Sweet Jeebus, we can't even pay our bills, and they're drinking Royal Crown Cola!
Lucky the "Goracle" can afford to pay the bills; must be that fat cash he makes jetting around the globe, telling us we all suck. And yet:
Last night, Al Gore’s global-warming documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, collected an Oscar for best documentary feature, but the Tennessee Center for Policy Research has found that Gore deserves a gold statue for hypocrisy.
Gore’s mansion, [20-room, eight-bathroom] located in the posh Belle Meade area of Nashville, consumes more electricity every month than the average American household uses in an entire year, according to the Nashville Electric Service (NES).
In his documentary, the former Vice President calls on Americans to conserve energy by reducing electricity consumption at home.
The average household in America consumes 10,656 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year, according to the Department of Energy. In 2006, Gore devoured nearly 221,000 kWh—more than 20 times the national average.
Since the release of An Inconvenient Truth, Gore’s energy consumption has increased from an average of 16,200 kWh per month in 2005, to 18,400 kWh per month in 2006.
Thanks to Say Anything for the link.
So this is interesting - does Gore want us to cut back on our energy usage so he has more to himself?
Maybe all this enviorn-"mental"-ism is just some kind of psychological blowback; some guilt reaction to what he, The Goracle, has done to singlehandedly help wreck the ecosphere?
If that's the case, then what does all his flying around in private jets (which in one round trip equals the output of 10 SUVs for a year) signify in all this? Besides sheer hypocrisy, of course...
Ah, I don't know...but when the Goracle breaks out of his jet habit, and into a rickshaw, then I might start to take him seriously...
UPDATE: Richard Cohen moans Big Al's name softly, and with delight, but does have his concerns:
....maybe he will become shrill....
Dude! Go for one of those hearing tests! Ever hear five long fingernails scraped slowly, but with purpose, over a blackboard? Next to Gore's voice, that's the singing of summer swallows! And you are afraid he may become shrill?
Ah, love is blind...and deaf too, apparently...
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Monday, February 26, 2007
Apologist for Evil
New Jersey local newsrag The Asbury Park Press reprints a column from Gannett News Services' official apologist for Cuba, one Mr. DeWayne Wickham. He tells a tale of Cuba that even the boldest propoganda artist would hesitate to spin; I've highlighted some of the more incredible statements and qoutes:
More than six months after Cuban President Fidel Castro "temporarily" ceded power to brother Raul, Cuba appears to be running on autopilot.
The Galiano shopping district in Central Havana has a steady flow of Cubans. Some have money to spend in the "dollar stores" that offer high-priced consumer goods. But most are there simply to window shop or buy whatever they can afford in the poorly stocked pesos stores where most Cubans shop.
The food shortages, the power blackouts, the desire for a better conditions and the widespread disdain among Cubans for the long-running American economic embargo are all part of the matrix of life in this country.
Castro, the world's longest ruling head of government, may be in failing health, but that hasn't put this nation in a tailspin, as many in Washington and Miami had hoped.
"The Cuban revolution is completely transcendental," Ruben Remigio Ferro, the head of Cuba's Supreme Court, told me. "The revolution is bigger than Fidel. It won't end when Fidel's life ends."
Based on Wicky's biography, he likes to sit down and dine with despots, so this bit of boot-lickery is no surprise:
In February 1999, Wickham traveled to Cuba and had a 6-hour dinner meeting with Fidel Castro. A year later he returned to Cuba and met with Cuban people to gauge the impact of the U.S. embargo.
Ready for some reality, Wicky? You'll get it, via Daimination!...here's your "transcendant revolution", jerk:
...when independent librarians are sent to the gulags, certain confiscated books — and sometimes all books in their libraries — are ordered incinerated by the presiding judge. A biography of Martin Luther King was sent to the flames because, said the judge, it "is based on ideas that could be used to promote social disorder and civil disobedience." And the nonviolent King's own books have been burned.
Even works by Jose Marti, the 19th-century organizer of Cuban independence, have been incinerated. Maybe because of the pamphlet he wrote during his exile in Spain, planning the liberation of his homeland. Marti's pamphlet was about the horrors of political imprisonment in Cuba under a pre-Castro dictator.
Among thousands of other incinerated "subversive" books and pamphlets are those books by George Orwell, Pope John Paul II, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (particularly dangerous) and reports by Human Rights Watch.
But hey! They can window-shop at the dollar stores! So life is good, and all problems can be traced back to the damned Yankees, huh?
I feel for the Cubans; but boy oh boy, apologists like Wicky here are not helping them whatsoever...
More than six months after Cuban President Fidel Castro "temporarily" ceded power to brother Raul, Cuba appears to be running on autopilot.
The Galiano shopping district in Central Havana has a steady flow of Cubans. Some have money to spend in the "dollar stores" that offer high-priced consumer goods. But most are there simply to window shop or buy whatever they can afford in the poorly stocked pesos stores where most Cubans shop.
The food shortages, the power blackouts, the desire for a better conditions and the widespread disdain among Cubans for the long-running American economic embargo are all part of the matrix of life in this country.
Castro, the world's longest ruling head of government, may be in failing health, but that hasn't put this nation in a tailspin, as many in Washington and Miami had hoped.
"The Cuban revolution is completely transcendental," Ruben Remigio Ferro, the head of Cuba's Supreme Court, told me. "The revolution is bigger than Fidel. It won't end when Fidel's life ends."
Based on Wicky's biography, he likes to sit down and dine with despots, so this bit of boot-lickery is no surprise:
In February 1999, Wickham traveled to Cuba and had a 6-hour dinner meeting with Fidel Castro. A year later he returned to Cuba and met with Cuban people to gauge the impact of the U.S. embargo.
Ready for some reality, Wicky? You'll get it, via Daimination!...here's your "transcendant revolution", jerk:
...when independent librarians are sent to the gulags, certain confiscated books — and sometimes all books in their libraries — are ordered incinerated by the presiding judge. A biography of Martin Luther King was sent to the flames because, said the judge, it "is based on ideas that could be used to promote social disorder and civil disobedience." And the nonviolent King's own books have been burned.
Even works by Jose Marti, the 19th-century organizer of Cuban independence, have been incinerated. Maybe because of the pamphlet he wrote during his exile in Spain, planning the liberation of his homeland. Marti's pamphlet was about the horrors of political imprisonment in Cuba under a pre-Castro dictator.
Among thousands of other incinerated "subversive" books and pamphlets are those books by George Orwell, Pope John Paul II, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (particularly dangerous) and reports by Human Rights Watch.
But hey! They can window-shop at the dollar stores! So life is good, and all problems can be traced back to the damned Yankees, huh?
I feel for the Cubans; but boy oh boy, apologists like Wicky here are not helping them whatsoever...
Sunday, February 25, 2007
Anti-Semites Protest Play about...Anti-Semites?
From today's New York Post:
THE Jewish Theater of New York... is in hot water again. The Polish Embassy is up in arms over its upcoming "Last Jew in Europe," Tuvia Tenenbom's tragicomedy about "closet Jews living in a present-day Poland where anti-Semitism is rampant and calls to send Jews to gas chambers go unchallenged."
The embassy says the play could turn American Jews against the Poles and claims that some of the anti-Semitic graffiti photographed in Lodz to publicize the production might have been created by theater staffers.
Tenenbom, whose play opens March 4, calls the charges "wholly insulting and quite unproductive . . . the most horrific of anti-Semitic slurs can be seen today in almost every street in Lodz."
Seems like the Polish Embassy is more concerned about perception than reality; or just afraid of what the infamous Jewish/Zionist lobby might do to their U.S. aid packages should this information get into wider circulation...
Well, there is some documentation here and here, but it dates back a few years. Read here for a slightly more positive outlook...
Yet whom could deny that the "Last Jew..." doesn't sound like an European snuff fantasy flick?
THE Jewish Theater of New York... is in hot water again. The Polish Embassy is up in arms over its upcoming "Last Jew in Europe," Tuvia Tenenbom's tragicomedy about "closet Jews living in a present-day Poland where anti-Semitism is rampant and calls to send Jews to gas chambers go unchallenged."
The embassy says the play could turn American Jews against the Poles and claims that some of the anti-Semitic graffiti photographed in Lodz to publicize the production might have been created by theater staffers.
Tenenbom, whose play opens March 4, calls the charges "wholly insulting and quite unproductive . . . the most horrific of anti-Semitic slurs can be seen today in almost every street in Lodz."
Seems like the Polish Embassy is more concerned about perception than reality; or just afraid of what the infamous Jewish/Zionist lobby might do to their U.S. aid packages should this information get into wider circulation...
Well, there is some documentation here and here, but it dates back a few years. Read here for a slightly more positive outlook...
Yet whom could deny that the "Last Jew..." doesn't sound like an European snuff fantasy flick?
Heroes of the Left - Part XVII
Presenting President Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe (the BBC kvells here, British ministers kneel here, even the Voice of America throws softballs)...:
Zimbabwe is reaching the endgame, witnessing the last, desperate throes of a regime that has destroyed one of Africa's few successful economies, plunged millions of people into grinding poverty and led to the deaths of tens of thousands from malnutrition and lack of medical care.
The world's worst hyperinflation is spiralling out of control, bringing shortages of food, fuel, medication and electricity....
Mugabe blames sanctions, drought and former colonizer Britain for the collapse of an economy based on exports of a wealth of agricultural and mineral products.
Others blame land grabs over the past several years in which Mugabe encouraged blacks to violently force out most of the 5,000 white commercial farmers who owned 40 per cent of all agricultural land and produced 75 per cent of agricultural output.
White farmers had employed the country's largest workforce and their ejection led to the displacement of 300,000 families. The farms, most given to Mugabe relatives, allies and cronies, lie fallow today and Zimbabwe does not have the foreign currency to import food.
The World Bank estimates it would take more than 20 years for Zimbabwe's economy to return to levels in 1980, when the country was considered the breadbasket of the region.
The rate of hyperinflation – running at near 1,600 per cent – that economists say soon will be represented by an upright line on a graph has the country in revolt. The number of Zimbabwe dollars that bought a three-bedroom house with a swimming pool and tennis court in 1990 will buy a brick today.
A lifetime public worker's monthly pension can't buy a loaf of bread...
My God, how many more liberal victories can the world absorb?
Toronto Star link via Damian Penny , who posits a few different ends for Mr. Mugabe...
Zimbabwe is reaching the endgame, witnessing the last, desperate throes of a regime that has destroyed one of Africa's few successful economies, plunged millions of people into grinding poverty and led to the deaths of tens of thousands from malnutrition and lack of medical care.
The world's worst hyperinflation is spiralling out of control, bringing shortages of food, fuel, medication and electricity....
Mugabe blames sanctions, drought and former colonizer Britain for the collapse of an economy based on exports of a wealth of agricultural and mineral products.
Others blame land grabs over the past several years in which Mugabe encouraged blacks to violently force out most of the 5,000 white commercial farmers who owned 40 per cent of all agricultural land and produced 75 per cent of agricultural output.
White farmers had employed the country's largest workforce and their ejection led to the displacement of 300,000 families. The farms, most given to Mugabe relatives, allies and cronies, lie fallow today and Zimbabwe does not have the foreign currency to import food.
The World Bank estimates it would take more than 20 years for Zimbabwe's economy to return to levels in 1980, when the country was considered the breadbasket of the region.
