Thursday, November 30, 2006

"Anti Semitism in Venezuela: It Is Planned"

That's the title of a chilling post by Daniel at Venezuela News And Views. He provides us with a translation of an article in El Diario de Caracas, a pro-Chavez rag that masquerades as an unbiased news source (sound familiar?). And what are these Chavezites clamoring for? Why, the death of the Jews, of course! From the article:

The genocide they executed in Palestine and Lebanon is similar to the Holocaust which the Nazis executed against them, and they will undergo another Holocaust because of the global hatred they are accumulating. If the Jews have charged the Nazis for their victims, they will have to pay Lebanon for their killings. The Jewish race is condemned to disappear, because if they continue marrying among themselves they will continueto degenerate; if they open their marriages they will racially dilute themselves, so they only recourse is to stay united, to provoke wars, and auto-genocides.

I'm not even going to dissect this drivel, I simply do not have the stomach for it. Chavez is
not as secure as Western liberals would have you believe; and like so many other tin-pot despots who feel the ground shaking beneath him, will El Presidente seek a scapegoat; perhaps fertilizing the ground for his own little Kristallnacht? After all, the step from fascism to genocide is a small one...

The remainder of the article suggests his future course of action:

Let's pay attention of the Israeli-Zionist associations, unions and federations which are conspiring to Venezuela to take over our finances, our industries, commerce, construction; which are infiltrating government positions and politics. Possibly, we'll have to expel them from the country, as other nations have done, which is the reason that Jews remain in a continuous state of stateless exodus...

So the primary pro-Chavez newspapers are supporting the forced expulsion of the Jews from Venezuela...are they going to march them over the border, put them out to sea in rickety boats, or just shoot 'em in the back like the Nazis did? Did Mahmoud Ahmadinejad offer Chavez some dirty little nuclear secrets if he would join his effort to make the globe Judenrein ?

And how much do you bet that if you showed this article to those Northeastern liberals who crow about Chavez's donation of oil to the poor, they would simply shrug and turn their backs? Maybe some blood for oil is OK....

Monday, November 27, 2006

Where's my freakin' "global warming" already ??

Drudge provides us with a variety of links for which we can delve into in order to mock the most ridiculous pseudo-scientific theory of all time, the so-called "global warming" phenomenon:

With cataclysmic predictions that hurricanes would swarm from the tropics like termites, no one thought 2006 would be the most tranquil season in a decade.
As they say about the stock market: Past results are no indication of future performance.

9: The number of named storms this year
17: The number of named storms predicted May 31 by a team at Colorado State University led by Professor William Gray
45 mph: The wind speed when Tropical Storm Alberto hit the Florida Panhandle near Adams Beach on June 13, the strongest winds over Florida all season

56 percent: The average homeowner rate increase Citizens Property Insurance Corp. requested even after no hurricanes struck Florida
27 percent: The Citizens rate increase approved to start Jan. 1

0: The number of storms that formed in October, the first time since 2002 that no storms formed that month. Also, no Category 4 or 5 storms formed this year for the first time since 1997.

And as they say on those late night TV infomercials..."But wait! There's more! "

March 20, 2006 - The northeast U.S. coast could be the target of a major hurricane, perhaps as early as this season, according to research announced today by the Hurricane Center.

"The Northeast is staring down the barrel of a gun," said Joe Bastardi, Chief Forecaster of the Hurricane Center..."Determination of where we are in the cycle has enabled meteorologists to accurately predict hurricane activity in Florida in 2004 and along the Gulf Coast last year. There are indications that the Northeast will experience a hurricane larger and more powerful than anything that region has seen in a long time."

Er, Mr. Chief Forecaster? Do you have a flippin' clue what you are talking about? Or were you just afraid to buck the doomsayers of global warming? And how do you feel about the fact that know-nothing predictions like yours helped raise the rates of Florida homeowners insurance by 27% ?

Bastardi, again, threatens the economy more than any carbon-fueled superstorm:

May 15, 2006- The Hurricane Center, led by Chief Forecaster Joe Bastardi, today released its 2006 hurricane season forecast. An active hurricane season appears imminent, which could have major repercussions for the U.S. economy and the one in six Americans who live on the Eastern Seaboard or along the western Gulf of Mexico.

"The 2006 season will be a creeping threat," said Bastardi...

"There are few areas of the U.S. East Coast and Gulf of Mexico that will not be in the bull's eye at some point this season," said Ken Reeves, AccuWeather's Director of Forecast Operations...

Geez, these guys suck - I'll think fondly of you idiots every time I hear an AccuWeather Report, and then I'll change the station...

Finally, from the
Washington Times:

May 29, 2006 - Al Gore's new movie on global warming, "An Inconvenient Truth," opens with scenes from Hurricane Katrina slamming into New Orleans. The former vice president says unequivocally that because of global warming, it is all but certain that future hurricanes will be more violent and destructive than those in the past.

With the official start of hurricane season days away, meteorologists are unanimous that the 2006 tropical storm season, which runs from June 1 through November, is likely to be a doozy...

Whoa! Hold on a second! These meteorologists are "unanimous"! Al Gore is "unequivocal"! Global warming must be an established scientific fact! How dare anyone contradict their great knowledge and wisdom! The only ones who scorn encroaching global warming are the neocons and their jack-booted right-wing religious thugs!

So where was the devestating hurricane season of 2006? Did George Bush and Dick Cheny turn off the weather manipulation machine stashed in the Artic Circle? Or could it be possible that even in unamity, scientists (or, perish the thought, the media) could be wrong ?

Remember, a flat earth of which the whole of the universe revolved around was once accepted scientific fact as well...

Sunday, November 26, 2006

Summoning Evil Spirits in Eurabia

Ralph Peters, in a column today, tries to knock down what he call the "myth" of a Europe that will soon be under Muslim domination. What does he use as his counterweight to the rise of Islamists within the Continent? Why, the rise of fascsim (again!) on the Continent:

The notion that continental Europeans, who are world-champion haters, will let the impoverished Muslim immigrants they confine to ghettos take over their societies and extend the caliphate from the Amalfi Coast to Amsterdam has it exactly wrong...

Don't let Europe's current round of playing pacifist dress-up fool you: This is the continent that perfected genocide and ethnic cleansing, the happy-go-lucky slice of humanity that brought us such recent hits as the Holocaust and Srebrenica.
THE historical patterns are clear: When Europeans feel sufficiently threatened - even when the threat's concocted nonsense - they don't just react, they over-react with stunning ferocity...

WE don't need to gloss over the many Muslim acts of barbarism down the centuries to recognize that the Europeans are just better at the extermination process...

Well, Peters is right on that point - Europe is, and always will be, a cauldren of nationalistic hatreds that the Imans of the Middle East can only dream about. For Peters to count on the rise of seething European racism is bad enough, but the problem is that his historical pattern is breaking down - the Muslims are making their move, and Europe hasn't even reacted (except to retreat), no less over-reacted.

Let's take a look at what's been going on across the pond...
No Parasan gives us the Europe of the future - today!

