it. Everything else is nothing but an educated guess. Following the U.N. report, "Global Warming" fanatics declared that "the debate is over." Oh, really? Over? Since when does science EVER put away its labcoats and clipboards and say: "Okay. That's that. Stop your experiments. We don't need to know anything else."
In other words, they want us to believe that...

a. They have "figured everything out" regarding Global Warming. All of it. Every piece of data, every method of analysis, every alternate theory. "They" now know exactly how this all works. All the incredibly complex global interactions of sun, earth, clouds, wind, oceans, land, gases, volcanoes, factories, jungles, cow farts, jet streams, snowstorms, hurricanes, landslides, ice caps, currents, landfills, wildfires, lakes, streams, bogs, bays, puddles, snowbanks….. all of it! They've got a huge chalkboard like the one you saw in "Good Will Hunting" that explains it all.

b. It is OUR fault.

c. We MUST act NOW, or else CATASTROPHE is imminent.

d. In addition to having "solved" what the "problem" is, the same geniuses have simultaneously and conveniently ALSO "solved" the problem of what is the "solution." Thank you. That was handy.

e. We can "afford it." Trust them.

Its surprising that a sports radio host can cut through all the B.S. and remind us all that science never puts away the labcoats.

--Finally I'll leave you with the comedic stylings of Lewis Black who has a few things to say about the subject here on Hotair;

Conclusion ??? --> Global Warming --> A Market correction for the Global Cooling of the 1970's

(I warned you guys I didn't want to have to wade back into this debate b/c I was afraid of posting too much and alas although I posted alot, I have only posted about 1/2 of what I have on this subject on just this one harddrive - I have tons of other stuff as well)

{edited some links and formatted for style ~ LN}

THERE GOES SOCIAL SECURITY!!! or "Why I Might Be Voting For Myself in 2008" !!

CAUTION: STREAM OF CONSCIOUSNESS RANT BELOW>>>

I HAVE HAD IT !!!

The Senate reached a "compromise" on illegal immigration yesterday.

Let me re-phrase that for you...

The Senate Republicans got rolled by Teddy Kennedy and agreed to a bill granting AMNESTY to lawbreakers !!!

Read about it here;

The plan, which was still being finalized, allows the estimated 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens in the United States to come forward and receive probationary status

So...people who are waiting in their home countries for YEARS...playing by the rules get shafted so the Senators can be seen as "doing something" on illegal immigration??? Senators, the only thing worse than doing nothing is doing something so mind-numblingly stupid and crafting a bill that effectively rewards law-breaking.

This bill is so eerily similar to the 1986 bill that it is scary...

Take a look at what Ed Meese (Reagan's Attorney General) has to say about the 1986 Amnesty Bill here;

President Reagan set out to correct the loss of control at our borders. Border security and enforcement of immigration laws would be greatly strengthened—in particular, through sanctions against employers who hired illegal immigrants. If jobs were the attraction for illegal immigrants, then cutting off that option was crucial.

He also agreed with the legislation in adjusting the status of immigrants—even if they had entered illegally—who were law-abiding long-term residents, many of whom had children in the United States. Illegal immigrants who could establish that they had resided in America continuously for five years would be granted temporary resident status, which could be upgraded to permanent residency after 18 months and, after another five years, to citizenship. It wasn’t automatic. They had to pay application fees, learn to speak English, understand American civics, pass a medical exam and register for military selective service. Those with convictions for a felony or three misdemeanors were ineligible.

So... how well did THAT turn out... I wonder ??? Anyone see any real ENFORCEMENT going on?? Anyone see the borders locked down and illegal immigrants numbers declining? Nope??!! Me either ...

I turns out that there is a huge long-term cost to this AMNESTY bill. It will strain our social services as the people who come herei llegally will be marginally employable and will not be a net-positive taxpayer. In other words, they will use up more resources than they contirbute. Now this is bad enough when it is home-grown people, but immigration is about controlling the flow of immigrants through our borders so that we are stronger..not weaker.

So with this drain on our local, state and federal coffers what do you think they governments are gonna do?? Either raise taxes or lower benefits on such things as Social Security. Being that I'm 38 years old...I'm SCREWED !! At least in terms of being able to enjoy the same level of Soc. Security benefits that the generations before me enjoyed. And until that time, my taxes are going to go up to pay for the welfare benefits of people that SHOULD NOT BE HERE !!! It is bad enough that the government is robbing Peter to pay Paul. Its even worse when he robs Peter to pay Paul and Jose' and Jesus and Carmen and Abdullah, etc...

