Virginia Postrel reviews "Charisma: The Gift of Grace and How it Has Been Taken Away From Us" in today's New York Post, and within the first few paragraphs some excellent points are made about the nature of "charisma", and how it has become the Fatal Attaraction of the Democratic Party:
DEMOCRATS are "hypnotized by charisma," warns former Sen. Bill Bradley in his new book, "The New American Story."
"Ever since JFK's Camelot, Democrats have been looking for a leader whose very presence would ensure the nation's primacy."
His party's obsession with charisma, Bradley suggests, has distracted Democrats from the work of party-building and policy making. "Many of us are still waiting for another charismatic leader whom we can invest with powers more magical than real," he writes.
You can see this dynamic in the race for the 2008 presidential nomination. Hillary Clinton may be the Democrats' top fund-raiser but she's losing, badly, to Barack Obama in the charisma contest. He is the fresh young prince onto whom Democrats project their hopes and dreams.
But that's not charisma. It's glamour.
Glamour is an imaginative illusion - the word originally meant a literal magic spell - whose meaning comes from the audience's own aspirations. Glamour requires mystery. It is escapist. It does not spell out an agenda. It allows the audience to imagine whatever it desires.
Charisma, by contrast, is demanding.....
For the last forty years, the Democrats have been looking for the reincarnation of JFK to lead them out of the wilderness. They got Bill Clinton instead, a reasonable facsimile until he helped lose the party's control of Congress and was outed for his terrible taste in women (one could almost see JFK looking down from above, shaking his head in dismay as Bill trysted with his makeup-smeared heavyweight).
With 2008 coming up in the side view mirror (and thankfully, this time objects are actually further away than they appear), the lefties longing for love know that Hillary cannot fit the JFK bill. She's dowdy, shrill, and pedantic - on a good day. Obama, on the other hand, has it all for the messiah-seeking Democrat - good looks, a winning smile, soaring oratory, and the politically correct skin color. Yet as Postrel points out in her review, this makes him more of a celebrity than a serious candidate for the most powerful job on earth.
What he lacks is experience - in both government and in life - and real policy outlines that can convince 51% of the American people to vote for him. Obama's skillful phrase-turning and solemn vows will make the Democratic base swoon, as they fall in love with another man whom they believe can fulfill their JFK fantasies. But the broader electorate always demands answers, and actually studies ideologies and policy positions - just ask John "JFK" Kerry, who had a "secret" plan for liberating Iraq, and who never released his own military records - how well sweeping generalizations work with the general public.
The media will try to convince us that we, like them, are drawn to celebrity like bugs to the zapper and will be unable to resist Obama's magnetic pull. And as in 2000, and in '04, the American people will need to teach them again that substance matters....
วันอาทิตย์, เมษายน 08, 2550
วันเสาร์, เมษายน 07, 2550
New Jersey's Future? Just Look at Michigan...
This idea, proposed by the Democratic head of the Michigan House of Representatives, is so wacked-out that it could have come out of the mouth of any left-wing Jersey hack...from an editorial in The Detroit News:
We have come to the conclusion that the crisis Michigan faces is not a shortage of revenue, but an excess of idiocy. Facing a budget deficit that has passed the $1 billion mark, House Democrats Thursday offered a spending plan that would buy a MP3 player or iPod for every school child in Michigan.
No cost estimate was attached to their hare-brained idea to "invest" in education. Details, we are promised, will follow.
Their plan goes beyond cluelessness. Democrats are either entirely indifferent to the idea that extreme hard times demand extreme belt tightening, or they are bone stupid. We lean toward the latter.
We say that because the House plan also keeps alive, again without specifics, the promise of tax hikes.
The range of options, according to Rep. Steve Tobocman, D-Detroit, includes raising the income tax, levying a 6 percent tax on some services, and taxing junk food and soda.
We wonder how financially strained Michigan residents will feel about paying higher taxes to buy someone else's kid an iPod...
Just substitute New Jersey for Michigan, and Newark for Detoit, and this story could be happening (or will be happening) in our happy little state at any time now. I mean, why not? Think about the low self-esteem of the poor students who don't have an iPod! Liberal idiots to the rescue!
While trying to find more on this story, I stumbled upon the LunchBucket Conservative, who has more on the liberal Democrats' Michigan Follies:
Speaker Dillon on Thursday unveils his new tax on power utilities and plan to eliminate customer choice by returning to the old monopolies, and already one of Michigan’s incumbent power companies is trying to get its nose in the tent with a request for a $143.5 million rate increase.
At least the Michigan Republicans are trying to stand up to the Democrats and their equally mentally deficient Governor Jennifer Granholm (D); striking down the following proposed statewide tax increases:
They made the tough call to cut spending in order to bring some sanity to Michigan’s budget. And for good measure, they struck down Governor Granholm’s ill-conceived 2-cent tax on haircuts…movies…golf…home sales…funerals…accounting services…laundromats…alterations….well, you get the picture. Anytime 2-cents add up to $1.5 billion we should all be very scared.
Why do I feel like Governor Corzine - who is doing his part to lead New Jersey down Michigan's road to ruin - is taking notes right now...
"Wow, taxing movie tickets and haircuts! Pure brilliance ! I can't believe we didn't think of that ! "
We have come to the conclusion that the crisis Michigan faces is not a shortage of revenue, but an excess of idiocy. Facing a budget deficit that has passed the $1 billion mark, House Democrats Thursday offered a spending plan that would buy a MP3 player or iPod for every school child in Michigan.
No cost estimate was attached to their hare-brained idea to "invest" in education. Details, we are promised, will follow.
Their plan goes beyond cluelessness. Democrats are either entirely indifferent to the idea that extreme hard times demand extreme belt tightening, or they are bone stupid. We lean toward the latter.
We say that because the House plan also keeps alive, again without specifics, the promise of tax hikes.
The range of options, according to Rep. Steve Tobocman, D-Detroit, includes raising the income tax, levying a 6 percent tax on some services, and taxing junk food and soda.
We wonder how financially strained Michigan residents will feel about paying higher taxes to buy someone else's kid an iPod...
Just substitute New Jersey for Michigan, and Newark for Detoit, and this story could be happening (or will be happening) in our happy little state at any time now. I mean, why not? Think about the low self-esteem of the poor students who don't have an iPod! Liberal idiots to the rescue!
While trying to find more on this story, I stumbled upon the LunchBucket Conservative, who has more on the liberal Democrats' Michigan Follies:
Speaker Dillon on Thursday unveils his new tax on power utilities and plan to eliminate customer choice by returning to the old monopolies, and already one of Michigan’s incumbent power companies is trying to get its nose in the tent with a request for a $143.5 million rate increase.
At least the Michigan Republicans are trying to stand up to the Democrats and their equally mentally deficient Governor Jennifer Granholm (D); striking down the following proposed statewide tax increases:
They made the tough call to cut spending in order to bring some sanity to Michigan’s budget. And for good measure, they struck down Governor Granholm’s ill-conceived 2-cent tax on haircuts…movies…golf…home sales…funerals…accounting services…laundromats…alterations….well, you get the picture. Anytime 2-cents add up to $1.5 billion we should all be very scared.
Why do I feel like Governor Corzine - who is doing his part to lead New Jersey down Michigan's road to ruin - is taking notes right now...
"Wow, taxing movie tickets and haircuts! Pure brilliance ! I can't believe we didn't think of that ! "
วันศุกร์, เมษายน 06, 2550
Is "Global Warming" just another way to attack the middle class?
Funny how all of the media elite's prescriptions for solving global warming usually involve pinning the most sacrifice on the American middle class. Time magazine has all the answers in their " Global Warming Survival Guide"; note the tilt of their "solutions":
Pay the Carbon Tax
Everyone agrees that it's necessary to reduce carbon emissions around the world....Carbon taxes are more straightforward: a set tax rate is placed on the consumption of carbon in any form—fossil-fuel electricity, gasoline—with the idea that raising the price will encourage industries and individuals to consume less.