You can be in a northern English town after 9 o’clock at night on a Saturday night and these tattooed gangs of Pakistani skinheads came rolling through town. You think, what the hell is this? It’s like some futuristic dystopian thing cooked up by some mad lab scientist in which he’s taken the worst pathologies of the western world and the worst pathologies of the Muslim world and fused them together.

In France, at least these is some racist rioting going on, but it is only against the usual suspects:

...a [black] plainclothes policeman, who came to the rescue of an Israeli pursued by 150 enraged Paris St. Germain fans, fired into the crowd killing one assailant and critically wounding another.
The incident occurred after the Hapoel Tel Aviv soccer team beat Paris St. Germain 4 to 2 at the Parc des Princes stadium near the bois de Boulogne.
....Philippe Broussard of l’Express, former sports journalist and expert on hooliganism, who witnessed the attack, describes the crowd as an extremely violent dangerous horde, shouting racist and anti-Semitic insults.
“They asked if we were Jewish, or just said ‘Jew’ to see how we reacted, they looked in people’s bags to see if they had an Israeli flag, something Jewish. I saw two or three guys really get hit.”
The missing link. And yet it’s so obvious. Of course it was not one incident, not one or even five Hapoel fans, it was Jews in general who were hassled...

So the racist punks in Europe still haven't turned on the Muslims, in fact, they may be joining sides in order to destroy their common enemy, the Jew. Read the whole account of the soccer riot at Pajamas Media under the title A Jackpot - A Black and a Jew! - Nidra Poller gives a good account of the bravery of the lone French policeman who stood up to the mob as well.

So European rage continues to be aimed at the same-old same-old, while the Muslims go about remaking the Old World into a New Caliphate under Sharia law - by force, if necessary (and isn't it always?)...via

...what Islamists use most is intimidation. A survey conducted in France in May 2003 found that 77 percent of girls wearing the hijab said they did so because of physical threats from Islamist groups. A series in the newspaper Libération in 2003 documented how Muslim women and girls in France who refuse to wear the hijab are insulted, rejected, and often physically threatened by Muslim males. One of the teenage girls interviewed said, "Every day, bearded men come to me and advise me strongly on wearing the veil. It is a war. For now, there are no dead, but there are looks and words that do kill."

Sorry sweetie, you are correct of course, but there is nobody listening; they are too busy hounding the Jews. Apologies as well to Mr. Ralph Peters, whom I supposed was right to count on the rise of the old dark fury within the European soul; but was wrong when it came to which direction it would take (although it did follow a "historical pattern" of sorts)...but isn't that the problem that always happens when evil spirits are summoned? One may be able to conjour them up quite easily, but to control them - well, that's another matter entirely.

I'd still expect to bring an Arabic-to-English dictionary when visiting any/all of the great capital cities of Europe in the year 2020 - no Jews allowed, though...

UPDATE: Paul Belian at The Brussels Journal assures Peters that the Muslim threat to Europe that he so blithely dismisses is, in fact, quite real...also find it here.

Saturday, November 25, 2006

Catching The Dirty Little Fish

While much of the nation is surprised and tut-tuts at New Jersey (deservedly so) for constantly electing corrupt politicians such as Corzine and Menendez to top statewide posts, one needs to understand that there are no other types of politician in New Jersey; from the bottom up, they are all mired in the muck. Finally, though, recently appointed Attorney General Stuart Rabner is looking at the bottom of the pond and realizing the scum that resides down there is just as harmful to the average Jersey resident as that which (unfortunately) rises to the top:

The mayor of a southern New Jersey town was indicted yesterday, charged with public corruption for offering government jobs to his political opponent in exchange for the man pulling out of a local election.
Carneys Point Mayor John M. Lake was charged with two counts of bribery and one count of official misconduct, state officials said.
The opponent didn't exit the town council election, and Lake lost the race for the board's one open seat.

Lake's Democratic opponent for town council, Anthony Rullo, told the Associated Press he was surprised when Lake showed up at his home July 4 and began offering him municipal jobs. Rullo said the caveat was that he had to drop out of the race by a certain deadline that would prevent another candidate from being placed on the ballot.
Rullo said Lake first offered to reappoint him to the sewerage authority -- a five-year appointment that pays $1,500 a year -- if Rullo agreed to back out.
He said Lake later upped the ante, offering Rullo a part-time job at the authority that pays an estimated $10,000 to $12,000 a year. When that didn't work, Lake then offered him a job as a housing inspector for up to $15,000 a year, Rullo said.

This is one of the reason that taxes are so high in New Jersey and services are so poor - jobs that need to be done, and done well, are handed out as political patronage, or as we see above, as outright bribes. Who cares if a building falls down? Hey, we got "our man" on the Board, right?

Asbury Park-Press comments in an editorial:

Attorney General Stuart Rabner's announcement this week of the indictment of a small-town mayor from southern New Jersey may look like he snagged a small fish in a big pond. But eight weeks into the job, Rabner has had little time to cast out all his lines. We encourage him to reel in every corrupt politician he can find — all are "keepers" for prosecution.

Rabner, a former prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney's Office with extensive experience in fighting corruption and terrorism, gives New Jersey residents hope that the days are numbered for the state's culture of corruption. Even though Lake's arrest may look like small potatoes, it should cause considerable unease among public officials who engage in political horse-trading and use their power to give taxpayer-funded jobs to people who do them favors.
We hope Rabner has his sights set on bigger fish. But we're glad to see him reeling in the little ones.

I share the APP's enthusiasm for the indictment, but I do not care for their characterization of Mayor Lake as a "small fish". Small in statewide stature to be sure, but large in representation of the corruption that goes on in every single township in the state of New Jersey. I am sure there is many a crooked small-town Jersey official that got quite nervous upon hearing of Lake's indictment - if the big guys can dip into Carneys Point, who says they can't wade into my tiny 'burg, right?

Remember the Rudy Guliani method of policing - when graffiti-tagging, turnstile-jumping and breaking windows became serious criminal offenses, the mental leap to committing armed robbery and murder became much harder to make. If one small-time small town mayor can get sent to the hoosegow for illegal patronage, who knows how that can reverberate up the ladder?

UPDATE: I like Rabner's resume:

Rabner’s federal career was notable for his prosecution of corrupt public officials, including former Hudson County Executive Robert Janiszewski in 2002 and former Somerset County Prosecutor Nicholas Bissell in 1996. In 2005, he prosecuted Hemant Lakhani, a British national who attempted to purchase shoulder-fired, surface-to-air missiles for terrorists. Lakhani was convicted after trial and sentenced to 47 years in prison.

A refreshing change from the usual stench that hangs over New Jersey Attorney Generals...

Thursday, November 23, 2006

Israel's New Two-Front War

One the one side, we have Hamas, claiming its first suicide bombing in almost two years, using a 64 year old grandmother as the vehicle of their vengence...Gateway Pundit reports:

64-year-old Palestinian grandmother blew herself up near Israeli troops sweeping through northern Gaza on Thursday, and eight other Palestinians were killed in a day of clashes and rocket fire.
The militant Hamas, which is in charge of the Palestinian government, claimed responsibility for the suicide attack and identified the bomber as Fatma Omar An-Najar. Her relatives said she was 64 — by far the oldest of the more than 100 Palestinian suicide bombers who have targeted Israelis over the past six years.