Think I'm crazy? Then you outta take a look at the testimony of Robert Rector (Heritage Foundation) before the House Judiciary Committee;

Here is some of what he had to say;

The National Academy of Sciences in a very comprehensive study of the fiscal impact of immigration said that each high school dropout immigrant coming into the United States costs the taxpayers of the United States about $100,000 over the course of his lifetime. That would mean if you took that figure, and that's net of the taxes that he puts in, if you took that figure and applies it to the current illegal population it would indeed result in something like a net cost of a half a trillion dollars over the course of lifetime.

Now, with respect to the costs of the Senate bill, the Senate bill one of its key features is to give amnesty to around 10 million current illegal immigrants. That means that they will probably pay more in taxes, but it also means that they're eligible for a much wider variety of welfare programs. And as a result of that increased welfare eligibility, I calculate that the amnesty alone would have a direct cost of around $16 billion a year.

He goes on to explain other unexpected costs and his main zinger was this one;

We have a very expensive, very large welfare system in the United States. We simply cannot make it unconditionally available to huge numbers of people from less developed nations

You can read the other people's testimony as well and you'll find yourself asking the same question... who is gonna pay for all of this??

Especially when the bill allows so many "set asides" by any Administration so that even the $5000 fine can be waived. And you know it WILL be waived when Reid and Pelosi complain that making someone who makes $3/hour pay a $5000 fine is "heartless" and "cruel" and something only "despicable Republicans do". and then "poof" - there goes the fine.

Check out some blog reactions here;

Hotair hates it...

As does Michelle Malkin;

Redstate also pans it ;

Powerline doesn't like it;

Hugh Hewitt absolutely hates it like I do;

In short - we have another Harriet Myers situation here. It takes everyone calling their Representatives and Senators and letting them know that if they vote for this deal they are going to lose their next primary or general election. I have contacted Sen. Jon Kyl here: Contact

Sen. Kyl is the point man for those who want to keep this Amnesty from proceeding to the President's desk.

I told Sen Kyl that I would not support the Senate's Campaign Committee any longer if any GOP senator voted for that bill. Additionally, my money and support would instead go to the primary challenger of those Senators. I may not be one of their constituents and they may think they don't have to listen to me as I cannot vote for or against them. But I CAN help BANKROLL their opponent. Thats the beautiful thing about campaign contributions and the internet.

My next email is to my Senior Senator of Virginia John Warner-R. He is going to get the same message (along with the counterparts in the House).

I had been warming up to McCain due to his stance on the war and finishing the job, etc... Many others were too. He's finished now... you heard it here first. He will NOT get the Republican nomination for President in 2008.

I'm serious...I feel like Ronald Reagan did when he said that he didn't leave the Democrat Party - it left him (yes Reagan was an FDR Democrat at one time).

If the GOP keeps this charade (of acting like Democrats) up...on what basis do they have a right to come looking for our votes in 2008??

If they keep acting like de facto Democrats and letting Teddy roll them then I have no qualms with letting them lose big in 2008.

I'd rather get stabbed (with the proverbial knife) in my chest by the Dems than in the back by the Repubs.
Filed: democrats, republicans, illegal immigration, Fatah, amnesty, BlogPower, Thaiphoon

Say Hello to your New Cellmate Mrs. Clinton !!!

So I'm perusing the net tonight (on the rare moments recently when I have the time) and I came across this.

It appears the worst Senator in the US has apparently been a naughty-girl !! IF the story proves true ( and God I hope it does). We could be seeing the end of Hillary's Presidential campaign...the end of her Senate career... and the beginning of her stay at a federal penitentiary.

It appears that the fundraiser for her Senate campaign that a donor essentially footed the bill for was in fact coordinated (in part) by Clinton. Additionally, the tape implicates her directly soliciting entertainers (which therefore provided "in-kind" contributions by performing). Helping people illegally contribute amounts exceeding $25,000 is a big no-no according to federal election law (at least the last time I looked).

Go here for the story;

Peter Franklin Paul, in a civil fraud suit filed against Bill and Hillary Clinton, claims the former president destroyed his entertainment company to get out of a $17 million deal in which Clinton promised to promote the firm in exchange for stock, cash options and massive contributions to his wife's 2000 campaign. Paul contends he was directed by the Clintons and Democratic Party leaders to foot the bill for a lavish Hollywood gala and fund-raiser prior to the 2000 election that eventually cost him nearly $2 million.