Love the way they slip gasoline in there - it's always about my SUV, and not your global airline travel, huh? Keep your filthy socialist paws off of me, you damn dirty apes!
Ditch the Mansion
A typical new single-family home in the U.S. is nearly 2,500 square feet today, up from about 1,000 square feet in 1950, even as the average household has shrunk from 3.4 to 2.6 people.
If you really want to live small, visit Jay Shafer. The former art professor dwells alone in a home fit for a hobbit, 100 sq. ft....
He made his move because he felt guilty....
So you've finally hit the big time, and can afford a big house! Sorry, although some people already have big houses, you can't have one. Not like we are going to tear down the ones that the liberal elite already have; it's just that someone has to sacrifice, and really - why should it be the Times writers and their friends, who have such swell summer white parties in their Hampton mansions?
And I'd reckon those mansions are a wee bit bigger than 2500 square feet...
Move to a High-Rise
If you're a true environmentalist, a dyed-in-the-wool greenie, then why not pack up your leafy rural home and move to New York City—preferably to a tall building right in the middle of Manhattan?
Sigh - typical view of the childless media elite, who cannot fathom why everybody doesn't want to live in the fabulous big city just like they do. Hey jerkies - people save their whole lives to move out of the city. Most Americans do not dream of living in an aging 1200 square foot, three bedroom apartment for $3K/month, with no backyard, no car, noisy neighbors, smelly streets, and underperforming schools. Actually, owning a home is often described as The American Dream. Why do you want to take it away from the middle class? Oh, right - there is no sacrifice to great for the proletariat....
There's more of this crap, much more. All delivered by folks whom detest the suburban lifestyle, and are using the guise of "global warming" to strip the middle class of their most prized possessions. Read it all, the message comes through loud and clear....
Pay the Carbon Tax
Everyone agrees that it's necessary to reduce carbon emissions around the world....Carbon taxes are more straightforward: a set tax rate is placed on the consumption of carbon in any form—fossil-fuel electricity, gasoline—with the idea that raising the price will encourage industries and individuals to consume less.
Love the way they slip gasoline in there - it's always about my SUV, and not your global airline travel, huh? Keep your filthy socialist paws off of me, you damn dirty apes!
Ditch the Mansion
A typical new single-family home in the U.S. is nearly 2,500 square feet today, up from about 1,000 square feet in 1950, even as the average household has shrunk from 3.4 to 2.6 people.
If you really want to live small, visit Jay Shafer. The former art professor dwells alone in a home fit for a hobbit, 100 sq. ft....
He made his move because he felt guilty....
So you've finally hit the big time, and can afford a big house! Sorry, although some people already have big houses, you can't have one. Not like we are going to tear down the ones that the liberal elite already have; it's just that someone has to sacrifice, and really - why should it be the Times writers and their friends, who have such swell summer white parties in their Hampton mansions?
And I'd reckon those mansions are a wee bit bigger than 2500 square feet...
Move to a High-Rise
If you're a true environmentalist, a dyed-in-the-wool greenie, then why not pack up your leafy rural home and move to New York City—preferably to a tall building right in the middle of Manhattan?
Sigh - typical view of the childless media elite, who cannot fathom why everybody doesn't want to live in the fabulous big city just like they do. Hey jerkies - people save their whole lives to move out of the city. Most Americans do not dream of living in an aging 1200 square foot, three bedroom apartment for $3K/month, with no backyard, no car, noisy neighbors, smelly streets, and underperforming schools. Actually, owning a home is often described as The American Dream. Why do you want to take it away from the middle class? Oh, right - there is no sacrifice to great for the proletariat....
There's more of this crap, much more. All delivered by folks whom detest the suburban lifestyle, and are using the guise of "global warming" to strip the middle class of their most prized possessions. Read it all, the message comes through loud and clear....
It's all yours - once you pry it from my cold, dead hands, you flippin' wankers....
Hat tip to Fausta, who mocks the Times' sophisticated urban writers for having the ignorance to recommend bamboo fencing in the 'burbs....geez, Jersey girl, thanks for getting me all riled up on a Friday night!
Great Britain's Great Shame
Lots of revulsion out there for the behavior of the British sailors/marines that seemed to have willingly served as propoganda tools for the fanatical Iranian regime. Ralph Peters, from the New York Post:
IT WAS a fitting image of the 14 wimps and a sob sister arriving back in the United Kingdom yesterday: skulking away with pink goody bags in hand.
The color was no accident - although yellow would've been more appropriate.
But why on earth is Britain, the land of the legendary stiff upper lip, celebrating cowards who clambered over one another to shame their country?
In a sharp signal of the difference between our military and the politically beleaguered Brits, our chief of naval operations gave an interview to CNN (which he knows the Iranians watch), making it clear that if Tehran tried such a stunt with our sailors and Marines, we'd feed their thugs to the sharks.
The admiral also stressed that if captured, our troops are still taught to give name, rank, service number - and very little else. [ See related link here ]
Those blubbering Brits were only playing dress-up in the military uniforms...They hadn't been through the Bataan Death March. They didn't suffer four years in Changi Prison after the fall of Singapore. They didn't spend a five-year lifetime in the Hanoi Hilton. And we have yet to see evidence of torture.
But they started criticizing their own country within days.
And from the same paper’s editorial page:
If there has ever in history been a faster, more humiliating submission to Stockholm Syndrome, we're unaware of it.
Of course, the only story that the terrorist homepage will print is one defending the actions of the British military:
Britain's top naval officer on Friday defended the conduct of 15 sailors and marines seized by Iranian forces after boarding and inspecting a merchant vessel in the Persian Gulf.
He told the British Broadcasting Corp. he believed the crew behaved with "considerable dignity and a lot of courage" during their 13 days in Iranian captivity.
He also said the so-called confessions made by some of them and broadcast on Iranian state television appeared to have been made under "a certain amount of psychological pressure."
"I would not agree at all that it was not our finest hour. I think our people have reacted extremely well in some very difficult circumstances," he said.
This is Orwellian doublespeak at its finest....“considerable dignity”? Good sir, I refer you to the one-liner above from the NY Post…and incidentally, if making treasonous statements is “dignified”, then doesn’t that make a complete surrender “heroic”? If this is the state of the armed services of the West, we’d better start fitting our womenfolk for the hajib and veil….
Charles Krauthammer points out how this little debacle should destroy any illusions regarding the power of multinational institutions:
Iran has pulled off a tidy little success ... All with total impunity. Further, it exposed the impotence of all those transnational institutions -- most prominently the European Union and the United Nations -- that pretend to maintain international order.
You would think maintaining international order means, at least, challenging acts of piracy. No challenge here. Instead, a quiet capitulation.
Europeans talk all the time about their preference for "soft power" over the brute military force those Neanderthal Americans resort to all the time. What was the soft power available here? Iran's shaky economy is highly dependent on European credits, trade and technology. Britain asked the European Union to threaten to freeze exports, $18 billion a year of commerce. Iran would have lost its No. 1 trading partner. The European Union refused.
The capture and release of the British hostages illustrate once again the fatuousness of the "international community" and its great institutions. You want your people back? Go to the European Union and get stiffed. Go to the Security Council and get a statement that refuses even to "deplore" this act of piracy. (You settle for a humiliating expression of "grave concern.") Then turn to the despised Americans. They'll deal some cards and bail you out.
You know, maybe we should reconsider our criticism of the behavior of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s hostages – if no one in the West, including the U.N., EU, and their own government, was willing to stand up to Iran, why should they? Why should these captured soldiers stand tall, when their leadership is on its knees?
IT WAS a fitting image of the 14 wimps and a sob sister arriving back in the United Kingdom yesterday: skulking away with pink goody bags in hand.
The color was no accident - although yellow would've been more appropriate.