Israeli forces were moving through the Jebaliya refugee camp in northern Gaza on the second day of an operation to stem rocket fire from the coastal strip into southern Israel.
They spotted a woman acting suspiciously, the military said. Soldiers threw a stun grenade, a weapon that makes a loud nose but causes no damage. The woman then set off explosives she was carrying, killing herself and slightly wounding two soldiers.

It kind of reminds me of the waning days of WWII, when the Germans were drafting old men and teenage boys into service to defend Berlin, as there was no one else left. Nevertheless, between the non-stop shelling of Israeli cities and now Hamas-supported suicide attacks coming out of Gaza, Israel is essentially engaged in what may be a ceaseless military operation on that particular border - ceaseless, becuase they don't have the will to outright call it a war, and/or to go out and win it. Can you imagine the Allies being afraid to enter Berlin because they may shoot irregular infantry? We'd still be fighting...just like Israel is!

And now on the Lebanese border, the French - who were originally sent to protect Israel from Hezbollah - SUCKERS! - now are
authorized to fire on Israeli aircraft patrolling the portions of Southern Lebanon that the French fear to tread:

French soldiers in Lebanon who feel threatened by aggressive Israeli overflights are permitted to shoot at IAF fighter jets, a high-ranking French military officer told The Jerusalem Post Wednesday, several days after meeting with an IDF general in Paris to discuss what he said was a “blatant violation of the cease-fire.”

Last weekend, Maj.-Gen. Ido Nehushtan, head of the IDF Planning Directorate, traveled to Paris and met with military officials to explain why the IAF flies over Lebanon despite the UN-brokered cease-fire.
Nehushtan, new to his post and previously deputy commander of the air force, told his French counterparts that Israel was conducting the flights to collect intelligence on Hizbullah positions in southern Lebanon.

The French told Nehushtan they would view further aggressive flyovers as a violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1701. No assurances were made to us that they [the IAF] would stop [the flights],” the French officer said. “The orders that the [French] soldiers have is that their weapons are for self-defense and if a commander will feel threatened, as it was about to happen on the 31st of October, he would have the right to use force.”

I guarentee the French will fire on Israeli aircraft; from their perspective, the Jews are easy pickings and instigating a conflict is a political no-brainer. Attacking Israeli jets, goes the feeling in French ministry/military circles, will help solidify France as an Arab "partner" that offers the Muslim world a clear alternative to American influence. Of course, the imminent intifada that is simmering in the major cities of France is always top of mind, and the French functionaries feverently hope that an act of dhimmitude like pitting the French army against the Jews may help settle the natives down, for a while...

Remember, Ehud Olmert invited the French in - an act of military stupidity that will go down in infamy hand in hand with his fear of actually fighting Hezbollah, and winning. Debka reports that Olmert is planning a similar "war" against Hamas in Gaza, with the aim of destroying their rocket arsenal (sound familiar?) :

DEBKAfile’s military sources disclose that Israel’s security cabinet decided Wednesday, Nov. 22, that there is no option but to launch a major offensive against Hamas and its terrorist allies in the Gaza Strip - both to pre-empt their war build-up and reduce Qassam missile attacks which climbed to 80 in the last ten days. The date remains to be set.

As I said above, I don't believe a UN-fearing Europhile like Olmert is capable of launching or winning a war against anybody; he will cave to international pressure as soon as the French release a Photoshopped picture of a civilian casualty. Israel is doomed to fight a war of attrition, one that they can only lose (and the Arabs know this), until they elect a leader that is more concerned about the lives of his/her countrymen than the snarky words of some hate-filled UN Comissioner...

Thanksgiving 2006

George Will channels British journalist and historian Godfrey Hodgson, who observes the American celebration of Thanksgiving from the outside:

His [Hodgson's] "A Great and Godly Adventure: The Pilgrims and the Myth of the First Thanksgiving" makes clear that the Pilgrims embarked on the angry north Atlantic in storm season not because they wanted to impose their strict ways on anyone, but to avoid being bothered by anyone.

Kinda tells you where the true origins of the "Don't Tread on Me" standard (on the Gadsden flag, or the First Navy Jack) came from....anyway:

This year, when one of the Transportation Security Administration's 43,000 airport-security screeners confiscated a traveler's too-large tube of toothpaste, the traveler perhaps thought: Life is hard. So it is timely for Hodgson to remind us of the admiration that is due "as a tiny band of men and women, determined to follow what they believe to be the ordinances of their God, entrust themselves to the wild freezing ocean; confront disease, starvation, ferocious enemies and justified fear."

Thanksgiving, Hodgson notes, is an echo of the breaking of bread at the heart of Christian worship, and of a Jewish Seder. It also is a continuation, in today's abundance, of harvest festivals around the world, which began millennia ago, when abundance was so rare as to seem miraculous.

Hodgson thinks Thanksgiving expresses "the deepest of all American national feelings" - gratitude. It is the inclusive gratitude "of a nation of immigrants who have lived for the most part in peace and plenty under the rule of law as established with the consent of the governed."

An Englishman (Samuel Johnson) said that people more often need to be reminded than informed. Sometimes Americans need a sympathetic foreigner, such as Hodgson, to remind them of the dignity of what they are doing, on this day, and all others.

Indeed. Well spoken by Mr. Will and Mr. Hodgson.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Wednesday, November 22, 2006

Reactionary Rosie Rips Ravishing Ripa !

Ah, a pre-Thanksgiving celebrity dustup... but this time, the JerseyNut is gonna take sides. Nobody messes with my Kelly! Here's the setup:

Ripa had been upset Friday during her show when Aiken covered her mouth with his hand while he was sitting in for Regis Philbin on "Live! With Regis & Kelly." Ripa responded to the move, saying, "No, no, no. I don't know where that hand's been."
She was so upset, Ripa mentioned the incident on Monday's show, three days after it occurred.

Nothing wrong so far; I think any stranger (and while Clay Aiken may not be a stranger to Kelly Ripa, he sure is strange) putting a hand directly over my mouth is gross; I would have slapped it away myself. Even if it is someone familiar to me (say, a pretty girl?) I still would have issue with the hand - hey, even pretty girls forget to wash their hands sometimes, right?

But no, Rosie knows what the truth is - Kelly's a hater! A hater of gays!

"Now listen to me," Rosie said on yesterday's edition of "The View." "That's a homophobic remark. If that had been a cute man, a guy she didn't question his sexuality. . . I guarantee if that had been Mario Lopez she would not have said the same thing."

But my Kelly, who is as funny as she is pretty ("Hope and Faith" was my secret shame), ain't taking any guff from tubby, no sir-eee:

Ripa, who was still at the "Live!" studios while "The View" was on, immediately called into the show to rebut O'Donnell's comments.
"I'm watching the show, Rosie. I love you dearly, but I have to strongly, strongly disagree," Ripa said. "I think what you said is downright outrageous."
Ripa then pointed out that she is probably the only talk show host who has interviewed the former "American Idol" star, who hasn't asked him about his sexuality.

But because Rosie's gay, she has victim status, and that makes her in the right!