Sen. Clinton has claimed through her spokesman Howard Wolfson that Paul gave no money to her campaign, and her supporters have denied she had any anything to do with coordinating the August 2000 event or soliciting contributions directly from donors. Doing so would make Paul's substantial contributions a direct donation to her Senate campaign rather than her joint fundraising committee, violating federal statutes that limit "hard money" contributions to a candidate to $2,000 per person. Furthermore, knowingly accepting or soliciting $25,000 or more in a calendar year is a felony carrying a prison sentence of up to five years

Clinton's campaign has counted the more than $800,000 of in-kind contributions it reported in a 2006 amended FEC report for the Hollywood Gala as indirect, or "soft money," given to the New York Senate 2000 Committee, a state account that was run jointly by Clinton, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and the New York State Democratic Party.

But the videotape, with clear audio of Sen. Clinton, documents her direct knowledge and involvement with Paul in producing the Hollywood fund-raiser and indicates she participated in solicitation of entertainers, whose in-kind contributions of their services would also constitute illegal contributions exceeding $25,000.

She'd better hope she gets the same sweetheart deal Sandy Berger received !!

One tip Mrs. Clinton - don't count on any conjugal visits from Bill !!

Gun Control - Where We're Headed !!! and ... Second Amendment Second Reading !!!

Ok - so our friends from across the ponds seem to think us Americans would do better to engage in more gun control (read: gun confiscation).

So I thought I'd post these gems that I saved many years ago.

The first one is from Robert Waters and it is called
"Gun Control - Where We're Headed!!"

You're sound asleep when you hear a thump outside your bedroom door. Half awake, and nearly paralyzed with fear, you hear muffled whispers. At least two people have broken into your house and are moving your way. With your heart pumping, you reach down beside your bed and pick up your shotgun. You rack a shell into the chamber, then inch toward the door and open it. In the darkness, you make out two shadows.

One holds something that looks like a crowbar. When the intruder brandishes it as if to strike, you raise the shotgun and fire. The blast knocks both thugs to the floor. One writhes and screams while the second man crawls to the front door and lurches outside.

As you pick up the telephone to call police, you know you're in trouble. In your country, most guns were outlawed years before, and the few that are privately owned are so stringently regulated as to make them useless. Yours was never registered.

Police arrive and inform you that the second burglar has died. They arrest you for First Degree Murder and Illegal Possession of a Firearm. When you talk to your attorney, he tells you not to worry: authorities will probably plea the case down to manslaughter.

"What kind of sentence will I get?" you ask.

"Only ten-to-twelve years," he replies, as if that's nothing. "Behave yourself, and you'll be out in seven." The next day, the shooting is the lead story in the local newspaper.

Somehow, you're portrayed as an eccentric vigilante while the two men you shot are represented as choirboys. Their friends and relatives can't find an unkind word to say about them. Buried deep down in the article, authorities acknowledge that both "victims" have been arrested numerous times. But the next day's headline says it all: "Lovable Rogue Son Didn't Deserve to Die." The thieves have been transformed from career criminals into Robin Hood type pranksters. As the days wear on, the story takes wings. The national media picks it up, then the international media. The surviving burglar has become a folk hero.

Your attorney says the thief is preparing to sue you, and he'll probably win.

The media publishes reports that your home has been burglarized several times in the past and that you've been critical of local police for their lack of effort in apprehending the suspects. After the last break-in, you told your neighbor that you would be prepared next time. The District Attorney uses this to allege that you were lying in wait for the burglars.

A few months later, you go to trial. The charges haven't been reduced, as your lawyer had so confidently predicted. When you take the stand, your anger at the injustice of it all works against you. Prosecutors paint a picture of you as a mean, vengeful man. It doesn't take long for the jury to convict you of all charges.

The judge sentences you to life in prison.

This case really happened. (link)

Go read the whole thing...

You can then draw your own conclusions as to which society you'd rather live in.

The second article is by Daniel Polsby who argues that we should treat the Second Amendment as normal Constitutional Law and not as some bastard child that isn't deserving of sitting at the same table as the others...

Normal constitutional argument begins with text.

The first question to consider, then, is:

What does the Constitution say about the right to keep and bear arms? There seem to be two main theories of what sense is conveyed by the language of the Second Amendment. The theory that is most often encountered by the intelligent lay public reads the words to say something like:

"In order to make themselves secure, states have a right to have a well regulated militia, and Congress may not restrict state regulation of militia members' weapons."

This is approximately the interpretation favored by most major newspapers' editorial writers, by gun control groups, and by a broad swath of conventional public opinion, running the partisan gamut from left (e.g., Rep. Charles Schumer of New York) to right (e.g., President Nixon) and most political shades in between.

But in places where close attention is paid to what words actually say, the states'-rights reading of the Second Amendment has attracted surprisingly little support. After all, the Second Amendment does not say;

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, shall not be infringed."