But why on earth is Britain, the land of the legendary stiff upper lip, celebrating cowards who clambered over one another to shame their country?
In a sharp signal of the difference between our military and the politically beleaguered Brits, our chief of naval operations gave an interview to CNN (which he knows the Iranians watch), making it clear that if Tehran tried such a stunt with our sailors and Marines, we'd feed their thugs to the sharks.
The admiral also stressed that if captured, our troops are still taught to give name, rank, service number - and very little else. [ See related link here ]
Those blubbering Brits were only playing dress-up in the military uniforms...They hadn't been through the Bataan Death March. They didn't suffer four years in Changi Prison after the fall of Singapore. They didn't spend a five-year lifetime in the Hanoi Hilton. And we have yet to see evidence of torture.
But they started criticizing their own country within days.
And from the same paper’s editorial page:
If there has ever in history been a faster, more humiliating submission to Stockholm Syndrome, we're unaware of it.
Of course, the only story that the terrorist homepage will print is one defending the actions of the British military:
Britain's top naval officer on Friday defended the conduct of 15 sailors and marines seized by Iranian forces after boarding and inspecting a merchant vessel in the Persian Gulf.
He told the British Broadcasting Corp. he believed the crew behaved with "considerable dignity and a lot of courage" during their 13 days in Iranian captivity.
He also said the so-called confessions made by some of them and broadcast on Iranian state television appeared to have been made under "a certain amount of psychological pressure."
"I would not agree at all that it was not our finest hour. I think our people have reacted extremely well in some very difficult circumstances," he said.
This is Orwellian doublespeak at its finest....“considerable dignity”? Good sir, I refer you to the one-liner above from the NY Post…and incidentally, if making treasonous statements is “dignified”, then doesn’t that make a complete surrender “heroic”? If this is the state of the armed services of the West, we’d better start fitting our womenfolk for the hajib and veil….
Charles Krauthammer points out how this little debacle should destroy any illusions regarding the power of multinational institutions:
Iran has pulled off a tidy little success ... All with total impunity. Further, it exposed the impotence of all those transnational institutions -- most prominently the European Union and the United Nations -- that pretend to maintain international order.
You would think maintaining international order means, at least, challenging acts of piracy. No challenge here. Instead, a quiet capitulation.
Europeans talk all the time about their preference for "soft power" over the brute military force those Neanderthal Americans resort to all the time. What was the soft power available here? Iran's shaky economy is highly dependent on European credits, trade and technology. Britain asked the European Union to threaten to freeze exports, $18 billion a year of commerce. Iran would have lost its No. 1 trading partner. The European Union refused.
The capture and release of the British hostages illustrate once again the fatuousness of the "international community" and its great institutions. You want your people back? Go to the European Union and get stiffed. Go to the Security Council and get a statement that refuses even to "deplore" this act of piracy. (You settle for a humiliating expression of "grave concern.") Then turn to the despised Americans. They'll deal some cards and bail you out.
You know, maybe we should reconsider our criticism of the behavior of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s hostages – if no one in the West, including the U.N., EU, and their own government, was willing to stand up to Iran, why should they? Why should these captured soldiers stand tall, when their leadership is on its knees?
วันพฤหัสบดี, เมษายน 05, 2550
Defending the Devil(s)
That’s right, I’m standing up for Big Oil this morning – but I’ll let George Will do the talking. Here's his salient points:
In the 20 years from 1987 to 2006, Exxon Mobil invested more ($279 billion) than it earned ($266 billion). Five weeks after the company announced its 2006 earnings, it said it will invest $60 billion in oil and gas projects over the next three years.
Oil companies make about 13 cents on a gallon of gas. Government makes much more: The federal tax is 18.4 cents per gallon. New York collects 42.4 cents a gallon. Forty-nine states - all but Alaska - make more than the oil companies do on every gallon.
Oh – and do you really want to end global warming? Tim Blair pointed out we could save the world simply by “shifting” to manual transmissions (which would save 5,650,000,000 barrels of oil per year in the US alone), from the less fuel-efficient automatic variety. Mr. Will has another common-sense suggestion:
...what can be done immediately about the gasoline "crisis" du jour? Americans could save 1.2 billion of the 130 billion gallons of gasoline they use a year if they would properly inflate their tires.
Of course, neither of these modest ideas are acceptable to the Democrats and the liberal elite:
- they don’t require the lifestyle changes and sacrifice that the Left wants to force upon the American middle class in order to change the world into their "paradise of the downtrodden".
- The real object of the “Global Warming” scam is to distract attention from the war against Islamic fundamentalists. Democrats cannot face the fight against these deadly foes; they are not willing to make the adjustments in their ideology necessary (military action, tighter borders, increased surveillance) to win such a war, and they know it. So they created a new enemy – Mother Nature herself, to an extent - whom they can fight by implementing their unpopular agenda. Because this agenda requires sacrifices that they approve of, the Democrats have trumpeted this make-believe danger as a greater threat than people who, you know, actually take up arms and kill Americans.
Earth itself, as the ultimate Democratic straw man. Maybe I could forgive them if, you know, they weren’t so complicit in the “soaring price” of gasoline…
In the 20 years from 1987 to 2006, Exxon Mobil invested more ($279 billion) than it earned ($266 billion). Five weeks after the company announced its 2006 earnings, it said it will invest $60 billion in oil and gas projects over the next three years.
Oil companies make about 13 cents on a gallon of gas. Government makes much more: The federal tax is 18.4 cents per gallon. New York collects 42.4 cents a gallon. Forty-nine states - all but Alaska - make more than the oil companies do on every gallon.
Oh – and do you really want to end global warming? Tim Blair pointed out we could save the world simply by “shifting” to manual transmissions (which would save 5,650,000,000 barrels of oil per year in the US alone), from the less fuel-efficient automatic variety. Mr. Will has another common-sense suggestion:
...what can be done immediately about the gasoline "crisis" du jour? Americans could save 1.2 billion of the 130 billion gallons of gasoline they use a year if they would properly inflate their tires.
Of course, neither of these modest ideas are acceptable to the Democrats and the liberal elite:
- they don’t require the lifestyle changes and sacrifice that the Left wants to force upon the American middle class in order to change the world into their "paradise of the downtrodden".
- The real object of the “Global Warming” scam is to distract attention from the war against Islamic fundamentalists. Democrats cannot face the fight against these deadly foes; they are not willing to make the adjustments in their ideology necessary (military action, tighter borders, increased surveillance) to win such a war, and they know it. So they created a new enemy – Mother Nature herself, to an extent - whom they can fight by implementing their unpopular agenda. Because this agenda requires sacrifices that they approve of, the Democrats have trumpeted this make-believe danger as a greater threat than people who, you know, actually take up arms and kill Americans.
Earth itself, as the ultimate Democratic straw man. Maybe I could forgive them if, you know, they weren’t so complicit in the “soaring price” of gasoline…
วันพุธ, เมษายน 04, 2550
Europe Fights Global Warming, the Stupid Way!
Surprised I haven't seen this appear in the Brussels Journal yet; this is from Novosti, a Russian news service:
The government of Belgium's French-speaking region of Wallonia, which has a population of about 4 million, has approved a tax on barbequing, local media reported.
Experts said that between 50 and 100 grams of CO2, a so-called greenhouse gas, is emitted during barbequing. Beginning June 2007, residents of Wallonia will have to pay 20 euros for a grilling session.
The local authorities plan to monitor compliance with the new tax legislation from helicopters, whose thermal sensors will detect burning grills.
The government of Belgium's French-speaking region of Wallonia, which has a population of about 4 million, has approved a tax on barbequing, local media reported.
Experts said that between 50 and 100 grams of CO2, a so-called greenhouse gas, is emitted during barbequing. Beginning June 2007, residents of Wallonia will have to pay 20 euros for a grilling session.