"I'm just saying that as a gay person in the world, that's how it came off to me," Rosie argued.
Listen, Rosie, you fat, ugly, mean little no-talent faghag, not eveyone who says something negative about a gay person is a homophobe, OK? In fact, if you are so shrill about being treated equally, you have to expect to be critisized and be able to take it, just like anyone else. Not to mention that there was nothing sexist or homophobic at all about Miss Ripa's remarks - you may be able to knock her as a germaphobe, but if you saw as many people as I do scrubbing themselves with Purell on a daily basis, you would think Kelly's reaction to having a strange hand jammed over her mouth to be a bit subdued, as opposed to excessive.

Now go sit in the corner, Rosie, and think about what you've done! And mind you don't choke on the drumstick while you do so, and...hey! Stop licking your fingers! That's gross! (oops - does that make me a homophobe?)

And thumbs-up to Kelly Ripa, who smacked Rosie down fearlessly, while remaining more civil than she needed to be...pretty, funny, smart, and tough! Yum!

Tuesday, November 21, 2006

Terrorism in Old Bridge!

Yup, even in my little corner of New Jersey, the allies of terror are working to bring their message of hate to America. Seems like the corner dentist, a "pleasent" man by all accounts, was taking big cash payoffs directly from Hezbollah to do their bidding here in the tri-state area. From the Asbury Park-Press:

An Old Bridge resident was one of two men charged Monday with supporting the Lebanese terrorist group Hezbollah by conspiring to broadcast the group's television station in New York.
Saleh Elahwal, 52, of Highpointe Way was arrested at his home Monday morning by federal law enforcement officials. Elahwal was charged along with Javed Iqbal, 42, of Staten Island, who surrendered to authorities Monday.

The men were charged with providing material support to a terrorist organization by arranging to broadcast al Manar, Hezbollah's television station, to customers of the Brooklyn-based HDTV Ltd. satellite television business, which federal prosecutors allege the two operate. The station was designated by the U.S. government this year as a global terrorist entity.

The men also were charged with providing broadcast technology to al Manar.

They face maximum jail terms of 100 years if convicted...

According to the indictment, from September 2005 to March 2006, the men received nearly $112,000 in payments in four installments from al Manar to broadcast the network...

Michael J. Garcia, U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, said in a statement that the men "engaged in transactions that support the terrorist organizations,'' Hezbollah and al Manar, "and did so for financial profit. As terrorist organizations become more sophisticated, it is critical that we respond using all the enforcement tools the law provides.''

This is serious business. Two men took cash payments totaling nearly half a million dollars from Hezbollah, a sworn enemy of the United States, in order to set up a system to allow them to disseminate their hateful anti-Semitic, anti-American pro-Islamist message. And if some in America were encouraged by these transmissions to attack their home/host country? Well, a bonus would be in order for Saleh Elahwal and Javed Iqbal !! And at the very least, through the actions of these two men, Hezbollah has an opportunity to warp the conversation and influence opinion (and possibly radicalize it) within Arabic population segments in New York and New Jersey.

And please don't give me any B.S. about Hezbollah needing to tell "its side of the story" - because all sides (including Lebanon and the UN) agree that they attacked Israel without provocation this summer, that they hid behind civilian personnel while attired in civilian clothing, and that they have no legitimate claim on any of Israel's territory, including Sheeba Farms. Hezbollah's story has already been told, and it is written in the blood of innocents...

I hope Mr. Garcia throws the book at these two traitorous spitbags, and goes for the 100 years in the hoosegow - and that's still better than they deserve....transferring technology to the enemy and opening up propganda outlets for them in wartime should be a death penalty offense.

Monday, November 20, 2006

Palestinian Non-Violence? Yeah, Right...

So Israel backed down again yesterday from Hamas, and has ensured greater casualities in the future...via Daimnation! :

Palestinians yesterday stopped Israel from destroying the home of two militants by surrounding it with a human shield.
In the first incident of its kind, hundreds of neighbours surrounded the home of Mohammed Baroud and climbed on its roof after he received a call from the Israeli army informing him he had 30 minutes to vacate his home before it was destroyed by missiles.
The Israeli airforce called off its strike because of the risk of killing a large number of civilians.

It is the first time Palestinians have thwarted an Israeli air strike in this way. Israel has developed a strategy of telephoning its targets to ensure that nobody is inside when the homes are struck. Residents are given about half an hour to gather some clothes and escape. Neighbours are also contacted if the explosion is likely to be big enough to endanger them.

Nizar Rayan, a Hamas member who led the Jabalya protest, said Palestinians would continue to rush into every house to be threatened by bombardment. "We will pay with our lives to protect the houses of the fighters so they can resist the enemy assured that their homes are being protected," he said.

So Israel tries to fight a war sweetly, and is defeated because it is afraid to use the heavy-handed tactics necessary to win a war (see Iraq, American debacle in ). So now they faced with a choice - to continue to allow their enemies to run free under their noses with impunity while they continue slaughtering more innocent Jews, or to hit these targets regardless and face harsh condemnation from the world community for killing civilians.

Or are they actually "civilians" ? How innocent are the Palestinians who run to the homes of these admitted militants to protect them? Are they not forcefully endorsing the war against Israel by volunteering to protect those whom wage it? Don't these actions make them complicit in the actions of the Hamas terrorists? Does it not remove the title of "civilian" from any Palestinian who rushes to a site to defend it against a pre-broadcast oncoming Israeli attack?

Olmert's fears of the "international community" has already led him to a harsh defeat in a war he could have easily won this summer if he did not bow before the pressure of those whom wish death upon him and his countrymen anyway. Now, by these recent actions, he has bestowed the title of "civilian" upon a much larger group of Palestinian irregulars whom would be considered fair game in any other combat in human history. When do the militiamen of Hamas and Fatah rise up, rifles in one hand and Jewish heads in the other, and cry out "We are all civilians!"? That day is not far off, as The Chistian Science Monitor gleefully cheers this new Palestinian passive-aggression as..."the most effective act of nonviolent protest in the six-year Palestinian uprising" .

Why don't you ask the future victims of Baroud if the saving of his life is "nonviolent protest"?

Put another way - If you had a a chance to drop a big 'ol nasty bomb on Hitler in the early 40's, would you hesitate because he was surrounded by a few hundred swastika-wearing, seig-hailing "civilians"? Or has personal responsibilty become such an anachronism that one is no longer responsible for the policies they clearly endorse?

Bet you know what I would do...

Sunday, November 19, 2006

The Apple-Not-Falling-Too-Far Thing....

Today's New York Post points out exactly how representative new House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is of her radically liberal San Francisco district:

....prominent among the newly empowered cut-and-run Democrats is the new speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco.
Regarding Iraq, she wants out.
This has all sorts of negative implications...but never let it be said that she doesn't represent the views of her district. At least on this issue.
San Francisc
o, which has elected Pelosi as its representative for 10 successive terms, with an average of 81.66 percent of the vote, last week expelled the Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps from its high schools.