The rate of hyperinflation – running at near 1,600 per cent – that economists say soon will be represented by an upright line on a graph has the country in revolt. The number of Zimbabwe dollars that bought a three-bedroom house with a swimming pool and tennis court in 1990 will buy a brick today.
A lifetime public worker's monthly pension can't buy a loaf of bread...
My God, how many more liberal victories can the world absorb?
Toronto Star link via Damian Penny , who posits a few different ends for Mr. Mugabe...
Saturday, February 24, 2007
The Threat of Empty Threats
An unusual perspective from inside Iran...from that country's Persian-language Ayande-Nou newspaper, we see an editorial expressing grave concern about the aggressive path Iran's leadership is taking, and the possible consequences:
Given the present circumstances, wisdom and expediency require taking steps in a more reasonable and well-thought-out manner. We should neither exaggerate our abilities nor belittle those of the enemy. As a famous proverb says, "there is no small enemy." Over recent months the trend of developments has been noteworthy.
....our officials said that the issue would not be put on the Security Council agenda; but then it was. In the third phase, our officials said that the U.N. would be unable to pass a resolution headlined "5+1=0;" and yet such a resolution was passed [5+1 is in reference to the sponsors of the Security Council resolution].
Rather than trying to wisely diminish the threat, reduce hostilities and increase our small number of allies, we chose an easier way: to sloganeer and withstand the consequences. And finally, they [Iranian officials] described the resolution as a piece of mere trash paper.
But in our country, the overwhelming message of Iranian politics is that there's no need to worry. Some people say that no one can do a damned thing and that in a nuclear confrontation, America will suffer a defeat.
Interestingly, while all attempts have been made to prove that Iran's nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only, our security and military officials talk of nuclear war and Iran's victory in such a war.
Just like Don Quixote , we continue to appear optimistic and disseminate information based on this vision, trying in vain to keep the morale of the people high. But it's clear that if we fail to inspect the chess board precisely; if we lack a clear understanding of the existing atmosphere; if we entertain optimism destined to lead to crisis and misunderstanding, then we will lose the game.
A well thought-out and logical analysis - of course, if the Democrats had their way, a binding resolution would pass outlawing any measures of force against Iran, and the concerns listed above would cease to be an issue, and Iran could go happily along its way, building nukes and whistling down the road to their long-dreamed of Holocaust sequel. All the while stringing along fools like Bill Richardson (linked above), who claim we need to address Iran by "speaking credibly from a position of strength", while damning the very strength he claims we need to succeed (a Mitt Romney-type flip, but since Richardson is a Democrat, the media just waves his stupidity through).
Given the present circumstances, wisdom and expediency require taking steps in a more reasonable and well-thought-out manner. We should neither exaggerate our abilities nor belittle those of the enemy. As a famous proverb says, "there is no small enemy." Over recent months the trend of developments has been noteworthy.
....our officials said that the issue would not be put on the Security Council agenda; but then it was. In the third phase, our officials said that the U.N. would be unable to pass a resolution headlined "5+1=0;" and yet such a resolution was passed [5+1 is in reference to the sponsors of the Security Council resolution].
Rather than trying to wisely diminish the threat, reduce hostilities and increase our small number of allies, we chose an easier way: to sloganeer and withstand the consequences. And finally, they [Iranian officials] described the resolution as a piece of mere trash paper.
But in our country, the overwhelming message of Iranian politics is that there's no need to worry. Some people say that no one can do a damned thing and that in a nuclear confrontation, America will suffer a defeat.
Interestingly, while all attempts have been made to prove that Iran's nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only, our security and military officials talk of nuclear war and Iran's victory in such a war.
Just like Don Quixote , we continue to appear optimistic and disseminate information based on this vision, trying in vain to keep the morale of the people high. But it's clear that if we fail to inspect the chess board precisely; if we lack a clear understanding of the existing atmosphere; if we entertain optimism destined to lead to crisis and misunderstanding, then we will lose the game.
A well thought-out and logical analysis - of course, if the Democrats had their way, a binding resolution would pass outlawing any measures of force against Iran, and the concerns listed above would cease to be an issue, and Iran could go happily along its way, building nukes and whistling down the road to their long-dreamed of Holocaust sequel. All the while stringing along fools like Bill Richardson (linked above), who claim we need to address Iran by "speaking credibly from a position of strength", while damning the very strength he claims we need to succeed (a Mitt Romney-type flip, but since Richardson is a Democrat, the media just waves his stupidity through).
And yet, unlike Nazi Germany, there seems to be very little public support among the Persian population for the planned Juden-free World Domination that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad seeks....it seems like the tension in Iran is bubbling right below the surface....
UPDATE: Here's an example of the empty boasting that our editorial writer above speaks of:
"We do not see America in a position to impose another crisis on its tax payers inside America by starting another war in the region," Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki told reporters.
"The Islamic Republic of Iran has prepared itself for any possibility, but insists on constructive cooperation, Mottaki said.
You insist? Well, we'll see....and whose threat is emptier, Mottaki's or Richardson's?
UPDATE II: Richardson, in the Washington Post Op-ed linked above, makes the following false claim:
No nation has ever been forced to renounce nuclear weapons, but many have chosen to do so.
Well, one could say that the Germans were pretty knee-deep in nuclear weapon design/manufacture in the latter days of WWII; and only the carpet-bombing of the German nation prevented a Nazi Nuke. One could also say that while Libya gave up their nuclear weapons program peacefully a few years back, it was only after Gaddafi saw Afghanistan and Iraq overrun by American troops did the lessons that Ronald Reagan taught him in the early '80's resurface.
But why let troublesome things like facts get in the way of a faulty arguement? And who is the media to correct a Democrat, anyway?
UPDATE III: Credit where it is due, always - editorial from Iran via Watching America, an invaluable site for assessing the foreign media's role in anti-Americanism.
Friday, February 23, 2007
It Ain't All Bad...
Just trying to provide a little balance in my tiny corner of the 'sphere...
Supporters of US Vice President Dick Cheney hold a banner outside the hotel where he delivered his Australian American Leadership Dialogue in Sydney. Cheney on Saturday met Australian Prime Minister John Howard, one of Washington's staunchest allies, for talks likely to focus on troop deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan.
Thursday, February 22, 2007
Misleading Headline Alert!
This is ridiculous:
Iraq war protests grow before Cheney's Australia trip
SYDNEY (Reuters) - Anti-Iraq war protesters briefly scuffled with police in Sydney on Thursday ahead of a visit by Vice President Dick Cheney, underlining divisions within one of Washington's firmest allies over the unpopular war.
Wow! A scuffle! Must have been some protest, right?
A police spokeswoman said seven people were arrested when police barred up to 200 Stop the War Coalition protesters from marching through Australia's largest city, demanding Prime Minister John Howard pull troops out of Iraq.
200 people? In Australia's largest city? And the protests are growing? Where were they held last week, in the trunk of a frickin' Prius?
Now watch Reuters spin the other way:
Italy president in crisis talks after Prodi quits
Italy's president holds crisis talks with political leaders on Thursday to see if Romano Prodi, who resigned as prime minister after nine months in power, can still head a government or must be replaced.
Prodi, who won the narrowest election in Italy's post-war history last year, quit on Wednesday after he was defeated in the Senate on foreign policy -- a constant source of friction in his nine-party, Catholics-to-communists coalition
But wasn't Prodi a hardcore liberal - an anti-Iraq, pro-EU, pro-appeasemtn, anti-American candidate? What "foreign policy" issues was he smacked down over?
Beats me - 17 paragraphs follow the two I just reprinted, and none of them reveal a hint over what the divisions were....
What is Reuters hiding?
Iraq war protests grow before Cheney's Australia trip
SYDNEY (Reuters) - Anti-Iraq war protesters briefly scuffled with police in Sydney on Thursday ahead of a visit by Vice President Dick Cheney, underlining divisions within one of Washington's firmest allies over the unpopular war.
Wow! A scuffle! Must have been some protest, right?
A police spokeswoman said seven people were arrested when police barred up to 200 Stop the War Coalition protesters from marching through Australia's largest city, demanding Prime Minister John Howard pull troops out of Iraq.
200 people? In Australia's largest city? And the protests are growing? Where were they held last week, in the trunk of a frickin' Prius?
Now watch Reuters spin the other way:
Italy president in crisis talks after Prodi quits
Italy's president holds crisis talks with political leaders on Thursday to see if Romano Prodi, who resigned as prime minister after nine months in power, can still head a government or must be replaced.
Prodi, who won the narrowest election in Italy's post-war history last year, quit on Wednesday after he was defeated in the Senate on foreign policy -- a constant source of friction in his nine-party, Catholics-to-communists coalition
But wasn't Prodi a hardcore liberal - an anti-Iraq, pro-EU, pro-appeasemtn, anti-American candidate? What "foreign policy" issues was he smacked down over?
Beats me - 17 paragraphs follow the two I just reprinted, and none of them reveal a hint over what the divisions were....
What is Reuters hiding?
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
The Media and Mitt Romney
The media (or is it primarily the Washington Post?) has been going after Mr. Romney with a vengeance lately - yesterday we posted on a Richard Cohen- penned screed bashing Mitt for his evolving positions (although my post was mainly focused on Cohen's free use of hate-speech); today the WaPost backs him up with a column by Ruth Marcus, who recites an anecdote from over two years ago:
Precisely two years ago, Mitt Romney, then the governor of Massachusetts but already eyeing a 2008 presidential bid, sat in the coffee shop of a Washington hotel, doing his best not to explain his views on abortion.....
She goes on to mock what may very well be some convoluted reasoning, and concludes thusly:
Those considering Romney in 2008 have reason to wonder what a politician who admits so freely to...manipulation is willing to do to win their votes.
Again, not necessarily an unfair statement - but only if evenly applied. How about applying the same standards to Hillary Clinton and her "evolving" poistions on the war, which seem to mutate with each passing day and every new public opinion poll?
Or to John Edwards - the media gushes over his tax-raising health care plan, but never mentions, you know, that multi-millionaire ambulance-chasing lawyers like Edwards have caused the very crisis in healthcare that he/they now claim needs "fixing". At the very least, his new $6 million dollar family compund should be featured (and not in the "Home" section, either!).
And how about Obama - can someone tell me why the media is refusing to question his inexplicable taunts of some of our staunchest overseas allies (messing with John Howard and the Aussies? are you kidding?), and his child-like view of the world in general? Or perhaps he is their idealistic "JFK" for 2008 (see Kerry, John)...and if you want to talk religion( as everyone wants to do with Mitt), perhaps someone could explore Obama's devotion to the quite non-traditional church he belongs to on Chicago's South Side. Maybe Obama's positions have not changed much (started stupid, stayed same), but since he has far less experience than one pilloried ex-Vice President known as J. Danforth Quayle, one would expect a bit more scrutiny...
Again, this blog is not huge on Mitt Romney (we've already endorsed Rudy), and if we were to offer any advice, it would be to...be yourself, a moderate Republican, and see where the chips fall in '08. Don't listen to the pundits that tell you that you need to position yourself "here" or "there" to win votes; the man who is true to himself will gain more supporters than any artifically endorsed positioning.
But my point remains - if you are going to pound Mitt for position shifts, then do the same for the Democratic candidates, or don't do it at all. Otherwise, you may come across as politically biased (and we know that isn't true!), or as just another anti-Mormonite....
Precisely two years ago, Mitt Romney, then the governor of Massachusetts but already eyeing a 2008 presidential bid, sat in the coffee shop of a Washington hotel, doing his best not to explain his views on abortion.....