The local authorities plan to monitor compliance with the new tax legislation from helicopters, whose thermal sensors will detect burning grills.
I’m assuming these will be hydrogen fuel cell helicopters, of course….otherwise, can someone compute for me how many barbeques it would take to equal the CO2 output of a low-flying chopper, in the air for say, one hour, while carrying and powering a thermal sensor unit?
Seems to me like our moral and intellectual superiors in the heartland of the EU are going a little bit…
A) Overboard?
B) Insane?
C) Fascist?
Correct answer would be - D) All of the above....
วันอังคาร, เมษายน 03, 2550
Trouble for Hillary in New Jersey?
Red Generation tells us why:
Yesterday, supporters of Hillary Clinton, including Governor Corzine, gathered in Elizabeth to celebrate what many perceive as a united front in the Garden State backing the Senator from across the Hudson.
…this event demonstrated the fault lines in NJ and in some ways national Democratic politics. For one, why was the event held in New Jersey’s fourth-largest city? Because the leaders of the two largest cities, Mayor Cory Booker of Newark and Mayor Jeremiah Jersey City, are backing Barack Obama for President in 2008.
Moreover, the leaders in the three other flagship counties for Democrats are not backing Hillary for President. Bergen’s 109,000 Democrats, Passaic’s 53,300 and Middlesex’s 118,000 have party leaders that may or have endorsed other candidates
And is Corzine emulating another famous New Jersey politician?
Perhaps Senators Menendez and Lautenberg were smart to stay away. This could be like McGreevey’s ill-fated endorsement of Dean in 2004...
We still think here that Hillary will win the nomination nationally, but as Jersey is a mix of large urban areas and large suburban areas, the Obama/Clinton contest will be tightly contested in this state…the scary question is, will their be a black/white schism within the Democratic voters of New Jersey?
Doesn’t matter, for two reasons. One, the Democrats will fall in line behind the eventual nominee anyway -only the diehard few will "stay away" on election day because their candidate is not available. Two, if Rudy wins the Republican nomination, he’ll take New Jersey. Narrowly, but undoubtedly. Too many ex-New Yorkers here who remember how Rudy raised New York City from the dead, while the many Jersey independents who would only vote Hillary whilst holding their noses will be thrilled to have a centrist choice.
But one wonders - in how many other states will Hillary face this type of racial divide? White governors holding Hillary’s hand up high, while big-city mayors stand shoulder to shoulder with Barak Obama? Should be interesting to see how the "big-tent" party holds together…
Yesterday, supporters of Hillary Clinton, including Governor Corzine, gathered in Elizabeth to celebrate what many perceive as a united front in the Garden State backing the Senator from across the Hudson.
…this event demonstrated the fault lines in NJ and in some ways national Democratic politics. For one, why was the event held in New Jersey’s fourth-largest city? Because the leaders of the two largest cities, Mayor Cory Booker of Newark and Mayor Jeremiah Jersey City, are backing Barack Obama for President in 2008.
Moreover, the leaders in the three other flagship counties for Democrats are not backing Hillary for President. Bergen’s 109,000 Democrats, Passaic’s 53,300 and Middlesex’s 118,000 have party leaders that may or have endorsed other candidates
And is Corzine emulating another famous New Jersey politician?
Perhaps Senators Menendez and Lautenberg were smart to stay away. This could be like McGreevey’s ill-fated endorsement of Dean in 2004...
We still think here that Hillary will win the nomination nationally, but as Jersey is a mix of large urban areas and large suburban areas, the Obama/Clinton contest will be tightly contested in this state…the scary question is, will their be a black/white schism within the Democratic voters of New Jersey?
Doesn’t matter, for two reasons. One, the Democrats will fall in line behind the eventual nominee anyway -only the diehard few will "stay away" on election day because their candidate is not available. Two, if Rudy wins the Republican nomination, he’ll take New Jersey. Narrowly, but undoubtedly. Too many ex-New Yorkers here who remember how Rudy raised New York City from the dead, while the many Jersey independents who would only vote Hillary whilst holding their noses will be thrilled to have a centrist choice.
But one wonders - in how many other states will Hillary face this type of racial divide? White governors holding Hillary’s hand up high, while big-city mayors stand shoulder to shoulder with Barak Obama? Should be interesting to see how the "big-tent" party holds together…
Contemplations on an Anniversary...
{editor's note: first posted 4/2; updated 4/3 at bottom - I wanted to change the name of this post to "In Heaven, Winston Churchill's puking up premium scotch", but I didn't want to mess up any inbound links...}
...on how far the British have fallen:
Today is the 25th anniversary of Argentina's invasion of the Falklands. The recapture of the Falklands became the defining event of the Thatcher years. A nation that had been in decline since WWII found a new confidence.
A quarter of a century later the role of aggressor is being played by the much more deadly Iran. On this morning's television screens, for the fourth successive day, we watch kidnapped British sailors being humilated by their Iranian captors.
The Belmont Club explains why:
...as events transpired, Whitehall telegraphed that it was going the diplomatic route by first going to the EU, then to the UN, which of course required that its Embassy remain in Teheran. The Ayatollahs must have breathed a sigh of relief at that moment. Because now they knew which route the British were going to take. And unsurprisingly the wheels came off the British wagon within days. The EU threatened to take appropriate action. The UN spent a whole day deliberating whether to issue a statement expressing "concern" over the British hostages instead of taking the opportunity to "deplore" Iran's actions.
Teheran is doing well because they are not playing the diplomatic game....They are punching entirely below the belt while their opponent is locked into a Marquis of Queensbury stance. That's asymmetrical warfare...
May I remind you that this is the stance that American liberals insist we adopt in order to make the Muslims and their mullahs treat us with love and respect ? Hmmm, see the love and respect they are showing the Brits...?
And speaking of the left, note what wussies they have turned the British Armed Services into - via God Help Britain:
Lord Nelson, alas, was killed at the battle of Trafalgar in 1805. The captain of the HMS Cornwall is Commodore Nick Lambert, a more modern sort. He did nothing as six Iranian speedboats seized the boarding party from his ship as they were leaving the freighter they had inspected in Iraqi territorial waters.
Samizdata asks "What the hell happened to "name, rank and serial number?":
From the moment they were captured they should have responded with NOTHING except "Name, rank and serial number". These people have a professional (and legal) requirement to keep their yaps shut and not give aid with their words to a clearly hostile foreign government.
Incidentally, the American POW code is as follows:
ARTICLE I.
I am an American, fighting in the forces which guard my country and our way of life. I am prepared to give my life in their defense.
ARTICLE II.
I will never surrender of my own free will. If in command, I will never surrender the members of my command while they still have the means to resist.
ARTICLE III.
If I am captured, I will continue to resist by all means available. I will make every effort to escape and aid others to escape. I will accept neither parole nor special favors from the enemy.
ARTICLE IV.
If I become a prisoner of war, I will keep faith with my fellow prisoners. I will give no information or take part in any action which might be harmful to my comrades. If I am senior, I will take command. If not, I will obey the lawful orders of those appointed over me and will back them up in every way.
ARTICLE V.
When questioned, should I become a prisoner of war, I am required to give name, rank, service number, and date of birth. I will evade answering further questions to the utmost of my ability. I will make no oral or written statements disloyal to my country and its allies or harmful to their cause.
ARTICLE VI.
I will never forget that I am an American, fighting for freedom, responsible for my actions, and dedicated to the principles which made my country free. I will trust in my God and in the United States of America.
How soon until the Democrats change that as well, to more emulate their less-brave (and I am being generous) European bretheran? Can we fall as far as the Brits have in the next 25 years? Heck, with the help of the Democratic party, there's no telling how far down the bottom is!
UPDATE 4/3: Ralph Peters shows his disgust with the British:
THE greatest shock from the Middle East this year hasn't been terrorist ruthlessness or the latest Iranian tantrum. It's that members of Britain's Royal Marines wimped out in a matter of days and acquiesced in propaganda broadcasts for their captors.