Despite the program's immense popularity, the board deemed it better to focus on what one member termed a "curriculum of peace."
"We're really shocked," a fourth-year cadet, Eric Chu, told the San Francisco Gate Chronicle.
This was no anomaly. One year ago, San Franciscans overwhelmingly passed a referendum - "College, not Combat" - which condemned military recruiting in the city's high schools and colleges.
Before that, the City Council voted 8-3 to bar the mothballed battleship USS Iowa from the Port of San Francisco, where organizers had hoped to convert the warship into a museum.
There's even more, but the point is clear: Nancy Pelosi comes by her extreme views on Iraq honestly - her constituents feel the same way.

Quick Notes:

- Had the Republicans run on Nancy Pelosi (and Charles "reinstate the draft" Rangel, and Carl Levin) the way the Democrats ran on Iraq, they would have stood a much better chance of retaining the House.
- The People's Republic of San Francisco is not all about "peace", as they like to proclaim, but more about an ignorant disdain and disrespect for the military.
-Sending children into today's world holding onto nothing more than vain pleas for peace is like sending them outside naked in a snowstorm. You are essentially greatly reducing their chances for survival...but try to tell that to the pious ones who came up with the "curriculum of stupidity".

And a prediction:
Nancy cannot escape her electoral heritage; and she will use every bit of political persuasion at her disposal to enact legislation and policies that mirror that of her home district. Will she succeed in turning all of America into a Greater San Francisco? Or will the conservative Democrats who took most of the seats previously held by Republicans resist, know their political survival is on the line?
January 21st, 2009: Republican President sworn in, with new Republican Congressional majorities. The San Francisco Experiment fails, returning Pelosi and her like-mined radical liberal ilk to the sidelines, where they will brey about injustice in tune with the editorial pages of the New York Times...

More about just how dangerous the San Francisco-designed Cut-and-Run policy really is can be found here... as well as an answer to the question, "What is more important - a million foreign lives, or one self-sacrificing American life?"

UPDATE: From The Boston Globe, Jeff Jacoby writes about San Fransicko:

"IN THE FIRST place God made idiots," observed Mark Twain. "This was for practice. Then he made school boards." The San Francisco Board of Education's 4-2 vote last week to abolish the Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps program, which has been active in the city's high schools for 90 years, tends to support his view...

Saturday, November 18, 2006

France Ready to Attack Israel

Way back in early September, yours truly noted the French military buildup in Lebenon, allegedly for their role as UN "peacekeepers", and predicted thusly:

...and who's to say that France is not intending to more forcefully step into a possible renewed Israeli-Lebanese conflict, given their longstanding colonial roots in that nation? Could their final dhimmitude be achieved by deploying the French armed forces against Israel?

here we go today:

French UN anti-aircraft batteries have taken “preparatory steps” to respond to Israeli jets violating Lebanese airspace, despite global criticism of such incursions.
“The anti-aircraft unit of the (French) battalion took initial preparatory steps to respond to these actions,” Milos Strugar, spokesman for the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) told AFP on Friday.

So the French are not willing to stop the resupply of Hezbollah through Lebanon and Syria, but are chomping at the bit to shoot down Israeli planes trying to observe the rearmament of an enemy that attacked them back in July.

But one cannot totally blame the dhimmi French; Jew-killing has been in their blood for over a thousand years, and they cling to the vain hope that by joining sides with their Muslim tormentors they may be spared the further onslaughts of the intifada that has been burning their cities.

But one can blame Ehud Olmert, for fighting a war he was afraid to win, then signing a "peace treaty" under UN auspices, perhaps the most anti-Israeli and anti-Semetic organization save the remnents of the Nazi party itself. He allowed the wolves through the gates and onto the doorstep of his tiny country, where they now are poised to feast, all so that he could avoid the feared and dreaded "international condemnation" (which Israel gets smacked with on a daily basis anyway).

Have no doubt, the French will fire upon Israeli jets, and upon Israeli territory. For they know there is nothing Israel can do to respond. Any attempt to fire back upon the French risks alienating all of the EU, and likely qualifies as attacking a UN-backed unit. Olmert has poffered his hands to be cuffed, and now that he is immobile, can do nothing to protect himself and his country from the next onslaught by Hezbollah (figure by late springtime, or thereabouts). He has done more damage to the security of Israel than any Arab leader or Muslim terrorist has been able to accomplish since 1948. The enemies of Israel know this, and are
moving forward...

Meanwhile, Gateway Pundit reports that Israel may have developed a way for oil to be obtained cheaply from shale deposits within the earth and sold for aound $17- a barrel in an enviornmentally-freindly manner. Could save the planet from global warming, could prevent WWIII....hmmm...while we frantically bow to the Muslims every time they rattle their swords, the world spits upon Israel and the Jews, who only work tirelessly to make the world a better place. What does this say about the morality of the "international community"? Well, my question is....

When will the United Nations take action to prevent Israel from developing this technique? After all, it is obviously an attack on Arab countries; can you imagine what would happen to the price of crude if most nations could retrieve the majority of their oil from within their own borders? How would Arab nations support their favorite terrorist, I mean, what would happen to the economies of much of the Middle East if their energy resources became redundant?

This Israeli attack on the Muslim people, via their inventive and clever nature, is just another cruel Jew trick to keep down the peoples of the prophet! Shouldn't the UN Human Rights Committee be investigating, and stopping the development of cheaper oil-aquisition processes?

What - do you think I am kidding? Just wait...

Friday, November 17, 2006

Stupidity, Served South Korean Style...

President Bush, trying to stiffen global resolve to confront North Korea, failed to win South Korea's support Saturday for a tough inspection program to intercept ships suspected of carrying supplies for Pyongyang's nuclear weapons and missiles

Bush sought to persuade South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun to fully implement U.N. sanctions imposed on North Korea for testing nuclear weapons. He also sought South Korea's support in the Proliferation Security Initiative, a voluntary international program that calls for stopping ships suspected of trafficking in weapons of mass destruction.
Roh said his country "is not taking part in the full scope" of the security initiative" but that it would "support the principles and goals of the PSI"

How does one support "principles" by refusing to take actions that help achieve the "goals" of those principles?

North Korea is a primary target of the Proliferation Security Initiative. South Korea has only been an observer to the program out of concern its direct participation in stopping and searching North Korean ships could lead to armed clashes with its volatile neighbor.

So Roh supports "in principle" the boarding of North Korean ships in order to prevent nuclear proliferation, but will not actually board any ships that might be carrying cargo that directly lead to said proliferation. Why? Becuase of their "concern" that it may "provoke" a violent response. In other words, the South Koreans admit cowardice.

The South Koreans also cede the moral high ground to the North, by again admitting that their threats of violent retaliation are stronger than the South's attachments to their 'principles". Roh also declares, by his fear of even a skirmish with his under-armed and poorly-supplied neighbor, that a nuclear-armed North Korea is something he is willing to accept in order to aviod a fight today...

But what of tomorrow, my South Korean fool? If the North sees you are willing to vacate your so-called "principles" in order to avoid a bit of a scrape, how do you think they will treat with you once they have nukes pointed in your direction? Do you think, as you tremble in fear now, that you will find your courage in an even more perilous spot down the road?

Or do you think that the United States, even as you spit venom in their direction, will somehow sacrifice thousands of their young soldiers in order to prevent you from suffering the consequences of your short-sighted stupidity? You need us to survive, yet encourage loathing of us, and go out of your way to defy us on matters that are vital to your very survival...where is the moral principle in those actions?