She goes on to mock what may very well be some convoluted reasoning, and concludes thusly:
Those considering Romney in 2008 have reason to wonder what a politician who admits so freely to...manipulation is willing to do to win their votes.
Again, not necessarily an unfair statement - but only if evenly applied. How about applying the same standards to Hillary Clinton and her "evolving" poistions on the war, which seem to mutate with each passing day and every new public opinion poll?
Or to John Edwards - the media gushes over his tax-raising health care plan, but never mentions, you know, that multi-millionaire ambulance-chasing lawyers like Edwards have caused the very crisis in healthcare that he/they now claim needs "fixing". At the very least, his new $6 million dollar family compund should be featured (and not in the "Home" section, either!).
And how about Obama - can someone tell me why the media is refusing to question his inexplicable taunts of some of our staunchest overseas allies (messing with John Howard and the Aussies? are you kidding?), and his child-like view of the world in general? Or perhaps he is their idealistic "JFK" for 2008 (see Kerry, John)...and if you want to talk religion( as everyone wants to do with Mitt), perhaps someone could explore Obama's devotion to the quite non-traditional church he belongs to on Chicago's South Side. Maybe Obama's positions have not changed much (started stupid, stayed same), but since he has far less experience than one pilloried ex-Vice President known as J. Danforth Quayle, one would expect a bit more scrutiny...
Again, this blog is not huge on Mitt Romney (we've already endorsed Rudy), and if we were to offer any advice, it would be to...be yourself, a moderate Republican, and see where the chips fall in '08. Don't listen to the pundits that tell you that you need to position yourself "here" or "there" to win votes; the man who is true to himself will gain more supporters than any artifically endorsed positioning.
But my point remains - if you are going to pound Mitt for position shifts, then do the same for the Democratic candidates, or don't do it at all. Otherwise, you may come across as politically biased (and we know that isn't true!), or as just another anti-Mormonite....
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Insult !
Mr. Richard Cohen goes after Republicans with a hateful slur while writing an article trashing Mitt Romney:
....And in a letter written in 1994 to the Log Cabin Republicans, he looked forward to the day when gays and lesbians could serve "openly and honestly in our nation's military." That day will not come should he become president, he has said recently. Peering into the homophobic heart of GOP primary voters, Romney now thinks gays ought to stay in the closet. He has changed his mind.
F*ck you, Cohen. How dare you use a general slur like "homophobic" against everyone who dares to thwart your will and vote in the Republican primaries? Can I expect you use the phrase "terror-appeasing" to describe every Democratic voter that trudges to the polls to vote for their favorite surrender-monkey?
Making this all the more unbelieveable is that Cohen has complained about being called an anti-Semite after writing a few columns on the need for Israel to cease to exist. Yet he turns around and charges, with no apparent irony(or basis in fact), all Republicans with hate crimes.
Here's his whining about the backlash he suffered, incidentally:
So it comes as a surprise that has the force of a mugging to be accused of aiding the very people I so hate -- of being an abettor of something called "The New Anti-Semitism."
....Certain prominent American Jews -- the historian Tony Judt, the playwright Tony Kushner, the poet Adrienne Rich and I, among others -- were charged with aiding anti-Semitism with our writings. We were, in other words, enablers. As if that was not bad enough, Shulamit Reinharz, a Brandeis University professor and a columnist for a Jewish weekly, dispensed totally with Rosenfeld's qualification. She told the Boston Globe that all of us mentioned in the AJC report are just plain anti-Semites.
Well, Cohen, it has hit me with the force of a mugging that I am labeled as a "homophobe" because I share different views than you about overt homosexuality's place in society. Seems like you can't take it, yet continue to dish it out furiously. If you don't like labels, than don't apply them to others, especially folk you do not know, or apprently even care to understand. Or does your left-of-center hatred of all things rightward simply blind you to the world you are creating with your incindenary columns?
Read the article - he bashes poor Mitt Romney for "flip-flops" that Hillary Clinton has been commiting on a daily basis since she began running for president (in 2000?) but apparently gets a pass for... not to mention the potshots he takes at Romney's commitment to his religion.
Cohen is pathetic, and as I said in the post linked above, more than a bit sick, and more than a bit racist....
UPDATE: If Richard Cohen wasn't such a left-wing self-loathing Jew, maybe he'd have the courage to go after this guy. Based on his comments, he's one of the people you "so hate". Or is that hatred only reserved for American conservatives?
....And in a letter written in 1994 to the Log Cabin Republicans, he looked forward to the day when gays and lesbians could serve "openly and honestly in our nation's military." That day will not come should he become president, he has said recently. Peering into the homophobic heart of GOP primary voters, Romney now thinks gays ought to stay in the closet. He has changed his mind.
F*ck you, Cohen. How dare you use a general slur like "homophobic" against everyone who dares to thwart your will and vote in the Republican primaries? Can I expect you use the phrase "terror-appeasing" to describe every Democratic voter that trudges to the polls to vote for their favorite surrender-monkey?
Making this all the more unbelieveable is that Cohen has complained about being called an anti-Semite after writing a few columns on the need for Israel to cease to exist. Yet he turns around and charges, with no apparent irony(or basis in fact), all Republicans with hate crimes.
Here's his whining about the backlash he suffered, incidentally:
So it comes as a surprise that has the force of a mugging to be accused of aiding the very people I so hate -- of being an abettor of something called "The New Anti-Semitism."
....Certain prominent American Jews -- the historian Tony Judt, the playwright Tony Kushner, the poet Adrienne Rich and I, among others -- were charged with aiding anti-Semitism with our writings. We were, in other words, enablers. As if that was not bad enough, Shulamit Reinharz, a Brandeis University professor and a columnist for a Jewish weekly, dispensed totally with Rosenfeld's qualification. She told the Boston Globe that all of us mentioned in the AJC report are just plain anti-Semites.
Well, Cohen, it has hit me with the force of a mugging that I am labeled as a "homophobe" because I share different views than you about overt homosexuality's place in society. Seems like you can't take it, yet continue to dish it out furiously. If you don't like labels, than don't apply them to others, especially folk you do not know, or apprently even care to understand. Or does your left-of-center hatred of all things rightward simply blind you to the world you are creating with your incindenary columns?
Read the article - he bashes poor Mitt Romney for "flip-flops" that Hillary Clinton has been commiting on a daily basis since she began running for president (in 2000?) but apparently gets a pass for... not to mention the potshots he takes at Romney's commitment to his religion.
Cohen is pathetic, and as I said in the post linked above, more than a bit sick, and more than a bit racist....
UPDATE: If Richard Cohen wasn't such a left-wing self-loathing Jew, maybe he'd have the courage to go after this guy. Based on his comments, he's one of the people you "so hate". Or is that hatred only reserved for American conservatives?
Monday, February 19, 2007
The Visions and Prophecies of George Washington
Something spooky for President's Day....as written in George Washington's memoirs, and thus recorded at the Library of Congress - a vision presented to him in the cold days of 1777:
"This afternoon, as I was sitting at this table engaged in preparing a dispatch, something seemed to disturb me. Looking up, I beheld standing opposite me a singularly beautiful female. S o astonished was I, for I had given strict orders not to be disturbed, that it was some moments before I found language to inquire the cause of her presence. A second, a third and even a fourth time did I repeat my question, but received no answer from my mysterious visitor except a slight raising of her eyes....All I could do was to gaze steadily, vacantly at my unknown visitor...Gradually the surrounding atmosphere seemed as if it had become filled with sensations, and luminous....
"....`Son of the Republic' said the same mysterious voice as before, `look and learn,' At that moment I beheld a dark, shadowy being, like an angel, standing, or rather floating in mid-air, between Europe and America. Dipping water out of the ocean in the hollow of each hand, he sprinkled some upon America with his right hand, while with his left hand he cast some on Europe. Immediately a cloud raised from these countries, and joined in mid-ocean. For a while it remained stationary, and then moved slowly westward, until it enveloped America in its murky folds. Sharp flashes of lightning gleamed through it at intervals, and I heard the smothered groans and cries of the American people.
"A second time the angel dipped water from the ocean, and sprinkled it out as before. The dark cloud was then drawn back to the ocean, in whose heaving billows it sank from view..."
"And again I heard the mysterious voice saying, `Son of the Republic, look and learn.' At this the dark, shadowy angel placed a trumpet to his mouth, and blew three distinct blasts; and taking water from the ocean, he sprinkled it upon Europe, Asia and Africa. Then my eyes beheld a fearful scene: from each of these countries arose thick, black clouds that were soon joined into one.
Throughout this mass there gleamed a dark red light by which I saw hordes of armed men, who, moving with the cloud, marched by land and sailed by sea to America. Our country was enveloped in this volume of cloud, and I saw these vast armies devastate the whole country and burn the villages, towns and cities that I beheld springing up. As my ears listened to the thundering of the cannon, clashing of swords, and the shouts and cries of millions in mortal combat, I heard again the mysterious voice saying, `Son of the Republic, look and learn.' When the voice had ceased, the dark shadowy angel placed his trumpet once more to his mouth, and blew a long and fearful blast...
"The scene instantly began to fade and dissolve, and I at last saw nothing but the rising, curling vapor I at first beheld. This also disappearing, I found myself once more gazing upon the mysterious visitor, who, in the same voice I had heard before, said, `Son of the Republic, what you have seen is thus interpreted: three great perils will come upon the Republic. The most fearful is the third, but in this greatest conflict the whole world united shall not prevail against her. Let every child of the Republic learn to live for his God, his land and the Union. With these words the vision vanished, and I started from my seat and felt that I had seen a vision wherein had been shown to me the birth, progress and destiny of the United States."
Is it just me, or is the great General's apocalyptic vision of a "third peril" one that seems as if it could befall us at any minute?
Or do all whom ever live, believe that their times are the end times?
"This afternoon, as I was sitting at this table engaged in preparing a dispatch, something seemed to disturb me. Looking up, I beheld standing opposite me a singularly beautiful female. S o astonished was I, for I had given strict orders not to be disturbed, that it was some moments before I found language to inquire the cause of her presence. A second, a third and even a fourth time did I repeat my question, but received no answer from my mysterious visitor except a slight raising of her eyes....All I could do was to gaze steadily, vacantly at my unknown visitor...Gradually the surrounding atmosphere seemed as if it had become filled with sensations, and luminous....
"....`Son of the Republic' said the same mysterious voice as before, `look and learn,' At that moment I beheld a dark, shadowy being, like an angel, standing, or rather floating in mid-air, between Europe and America. Dipping water out of the ocean in the hollow of each hand, he sprinkled some upon America with his right hand, while with his left hand he cast some on Europe. Immediately a cloud raised from these countries, and joined in mid-ocean. For a while it remained stationary, and then moved slowly westward, until it enveloped America in its murky folds. Sharp flashes of lightning gleamed through it at intervals, and I heard the smothered groans and cries of the American people.
"A second time the angel dipped water from the ocean, and sprinkled it out as before. The dark cloud was then drawn back to the ocean, in whose heaving billows it sank from view..."
"And again I heard the mysterious voice saying, `Son of the Republic, look and learn.' At this the dark, shadowy angel placed a trumpet to his mouth, and blew three distinct blasts; and taking water from the ocean, he sprinkled it upon Europe, Asia and Africa. Then my eyes beheld a fearful scene: from each of these countries arose thick, black clouds that were soon joined into one.