Jingoism aside, I can't imagine any squad of U.S. Marines behaving in such a shabby, cowardly fashion. Our Marines would have fought to begin with. Taken captive by force, they would've resisted collaboration. To the last man and woman.
You could put a U.S. Marine in a dungeon and knock out his teeth, but you wouldn't knock out his pride in his country and the Corps. "Semper fi" means something.
And our Aussie allies would be just as tough.....
Naturally, the European Union has praised Britain's "restraint." We've now got another synonym for cowardice.
In Heaven, Winston Churchill's puking up premium scotch....
The once-proud Brit military has collapsed to a sorry state when its Royal Marines surrender without a fight, then apologize to their captors (praising their gentle natures!) while criticizing their own country. Pretty sad to think that the last real warriors fighting under the Union Jack are soccer hooligans
Think about Sen. John McCain with his broken limbs undergoing torture in that Hanoi prison - and refusing an early chance to be repatriated because he wouldn't leave his comrades behind. Think he'd do a Tokyo Rose for Tehran?
...on how far the British have fallen:
Today is the 25th anniversary of Argentina's invasion of the Falklands. The recapture of the Falklands became the defining event of the Thatcher years. A nation that had been in decline since WWII found a new confidence.
A quarter of a century later the role of aggressor is being played by the much more deadly Iran. On this morning's television screens, for the fourth successive day, we watch kidnapped British sailors being humilated by their Iranian captors.
The Belmont Club explains why:
...as events transpired, Whitehall telegraphed that it was going the diplomatic route by first going to the EU, then to the UN, which of course required that its Embassy remain in Teheran. The Ayatollahs must have breathed a sigh of relief at that moment. Because now they knew which route the British were going to take. And unsurprisingly the wheels came off the British wagon within days. The EU threatened to take appropriate action. The UN spent a whole day deliberating whether to issue a statement expressing "concern" over the British hostages instead of taking the opportunity to "deplore" Iran's actions.
Teheran is doing well because they are not playing the diplomatic game....They are punching entirely below the belt while their opponent is locked into a Marquis of Queensbury stance. That's asymmetrical warfare...
May I remind you that this is the stance that American liberals insist we adopt in order to make the Muslims and their mullahs treat us with love and respect ? Hmmm, see the love and respect they are showing the Brits...?
And speaking of the left, note what wussies they have turned the British Armed Services into - via God Help Britain:
Lord Nelson, alas, was killed at the battle of Trafalgar in 1805. The captain of the HMS Cornwall is Commodore Nick Lambert, a more modern sort. He did nothing as six Iranian speedboats seized the boarding party from his ship as they were leaving the freighter they had inspected in Iraqi territorial waters.
Samizdata asks "What the hell happened to "name, rank and serial number?":
From the moment they were captured they should have responded with NOTHING except "Name, rank and serial number". These people have a professional (and legal) requirement to keep their yaps shut and not give aid with their words to a clearly hostile foreign government.
Incidentally, the American POW code is as follows:
ARTICLE I.
I am an American, fighting in the forces which guard my country and our way of life. I am prepared to give my life in their defense.
ARTICLE II.
I will never surrender of my own free will. If in command, I will never surrender the members of my command while they still have the means to resist.
ARTICLE III.
If I am captured, I will continue to resist by all means available. I will make every effort to escape and aid others to escape. I will accept neither parole nor special favors from the enemy.
ARTICLE IV.
If I become a prisoner of war, I will keep faith with my fellow prisoners. I will give no information or take part in any action which might be harmful to my comrades. If I am senior, I will take command. If not, I will obey the lawful orders of those appointed over me and will back them up in every way.
ARTICLE V.
When questioned, should I become a prisoner of war, I am required to give name, rank, service number, and date of birth. I will evade answering further questions to the utmost of my ability. I will make no oral or written statements disloyal to my country and its allies or harmful to their cause.
ARTICLE VI.
I will never forget that I am an American, fighting for freedom, responsible for my actions, and dedicated to the principles which made my country free. I will trust in my God and in the United States of America.
How soon until the Democrats change that as well, to more emulate their less-brave (and I am being generous) European bretheran? Can we fall as far as the Brits have in the next 25 years? Heck, with the help of the Democratic party, there's no telling how far down the bottom is!
UPDATE 4/3: Ralph Peters shows his disgust with the British:
THE greatest shock from the Middle East this year hasn't been terrorist ruthlessness or the latest Iranian tantrum. It's that members of Britain's Royal Marines wimped out in a matter of days and acquiesced in propaganda broadcasts for their captors.
Jingoism aside, I can't imagine any squad of U.S. Marines behaving in such a shabby, cowardly fashion. Our Marines would have fought to begin with. Taken captive by force, they would've resisted collaboration. To the last man and woman.
You could put a U.S. Marine in a dungeon and knock out his teeth, but you wouldn't knock out his pride in his country and the Corps. "Semper fi" means something.
And our Aussie allies would be just as tough.....
Naturally, the European Union has praised Britain's "restraint." We've now got another synonym for cowardice.
In Heaven, Winston Churchill's puking up premium scotch....
The once-proud Brit military has collapsed to a sorry state when its Royal Marines surrender without a fight, then apologize to their captors (praising their gentle natures!) while criticizing their own country. Pretty sad to think that the last real warriors fighting under the Union Jack are soccer hooligans
Think about Sen. John McCain with his broken limbs undergoing torture in that Hanoi prison - and refusing an early chance to be repatriated because he wouldn't leave his comrades behind. Think he'd do a Tokyo Rose for Tehran?
วันจันทร์, เมษายน 02, 2550
Is it just me...
....or do these op-ed columnists get dumber on a daily basis? E.J. Dionne writes such a lackluster, unconvincing column on the dismantling of the electoral college system that, had it appeared in the blogosphere instead of the Washington Post, it would be just another piece of unlinked flotsam in the great internet sea. But since the standards-free WaPost chooses to print it, I'll spill some virtual ink mocking it...
He starts by exposing his deep-seated hatreds:
The American way of electing presidents is antiquated, impractical and dangerous. It is odd indeed that in 2000, a nation devoted to spreading democracy throughout the world gave power to a man who received 543,895 fewer votes than his opponent.
And exposes his psychological predisposition for projection by saying:
And please, dear Republican friends, don't shout "Get over it!"
E.J.: Get over it. The fact that you can't is evidenced by your support of the following:
As someone who lives in Maryland, I am proud that my state may pioneer a process that could lead to popular election of the president. The state Senate passed a bill last Wednesday that would commit Maryland's 10 electors to voting for the winner of the nationwide popular vote.
How nice - so if 90% of Maryland's voters cast their ballots for a Democratic candidate for President, and a Republican wins the popular vote overall, all of Maryland's electors would be forced to vote for the Republican candidate, thus completely thwarting the will of the state's electorate. Even their voice of protest against said imaginary Republican would be squelched, as their state would officially be labeled as "red". I am sure this is not the outcome that Dionne expects, but as he points out, Bush did win the popular vote by 3 million + in '04....
Finally, look at the arguments Dionne makes to support his crooked election scam:
Yes, this is an effort to circumvent the cumbersome process of amending the Constitution. That's the only practical way of moving toward a more democratic system.
Sorry the Constitution doesn't fit your needs, Dionne. While we are at it, what other elements would you like to circumvent against the will of the people, and in defiance of the genius of the framers (a genius you apparently feels pales before your own)? The Second Amendment obviously needs to go, but why stop there? What about that entire pesky "bill of rights"?
Final statement of stupidity:
But direct election of presidents works just fine in France and in Mexico, which managed to get through a divisive, terribly narrow presidential election last year. Are opponents of the popular vote saying our country is less competent at running elections than France or Mexico?