Time to pull our remaining 35,00o boys out of harm's way; a harm created just as much by the sheer stupidity of the South Korean leadership as the dangerous insanity of the monsterous regime of Kim Jung Il....

Dance, little cowardly pig, dance!

Wednesday, November 15, 2006 a Handbasket

Well, if you saw the Democratic takeover of Congress as the first sign of the apocalypse, well, maybe you were right. They're about to implement their plan for ending the Iraq war:

Kucinich Calls for Cutting Off Iraq War Funds
"That’s the only way we’re going to end this war."

Congressman Kucinich called Wednesday for cutting off funding of the Iraq war, as the surest way out of Iraq. His statements were made in an interview by
Democracy Now!'s Amy Goodman.
"I want to say that there's one solution here, and it's not to engage in a debate with the President, who has taken us down a path of disaster in Iraq, but it's for Congress to assume the full power that it has under the Constitution to cut off funds. We don't need to keep indulging in this debate about what to do, because as long as we keep temporizing, the situation gets worse in Iraq.

"We have to determine that the time has come to cut off funds. There’s enough money in the pipeline to achieve the orderly withdrawal that Senator McGovern [???] is talking about. But cut off funds, we must. That's the ultimate power of the Congress, the power of the purse.

That's how we'll end this war, and that’s the only way we’re going to end this war...

Great job, Congressman! Now tell us again how much you "support the troops"...

Meanwhile, Gateway Pundit reminds us exactly who is in charge of Iran, and his indoctronation into Western foreign policy and "diplomacy' -
Yup, old Mahmood Ahmadinejad (circa 1979 at left, planning to kill US civilians, circa 2006 at right, fantasizing about the same thing), veteran terrorist and hostage taker, schooled in the arts of the game by none other than the Democrat's favorite anti-Semetic ex-President, Jimmy Carter. No wonder he is so certain he can bring America to its knees - he's already done it once; this time he'll throw in a Second Holocaust as an added bonus! Watch for Jimmy to appear before the fallout hits the ground, blaming Israel for bringing it on itself, and urging more diplomacy with Iran.

Ahmadinejad is the freakin' anti-Christ; and Jimmy Carter is the mother who's teet he suckled on. He grows in strength, while the Democrats plan to cut funds for the war...god, I can hear his evil laugh all the way in New Jersey....

And his minions here in America help him along, with small but mean little Golem-like moves. Soccer Dad reports on John Conyers' House Resolution 228, singling Islam out for special protection:

...there is no reason to single out Islam as being especially deserving of respect and tolerance.

For 2005 the FBI report on bias attacks indicates that 68.5 were anti-Jewish while only 11.1 were anti-Islamic. In other words, when it comes to bias attacks--Jews are far and away the group that is in greater danger and more in need of protection
For 2004, the FBI report indicated that 67.8 were anti-Jewish and 12.7 showed anti-Islamic bias. This indicates that the trend shows that while anti-Jewish bias attacks were slightly up--anti-Islamic attacks actually went down.

And Mr. Conyers is all set to become the new chairman of the House Judiciary Committee! Maybe then the Jews would get the hint, and move to Canada - and take all of their money and science and medicine and artistic and philantropic activity with them!
Sweet Jeebus, Nancy, why don't you just dig up Himmler, or the Tenth Pharaoh or something? I mean, if you are going to do it right!

And the media is looking towards Mecca as well - Little Green Footballs has a shocking story about how both US News and World Report and Time Magazine, changed the caption of a dramatic photo from the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict "to convey an anti-Israel message, throwing the truth right out the window to do it." Read it all; it's just un-freakin-believable...

Ah - but that is how the master of lies and deception, the evil Ahmadinejad, will ascend to his throne - one that rules over a worldwide Muslim Caliphate, with its seat in Tehran, overlooking a 12th Century society - which looks remarkably like a post-apocalyptic wasteland...

And as a final gesture of peace and of thanks, we understand that he will behead dhimmi Congressman and newsweekly editors last of all....

Tuesday, November 14, 2006

The Whole Inmates/Asylum Thing...

...seems to be happening right on cue in the newly-Democratic House, as Nancy Pelosi backs the architect of the "cut-and-run" Iraqi policy, John Murtha, as the new House Majority leader:

Pelosi said in her letter that she was swayed to endorse Murtha, a longtime ally, by his early call for a withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq.

Pelosi does owe Murtha a debt, for finding a new way to couch the word "surrender" in a media-friendly style; now we just call it "redeployment"!
Nevertheless, Pelosi may have met her Harriet Meirs moment a bit early:

A public advocacy group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, blasted Pelosi, a California liberal, for backing Murtha, who it denounced as "one of the most unethical members in Congress."

"A California liberal" - whoa, there! Is this actually Reuters I'm reading?

Anyway, I mock all those Andrew-Sullivan-esque bloggers whom said that by inheriting the war, the Democrats, in assuming stewardship of it, would have to act responsibly with it. Yeah, right...How many unfit parents have destroyed their children because they didn't have the ability to act responsibly in their role as a parent, as a steward? What, you expect more from the Democrats, now stuck with a war they no longer want? Should we expect them to act responsibly here, or simply in their own immediate political interests?

Is Pelosi's backing of Murtha just a throw to the hard-left, or is reflective of incoming Democratic policy? Remember, sweet Nancy, that you did not win Congress with a wave of neo-lefties; you won it with a wave of conservative Democrats, whose constituents may not have realized that they were voting for the likes of you, John Murtha, Teddy Kennedy, Charles Rangel and Henry Waxman to assume policy control of the nation.

We shall see....meanwhile, I'll leave you with the thoughts of Andrew Olmsted:

I see that the Democrats are now ready to start pulling U.S. forces out of Iraq. While I suppose this is no surprise, I'm disappointed to see it. The Democrats have rightly pointed out that Republicans acted without gathering all appropriate data, leading to problems like Iraq. Yet now they're poised to do precisely the same thing....

Sunday, November 12, 2006

Going Too Far in Springfield

OK, that was just enough.

The Simpsons used to be the gold standard of cutting edge satire, clever and whimiscal while rarely taking a side. Yet this evening's episode was one of the crudest hatchet jobs I have seen on television in some time; with the United States Army as its target.

The military services have been the subject of many a Simpsons episode, but they were usually always done with a bit of whimsy and with due respect (think of Bart's boy-band delivering subliminal messages for the Navy, Sideshow Bob stealing a nuke at the Air Force base, or Homer's various stints in the Navy and Coast Guard).

Nothing like that tonight, no sir. Really base, high-school level humor ("We went to the dumbest town in the dumbest state, and we still can't get anyone stupid enough to join the Army!), constantly stressing the mental deficiancy and the desperation of the army (recruiting at Springfield Elementary thru trickery, for instance) throughout a nonexistant plot. The insults and impotent rage hurled at the Army by the writers is so sophmoric and classless (Skinner tells the recruiters, "Bite me!") that it never would have passed network muster had it been a less venerated show.