Throughout this mass there gleamed a dark red light by which I saw hordes of armed men, who, moving with the cloud, marched by land and sailed by sea to America. Our country was enveloped in this volume of cloud, and I saw these vast armies devastate the whole country and burn the villages, towns and cities that I beheld springing up. As my ears listened to the thundering of the cannon, clashing of swords, and the shouts and cries of millions in mortal combat, I heard again the mysterious voice saying, `Son of the Republic, look and learn.' When the voice had ceased, the dark shadowy angel placed his trumpet once more to his mouth, and blew a long and fearful blast...
"The scene instantly began to fade and dissolve, and I at last saw nothing but the rising, curling vapor I at first beheld. This also disappearing, I found myself once more gazing upon the mysterious visitor, who, in the same voice I had heard before, said, `Son of the Republic, what you have seen is thus interpreted: three great perils will come upon the Republic. The most fearful is the third, but in this greatest conflict the whole world united shall not prevail against her. Let every child of the Republic learn to live for his God, his land and the Union. With these words the vision vanished, and I started from my seat and felt that I had seen a vision wherein had been shown to me the birth, progress and destiny of the United States."
Is it just me, or is the great General's apocalyptic vision of a "third peril" one that seems as if it could befall us at any minute?
Or do all whom ever live, believe that their times are the end times?
Sunday, February 18, 2007
Ru-dee! Ru-dee! Ru-dee...!
New York, circa 1992, was considered, literally, an "ungovernable" city (made all the worse so by the disasterous reign of former mayor David Dinkins). Enter stage right one Rudy Giuliani, and watch a city often compared (negatively) against third-world nations become a low-crime, business-friendly, family-themed Disneyland of the Northeast. Any wonder why he's looking like the most likely candidate in the field to be taking the oath in January '09? George Will:
....for many months commentators have said that when the Republican base learns the facts about Rudy Giuliani's personal life (an annulled first marriage, a messy divorce, then a third marriage) and views on social issues (for abortion rights, gay rights and gun control, in each case with limits), support for him will evaporate. But such commentary is becoming self-refuting. The insistent reiteration of it during Giuliani's coast-to-coast campaigning is telling activist Republicans -- the sort of people who read political commentary -- the facts about Giuliani. And so far those facts are not causing a recoil from him: According to the USA Today-Gallup poll, his lead over John McCain has grown from 31 percent to 27 percent in November to 40-24 today.
And despite the media's attempt to portray all conservatives as "Christofascists" (sorry, John Edwards!), Will explains the nuance that the MSM is too thick to grasp:
People for whom opposition to abortion is very important might, however, think that in wartime it is not supremely important...
More on Rudy's accomplishments in an essay by Steven Malanga in today's New York Post:
NOT since Teddy Roosevelt took on Tammany Hall a century ago has a New York politician closely linked to urban reform looked like presidential timber...
He ran New York with a conservative's priorities - and delivered reform to a degree unprecedented in modern U.S. history. All while facing perhaps the only American media and political establishment even more liberal than the national one.
Over the last century, millions of people from all over the world have come to New York City," Giuliani once observed. "They didn't come here to be taken care of and to be dependent on city government. They came here for the freedom to take care of themselves....
TO those of us who observed Giuliani from the beginning, it was astonishing how fully he followed through on his conservative principles once elected - no matter how much he upset elite opinion, no matter how often radical advocates took to the streets in protest, no matter how many veiled (and not so veiled) threats that incendiary figures like Al Sharpton made against him and no matter how often The New York Times fulminated against his policies.
And while another canard in the anybody-but-Rudy campaign is that "no blacks will ever vote for him", one important fact should be made crystal clear:
For Giuliani, "the most fundamental of civil rights is the guarantee that government can give you a reasonable degree of safety."
Giuliani was responsible for:
...a historic drop in crime far beyond what anyone could have imagined - with total crime down by some 64 percent during the Giuliani years, and murder (the most reliable crime statistic) down 67 percent, from 1,960 in 1992 to 640 in Giuliani's last year.
How many of those 1300 lives saved annually were black? How much did Rudy's crackdown on crime actually improve the quality of life for all black citizens of New York, the segment most likely to be a crime victim in the pre-Rudy years? My bet (hope might be a better word) is that some black leaders will wake up to this and support Rudy, rather than falling back on annual Democratic assurances of renewed race-grievances and additional job-training centers...Sharpton, in eight years of battling with Rudy Giuliani, was never able to get the upper hand on him; why would anybody follow his lead now?
Now, together with me...Ru-dee! Ru-dee! Ru-dee!
....for many months commentators have said that when the Republican base learns the facts about Rudy Giuliani's personal life (an annulled first marriage, a messy divorce, then a third marriage) and views on social issues (for abortion rights, gay rights and gun control, in each case with limits), support for him will evaporate. But such commentary is becoming self-refuting. The insistent reiteration of it during Giuliani's coast-to-coast campaigning is telling activist Republicans -- the sort of people who read political commentary -- the facts about Giuliani. And so far those facts are not causing a recoil from him: According to the USA Today-Gallup poll, his lead over John McCain has grown from 31 percent to 27 percent in November to 40-24 today.
And despite the media's attempt to portray all conservatives as "Christofascists" (sorry, John Edwards!), Will explains the nuance that the MSM is too thick to grasp:
People for whom opposition to abortion is very important might, however, think that in wartime it is not supremely important...
More on Rudy's accomplishments in an essay by Steven Malanga in today's New York Post:
NOT since Teddy Roosevelt took on Tammany Hall a century ago has a New York politician closely linked to urban reform looked like presidential timber...
He ran New York with a conservative's priorities - and delivered reform to a degree unprecedented in modern U.S. history. All while facing perhaps the only American media and political establishment even more liberal than the national one.
Over the last century, millions of people from all over the world have come to New York City," Giuliani once observed. "They didn't come here to be taken care of and to be dependent on city government. They came here for the freedom to take care of themselves....
TO those of us who observed Giuliani from the beginning, it was astonishing how fully he followed through on his conservative principles once elected - no matter how much he upset elite opinion, no matter how often radical advocates took to the streets in protest, no matter how many veiled (and not so veiled) threats that incendiary figures like Al Sharpton made against him and no matter how often The New York Times fulminated against his policies.
And while another canard in the anybody-but-Rudy campaign is that "no blacks will ever vote for him", one important fact should be made crystal clear:
For Giuliani, "the most fundamental of civil rights is the guarantee that government can give you a reasonable degree of safety."
Giuliani was responsible for:
...a historic drop in crime far beyond what anyone could have imagined - with total crime down by some 64 percent during the Giuliani years, and murder (the most reliable crime statistic) down 67 percent, from 1,960 in 1992 to 640 in Giuliani's last year.
How many of those 1300 lives saved annually were black? How much did Rudy's crackdown on crime actually improve the quality of life for all black citizens of New York, the segment most likely to be a crime victim in the pre-Rudy years? My bet (hope might be a better word) is that some black leaders will wake up to this and support Rudy, rather than falling back on annual Democratic assurances of renewed race-grievances and additional job-training centers...Sharpton, in eight years of battling with Rudy Giuliani, was never able to get the upper hand on him; why would anybody follow his lead now?
Now, together with me...Ru-dee! Ru-dee! Ru-dee!
Saturday, February 17, 2007
Scoundrels !
Ralph Peters, in today's New York Post, on the Democrats:
PROVIDING aid and comfort to the enemy in wartime is treason. It's not "just politics." It's treason.
And signaling our enemies that Congress wants them to win isn't "supporting our troops."
The "nonbinding resolution" telling the world that we intend to surrender to terrorism and abandon Iraq may be the most disgraceful congressional action since the Democratic Party united to defend slavery.
The Washington Post practically jumps for joy at this development; of course they have made it clear for some time that they would rather see America defeated in Iraq than have President Bush appear victorious, so their cheerleading for treason is to be expected...
And speaking of slavery - since the donkeys can't defend that any longer, they keep the blacks on the plantation by ingraining them with victimization, something they can fall back on when the left drags them into scandal:
The key black South Carolina leader who scored a big payday for his consulting firm just before he endorsed Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential bid said any allegations of impropriety are laced with racism.
"I'm somewhat offended in the sense that . . . the national media thinks that an African-American in my position cannot support a candidate without being paid off," huffed state Sen. Darrell Jackson, a well-connected lawmaker and pastor whose support is coveted by national campaigns.
His public-relations and consulting firm, Sunrise Enterprises, snagged a deal with Clinton's campaign for $10,000 per month through the 2008 primary.
Ah, with the Clintons around, it's 1994 all over again - just what Hillary thinks the voters are looking for in 2008...
Hey Hil, remember what happened in '94? Salivating Republicans do....
Or is this a repeat of 1975, when Saigon fell after a Democratic Congress cut funds for Vietnam? Yeah, that burnished their national security credentials. Seems like the party of "Progressives" is actually more than a bit regressive....
PROVIDING aid and comfort to the enemy in wartime is treason. It's not "just politics." It's treason.
And signaling our enemies that Congress wants them to win isn't "supporting our troops."
The "nonbinding resolution" telling the world that we intend to surrender to terrorism and abandon Iraq may be the most disgraceful congressional action since the Democratic Party united to defend slavery.
The Washington Post practically jumps for joy at this development; of course they have made it clear for some time that they would rather see America defeated in Iraq than have President Bush appear victorious, so their cheerleading for treason is to be expected...
And speaking of slavery - since the donkeys can't defend that any longer, they keep the blacks on the plantation by ingraining them with victimization, something they can fall back on when the left drags them into scandal:
The key black South Carolina leader who scored a big payday for his consulting firm just before he endorsed Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential bid said any allegations of impropriety are laced with racism.
"I'm somewhat offended in the sense that . . . the national media thinks that an African-American in my position cannot support a candidate without being paid off," huffed state Sen. Darrell Jackson, a well-connected lawmaker and pastor whose support is coveted by national campaigns.
His public-relations and consulting firm, Sunrise Enterprises, snagged a deal with Clinton's campaign for $10,000 per month through the 2008 primary.
Ah, with the Clintons around, it's 1994 all over again - just what Hillary thinks the voters are looking for in 2008...
Hey Hil, remember what happened in '94? Salivating Republicans do....
Or is this a repeat of 1975, when Saigon fell after a Democratic Congress cut funds for Vietnam? Yeah, that burnished their national security credentials. Seems like the party of "Progressives" is actually more than a bit regressive....
Friday, February 16, 2007
Late Night Snack....
Mr. Roger Simon, a thoughtful man who usually chooses his words carefully, gets a tad unhinged as he goes after the media's kid-glove treatment of John Murtha...and I love it:
Anne Flaherty of the AP fervently kisses the feet of John Murtha in her idolatrous news reporting today"Murtha Moves to Forefront of Iraq Debate." . I doubt who John Murtha really is slipped her mind (even though it isn't in the article), but I will remind her. John Murtha is a creepy, corrupt politician who escaped an Abscam indictment by testifying against his peers...
....Murtha is pond scum. The best you can say of him is that he is the kind of pol who - knowing full well he was dealing with corrupt criminals willing to give bribes- urges those same criminals to invest in his district before bribing him. ("Don Corleone, please invest in my sister's brothel...").
Yow. And I think Simon is being kind, incidentally. The Washington Post, shockingly, goes after Pelosi's little bitch-boy as well:
Mr. Murtha's cynicism is matched by an alarming ignorance about conditions in Iraq.
Is that a nice way of saying the same thing that Roger is?