We always say here that liberals are dying to turn America into Europe, or into a third world nation. Now we have the proof, as Dionne challenges us to live up to these nation's lofty ideals. Hey E.J., in case you haven't looked lately, France is on the verge of civil war, and Mexico is in economic ruin, with as many of its citizens as possible moving to...the United States.
If it isn't broke, don't try to fix it. E.J. isn't happy with the results, so he'd rather praise countries that have had mayhem, revolution, tyrants and anarchy over the last 200+ years, as opposed to America, which simply has had one peaceful election after another for generations.
To Dionne, the only honest election is one where his candidate gets elected. There is no other.
Buddy - get over it.
He starts by exposing his deep-seated hatreds:
The American way of electing presidents is antiquated, impractical and dangerous. It is odd indeed that in 2000, a nation devoted to spreading democracy throughout the world gave power to a man who received 543,895 fewer votes than his opponent.
And exposes his psychological predisposition for projection by saying:
And please, dear Republican friends, don't shout "Get over it!"
E.J.: Get over it. The fact that you can't is evidenced by your support of the following:
As someone who lives in Maryland, I am proud that my state may pioneer a process that could lead to popular election of the president. The state Senate passed a bill last Wednesday that would commit Maryland's 10 electors to voting for the winner of the nationwide popular vote.
How nice - so if 90% of Maryland's voters cast their ballots for a Democratic candidate for President, and a Republican wins the popular vote overall, all of Maryland's electors would be forced to vote for the Republican candidate, thus completely thwarting the will of the state's electorate. Even their voice of protest against said imaginary Republican would be squelched, as their state would officially be labeled as "red". I am sure this is not the outcome that Dionne expects, but as he points out, Bush did win the popular vote by 3 million + in '04....
Finally, look at the arguments Dionne makes to support his crooked election scam:
Yes, this is an effort to circumvent the cumbersome process of amending the Constitution. That's the only practical way of moving toward a more democratic system.
Sorry the Constitution doesn't fit your needs, Dionne. While we are at it, what other elements would you like to circumvent against the will of the people, and in defiance of the genius of the framers (a genius you apparently feels pales before your own)? The Second Amendment obviously needs to go, but why stop there? What about that entire pesky "bill of rights"?
Final statement of stupidity:
But direct election of presidents works just fine in France and in Mexico, which managed to get through a divisive, terribly narrow presidential election last year. Are opponents of the popular vote saying our country is less competent at running elections than France or Mexico?
We always say here that liberals are dying to turn America into Europe, or into a third world nation. Now we have the proof, as Dionne challenges us to live up to these nation's lofty ideals. Hey E.J., in case you haven't looked lately, France is on the verge of civil war, and Mexico is in economic ruin, with as many of its citizens as possible moving to...the United States.
If it isn't broke, don't try to fix it. E.J. isn't happy with the results, so he'd rather praise countries that have had mayhem, revolution, tyrants and anarchy over the last 200+ years, as opposed to America, which simply has had one peaceful election after another for generations.
To Dionne, the only honest election is one where his candidate gets elected. There is no other.
Buddy - get over it.
วันอาทิตย์, เมษายน 01, 2550
British Surrender Imminent...
...so says DEBKA:
The statement by a senior British defense official Sunday, April 1 is fraught with broad implications: He said: “We are quite prepared to give the Iranians a guarantee that we would never knowingly enter their waters without their permission, now or in the future.”
The Blair government’s willingness to offer Iran a guarantee never to knowingly enter its waters is a blow to this partnership and American interests in the region. It means that Tony Blair is going off in his own direction, heading for negotiations with Tehran and a ransom deal for the 15 hostages that would potentially place British naval and marine strength on an exit course from the Shatt al-Arb. Only a month ago, the Royal Navy doubled its deployment in the Persian Gulf, Sea of Oman and Arabian Sea, to match the arrival of the US nuclear carrier Stennis and its naval, air and marine buildup.
Of course, the British now would be unable to participate in any offensive against Iran to contain their nuclear ambitions, a tremendous victory by the mullahs:
The fruits plucked out of the sea with the British sailors could not be sweeter for Tehran. The British will have to ease out of the task they undertook to secure the sea routes to southern Iraq and its southern oil installations. This extra burden will devolve on the United States.
The guarantee never to enter Iranian waters will exclude Britain from any potential Western military action against Iran’s nuclear installation and further accelerate the British military pull-out from southern Iraq.
DEBKAfile’s Tehran sources report the radical Revolutionary Guards and president Mahmoud Ahmadnejad are celebrating their successes. By a single move, they have planted a wedge in the heart of the Western alliance ranged against Iran, helped boost crude to a six-month high, as well as humiliating Britain. Now, they are considering ways to capitalize on their success by follow-up coups.
Mark Steyn considers the hostage episode as an overwhelming defeat for the British, the EU, and the UN:
On this 25th anniversary of the Falklands War, Tony Blair is looking less like Margaret Thatcher and alarmingly like Jimmy Carter, the embodiment of the soi-disant "superpower" as a smiling eunuch.
....the 15 hostages are "British subjects." But, as a point of law, they are also "citizens of the European Union."
...if Europe is as it claims to be, what's it going to do about it?''
Short answer: Nothing.
....Europe has more economic leverage on Iran than America has. The European Union is the Islamic Republic's biggest trading partner, accounting for 40 percent of Iranian exports. They are in a position to inflict serious pain on Tehran. But not for 15 British servicemen. There may be "European citizens," but there is no European polity.
So what's the U.N. doing about this affront to its authority and (in the public humiliation of the captives) of the Geneva Conventions?
Short answer: Nothing.
....the Security Council instead expressed its ''grave concern'' about the situation. That and $4.95 will get you a decaf latte. Ask the folks in Darfur what they've got to show for years of the U.N.'s "grave concerns" -- heavy on the graves, less so on the concern.
The U.N. will do nothing for men seized on a U.N.-sanctioned mission. The European Union will do nothing for its "European citizens." But if liberal transnationalism is a post-modern joke, it's not the only school of transnationalism out there. Iran's Islamic Revolution has been explicitly extraterritorial since the beginning: It has created and funded murderous proxies in Hezbollah, Hamas and both Shia and Sunni factions of the Iraq "insurgency."
And as of today, the Iranians are still "explicitly extraterritorial"; except the territory they are eyeing is ours - from Iranian news services:
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said here Sunday that arrogant powers will vanish like "bubbles on water."
Addressing local residents after a visit to Mishdagh, a center of operations during the war, Ahmadinejad said that April 1 (Farvardin 12) was an auspicious day as on this day 28 years ago the Islamic Republic of Iran was born.
The Iranian nation, in a referendum held in late March 1979, made the historic and decisive choice of voting for the establishment of an Islamic Republic system in the country, paving the way for a glorious future for themselves and, hopefully, for the entire world, he told his audience.
Consider us warned.
The statement by a senior British defense official Sunday, April 1 is fraught with broad implications: He said: “We are quite prepared to give the Iranians a guarantee that we would never knowingly enter their waters without their permission, now or in the future.”
The Blair government’s willingness to offer Iran a guarantee never to knowingly enter its waters is a blow to this partnership and American interests in the region. It means that Tony Blair is going off in his own direction, heading for negotiations with Tehran and a ransom deal for the 15 hostages that would potentially place British naval and marine strength on an exit course from the Shatt al-Arb. Only a month ago, the Royal Navy doubled its deployment in the Persian Gulf, Sea of Oman and Arabian Sea, to match the arrival of the US nuclear carrier Stennis and its naval, air and marine buildup.
Of course, the British now would be unable to participate in any offensive against Iran to contain their nuclear ambitions, a tremendous victory by the mullahs:
The fruits plucked out of the sea with the British sailors could not be sweeter for Tehran. The British will have to ease out of the task they undertook to secure the sea routes to southern Iraq and its southern oil installations. This extra burden will devolve on the United States.