Nor do the words of the amendment assert that;

"the right of the people to keep and bear arms"

is conditional upon membership in some sort of organized soldiery like the National Guard. Indeed, if there is conditional language in the Second Amendment at all, evidently the contingency runs the other way:

"Because the people have a right to keep and bear arms, states will be assured of the well regulated militias that are necessary for their security."

Some version of this reading is supported by almost all of the constitutional historians and lawyers who have published research on the subject. Indeed, this view is so dominant in the academy that Garry Wills, the lone dissenter among historians on the proper reading of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms," has dubbed it the Standard Model of the Second Amendment. (link)

Go read the whole thing...

I think Polsby's argument is pretty much rock-solid.

Filed:Constitution, 2nd Amendment, gun laws, Thaiphoon

A Few Random Thoughts to Pass the Time

So this post will contain a few items that are relatively unrelated. These are mostly meant to highlight items in the news or organizations I feel deserve to be recognized.

I've been holding onto this next story since October and have searched in vain to find it and finally found it hidden in a folder on a spare laptop I was using then.

It is about an Aleutian tribe telling Hugo Chavez (the South American version of Fidel Castro but with Oil) to go to hell because of his remarks at the UN comparing Bush to the Devil...

From the Associated Press (Oct. 2006)

"The Aleutian Pribilof Islands Association, a nonprofit organization that represents native Aleuts in Alaska, has rejected lower cost heating oil from Venezuela because of Hugo Chavez's remarks at the UN. These are among the poorest people in the entire state of Alaska and they pay some of the highest oil prices because of the high cost of transportation. Native villagers are refusing free heating oil from Venezuela, on the patriotic principle that no foreigner has the right to call their president 'the devil'"

Many Aleut communities are poor, so this was a show of real patriotism — putting country before self. This is something to remember the next time you see those insipid Citgo free-heating-oil commercials on TV.

I urge you to send donations to this community when you can (yes I know its late for this past winter but you could do this on a yearly basis if you'd like making it a annual reminder that there are true patriots in our midst);

Donations to help the villages affected can be made at a Key Bank account titled:
" Unangan Energy Assistance Fund" C/O Key Bank # 729681009001
Donations can be made at any Key Bank Branch Nationwide or Can be mailed to:

Unangan Energy Assistance Fund
c/o Aleutian Pribilof Islands Association
201 East Third Avenue
Anchorage , Alaska 99501

or

Unangan Energy Assistance Fund
c/o Key Bank
P.O. Box 110420
Anchorage , AK 99510

Donations are tax deductible as a contribution to a 501 c 3 Not For Profit TIN # 92-0073013

{heh, kind of ironic that the transport costs of oil in Alaska are so high considering the oil in Alaska - LN}

======================================================================

Ok now my next point.

Somewhere in the world a soldier sleeps far away from his home. He is sleeping in his bunk/foxhole/firing position far away from the comfy beds that we go to everynight after watching hours upon hours of TV and gorging on instant gratification entertainment.

What these soldiers could use is someone writing to them and sending them "care packages". You don't need to know the soldier... in fact you don't even have to already know how to get the letters and packages to them.

All you need to do is go to this website:

The website explains its mission thusly;

Sergeant Brian Horn from LaPlata, Maryland, an Army Infantry Soldier with the 173rd Airborne Brigade was in the Kirkuk area of Iraq when he started the idea of Any Soldier® to help care for his soldiers. He agreed to distribute packages that came to him with "Attn: Any Soldier" in his address to soldiers who didn't get mail.
Brian later completed a tour in Afghanistan and is now home, but AnySoldier.com continues larger then ever.
Any Soldier Inc. started in August 2003 as a simple family effort to help the soldiers in one Army unit, thus our name. Due to overwhelming requests, on 1 January 2004 the Any Soldier® effort was expanded to include any member, of any of the Armed Forces in harms way

My brother set himself up to receive the packages for the guys in his unit. His unit then received alot of these packages and letters (along with the ones I and the other family members sent to them). My brother and his buddies tell me that these packages really mean the world to the soldiers who "walk the wall", keeping us safe from harm.

The creator of AnySoldier gives us the same insight with this quote'

"I couldn't be any more proud to have been apart of such an honorable organization as AnySoldier.com. This is priceless, and I would like to thank all of you who entrusted me to be your contact. To have been able to distribute the mail personally as a contact to soldiers who get next to no mail at all and for that brief moment see the look of hope in their faces of good things to come. The hope that somebody out there does care. That somebody does in fact love them as they deservingly should be loved. The hope that some day their involvement in the fight on terror was to preserve those that believed in them so much through and through, until their fight was done. We fight so that maybe, just maybe your grandchildren won't have to.
Pray for us in all that we do."
Sergeant Brian Horn
Afghanistan, Nov 2005

Please go and participate in this program. It really takes very little time out of your day and makes a monumental impact on the lives of our servicemembers.