Ricky Martin - remember him? - apparently has "joined the other team".
No. Really:
During his performance in Puerto Rico, Ricky Martin stuck his middle finger out when he mentioned President Bush’s name. In the song Asignatura Pendiente, there is a line in the lyrics that goes:
“A photo with Bush…”
As he said this, Ricky gave him the F-you treatment and the crowd of 18,000 fans went crazy and cheered.
The irony in all of this is that Ricky was one of the artists to sing for Bush during his inauguration as President.
"If that is the way the wind is blowing, let no-one say that Ricky does not also blow." (with apologies to Mayor "Diamond Joe" Quimby)
And what's a Friday night without a March on the Dildo-Waving Hookers, via Right Truth:
A woman named Dirty Martini did a striptease. Weighing in at well over 200 pounds, she finished her routine wearing only a G-string and pasties.
Yow. Right Truth is really just making her points about the ACLU; but it's way more alluring out of context...sorry, R.T.~
How about Mitt Romney - with a brush mustache?
Mitt Romney has officially announced his intentions to steal the 2008 election, yet it has aroused little excitement in fellow party members who feel he’s not “conservative” enough for their support. Romney's against gay marriage and less than enthusiastic about abortion – he’d have to invade Poland to be any more “conservative”. Still, the GOP mullahs are worried that Romney may only be pretending to be one of them to woo Republican voters.
Gosh, if there was only some way for Romney to show the GOP that his conservativism is sincere...
And finally - Madonna tells us how she cares so about the world and everyone in it, but most importantly - she cares about herself!
I want to be like Gandhi and Martin Luther King and John Lennon – but I want to stay alive.
We are blessed, in these times of international crisis, to have among us so many brave celebrities...
Anne Flaherty of the AP fervently kisses the feet of John Murtha in her idolatrous news reporting today"Murtha Moves to Forefront of Iraq Debate." . I doubt who John Murtha really is slipped her mind (even though it isn't in the article), but I will remind her. John Murtha is a creepy, corrupt politician who escaped an Abscam indictment by testifying against his peers...
....Murtha is pond scum. The best you can say of him is that he is the kind of pol who - knowing full well he was dealing with corrupt criminals willing to give bribes- urges those same criminals to invest in his district before bribing him. ("Don Corleone, please invest in my sister's brothel...").
Yow. And I think Simon is being kind, incidentally. The Washington Post, shockingly, goes after Pelosi's little bitch-boy as well:
Mr. Murtha's cynicism is matched by an alarming ignorance about conditions in Iraq.
Is that a nice way of saying the same thing that Roger is?
Ricky Martin - remember him? - apparently has "joined the other team".
No. Really:
During his performance in Puerto Rico, Ricky Martin stuck his middle finger out when he mentioned President Bush’s name. In the song Asignatura Pendiente, there is a line in the lyrics that goes:
“A photo with Bush…”
As he said this, Ricky gave him the F-you treatment and the crowd of 18,000 fans went crazy and cheered.
The irony in all of this is that Ricky was one of the artists to sing for Bush during his inauguration as President.
"If that is the way the wind is blowing, let no-one say that Ricky does not also blow." (with apologies to Mayor "Diamond Joe" Quimby)
And what's a Friday night without a March on the Dildo-Waving Hookers, via Right Truth:
A woman named Dirty Martini did a striptease. Weighing in at well over 200 pounds, she finished her routine wearing only a G-string and pasties.
Yow. Right Truth is really just making her points about the ACLU; but it's way more alluring out of context...sorry, R.T.~
How about Mitt Romney - with a brush mustache?
Mitt Romney has officially announced his intentions to steal the 2008 election, yet it has aroused little excitement in fellow party members who feel he’s not “conservative” enough for their support. Romney's against gay marriage and less than enthusiastic about abortion – he’d have to invade Poland to be any more “conservative”. Still, the GOP mullahs are worried that Romney may only be pretending to be one of them to woo Republican voters.
Gosh, if there was only some way for Romney to show the GOP that his conservativism is sincere...
And finally - Madonna tells us how she cares so about the world and everyone in it, but most importantly - she cares about herself!
I want to be like Gandhi and Martin Luther King and John Lennon – but I want to stay alive.
We are blessed, in these times of international crisis, to have among us so many brave celebrities...
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Now Fighting for Al-Qaeda....Mr. John Murtha !!
Democrat John Murtha, lauded as "brave" by the media for bashing his country and their troops in the field, now is secretly working on a way to make sure al-Qaeda can run freely throughout Iraq and the Middle East:
Murtha, the powerful chairman of the defense subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, will seek to attach a provision to an upcoming $93 billion supplemental spending bill for Iraq and Afghanistan. It would restrict the deployment of troops to Iraq unless they meet certain levels adequate manpower, equipment and training to succeed in combat. That's a standard Murtha believes few of the units Bush intends to use for the surge would be able to meet.
In addition, Murtha, acting with the backing of the House Democratic leadership, will seek to limit the time and number of deployments by soldiers, Marines and National Guard units to Iraq, making it tougher for Pentagon officials to find the troops to replace units that are scheduled to rotate out of the country. Additional funding restrictions are also being considered by Murtha, such as prohibiting the creation of U.S. military bases inside Iraq, dismantling the notorious Abu Ghraib prison and closing the American detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
If Murtha and the Democrats think they will fool the American people into thinking that by defunding the troops in the field (and limiting support and reinforcements), they are actually somehow "supporting the troops" in the field, well, the only ones they will be fooling is themselves. While the Democrats might have very well been voted into power due to some frustration with the war effort (as much so with the war itself), they were not given carte blanche by the voters to surrender Iraq via Congressional fiat (I'm sorry - not surrender, "redeploy").
This shameful play will come to light (no matter how hard their allies in the media try to hide it), and the Democrats will be forced to take more direct action, and responsibility for those actions. Now that even the miserable al-Sadr is on the run from the surge in U.S. forces in Iraq, can the Democrats now take credit for fighting against a strategy that is working? Or will the media continue to spin every victory into a defeat to save the hides of the Donkeys?
Gateway Pundit has a lot more on the traitorous spitbag Murtha, and the long history of Democratic appeasement of the enemies of the Union....
UPDATE 2/19: The horror, the horror...the headline in today's WaPost reads Murtha in Command...I'll give you the opening, and the close, go read the gooey middle should you have the stomach:
After 16 undistinguished terms in Congress, Rep. John P. Murtha at long last felt his moment had arrived. He could not keep quiet the secret Democratic strategy that he had forged for the promised "second step" against President Bush's Iraq policy. In an interview last Thursday with the antiwar Web site MoveCongress.org, he revealed plans to put conditions on funding of U.S. troops. His message: I am running this show.
It seems all but certain that Democrats will pass what Murtha frankly calls an attempt to prevent funding of the surge. Improbable though it may seem, blunt and brassy Jack Murtha is moving close to command over U.S. policy on Iraq.
Murtha, the powerful chairman of the defense subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, will seek to attach a provision to an upcoming $93 billion supplemental spending bill for Iraq and Afghanistan. It would restrict the deployment of troops to Iraq unless they meet certain levels adequate manpower, equipment and training to succeed in combat. That's a standard Murtha believes few of the units Bush intends to use for the surge would be able to meet.
In addition, Murtha, acting with the backing of the House Democratic leadership, will seek to limit the time and number of deployments by soldiers, Marines and National Guard units to Iraq, making it tougher for Pentagon officials to find the troops to replace units that are scheduled to rotate out of the country. Additional funding restrictions are also being considered by Murtha, such as prohibiting the creation of U.S. military bases inside Iraq, dismantling the notorious Abu Ghraib prison and closing the American detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
If Murtha and the Democrats think they will fool the American people into thinking that by defunding the troops in the field (and limiting support and reinforcements), they are actually somehow "supporting the troops" in the field, well, the only ones they will be fooling is themselves. While the Democrats might have very well been voted into power due to some frustration with the war effort (as much so with the war itself), they were not given carte blanche by the voters to surrender Iraq via Congressional fiat (I'm sorry - not surrender, "redeploy").
This shameful play will come to light (no matter how hard their allies in the media try to hide it), and the Democrats will be forced to take more direct action, and responsibility for those actions. Now that even the miserable al-Sadr is on the run from the surge in U.S. forces in Iraq, can the Democrats now take credit for fighting against a strategy that is working? Or will the media continue to spin every victory into a defeat to save the hides of the Donkeys?
Gateway Pundit has a lot more on the traitorous spitbag Murtha, and the long history of Democratic appeasement of the enemies of the Union....
UPDATE 2/19: The horror, the horror...the headline in today's WaPost reads Murtha in Command...I'll give you the opening, and the close, go read the gooey middle should you have the stomach:
After 16 undistinguished terms in Congress, Rep. John P. Murtha at long last felt his moment had arrived. He could not keep quiet the secret Democratic strategy that he had forged for the promised "second step" against President Bush's Iraq policy. In an interview last Thursday with the antiwar Web site MoveCongress.org, he revealed plans to put conditions on funding of U.S. troops. His message: I am running this show.
It seems all but certain that Democrats will pass what Murtha frankly calls an attempt to prevent funding of the surge. Improbable though it may seem, blunt and brassy Jack Murtha is moving close to command over U.S. policy on Iraq.
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
New Jersey Jumps Off the Climate Cliff...
I just read with horror Jim's post on New Jersey's plan to attack "global warming":
....imagine how pleased I was to see that Governor Corzine will issue an Executive Order that contains long-term “global warming” goals matched only by those in California...
The state legislature will have to pass a statute in order to implement the goals that are contained in the Executive Order. No problemo, that. Democrats Linda Stender and Barbara Buono are ready to hold hearings on New Jersey’s “Global Warming Response Act”. According to the Star Ledger, The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection “will develop plans for meeting the goals in conjunction with the Department of Transportation, Board of Public Utilities [and] Department of Community Affairs …”
The prospect of four state agencies given the task of writing new regulations is downright frightening. Regulators just love to write regulations – lots of them. More regulations mean more bureaucracy, which in New Jersey means … yes, more taxes. Count on it.
If this continues, one day the only business left in New Jersey will be state government, and the only people left in the state will be state government employees. They can amuse themselves by regulating hell out of one another.
Well, we've said that before...I agree with Jim; we'll definitely see more taxes, especially on the New Jersey middle class, and most likely on our SUV's (yeah, fat lot of good a Prius would have been in getting me to work today, but Corzine and his ilk will always have their taxpayer-funded SUV's to take them to whatever fundraiser they need to get to).
New Jersey as the new California, except with worse weather and finances...just great.
There is a solution, though it is too simple and not punishment-oriented enough for the Democratic left ...via Tim Blair:
Easy. Simply ban automatic cars, as I advised in 2005. Because automatic cars use around 5% more fuel than manual cars, that simple law would save 5,650,000,000 barrels of oil per year in the US alone (and be minimally disruptive in developing nations, where a greater proportion of vehicles are non-automatic). If each barrel contains 175 kilograms of carbon, we’re looking at an annual carbon reduction (US only) in the region of 988,750,000 metric tons.
Save the enviornment, drive a stick!
Nah, never work...how would you raise revenues that way?
....imagine how pleased I was to see that Governor Corzine will issue an Executive Order that contains long-term “global warming” goals matched only by those in California...