And the end? Comparing a war-torn Springfield to Iraq for the second consecutive episode, and ending them both with the same lecture chastising stupid Americans (be it the Army, or the standin "alien invaders" Kodos and Kang) with the old, "Haven't we learned anything from...." speech ? Could it be any less tactful; and any more tasteless? And airing on the day after Veteran's Day, no less?

The sorry thing is that I am sure there were plenty of servicemen watching this episode (its appeal is primarily male), and they must have felt quite uncomfortable being ridiculed as "idiots", "stupid", or "dumb" by characters they have grown to love through the years. The words this group of talentless hack writers put into the mouths of the denizens of Springfield tonight was cringe-worthy; embarassing both as political commentary and as basic comedy writing.

Satire is fine, and even military-bashing and foreign policy criticism is within fair territory, but to employ the crass tones and vile script that The Simpsons writers used as a vehicle to voice their displeaure (at our military? the army in particular? US foreign policy? Who can say?) is inexcusable. Don't use one of TV's greatest shows as a platform to unintelligbly express your hatred of your country's military. If not for their vigilance, you wouldn't even have the freedom to air your juvenile rage.

And like children who have just thrown a tantrum in public, you should feel ashamed of yourselves...

UPDATE: More at Hot Air, with video and this comment:

How pitiful is it that Cracked magazine did a funnier job of lampooning John Kerry than the Simpsons did with the U.S. military?

The European Paradise !

Now why can't we be more like Europe, a place where multiculturalism reigns supreme; the government know best and "average people" live happy, satsified lives without all of the trappings of upward mobility that we feckless Americans love to attain?

Hmmm...seems like nowadays, even the Europeans don't want to Europe.
The Brussels Journal clues us in:

In the first nine months of this year, almost 100,000 people left the Netherlands to settle elsewhere, 12,000 more than the same period last year.
About half of the emigrants were Dutch natives, the national statistics office CBS said on Friday.
If the trend continues, more than 130,000 people will have left the country by the end of this year.
For the third successive year, the number of emigrants substantially outnumbers immigrants, the CBS said.
The net effect means the Dutch population was reduced in the 2004-06 period by 75,000.

Despite the dramatic reversal, the number of immigrants is also on the increase...

In the first nine months of this year, 139,000 babies were born, a decrease of 3,000 compared with the same period in 2005.
If this trend continues, this year's birth rate will be under 185,000, the lowest number in two decades.

The article doesn't mention why so many native born Dutch are fleeing their homeland; but two reasons for this type of outflow are standard: Lower quality of life and/or personal prosecution. The EU's floundering economic model is well known (and wait until they start
cutting back in order to appease the global warming gods); but what can Dutch nationals be so afraid of otherwise at home? I guess they could ask Theo van Gogh or Hirsi Ali.....

In Germany,
more of the same, as we hear from the rabidly anti-American propoganda rag Der Spiegel:

Faced with poor job prospects, high taxes and an intrusive bureaucracy, more and more Germans are choosing to emigrate. Most of those who leave, though, are highly qualified -- which could mean devastating economic consequences.

They are tired of living in country where landing a job is like playing the lottery, a country where not even half of citizens live from gainful employment and a country in which even academics in their mid-40s are already considered problem cases when it comes to job placement. In other words, they are fed up with living in a country where all opportunities already seem to be taken: opportunities to succeed in one's career, to own property and to achieve prosperity.
That is why they want to leave -- as fast as they can, in fact -- and move to places where they believe there is hope for a better future.

Der Spiegel is too full of hate for America to admit that any of these German emigrees are leaving for the United States, but I'll bet my last Deustchmark that we are already seeing some of them here. A look at who's leaving is an indictment of the whole European social and economic model:

Not only are more people turning their backs on Germany, but those who go are typically the country's best and brightest...The percentage of emigrants with doctorates is 10 times as high as it is in the general population. And half of emigrants are younger than 35. "
Meanwhile, the number of new immigrants is on the decline, and those who do choose to make Germany their home are often not exactly the kinds of workers companies actively seek out...

I guess well-trained, professional Germans are being tired of told it is their duty to humanity to work in menial jobs in which a large portion of their heavilty-taxed salary goes to immigrants who seem unable (ahem! cough!) to work at all. But here's the kicker -which we also noted in Holland - that spells the death of the Continent:

The demographic crisis is getting worse, especially when one considers that deaths outnumbered births by 144,000 in 2005, and that this gap is continuing to widen.

The two stars, the two enlightened powerhouses of the New Europe, are now collapsing under a political theorem designed to dis-incentive work and to favor the views and rights of new citizens over a nation's exisiting population and value system. And while Europe slowly collapses (or in France's case, burns), the remaining minds left to it focus squarely on...
global warming as the biggest threat to its existance. And any resistance to the ideas of the bureaucratic elite is regarded as nothing short of idiocy, blasmphemy, or something worse...and maybe that's why people are fleeing. Beacuse they've seen this type of thing happen before in Europe.

A final thought on this budding totalitarianism of the EU:

The era of the state church has been replaced by an age in which the state itself is the church. European progressives still don't get this: they think the idea of a religion telling you how to live your life is primitive, but the government regulating every aspect of it is somehow advanced and enlightened." -
Mark Steyn

A life, with every aspect regulated, is the European social paradise we hear so much about? The same way Cuba is, and the Soviet Union was, I suppose...yet why have people always fled (over fences, through shark-infested waters, over walls) these leftist Valhallahs even at the risk of their very lives?

Same reason they're leaving now, I suppose...

Saturday, November 11, 2006

Election Perception

I keep hearing the media trumpeting an "overwhelming mandate" for the Democrats based on their retaking of the House and Senate; of course, if the MSM had the ability to look at anything resembling historical perspective, they would know their "mandate" blather was false hyperbole. But hey, that's what propoganda outlets do, right? And this is what blogs do: debunk media-driven conventional wisdom and get to the truth.

We'll let Charles Krauthammer start for us:

On Tuesday Democrats took control of the House and the Senate. As of this writing, they won 29 House seats (with a handful still in the balance), slightly below the post-1930 average for the six-year itch in a two-term presidency. They took the Senate by the thinnest of margins -- a one-vote majority, delivered to them by a margin of 8,942 votes in Virginia and 2,847 in Montana.

Nonetheless, the difference between taking one house vs. both -- and thus between normal six-year incumbent-party losses and a major earthquake that shakes the presidency -- was razor-thin in this election. A switch of just 1,424 votes in Montana would have kept the Senate Republican

But the great Democratic wave of 2006 is nothing remotely like the great structural change some are trumpeting. It was an event-driven election that produced the shift of power one would expect when a finely balanced electorate swings mildly one way or the other.

Do you want a "structural change"? Let's look to George Will:

The Clintons' health-care plan validated the perception that their party was gripped by both intellectual hubris and intellectual sloth -- meaning, it was still in a New Deal and Great Society frame of mind. This perception contributed to the 1994 elections, in which Republicans gained 52 House seats (and soon five more from party-switchers) -- ending 40 years of Democratic control of the House -- and eight Senate seats (plus two party-switchers).

Do you want perspective? Will, again:

Republicans should feel relieved: Considering that in November 1942, 11 months after war was thrust upon America, President Franklin Roosevelt's party lost 45 House and nine Senate seats (there were then just 96 senators), Tuesday's losses were not excessive punishment...