Another such program is also found here;

=================================================

"Well Thai" -you'll say- "what about the soldiers who come home and are wounded and are bieng cared for?" {careful speaking to yourself like that Thai :) saw Hoyo said to tell you hi -LN}
Good question my friend...

For that there is my next organization;

Aleethia

In DC there are Walter Reed Army Medical Center and National Naval Medical Center that treat wounded soldiers (I have previously mentioned that my brother was being treated at Walter Reed). Aleethia seeks to help ease the burden of recuperation at these hospitals by giving them time away from the hospitals themselves and getting them out to the "real world".

Aleethia's mission is as follows;

Supporting Those Who Serve

The mission of the Aleethia Foundation is to support the newly injured troops with short-term therapeutic recreation. The doctors have determined that it is beneficial for the newly injured troops to get out of the hospital environment occasionally. Our mission is to help them get out for meals, movies, sightseeing, and visits to interesting sites.

Our main focus is the Friday Night Dinners for the wounded troops from Walter Reed Army Medical Center and National Naval Medical Center

What are the Friday Night Dinners?

They are dinners at Fran O'Briens Stadium Steakhouse that are donated to the troops as a measure of saying "Thank You".

Here's how Aleethia began and has evolved;

How The Aleethia Foundation Began

The Aleethia Foundation was started to provide a method of tax-deductible contributions to fund Friday Night Dinners at Fran O’Brien’s Stadium Steakhouse. In the process of providing the dinners, we found some of the troops in need of small financial grants ($1,500 to $2,500) to bridge different financial situations. We then expanded our mission to providing as many of these small grants as we could. We also found a need to do more than just the dinners, so we started supplying other short-term recreational activities such as siteseeing drives, trips to movies, and smaller dinner situations.

We are a small group of volunteers. There is no paid staff and no overhead. We spend all collected money on the troops.

Please go to the site and see what you can do to assist them either by donating money or your time. I guarantee it will be worth it to the organization, to you and most of all, to the soldiers.

=========================================================

Last but not least...another organization helping soldiers and their families.

Each year there is a fundraiser for Fisher House^TM

What is Fisher House^TM? Well... I know what it is...but I'll let Fisher House^TM explain who they are to you instead.

The Fisher House™ program is a unique private-public partnership that supports America's military in their time of need. The program recognizes the special sacrifices of our men and women in uniform and the hardships of military service by meeting a humanitarian need beyond that normally provided by the Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs.

Because members of the military and their families are stationed worldwide and must often travel great distances for specialized medical care, Fisher House™ Foundation donates "comfort homes," built on the grounds of major military and VA medical centers. These homes enable family members to be close to a loved one at the most stressful times - during the hospitalization for an unexpected illness, disease, or injury.

There is at least one Fisher House™ at every major military medical center to assist families in need and to ensure that they are provided with the comforts of home in a supportive environment. Annually, the Fisher House™ program serves more than 8,500 families, and have made available more than two million days of lodging to family members since the program originated in 1990. Based on a comparison of fees at a Fisher House™ (the average charge is less than $10 per family per day, with many locations offering rooms at no cost) with commercial lodging facilities in the same area, it is estimated that families have saved more than $60 million by staying at a Fisher House™ since the program began.

In addition to constructing new houses, Fisher House™ Foundation continues to support existing Fisher Houses™ and help individual military families in need. Families and friends of patients at any of the military's hospitals can now receive up-to-the-minute reports on a loved one by going to the patient's own customized web page, thanks to new services provided through CaringBridge. We are also proud to administer and sponsor Scholarships for Military Children, the Hero Miles program, and co-sponsor the Newman's Own Award.

As you can see, Fisher House^TM fills a vital role in the recovery of wounded troops as well as accomodations for their families who stay with them during recovery. Please go to their site and participate as much as you can (either via donation of money /services or time).



Ok ... I'll return you to your normal schedule of talking about the issues. I just wanted to highlight a few organizations that really deserve the recognition.

The Copperheads - Lincolns opponents in the North

Ok - since doubt has been shed on the Democrats' opposition to the US Civil War I though I'd post again with this.

Go here and get this book.

It is titled : Copperheads - The Rise and Fall of Lincoln's Opponents in the North

It is written by historian Jennifer Weber. In this book Ms. Weber identifies the “Peace Democrats,” who were the precursors to the Sheehan/Fondas of today.

MacKubin Thomas Owens has a great article on this book at National Review Online.

Please go here and read it for yourself;

A few quotes from both the article and the book...