The state legislature will have to pass a statute in order to implement the goals that are contained in the Executive Order. No problemo, that. Democrats Linda Stender and Barbara Buono are ready to hold hearings on New Jersey’s “Global Warming Response Act”. According to the Star Ledger, The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection “will develop plans for meeting the goals in conjunction with the Department of Transportation, Board of Public Utilities [and] Department of Community Affairs …”
The prospect of four state agencies given the task of writing new regulations is downright frightening. Regulators just love to write regulations – lots of them. More regulations mean more bureaucracy, which in New Jersey means … yes, more taxes. Count on it.
If this continues, one day the only business left in New Jersey will be state government, and the only people left in the state will be state government employees. They can amuse themselves by regulating hell out of one another.
Well, we've said that before...I agree with Jim; we'll definitely see more taxes, especially on the New Jersey middle class, and most likely on our SUV's (yeah, fat lot of good a Prius would have been in getting me to work today, but Corzine and his ilk will always have their taxpayer-funded SUV's to take them to whatever fundraiser they need to get to).
New Jersey as the new California, except with worse weather and finances...just great.
There is a solution, though it is too simple and not punishment-oriented enough for the Democratic left ...via Tim Blair:
Easy. Simply ban automatic cars, as I advised in 2005. Because automatic cars use around 5% more fuel than manual cars, that simple law would save 5,650,000,000 barrels of oil per year in the US alone (and be minimally disruptive in developing nations, where a greater proportion of vehicles are non-automatic). If each barrel contains 175 kilograms of carbon, we’re looking at an annual carbon reduction (US only) in the region of 988,750,000 metric tons.
Save the enviornment, drive a stick!
Nah, never work...how would you raise revenues that way?
Climate Change Theory, circa 1974:
A perfect post for a icy, snowy Valentine's Day in New Jersey...fFrom a commentor at the Brussels Journal:
TIME Magazine Archive Article -- Another Ice Age? -- Jun. 24, 1974 - However widely the weather varies from place to place and time to time, when meteorologists take an average of temperatures around the globe they find that the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three decades. The trend shows no indication of reversing. Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age.
Our friend follows up with a litle historical data of his own:
From around 800 A.D. to 1200 or 1300, the globe warmed again considerably and civilization prospered. This prosperous period collapsed at the end of the thirteenth century with the advent of the "Mini Ice Age". If Europe heats up by 1C it would do it a power of good. We can see this from records of 1000 years ago. Moreover, increased carbon dioxide makes plants grow more quickly, so improving crops and forests. A good environmental scare needs two ingredients. The first is impending catastrophe. The second is a suitable culprit to blame. In the second case, the ice age fails and global warming is gloriously successful. However, a new ice age, unlike global warming, would be a certain calamity.
From 800 to 1300, a "globally-warmed" Europe flourished, with an abundance of farmland allowing food and living space for its growing citizenry. Its living standards, culture and art surpassed that of most of the rest of the world. As the above notes, it all collapsed with "global cooling "in the mid 1300's. What is important to note is that a few years into the cooling of the early 13th Century, the Black Death erupted, killing a full one-third of the peoples of Europe and sending its civilization careening backwards. Is this what the proponants of the "crisis" of global warming are pushing us towards, with their "economic solutions" that will undoubtedly impoverish and weaken the world's population?
And check out this map of global temperature over the Earth's history - the bottom indicates early Earth, the very top part indicates modern times (a better look at this map is here). Jeez, those Jurassic Dinos must have had some helluva big SUV's to create some of that global warming, no? And relatively speaking, based again on the chart, aren't we due for a little bit of warmer temperatures?
TIME Magazine Archive Article -- Another Ice Age? -- Jun. 24, 1974 - However widely the weather varies from place to place and time to time, when meteorologists take an average of temperatures around the globe they find that the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three decades. The trend shows no indication of reversing. Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age.
Our friend follows up with a litle historical data of his own:
From around 800 A.D. to 1200 or 1300, the globe warmed again considerably and civilization prospered. This prosperous period collapsed at the end of the thirteenth century with the advent of the "Mini Ice Age". If Europe heats up by 1C it would do it a power of good. We can see this from records of 1000 years ago. Moreover, increased carbon dioxide makes plants grow more quickly, so improving crops and forests. A good environmental scare needs two ingredients. The first is impending catastrophe. The second is a suitable culprit to blame. In the second case, the ice age fails and global warming is gloriously successful. However, a new ice age, unlike global warming, would be a certain calamity.
From 800 to 1300, a "globally-warmed" Europe flourished, with an abundance of farmland allowing food and living space for its growing citizenry. Its living standards, culture and art surpassed that of most of the rest of the world. As the above notes, it all collapsed with "global cooling "in the mid 1300's. What is important to note is that a few years into the cooling of the early 13th Century, the Black Death erupted, killing a full one-third of the peoples of Europe and sending its civilization careening backwards. Is this what the proponants of the "crisis" of global warming are pushing us towards, with their "economic solutions" that will undoubtedly impoverish and weaken the world's population?
And check out this map of global temperature over the Earth's history - the bottom indicates early Earth, the very top part indicates modern times (a better look at this map is here). Jeez, those Jurassic Dinos must have had some helluva big SUV's to create some of that global warming, no? And relatively speaking, based again on the chart, aren't we due for a little bit of warmer temperatures?
It's time to start standing up to the fascists of climate change, before their warped gestapo science brings another plague upon us all!
OK, that's a bit melodramatic, but nevertheless, we may have more to fear from the "global warming" profiteers and crisis-mongers than we do from global warming itself....
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
The BBC Presents: A Warped View of America
All laid out nicely here, in this review from the New York Sun, of the three-part BBC fictional mini-series "The State Within". We'll excerpt:
The program's title alludes to the perception, common in Britain and hardly unusual here, that since the election of 2000, America has been run by a cabal bent on starting wars and willing to engineer atrocities on its own soil in order to justify them. Beginning with a British Airways flight exploding over Washington, D.C., the film pits British rationality and (mostly) good intentions against American overreaction, mendacity, and imperial greed.
It's also a kind of left-wing fantasy about how the British-American "special relationship" ought to function."This war's illegal, Lynn," the British ambassador, Sir Mark Brydon (Jason Isaacs), tells the American secretary of state shortly after we glimpse him in front of a portrait of Winston Churchill. "Stand the planes down!"
....The film eagerly depicts an America sliding into totalitarianism. After it is announced that the plane was blown up by a Muslim suicide bomber carrying a British passport, the governor of Virginia rounds up 200 British Muslims vacationing in his state. A panicked young Muslim couple — secular, attractive, the woman three months pregnant — is shot dead fleeing a road block. In the meantime, we learn — almost as an aside — that a million people are marching in London to protest the detentions in Virginia. Add to this a gripping subplot involving Luke Gardner (Lennie James), a British former soldier on death row in Florida, and Jane Lavery (Eva Birthistle), the comely British human rights lawyer trying to save him, it's a left-wing Disney Land: reckless neo-cons, mephitic corporations, redneck governors, the death penalty, and Muslims being rounded up like, er…
Where does it end?" demands Sir Mark, ambushing the chair of the Security Committee, Madeleine Cohen, in the Senate. "The detention of all Muslims in America? Sikhs? Catholics? Jews? I'm sure you're aware of the Reichstag Decree of 1933."
"Are you accusing me of being a Nazi, Sir Brydon?" Ms. Cohen (a Democrat) asks. No answer. Enough simply to plant the thought. At moments like these, you realize this is not a film protesting American totalitarianism; it's one that eagerly, pantingly, desires it.
Perhaps it's all that post-imperial blood in their veins, but the screenwriters, Lizzie Mickery and Daniel Percival, have an extraordinary ability to convey the feel of power, and to make the audience believe that what they're witnessing is the real thing. Their interpretation of how America uses that power is unremittingly hostile, however, and utterly ungenerous. "It's a turn-on, isn't it?" Brocklehurst sneers at Styles. "Playing with people's lives. Snap your fingers in Washington, the other side of the world quakes. I can smell the testosterone from here."...
"The State Within" is not only a terrific thriller, it's also a sobering reminder of how most of the world, including much of America, views this country now. To underline the point, BBC America is airing the first two episodes over Presidents Day weekend.
Nice one, mate.
I wonder if the Brits will call for our aid once the multicultural paradise they've concoted explodes in their face...or will they just go down shrieking that it was all America's fault, as one by one their heads are seperated from their bodies....
The program's title alludes to the perception, common in Britain and hardly unusual here, that since the election of 2000, America has been run by a cabal bent on starting wars and willing to engineer atrocities on its own soil in order to justify them. Beginning with a British Airways flight exploding over Washington, D.C., the film pits British rationality and (mostly) good intentions against American overreaction, mendacity, and imperial greed.
It's also a kind of left-wing fantasy about how the British-American "special relationship" ought to function."This war's illegal, Lynn," the British ambassador, Sir Mark Brydon (Jason Isaacs), tells the American secretary of state shortly after we glimpse him in front of a portrait of Winston Churchill. "Stand the planes down!"
....The film eagerly depicts an America sliding into totalitarianism. After it is announced that the plane was blown up by a Muslim suicide bomber carrying a British passport, the governor of Virginia rounds up 200 British Muslims vacationing in his state. A panicked young Muslim couple — secular, attractive, the woman three months pregnant — is shot dead fleeing a road block. In the meantime, we learn — almost as an aside — that a million people are marching in London to protest the detentions in Virginia. Add to this a gripping subplot involving Luke Gardner (Lennie James), a British former soldier on death row in Florida, and Jane Lavery (Eva Birthistle), the comely British human rights lawyer trying to save him, it's a left-wing Disney Land: reckless neo-cons, mephitic corporations, redneck governors, the death penalty, and Muslims being rounded up like, er…
Where does it end?" demands Sir Mark, ambushing the chair of the Security Committee, Madeleine Cohen, in the Senate. "The detention of all Muslims in America? Sikhs? Catholics? Jews? I'm sure you're aware of the Reichstag Decree of 1933."
"Are you accusing me of being a Nazi, Sir Brydon?" Ms. Cohen (a Democrat) asks. No answer. Enough simply to plant the thought. At moments like these, you realize this is not a film protesting American totalitarianism; it's one that eagerly, pantingly, desires it.
Perhaps it's all that post-imperial blood in their veins, but the screenwriters, Lizzie Mickery and Daniel Percival, have an extraordinary ability to convey the feel of power, and to make the audience believe that what they're witnessing is the real thing. Their interpretation of how America uses that power is unremittingly hostile, however, and utterly ungenerous. "It's a turn-on, isn't it?" Brocklehurst sneers at Styles. "Playing with people's lives. Snap your fingers in Washington, the other side of the world quakes. I can smell the testosterone from here."...
"The State Within" is not only a terrific thriller, it's also a sobering reminder of how most of the world, including much of America, views this country now. To underline the point, BBC America is airing the first two episodes over Presidents Day weekend.
Nice one, mate.
I wonder if the Brits will call for our aid once the multicultural paradise they've concoted explodes in their face...or will they just go down shrieking that it was all America's fault, as one by one their heads are seperated from their bodies....
Monday, February 12, 2007
Economic Primer
This is Bushenomics:
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- The U.S. federal budget surplus widened by 82% in January to $38.2 billion from $21 billion a year earlier, the Treasury Department reported Monday.
Receipts rose 13% year-over-year to a record $260.6 billion, while outlays increased 6% to $222.4 billion, the Treasury said.
For the first four months of the 2007 fiscal year, the deficit was $42.2 billion, about 57.2% lower than the $98.4 billion deficit in the same period in the previous fiscal year.