And while both Will and Krauthammer acknowledge the role of the mishandled Iraq war as the churner of much voter discontent, Krauthammer points out the overall success of the conservative ideal that has been expressed by this election:

Republican losses included a massacre of moderate Republicans in the Northeast and Midwest. And Democratic gains included the addition of many conservative Democrats, brilliantly recruited by Rep. Rahm Emanuel with classic Clintonian triangulation. Hence Heath Shuler of North Carolina, antiabortion, pro-gun, anti-tax -- and now a Democratic House member.
The result is that both parties have moved to the right....

Moreover, ballot initiatives make the claim of a major anti-conservative swing quite problematic. In Michigan, liberal Democrats swept the gubernatorial and senatorial races, yet a ballot initiative to abolish affirmative action passed 58 to 42 percent. Seven of eight proposed state constitutional amendments to ban gay marriage were approved. And nine states passed referendums asserting individual property rights against the government's power of eminent domain.

Not to mention (as Krauthammer does) the election of pro-war independant Joe Lieberman in a viciously anti-war blue state. So it seems as if to win back Congress, the Democrats had to move to the right (note the pro-gun vote here). So is the election a repudiation of conservative values and governance? No, just a repudiation of a Republican Party that had lost its way...

And I have a post brewing inside of me about the role the Iraq war played in the Republican's defeat, what the electorate might actually have been saying on November 7th, and what the future of American warfare ought to be. But its gonna be long, controversial, and a tad ugly. Maybe I'll save it for tomorrow, on what appears to be a long, rainy New Jersey Sunday. But its not just the Iraq war that needs to be resolved for the people to settle down; we need a discusion on how the nation must face the prospect of war in the future, and how we must fight it. Or else we are doomed to face a long string of Iraqs - one might certainlyconsider Israel's failed attack on Hezbollah, for instance, as part and parcel of the same military campaign/mindset...

But one thing is for sure - If we allow Iraq to become another Vietnam, I'd better start growing my beard long today, and figuring out which way points to Mecca. And now would be just about the right time to start sizing up my womanfolk up for their new burquas, as well....don't want to get caught in the rush...

Friday, November 10, 2006

The Democratic Circus Begins!

Cue the carnival music, please! It only takes the Democratic Party 48 hours after an electoral victory to live down to their basest instincts:

A Mississippi congressman says Rep. Charles Rangel (
news, bio, voting record) of New York owes the Southern state an apology, and he asks if insults are what Mississippi should expect when Democrats take over leadership in Congress.

Rangel, a Democrat, was quoted in The New York Times on Thursday saying: "Mississippi gets more than their fair share back in federal money, but who the hell wants to live in Mississippi?"
Rangel said he didn't intend to insult the state, but Rep. Chip Pickering, R-Miss., issued a sharp statement criticizing the choice of words.

"I hope his remarks are not the kind of insults, slander and defamation that Mississippians will come to expect from the Democrat leadership in Washington, D.C.," Pickering said.

Elbert Garcia, a Rangel spokesman in New York, sent The Associated Press a response from Rangel: "I certainly don't mean to offend anyone.
I just love New York so much that I can't understand why everyone wouldn't want to live here."

That's it in a nutshell, of course - a New York liberal who cannot fathom that life exists west of the Hudson River; and can't understand why all good-minded people do not share his views of government, and the world. Unless, of course, they are not really good-minded...

And remember yesterday, when I spoke about how the Democrat's urges to raise taxes was almost sexual in nature? Well, here is another dark urge from the closet that they could not resist:

The Democratic congressman who will investigate the Bush administration's running of the government says there are so many areas of possible wrongdoing, his biggest problem will be deciding which ones to pursue.

There's the response to Hurricane Katrina, government contracting in Iraq and on homeland security, political interference in regulatory decisions by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Food and Drug Administration, and allegations of war profiteering, Rep. Henry Waxman (news, bio, voting record), D-Calif., told the Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce.

"I'm going to have an interesting time because the Government Reform Committee has jurisdiction over everything," Waxman said Friday, three days after his party's capture of Congress put him in line to chair the panel. "The most difficult thing will be to pick and choose."

Didn't Nancy Pelosi assure us that the Democratic House would not be one of endless investigations and impeachment committees? Does she have that little control over her liberal minions, or was she just lying to our faces all along?

Bah, who cares....let them turn the House into a circus, and let 2008 be a referendum on whether they should be allowed to continue their behavior. If the Republicans can get their "house" in order and field a strong Presidential candidate, playtime for the demented left will be mercifully short...

Pence for Minority Leader!

Congressman Mike Pence (R-IN) is running for Minority Leader in the House of Representatives; and this humble blogger supports his election. Why? Listen to his words, spoken Wednesday after the Republican's Election Day defeat :

Some will argue that we lost our majority because of scandals at home and challenges abroad. I say, we did not just lose our majority, we lost our way.
While the scandals of the 109th Congress harmed our cause, the greatest scandal in Washington, D.C. is runaway federal spending.

After 1994, we were a majority committed to balanced federal budgets, entitlement reform and advancing the principles of limited government. In recent years, our majority voted to expand the federal government's role in education, entitlements and pursued spending policies that created record deficits and national debt.

This was not in the Contract with America and Republican voters said, 'enough is enough.
Our opponents will say that the American people rejected our Republican vision. I say the American people didn't quit on the Contract with America, we did. And in so doing, we severed the bonds of trust between our party and millions of our most ardent supporters.

As the 110th Congress convenes next year, Republicans must cordially accept defeat and dedicate ourselves to advancing our cause as the loyal opposition knowing that the only way to retake our natural, governing majority, is to renew our commitment to limited government, national defense, traditional values and reform.

That about sums it up, in even, measured tones (you see, when Republicans lose elections, they don't throw tantrums screaming about "disenfranchised voters" and "fraud" and "jackbooted brownshirt thugs" - they simply lift the hood, fix what's wrong, and move forward).

The bottom line is, as Republicans became less conservative they became less popular, and thus easily replaceable by, and barely indistinguishable from, conservative Democrats. The further they tried to distance themselves from the President and his policies, the more estranged from the base the candidates became. Note how few liberals whom we would define as "flaming" were elected this year over an incumbant - instead, pro-gun anti-abortion Democrats replaced apparently less conservative Republicans!

But the Democrat's urge to tax and spend is almost irresistable to them (it is almost sexual in nature); it won't be long until they are spending billions on inane social cure-alls funded by taxing businesses out of existence and re-defining who a "rich" American is.

That's when we will need men of clear principles like Pence to lead the party back to its conservative roots; from which it was madness to ever stray...

Economic policy led by tax cuts and less regulation has allowed the stock market to flourish (thus enriching every middle-class American that has a 401(k)); an aggressive foreign policy has prevented attacks on the American mainland for over five years;, and a social policy promoting basic moral values (sorry, gay marriage fans!) has proven popular with mainstream Americans.

The party should have stuck by its values; instead it was felled by cowardice, opportunism, and greed.

Pence undeerstands this. Give him the reigns and let him go...

UPDATE: Others in agreement here and here .