Owens writes;

In contradistinction to the claims of many earlier historians, Weber argues persuasively that the Northern anti-war movement was far from a peripheral phenomenon. Disaffection with the war in the North was widespread and the influence of the Peace Democrats on the Democratic party was substantial. During the election of 1864, the Copperheads wrote the platform of the Democratic party, and one of their own, Rep. George H. Pendleton of Ohio, was the party’s candidate for vice president. Until Farragut’s victory at Mobile Bay, Sherman’s capture of Atlanta, and Sheridan’s success in driving the Confederates from the Shenandoah Valley in the late summer and fall of 1864, hostility toward the war was so profound in the North that Lincoln believed he would lose the election.

Sound familiar?

It gets worse... Owens writes;

The fact is that many Union soldiers came to despise the Copperheads more than they disdained the Rebels. In the words of an assistant surgeon of an Iowa regiment, “it is a common saying here that if we are whipped, it will be by Northern votes, not by Southern bullets. The army regard the result of the late [fall 1862] elections as at least prolonging the war.”

Weber quotes the response of a group of Indiana soldiers to letters from Copperhead “friends” back home:

Your letter shows you to be a cowardly traitor. No traitor can be my friend; if you cannot renounce your allegiance to the Copperhead scoundrels and own your allegiance to the Government which has always protected you, you are my enemy, and I wish you were in the ranks of my open, avowed, and manly enemies, that I might put a ball through your black heart, and send your soul to the Arch Rebel himself.

I'll add a final quote from Owens for good measure...

For instance, Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts and Rep. Charles Rangel have suggested that soldiers fighting in Iraq are there because they are not smart enough to do anything else. Sen. Richard Durbin of Illinois has suggested a similarity between the conduct of U.S. troops in Iraq and that of Nazi soldiers in World War II. His Illinois colleagues, Sen. Barack Obama, claimed that the lives of soldiers lost in Iraq were “wasted.” And recently William Arkin, a military analyst writing online for the Washington Post, said of American soldiers that they are “mercenaries” who had little business taking critics of the war to task.

The Copperheads often abandoned all decency in their pursuit of American defeat in the Civil War. One Connecticut Copperhead told his neighbors that he hoped that all the men who went to fight for the Union cause would “leave their Bones to Bleach on the soil” of the South. The heirs of the Copperheads in today’s Democratic party are animated by the same perverted spirit with regard to the war in Iraq. Nothing captures the essence of today’s depraved Copperhead perspective better than the following e-mail, which unfortunately is only one example of the sort of communication I have received all too often in response to articles of mine over the past few months;

Dear Mr. Owens

You write, "It is hard to conduct military operations when a chorus of eunuchs is describing every action we take as a violation of everything that America stands for, a quagmire in which we are doomed to failure, and a waste of American lives."

But Mr. Owens, I believe that those three beliefs are true. On what grounds can I be barred from speaking them in public? Because speaking them will undermine American goals in Iraq? Bless you, sir, that's what I want to do in the first place. I am confident that U.S. forces will be driven from Iraq, and for that reason I am rather enjoying the war.

But doesn't hoping that American forces are driven from Iraq necessarily mean hoping that Americans soldiers will be killed there? Yes it does. Your soldiers are just a bunch of poor, dumb suckers that have been swindled out of their right to choose between good and evil. Quite a few of them are or will be swindled out of their eyes, legs, arms and lives. I didn't swindle them. President Bush did. If you're going to blame me for cheering their misery, what must you do to President Bush, whose policies are the cause of that misery?

Sounds like the Copperheads are alive and well today...doesn't it?

As for the book... I'm ordering it tomorrow.

Traitors !!! or Misguided???

I think I'm just about done with;

1.) liberals complaining that the Right is questioning their Patriotism when it comes to the War and combating Terrorism.

2.) people on the Right reflexively stating that we're not questioning their Patriotism, we're questioning their judgement.

Now, by-and-large I really do try to question the person's judgement instead of their underlying motives.

BUT ...

I think the past year (and recent events such as this weekend) have gradually started pushing me to question their Patriotism ( and to hell with their judgement) !!!

Case in point... Rosie O' Donnell

Rosie has been out there with many recent statements.

Here she laments Khalid Sheikh Muhammed (KSM) being robbed of his "humanity"

Check out HotAir's recap on this and her distortions.

She went nuclear on Elizabeth Hasselbeck because she (Hasslebeck) called KSM a "terrorist,".

Rosie O'Donnell said, and I quote...

"Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah! You're going to rob him of his humanity now. You want to rob him of his humanity by calling him a terrorist."