The guarantee never to enter Iranian waters will exclude Britain from any potential Western military action against Iran’s nuclear installation and further accelerate the British military pull-out from southern Iraq.
DEBKAfile’s Tehran sources report the radical Revolutionary Guards and president Mahmoud Ahmadnejad are celebrating their successes. By a single move, they have planted a wedge in the heart of the Western alliance ranged against Iran, helped boost crude to a six-month high, as well as humiliating Britain. Now, they are considering ways to capitalize on their success by follow-up coups.
Mark Steyn considers the hostage episode as an overwhelming defeat for the British, the EU, and the UN:
On this 25th anniversary of the Falklands War, Tony Blair is looking less like Margaret Thatcher and alarmingly like Jimmy Carter, the embodiment of the soi-disant "superpower" as a smiling eunuch.
....the 15 hostages are "British subjects." But, as a point of law, they are also "citizens of the European Union."
...if Europe is as it claims to be, what's it going to do about it?''
Short answer: Nothing.
....Europe has more economic leverage on Iran than America has. The European Union is the Islamic Republic's biggest trading partner, accounting for 40 percent of Iranian exports. They are in a position to inflict serious pain on Tehran. But not for 15 British servicemen. There may be "European citizens," but there is no European polity.
So what's the U.N. doing about this affront to its authority and (in the public humiliation of the captives) of the Geneva Conventions?
Short answer: Nothing.
....the Security Council instead expressed its ''grave concern'' about the situation. That and $4.95 will get you a decaf latte. Ask the folks in Darfur what they've got to show for years of the U.N.'s "grave concerns" -- heavy on the graves, less so on the concern.
The U.N. will do nothing for men seized on a U.N.-sanctioned mission. The European Union will do nothing for its "European citizens." But if liberal transnationalism is a post-modern joke, it's not the only school of transnationalism out there. Iran's Islamic Revolution has been explicitly extraterritorial since the beginning: It has created and funded murderous proxies in Hezbollah, Hamas and both Shia and Sunni factions of the Iraq "insurgency."
And as of today, the Iranians are still "explicitly extraterritorial"; except the territory they are eyeing is ours - from Iranian news services:
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said here Sunday that arrogant powers will vanish like "bubbles on water."
Addressing local residents after a visit to Mishdagh, a center of operations during the war, Ahmadinejad said that April 1 (Farvardin 12) was an auspicious day as on this day 28 years ago the Islamic Republic of Iran was born.
The Iranian nation, in a referendum held in late March 1979, made the historic and decisive choice of voting for the establishment of an Islamic Republic system in the country, paving the way for a glorious future for themselves and, hopefully, for the entire world, he told his audience.
Consider us warned.
The West Moves Against Iran!
As only the West can, of course:
Britain has frozen most contacts with Iran. The U.N. Security Council has expressed "grave concern" about the incident. The EU has demanded the sailors' unconditional release and warned of unspecified "appropriate measures" if Tehran does not comply — a position the Iranian Foreign Ministry called "bias and meddlesome."
Pathetic, says Damian Penny:
The European Union has refused to support Britain's call to freeze $28 billion in export trade with Iran until 15 British sailors are freed.
France urged avoiding inflaming the confrontation and the Dutch noted it was important that the dialogue with Iran continue, the Times of London said Saturday. EU ministers met in Germany Friday night to discuss the impasse about the detention of the British naval personnel for allegedly trespassing in Iranian waters.
Reminds me of this scene from Team America: World Police -
Britain has frozen most contacts with Iran. The U.N. Security Council has expressed "grave concern" about the incident. The EU has demanded the sailors' unconditional release and warned of unspecified "appropriate measures" if Tehran does not comply — a position the Iranian Foreign Ministry called "bias and meddlesome."
Pathetic, says Damian Penny:
The European Union has refused to support Britain's call to freeze $28 billion in export trade with Iran until 15 British sailors are freed.
France urged avoiding inflaming the confrontation and the Dutch noted it was important that the dialogue with Iran continue, the Times of London said Saturday. EU ministers met in Germany Friday night to discuss the impasse about the detention of the British naval personnel for allegedly trespassing in Iranian waters.
Reminds me of this scene from Team America: World Police -
Hans Blix: I'm sorry, but the UN must be firm with you. Let me in, or else.
Kim Jong Il: Or else what?
Hans Blix: Or else we will be very angry with you... and we will write you a letter, telling you how angry we are.
At least the fictional Hans Blix was honest...meanwhile, back in the "real" world, the Foreign Secretary whimpers:
Speaking to reporters in Bremen, British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett urged Iran to resolve the crisis over the military personnel peacefully, saying London remains open to dialogue.
"We encourage Iran to peacefully resolve this issue," Beckett said.
"We continue to express our willingness to engage in dialogue and discussions with Iran," she added. "That is very much in the best interest of our people and that is our foremost concern."
"I think everyone regrets that this position has arisen," she said. "What we want is a way out of it."
And where does Beckett's cowardly 'regret" get her? Bitch-slapped by Ahmadinejad,who knows to kick a woman when she's down:
In his first statement on the arrest of the crew, he told a rally marking the Persian New Year that Britain should have 'apologised and expressed regret' but had failed to act 'in the legal and logical way'. The crowd shouted 'Death to Britain', Iranian media reports said.
Ahmadinejad added: 'The British occupier forces did trespass our waters. Our border guards detained them with skill and bravery.'
Now, many are asking themselves, "WWAD?" (What Would America Do?) - in case you're curious, our soldiers have come across similar types of Iranian snag attempts in the very recent past, and as may be expected, reacted a tad differently...via The Belmont Club:
The soldiers who were there still talk about the September 7 firefight on the Iran-Iraq border in whispers...
...a platoon of Iranian soldiers appeared and moved to surround the coalition patrol, taking up positions on high ground. At that point, according to the Army's statement, the Iranian captain told the U.S. and Iraqi soldiers that if they tried to leave they would be fired on. Fearing abduction by the Iranians, U.S. troops moved to go anyway, and fighting broke out...
Why go after the Brits? Maybe becuase the Iranians had already probed American forces in incidents like the one above, and feared they would wind up in a true "shooting war". Knowing how eager the British were to avoid escalation (and how indifferent the U.S. armed forces were to possibly causing one), they became perceived as the low-hanging fruit on the tree. If our troops were operating under the same rules of engagement as the British, we would have had our own hostage crisis running into its seventh month...
Lesson in there for anyone anywhere?
วันเสาร์, มีนาคม 31, 2550
Traitors, All!
While some congressman work to advance al-Qaeda's aims within the United States, others work to further their aims outside the room...Left Wingnut Nancy Pelosi is making pilgrimage to Damascus, to honor and supplicate before despot and terrorist Bashar Al-Assad:
After media inquiries, Pelosi's office issued a statement.
"As recommended by the Iraq Study Group, a bipartisan delegation led by Speaker Pelosi intends to discuss a wide range of security issues affecting the United States and the Middle East with representatives of governments in the region, including Syria," the statement read.
Great idea - British patience and discussions with Iran has certainly changed their relationship! The once-mighty Brits are now reduced to bowing and scraping supplicants, begging the Iranians for the return of their sailors and Marines, and pleading with the UN for help in crafting strongly-worded statements.
That's progress, for sure - well, for the mullahs at least, and isn't that the aim of the Democrats in Congress today? After all, who benefits most from an immediate American troop withdrawal from Iraq? The Iranians and al-Qaeda, first and foremost (certainly not the Iraqi people!). And who benefits the most from congressional Democrats whom state emphatically that we will not go to war with Iran? Why, the mullahs, again! Nothing like knowing you cannot be punished for your actions to really inhibit you, right?
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said yesterday of Pelosi's visit: "Someone should take a step back and think about the message that it sends and the message that it sends to our allies."