For all of 2007, the CBO estimates a shortfall of about $200 billion, narrower than the $248 billion deficit in fiscal 2006.
But analysts at RBS Greenwich Capital believe this forecast is too pessimistic. They look for a drop in the deficit to around $155 billion in the fiscal year.
This is Pelosionomics:
Oh, for the days when Arizona's high school students could roll pizza dough, sweep up sticky floors in theaters or scoop ice cream without worrying about ballot initiatives affecting their earning power. That's certainly not the case under the state's new minimum-wage law that went into effect last month. Some Valley employers, especially those in the food industry, say payroll budgets have risen so much that they're cutting hours, instituting hiring freezes and laying off employees
And teens are among the first workers to go. Companies maintain the new wage was raised to $6.75 per hour from $5.15 per hour to help the breadwinners in working-poor families. Teens typically have other means of support.
Mark Messner, owner of Pepi's Pizza in south Phoenix, estimates he has employed more than 2,000 high school students since 1990. But he plans to lay off three teenage workers and decrease hours worked by others. Of his 25-person workforce, roughly 75 percent are in high school. "I've had to go to some of my kids and say, 'Look, my payroll just increased 13 percent,' " he said. " 'Sorry, I don't have any hours for you.' "
The Employment Policies Institute in Washington, which opposed the recent increases, cited 2003 data by Federal Reserve economists showing a 10 percent increase caused a 2 percent to 3 percent decrease in employment. It also cited comments by noted economist Milton Friedman, who maintained that high teen unemployment rates were largely the result of minimum-wage laws.
Tom Kelly, owner of Mary Coyle Ol' Fashion Ice Cream Parlor in Phoenix, voted for the minimum-wage increase. But he said, "The new law has impacted us quite a bit." It added about $2,000 per month in expenses. The store, which employs mostly teen workers, has cut back on hours and has not replaced a couple of workers who quit.
Hey Tom! Vote with your head next time; try not to support ballot initiatives that are aiming to destroy your business, OK? Can you grasp that?
I can just see him there, proud Bush-hating Democrat, scratching his skull and wondering why the wonderful socialist wage-pricing system he voted for is not quite working the way he thought...if he thought at all.
Big hat tip to Don Surber...
UPDATE 2/13: More hear about a Clinton-esque "boom" (only this time without the fradulant balance sheets) that is going unreported is here...
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- The U.S. federal budget surplus widened by 82% in January to $38.2 billion from $21 billion a year earlier, the Treasury Department reported Monday.
Receipts rose 13% year-over-year to a record $260.6 billion, while outlays increased 6% to $222.4 billion, the Treasury said.
For the first four months of the 2007 fiscal year, the deficit was $42.2 billion, about 57.2% lower than the $98.4 billion deficit in the same period in the previous fiscal year.
For all of 2007, the CBO estimates a shortfall of about $200 billion, narrower than the $248 billion deficit in fiscal 2006.
But analysts at RBS Greenwich Capital believe this forecast is too pessimistic. They look for a drop in the deficit to around $155 billion in the fiscal year.
This is Pelosionomics:
Oh, for the days when Arizona's high school students could roll pizza dough, sweep up sticky floors in theaters or scoop ice cream without worrying about ballot initiatives affecting their earning power. That's certainly not the case under the state's new minimum-wage law that went into effect last month. Some Valley employers, especially those in the food industry, say payroll budgets have risen so much that they're cutting hours, instituting hiring freezes and laying off employees
And teens are among the first workers to go. Companies maintain the new wage was raised to $6.75 per hour from $5.15 per hour to help the breadwinners in working-poor families. Teens typically have other means of support.
Mark Messner, owner of Pepi's Pizza in south Phoenix, estimates he has employed more than 2,000 high school students since 1990. But he plans to lay off three teenage workers and decrease hours worked by others. Of his 25-person workforce, roughly 75 percent are in high school. "I've had to go to some of my kids and say, 'Look, my payroll just increased 13 percent,' " he said. " 'Sorry, I don't have any hours for you.' "
The Employment Policies Institute in Washington, which opposed the recent increases, cited 2003 data by Federal Reserve economists showing a 10 percent increase caused a 2 percent to 3 percent decrease in employment. It also cited comments by noted economist Milton Friedman, who maintained that high teen unemployment rates were largely the result of minimum-wage laws.
Tom Kelly, owner of Mary Coyle Ol' Fashion Ice Cream Parlor in Phoenix, voted for the minimum-wage increase. But he said, "The new law has impacted us quite a bit." It added about $2,000 per month in expenses. The store, which employs mostly teen workers, has cut back on hours and has not replaced a couple of workers who quit.
Hey Tom! Vote with your head next time; try not to support ballot initiatives that are aiming to destroy your business, OK? Can you grasp that?
I can just see him there, proud Bush-hating Democrat, scratching his skull and wondering why the wonderful socialist wage-pricing system he voted for is not quite working the way he thought...if he thought at all.
Big hat tip to Don Surber...
UPDATE 2/13: More hear about a Clinton-esque "boom" (only this time without the fradulant balance sheets) that is going unreported is here...
Burn the Non-Believers! Burn Them!
(originally posted on Sunday 2/11; updated on Monday and Tuesday 2/12-2/13, at bottom...)
Miss Lisa Margonelli, in Friday's WaPost, tells us there is nothing left to study here:
Now that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has come out with unequivocal evidence of human caused global warming, all eyes are on Capitol Hill to finally come up with a plan to deal with greenhouse gases and US energy security...
"Unequivocal", huh? Well, mayhaps not:
Scientists say that cosmic rays from outer space play a far greater role in changing the Earth's climate than global warming experts previously thought.
In a book, to be published this week, they claim that fluctuations in the number of cosmic rays hitting the atmosphere directly alter the amount of cloud covering the planet.
Henrik Svensmark, a weather scientist at the Danish National Space Centre who led the team behind the research, believes that the planet is experiencing a natural period of low cloud cover due to fewer cosmic rays entering the atmosphere. This, he says, is responsible for much of the global warming we are experiencing. He claims carbon dioxide emissions due to human activity are having a smaller impact on climate change than scientists think.
The controversial theory comes one week after 2,500 scientists who make up the United Nations International Panel on Climate Change published their fourth report stating that human carbon dioxide emissions would cause temperature rises of up to 4.5 C by the end of the century.
Mr Svensmark claims that the calculations used to make this prediction largely overlooked the effect of cosmic rays on cloud cover and the temperature rise due to human activity may be much smaller.
Brave man, Mr. Svensmark is...to dare to confront the possibility that the condition of the globe is not necessarily dictated by the actions of man. Why, listen to how the Boston Globe's Ellen Goodman describes him:
I would like to say we're at a point where global warming is impossible to deny. Let's just say that global warming deniers are now on a par with Holocaust deniers, though one denies the past and the other denies the present and future.
Just like a flat earth was once impossible to deny...but don't argue with Ellen Goodman, she has three fluorescent light bulbs in her house, and a Prius in her driveway! So she has the moral upper hand, you see - just like Cindy Sheehan!
The left has become the spitting image of all it damns - a Medieval Catholic Church of the 21st century, holding tight pseudo-science that supports its doctrine while smearing the reputation of any man of intellect whom dares to question their premises.
When will the Galileo-esque heresy trials and arrests begin for climate dissenters? Time for some 21st century witch trials, brought to you by the Democratic party, and sponsored in part by the mainstream media...
And don't forget this.....
UPDATE: Via The Brussels Journal, Vaclav Claus, President of the Czech Republic, scoffs at the global warming alarmists:
Global warming is a myth and every serious person and scientist says so. It is not fair to refer to the U.N. panel. IPCC is not a scientific institution: it’s a political body, a sort of non-government organization of green flavor. It’s neither a forum of neutral scientists nor a balanced group of scientists. These people are politicized scientists who arrive there with a one-sided opinion and a one-sided assignment.
This is clearly such an incredible failure of so many people, from journalists to politicians....
Other top-level politicians do not express their global warming doubts because a whip of political correctness strangles their voice. [...] Environmentalism as a metaphysical ideology and as a worldview has absolutely nothing to do with natural sciences or with the climate. Sadly, it has nothing to do with social sciences either. Still, it is becoming fashionable ...
It is not quite exactly divided to the left-wingers and right-wingers. Nevertheless it’s obvious that environmentalism is a new incarnation of modern leftism....
Sound wisdom - too bad nobody's listening; after all, he's only a President of a recently liberated nation; it's not like he's a a movie star, or failed Vice-President...
UPDATE II -Tuesday 2/13: Barcepundit has much more on the subject of our Danish scientist, including this quote regarding the now-infamous "90% certainity" principle:
...a 10% uncertainty in any theory is a wide open breach for any latterday Galileo or Einstein to storm through with a better idea. That is how science really works...
Miss Lisa Margonelli, in Friday's WaPost, tells us there is nothing left to study here:
Now that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has come out with unequivocal evidence of human caused global warming, all eyes are on Capitol Hill to finally come up with a plan to deal with greenhouse gases and US energy security...
"Unequivocal", huh? Well, mayhaps not:
Scientists say that cosmic rays from outer space play a far greater role in changing the Earth's climate than global warming experts previously thought.
In a book, to be published this week, they claim that fluctuations in the number of cosmic rays hitting the atmosphere directly alter the amount of cloud covering the planet.
Henrik Svensmark, a weather scientist at the Danish National Space Centre who led the team behind the research, believes that the planet is experiencing a natural period of low cloud cover due to fewer cosmic rays entering the atmosphere. This, he says, is responsible for much of the global warming we are experiencing. He claims carbon dioxide emissions due to human activity are having a smaller impact on climate change than scientists think.
The controversial theory comes one week after 2,500 scientists who make up the United Nations International Panel on Climate Change published their fourth report stating that human carbon dioxide emissions would cause temperature rises of up to 4.5 C by the end of the century.
Mr Svensmark claims that the calculations used to make this prediction largely overlooked the effect of cosmic rays on cloud cover and the temperature rise due to human activity may be much smaller.
Brave man, Mr. Svensmark is...to dare to confront the possibility that the condition of the globe is not necessarily dictated by the actions of man. Why, listen to how the Boston Globe's Ellen Goodman describes him:
I would like to say we're at a point where global warming is impossible to deny. Let's just say that global warming deniers are now on a par with Holocaust deniers, though one denies the past and the other denies the present and future.
Just like a flat earth was once impossible to deny...but don't argue with Ellen Goodman, she has three fluorescent light bulbs in her house, and a Prius in her driveway! So she has the moral upper hand, you see - just like Cindy Sheehan!
The left has become the spitting image of all it damns - a Medieval Catholic Church of the 21st century, holding tight pseudo-science that supports its doctrine while smearing the reputation of any man of intellect whom dares to question their premises.
When will the Galileo-esque heresy trials and arrests begin for climate dissenters? Time for some 21st century witch trials, brought to you by the Democratic party, and sponsored in part by the mainstream media...
And don't forget this.....
UPDATE: Via The Brussels Journal, Vaclav Claus, President of the Czech Republic, scoffs at the global warming alarmists:
Global warming is a myth and every serious person and scientist says so. It is not fair to refer to the U.N. panel. IPCC is not a scientific institution: it’s a political body, a sort of non-government organization of green flavor. It’s neither a forum of neutral scientists nor a balanced group of scientists. These people are politicized scientists who arrive there with a one-sided opinion and a one-sided assignment.