Hmmm...the guy who planned the '93 WTC bombing and 9/11 - as well as Jose Padilla's mission - which all resulted in ( or attempted to result in) the deaths of thousands of innocent people (each of whom was robbed of more than just their "humanity"), is somehow just some innocent guy who was walking down Rodeo Drive and snatched up and "robbed of his humanity"?

Is she serious?? If it were left to just this comment I'd state that she was a few sandwiches short of a picnic.

In any other war these non-uniformed combatants would've been lined up and shot right there on the battlefield. For some reason Rosie thinks we should treat them like college students playing a prank instead of real killers trying to annihilate a nation.

But it gets better...

Apparently Rosie thinks 9/11 was an "inside job"...

So - its not a big leap to see where she's going with this. Apparently Pres. Bush ordered 9/11 in order to destroy WTC 7 and the files concerning Enron and WorldCom but to cover it up, we had to destroy the twin towers too.

Forget the fact that its impossible for 9/11 to be an inside job. Apparently her Bush-hatred has rendered her delusional. Or is she??

So - she thinks Bush ordered 9/11 and thinks we should be playing patty-cake with terrorists.

She has made repeated statements that Christianity is more dangerous than radical Islam.

She has repeatedly bad-mouthed this country in its war on terror even though, should we succumb to jihad, she'd be one of the first people executed by Al-Qaeda (for being homosexual).

Think I should still just be questioning her judgement?

I don't ... she is being politically calculating in her statements.

I no longer question her judgement. I am here and now...

Questioning her Patriotism.

You (dear reader) can do as you like. But I will no longer play the aforementioned "patriotism game" with Rosie.

Want some more patriots to fawn over?

Ok...

There was a recent anti-war protest in D.C. this weekend. The moonbats had planned to start at the Vietnam War Memorial and then go from there. Well...at the last anti-war march in D.C. the moonbats defaced the Capitol steps with spray-paint. Fearing the defacement of the Vietnam Wall, a Gathering of Eagles was formed to protect it.



A nice write-up of the counter-protest is here;

Another is here;

Here's a nice write-up by the American Thinker;

My buddy who went tells me that the anti-war protestors kept riding the metro trains back to the beginning of the march to give the illusion of a larger crowd than really was. This makes sense since the US Capitol police no longer gives estimates on crowd size but the DC Metro authority is used to get an estimated crowd size by examining rider-ship for the day vs. an average (baseline) day.

Now - check out the mirror protest in Portland. I'm linking to Michelle Malkin's site to show some pics of it;

Check out the first pic of the kid with the "Death to America" sign. Then check out the second pic down where they are not only burning the US flag...but an American soldier in effigy.

So much for supporting the troops and not the mission...huh ?

The unmitigated gall to not only diss your country but also the men and women who make it possible to enjoy each day of freedom is beyond my comprehension.

Yup folks. I'm pretty much done with the Sheehan/Fonda anti-war crowd. I no longer question just their judgement. I question their patriotism. Their lack of judgement is just a by-product of their lack of patriotism.


Let me give you some background before going forward.

My brother served in Afghanistan.

I was scared each day that he was over there. My wife will attest that for the year he was in-country I didn't sleep but a few hours at a time. Sometimes I had nightmares where it was just me and him in a foxhole fighting hand-to-hand with Islamists. At one time I was actually swinging at the imaginary islamists in my sleep (according to my wife). Each day I'd pore over news in Afghanistan. One time, I had heard of a US helicopter going down near his base and killing all aboard. I then stayed up all night just to get news that he was ok (he was - but he had been on that helicopter just hours beforehand). When he came home I drove him to Walter Reed Hospital to get treatment for his arm and his neck which were injured on one of his last missions in-country. He has never complained that he had to go (he is a highly successful person with 3 degrees, making 6-figures at his current job but joined the National Guard to do his duty) and hasn't whispered a word to me about the fact that he has endured consistent pain for the past 18 months. In fact he just came home today after surgery to repair the problem with his neck. If his unit is called up to go to Iraq and his neck injury is healed enough, he will go with his unit (he is the company 1rst Sgt). He doesn't necessarily want to be away from his wife and family but he says that as long as he is physically able to do his job, there is no way he's letting "his guys" go over there without him. I know others in his unit who are of the same mind.

These are better men than the "people" above who call themselves "patriots".

On a larger point ... when did we lose our will to support our country as a force for good? When did the supposed "intellectuals" become self-loathing America-bashers?

A patriot to me is one who supports this country and wants to see it do well. Encouraging our defeat and encouraging our enemy are not patriotic in my opinion.

I hate to say this (as I've reached the point of ranting now)... but since I'm worked up, I'm going to state the jingoistic statement here...

"My country ... right or wrong."