This is clearly such an incredible failure of so many people, from journalists to politicians....
Other top-level politicians do not express their global warming doubts because a whip of political correctness strangles their voice. [...] Environmentalism as a metaphysical ideology and as a worldview has absolutely nothing to do with natural sciences or with the climate. Sadly, it has nothing to do with social sciences either. Still, it is becoming fashionable ...
It is not quite exactly divided to the left-wingers and right-wingers. Nevertheless it’s obvious that environmentalism is a new incarnation of modern leftism....
Sound wisdom - too bad nobody's listening; after all, he's only a President of a recently liberated nation; it's not like he's a a movie star, or failed Vice-President...
UPDATE II -Tuesday 2/13: Barcepundit has much more on the subject of our Danish scientist, including this quote regarding the now-infamous "90% certainity" principle:
...a 10% uncertainty in any theory is a wide open breach for any latterday Galileo or Einstein to storm through with a better idea. That is how science really works...
Saturday, February 10, 2007
Quiz Time!
OK - in what year was the following printed?
The scary thing was, it took me a while to be sure it was a 20th Century Nazi propoganda piece. Admit it, it took you a few seconds as well.
Thing is, we are portrayed almost identically today.
Just think of where the world would be at this moment (under a second-generation Nazi boot? in a Soviet-ruled nuclear wasteland? Living under shari'a law, perhaps?) were it not for the American people. And yet, the bile continues - not only from our enemies, but from those whom claim our allegiance when convenient, as well.
The shame is on them.
But...I was told we weren't fighting al-Qaeda in Iraq?
Report from the Marines of 4th Platoon, Golf Company:
Under the command of Captain Mark Broekhuizen, Golf 2/8 had been making slow inroads in Saqliwiah (“sack-la-wee-ah”), a village on the northwestern outskirts of Fallujah...
“AQI is both feared and hated,” Capt Broekhuizen said, referring to Al Qaeda in Iraq. “They’ve been running a brutal terror campaign. No city leaders are left here who will take a leadership role.” Marines from Golf Company said they recently fished two bodies out of the local river: a man had been decapitated, and his 4-year old tied to his leg before both were thrown into the river and the little boy drowned. The killings were a product of Al Qaeda terror.
Read more about a Marine victory, both militarily and diplomatically, here....
Lefties, feel free to ignore the link, stick your head back into the sand, and shriek loudly, "America and Israel are the world's true enemies!"
Just like this ostrich writing for the Washington Post:
Members of Congress have a constitutional and moral obligation to exercise their authority to stop funding President Bush's failed policy in Iraq. Not eventually, but immediately.
...so that more Iraqis will be decapitated, and thrown into the river while tied to their fathers....well, I guess former governors of Iowa know national security best....along with the editorial page writers of the Washinton ComPost, of course. Nevertheless, all good Democrats know there are more important things to worry about, anyway...
Update: Before the recent revisionist history by the MSM, they reported openly and often on the Iraq/al-Qaeda connections. Video at Powerline, for those brave enough to pull their heads out of the sand...
Under the command of Captain Mark Broekhuizen, Golf 2/8 had been making slow inroads in Saqliwiah (“sack-la-wee-ah”), a village on the northwestern outskirts of Fallujah...
“AQI is both feared and hated,” Capt Broekhuizen said, referring to Al Qaeda in Iraq. “They’ve been running a brutal terror campaign. No city leaders are left here who will take a leadership role.” Marines from Golf Company said they recently fished two bodies out of the local river: a man had been decapitated, and his 4-year old tied to his leg before both were thrown into the river and the little boy drowned. The killings were a product of Al Qaeda terror.
Read more about a Marine victory, both militarily and diplomatically, here....
Lefties, feel free to ignore the link, stick your head back into the sand, and shriek loudly, "America and Israel are the world's true enemies!"
Just like this ostrich writing for the Washington Post:
Members of Congress have a constitutional and moral obligation to exercise their authority to stop funding President Bush's failed policy in Iraq. Not eventually, but immediately.
...so that more Iraqis will be decapitated, and thrown into the river while tied to their fathers....well, I guess former governors of Iowa know national security best....along with the editorial page writers of the Washinton ComPost, of course. Nevertheless, all good Democrats know there are more important things to worry about, anyway...
Update: Before the recent revisionist history by the MSM, they reported openly and often on the Iraq/al-Qaeda connections. Video at Powerline, for those brave enough to pull their heads out of the sand...
From E-Nough!....the liberals shrink from terrorists, cowards to the core, and replace their threat with the straw man of global warming...we know what will kill us first....
Friday, February 09, 2007
Limousine Liberals Gone Wild !
Elitism, rearing its ugly head with the rise of the limousine liberals...try and act surprised. Part One, from Instapundit - New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg gets a smackdown from the feds for running his own multi-state sting operations:
The federal government will not file criminal charges against any of the 15 out-of-state gun dealers accused by Mayor Bloomberg in a federal lawsuit of selling guns illegally, the Daily News has learned.
In a stern rebuke to the city's high-profile crusade against illegal guns, the feds warned the Bloomberg administration that it could face "potential legal liabilities" if it continues to conduct sting operations that fall within the jurisdiction of federal agents.
Long Live King Michael ! Behold, his decrees...He bans "trans-fats" in our food beacuse he needs to make sure we eat healthy; yet fights for overfly rights for private airplanes (like Cory Lidle's, and his own). Wants to clamp down on private gun ownership, yet arms his own private jets (more on that later) with a missle defense system.
Seems like now he can run his own extra-legal sting operations because, after all, he is the living personification of that guy on the Monopoly box...
From Arms and the Law:
I'd assume that Bloomberg and company (1) figured it was worth it for the publicity and (2) figured that the laws don't apply to the rich and powerful.
Well said. Part Two, thanks to John Edwards, who re-hired two anti-Catholic bloggers that he had fired after they were hired. After all, what's wrong with comparing the Holy Spirit to male spunk? Nothing, according to Edwards, but plenty, according to others:
John Edwards has apparently decided that there is more to be gained by aligning himself with the cultural left than by standing on principle and firing the Catholic bashers on his payroll....his goal is to loot the pockets of the Soros/Hollywood gang, and they—like him—aren’t offended by anti-Catholicism. Indeed, they thrive on it.
“When Mel Gibson got drunk and made anti-Semitic remarks, he paid a price for doing so. When Michael Richards got angry and made racist remarks, he paid a price for doing so. When Isaiah Washington got ticked off and made anti-gay remarks, he paid a price for doing so. But John Edwards thinks the same rules don’t apply to him, which is why he has chosen to embrace foul-mouthed anti-Catholic bigots on his payroll.
This guy's campaign is DOA, but the media still gives him a pass, because he's their Kennedy stand-in (see Kerry, John F. and Clinton, B.J.) for 2008. Good luck with that, guys.
Elitist Number Three: Nancy Pelosi (bet you didn't see that coming)! San Fran Nan won't fly on any old private GulfStream Jet; no-sir-ree! It has to be Air Force One-caliber, or nothing at all...yet, a NRO reader reports:
...got to walk through a just-completed C-37A many years ago when I interviewed for a job at Gulfstream. That particular jet had obviously been built up for VIP travel, and "plush" doesn't even begin to describe the interior. That's the kind of aircraft 99.99% of the people even in Pelosi's district will never even set foot in, much less have at their beck and call; if she's too good for a G-5, particularly THAT G-5, she's in the wrong line of work.
Finally - what's worse than these holier-than-thou elitists telling us we must suffer so they may breathe cleaner air in the smog-shrouded Hollywood Hills? Michael Barone telles 'em to put up or...
If we want to curb carbon dioxide emissions, then let's ban private jets. It's funny seeing those Hollywood stars private-jetting into Washington to tell the rest of us that we've got to have a lower standard of living. Let them fly first class, and save the Earth!
When I see Al Gore arriving at his next Global Warming Scare-a-Thon in a rickshaw, then I'll begin to take him and his ilk seriously.
And these guys all can't wait to impose their vision of liberal utopia upon us. May God have mercy on our souls...
I will refer to C.S. Lewis, one more time, and leave it at that....
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busy-bodies...
The federal government will not file criminal charges against any of the 15 out-of-state gun dealers accused by Mayor Bloomberg in a federal lawsuit of selling guns illegally, the Daily News has learned.
In a stern rebuke to the city's high-profile crusade against illegal guns, the feds warned the Bloomberg administration that it could face "potential legal liabilities" if it continues to conduct sting operations that fall within the jurisdiction of federal agents.
Long Live King Michael ! Behold, his decrees...He bans "trans-fats" in our food beacuse he needs to make sure we eat healthy; yet fights for overfly rights for private airplanes (like Cory Lidle's, and his own). Wants to clamp down on private gun ownership, yet arms his own private jets (more on that later) with a missle defense system.
Seems like now he can run his own extra-legal sting operations because, after all, he is the living personification of that guy on the Monopoly box...
From Arms and the Law:
I'd assume that Bloomberg and company (1) figured it was worth it for the publicity and (2) figured that the laws don't apply to the rich and powerful.
Well said. Part Two, thanks to John Edwards, who re-hired two anti-Catholic bloggers that he had fired after they were hired. After all, what's wrong with comparing the Holy Spirit to male spunk? Nothing, according to Edwards, but plenty, according to others:
John Edwards has apparently decided that there is more to be gained by aligning himself with the cultural left than by standing on principle and firing the Catholic bashers on his payroll....his goal is to loot the pockets of the Soros/Hollywood gang, and they—like him—aren’t offended by anti-Catholicism. Indeed, they thrive on it.
“When Mel Gibson got drunk and made anti-Semitic remarks, he paid a price for doing so. When Michael Richards got angry and made racist remarks, he paid a price for doing so. When Isaiah Washington got ticked off and made anti-gay remarks, he paid a price for doing so. But John Edwards thinks the same rules don’t apply to him, which is why he has chosen to embrace foul-mouthed anti-Catholic bigots on his payroll.
This guy's campaign is DOA, but the media still gives him a pass, because he's their Kennedy stand-in (see Kerry, John F. and Clinton, B.J.) for 2008. Good luck with that, guys.
Elitist Number Three: Nancy Pelosi (bet you didn't see that coming)! San Fran Nan won't fly on any old private GulfStream Jet; no-sir-ree! It has to be Air Force One-caliber, or nothing at all...yet, a NRO reader reports:
...got to walk through a just-completed C-37A many years ago when I interviewed for a job at Gulfstream. That particular jet had obviously been built up for VIP travel, and "plush" doesn't even begin to describe the interior. That's the kind of aircraft 99.99% of the people even in Pelosi's district will never even set foot in, much less have at their beck and call; if she's too good for a G-5, particularly THAT G-5, she's in the wrong line of work.
Finally - what's worse than these holier-than-thou elitists telling us we must suffer so they may breathe cleaner air in the smog-shrouded Hollywood Hills? Michael Barone telles 'em to put up or...
If we want to curb carbon dioxide emissions, then let's ban private jets. It's funny seeing those Hollywood stars private-jetting into Washington to tell the rest of us that we've got to have a lower standard of living. Let them fly first class, and save the Earth!
When I see Al Gore arriving at his next Global Warming Scare-a-Thon in a rickshaw, then I'll begin to take him and his ilk seriously.
And these guys all can't wait to impose their vision of liberal utopia upon us. May God have mercy on our souls...
I will refer to C.S. Lewis, one more time, and leave it at that....
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busy-bodies...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)