I view this country as a force for Good. And I view our actions in the War on Terror will be held in a positive light in history's hindsight. And I will revel in the day when the Rose O-Donnell's and the Sheehan/Fonda's and their anti-war sycophants are held up in the same regard as Benedict Arnold, Tokyo Rose, et al.



Thank you and goodnight.

The Sun Rises in the East and other things you never knew

This just in ... The Supreme Court is the highest court in the land !!!
This just in ... The Congress (both houses) craft legislation.
This just in ... The President of the US (POTUS) has the ability to fire US attorneys !!! < OH NO !!! RUN FOR THE BORDERS FOLKS - THIS IS CLEARLY A SIGN OF THE APOCALYPSE!!!>
Ok - I'll now remove tongue from cheek.

Just watched Pres. Bush's press conference earlier today (regarding allowing his advisors testifying before Congress) and wanted to say something I've not said to him in awhile...

"BRAVO MR. PRESIDENT !!!!"

Pres. Bush basically told the Democrats in Congress to go pound sand. AND ITS ABOUT TIME!!! Stand up and fight Mr. President. Stop letting people like us carry your water for you.

Lets face it my friends. This attorney firing scandal is anything BUT a scandal.

Lets get some facts out of the way;

1.) The US attorneys are not inherently vested with the power to prosecute citizens by the Constitution. That prerogative is vested in the Executive Branch.

2.) The Executive Branch consists of exactly ONE person. That would be the President. The Legislative consists of the Congress. The Judicial consists of the Supreme Court. The Executive begins and ends with the President as far as the Constitution is concerned.

3.) Since the Executive (POTUS) cannot be everywhere at once, he basically delegates his authority to prosecute to the various US attorneys nationwide.

4.) These attorneys follow the direction the POTUS lays down. So if one year, the POTUS decides there will be a focus on prosecuting money laundering over other crimes, it will be expected that the US attorneys will be aggressive in investigating and prosecuting such cases.

5.) These US attorneys owe their positions to Executive patronage. Which means that each US attorney serves at the pleasure of the POTUS.

6.) US attorneys serve 4 year terms at which time they are either let go or reappointed.

7.) The position as US attorney is therefore a POLITICAL position.

Therefore the POTUS can fire these attorneys ANYTIME HE WANTS TO AND FOR ANY REASON !!

In past presidencies it is natural that the POTUS would want "his people" in to make sure that his direction is followed. Past Presidents kind of eased out US attorneys as they went with one, HUGE, notable exception.

Bill Clinton

In 1993, Clinton fired 93 US attorneys (pretty much all of them)in order to put "his people" in place.

Noone batted an eye. No cries for an investigating from the Press or from Democrats who controlled Congress. In fact, we were told that these were political jobs and that Presidents always put their people in place. Which is not necessarily the case. Billie replaced all of the holdovers from previous GOP administrations without worrying about whether they were actually any good at their jobs. One of the attorneys he fired was investigating the Whitewater deal (anyone remember that?)

Fast forward 13 years and now a Republican president (after 6 years in office) fires a grand total of 8 US attorneys. Now I didn't learn any of the "New Math" but that would be... by my count... exactly 85 less than Bill Clinton fired in his first year in office. Even more important is the fact that while these US attorneys are mostly Clinton appointees they were RE-APPOINTED by Bush. So essentially he's just firing people he appointed.

Democrats in Congress (after winning the House and Senate on a themes of corruption) are naturally trying to play this up as another example of corruption.

I say let them come. Let them try to play this up and then SMACK them down with their own hypocrisy. Let the record show that Sens. Fienstein, Leahy, et al are guilty of playing politics and wasting the People's Time on matters that are not subject to their purview.

Let the sun shine in and let the public find out that the President has absolute authority to fire and appoint US attorneys and that the Congress should BUTT OUT !!

About the only thing I'm pissed about is AG Gonzales' performance to-date regarding this so-called "controversy". He seems to be shooting himself in the foot and if the Dems weren't howling for his scalp I'd be recommending he get fired. But since the Dems are trying to get him to resign as proxy to weaken Bush I'm standing by him.

So ... CONGRATULATIONS PRESIDENT BUSH !!! I'm glad to see you get your cajones back. You could see how pissed Sen. Schumer was when telling the press that because accounts would differ that it was important to get it under-oath and transcribed. They were hoping this would be like another Scooter Libby set-up and were hoping to nail Karl Rove

So go right ahead Pres. Bush.

Tell them to "pound sand".

Tell them - "no testimony under-oath".

And just to show them who is boss concerning whose prerogative it is to fire and appoint US attorneys...

tomorrow...

Fire another 8 US attorneys !!!