I'm more afraid of the message it sends to Syria, Iran and Hezbollah - why should these countries cooperate at all with the United States when Pelosi comes abroad and assures them she will allow no military retribution for their misdeeds, and tells them how they will get so much more respect and obedience from a Democratic Congressional/Presidential combo that she will guarentee them will be in place in just over a year and a half?
Her delegation includes Reps. Tom Lantos (D-Calif.), chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs; Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), the House's only Muslim lawmaker; Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.); Nick J. Rahall II (D-W.Va.); and David L. Hobson (R-Ohio).
These men and women are more interested in undermining Administration foreign policy and furthering their own agenda of appeasement and surrender than actually doing the right thing for the peoples of the Middle East, or the people of America, who they claim falsely to represent.
Remember their names.
Traitors, all.
After media inquiries, Pelosi's office issued a statement.
"As recommended by the Iraq Study Group, a bipartisan delegation led by Speaker Pelosi intends to discuss a wide range of security issues affecting the United States and the Middle East with representatives of governments in the region, including Syria," the statement read.
Great idea - British patience and discussions with Iran has certainly changed their relationship! The once-mighty Brits are now reduced to bowing and scraping supplicants, begging the Iranians for the return of their sailors and Marines, and pleading with the UN for help in crafting strongly-worded statements.
That's progress, for sure - well, for the mullahs at least, and isn't that the aim of the Democrats in Congress today? After all, who benefits most from an immediate American troop withdrawal from Iraq? The Iranians and al-Qaeda, first and foremost (certainly not the Iraqi people!). And who benefits the most from congressional Democrats whom state emphatically that we will not go to war with Iran? Why, the mullahs, again! Nothing like knowing you cannot be punished for your actions to really inhibit you, right?
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said yesterday of Pelosi's visit: "Someone should take a step back and think about the message that it sends and the message that it sends to our allies."
I'm more afraid of the message it sends to Syria, Iran and Hezbollah - why should these countries cooperate at all with the United States when Pelosi comes abroad and assures them she will allow no military retribution for their misdeeds, and tells them how they will get so much more respect and obedience from a Democratic Congressional/Presidential combo that she will guarentee them will be in place in just over a year and a half?
Her delegation includes Reps. Tom Lantos (D-Calif.), chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs; Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), the House's only Muslim lawmaker; Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.); Nick J. Rahall II (D-W.Va.); and David L. Hobson (R-Ohio).
These men and women are more interested in undermining Administration foreign policy and furthering their own agenda of appeasement and surrender than actually doing the right thing for the peoples of the Middle East, or the people of America, who they claim falsely to represent.
Remember their names.
Traitors, all.
Qur'an 9:5
"Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war."
Terrifying stuff over at iranian.com:
"Every stratagem," means every stratagem. No heinous act is out of bounds for these savages. They place children, for instance, in the backseat of a car bomb so that it could be waved through checkpoints without inspection. Then, the adults park the car in the midst of a shopping crowd, run out of the car and detonate it with the children inside. Horrific? Shocking? Absolutely barbaric? These are the same people who used thousands of Iranian children as minesweepers during the Iran-Iraq war to clear a path for their more valued armored vehicles.
Misguided advocates of negotiation with the mullahs, beware. The mullahs are on an Allah-mandated mission. They are intoxicated with Petrodollars and aim to settle for nothing less than complete domination of the world under the Islamic ummeh. It is precisely for this reason that they consider America and the West as "Ofooli," setting-dying system, while they believe their Islamism as "Tolooi," rising-living order. They are in no mood of negotiating for anything less than the total surrender of democracy, the very anathema to Islamism.
Read it all....
Terrifying stuff over at iranian.com:
"Every stratagem," means every stratagem. No heinous act is out of bounds for these savages. They place children, for instance, in the backseat of a car bomb so that it could be waved through checkpoints without inspection. Then, the adults park the car in the midst of a shopping crowd, run out of the car and detonate it with the children inside. Horrific? Shocking? Absolutely barbaric? These are the same people who used thousands of Iranian children as minesweepers during the Iran-Iraq war to clear a path for their more valued armored vehicles.
Misguided advocates of negotiation with the mullahs, beware. The mullahs are on an Allah-mandated mission. They are intoxicated with Petrodollars and aim to settle for nothing less than complete domination of the world under the Islamic ummeh. It is precisely for this reason that they consider America and the West as "Ofooli," setting-dying system, while they believe their Islamism as "Tolooi," rising-living order. They are in no mood of negotiating for anything less than the total surrender of democracy, the very anathema to Islamism.
Read it all....
วันพฤหัสบดี, มีนาคม 29, 2550
Rush Holt: New Jersey's Gift to Terror
My congressman, Rush Holt (D-NJ). continues to side with America’s enemies, this time supporting one of their most nefarious tactics yet. I’ll let Michelle Malkin give us the intro:
EARLIER this month, six publicity-seeking imams filed a federal lawsuit against US Airways and Minneapolis/St. Paul's Metropolitan Airports Commission. The Muslim clerics were removed from their flight last November and questioned for several hours after their suspicious behavior alarmed both passengers and crew members.
Katherine Kersten of The Minneapolis Star Tribune reported last week that the imams, advised by the grievance- mongers at the Council on American-Islamic Relations, also plan to sue "John Does" - innocent bystanders who alerted the authorities about their security concerns.
Rep. Steve Pearce (R-N.M.) has introduced legislation to protect John Does who report suspicious behavior from legal liability..
Now to LGF, who tells us a little more about the congressional tiff that followed:
House Republicans tonight surprised Democrats with a procedural vote to protect public-transportation passengers from being sued if they report suspicious activity — the first step by lawmakers to protect “John Doe” airline travelers already targeted in such a lawsuit.
After a heated debate and calls for order, the motion to recommit the Democrats’ Rail and Public Transportation Security Act of 2007 back to committee with instructions to add the protective language passed on a vote of 304-121. Republicans said the lawsuit filed by six Muslim imams against US Airways and “John Does,” passengers who reported suspicious behavior, could have a “chilling effect” on passengers who may fear being sued for acting vigilant.
Rep. Peter T. King, New York Republican and ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee, offered the motion saying all Americans — airline passengers included — must be protected from lawsuits if they report suspicious behavior that may foreshadow a terrorist attack.
LGF urges us to go to the roll call vote to see which representatives are in CAIR’s pocket (121 Nays, all Democrats – what a shock!) And a quick click told us exactly what we expected:
Nays
Holt
Holt is not stupid, he is an active tool of the Islamist interests. He knows that by allowing agitators like the alleged imans above to sue witnesses, people will hesitate to report suspected terrorist activities. Holt is essentially an accessory to the next terror attack that happens on American soil, for he is supporting the rights of the Islamists to silence those who would report their murderous activites.
Better for you, your family, and your children to be dead in Rush Holt’s America than to report possible terrorist action. Death pales before multiculturalism (or Islamic rule?). It’s sick, but believe it – it’s right in the roll call….
This is not new behavior for my congressional cockroach; Rush Holt fights harder against American interests and for Islamic / terrorist interests than virtually any other Congressman in the House. Certainly, he is a huge supporter of surrendering Iraq to al-Qaeda; he relentlessly votes for withdrawal while refusing to acknowledge what the consequences might be for this country, and the Iraqi people, if we do. Coward.
Let’s try to shame our treasonous congressman with some more bravery from Miss Malkin, as she makes her vow to protect America from Holt’s allies:
You don't know me. But I am on the lookout for you. You are my enemy. And I am yours.
I am John Doe.
I will act when homeland security officials ask me to "report suspicious activity."
I will embrace my local police department's admonition: "If you see something, say something."
I will protest your Jew-hating, America-bashing "scholars." I will petition against your hate-mongering mosque leaders.
I will raise my voice against your subjugation of women and religious minorities.
I will challenge your attempts to indoctrinate my children in our schools.
I will not be censored in the name of tolerance. I will not be cowed by your Beltway lobbying groups in moderates' clothing. I will not cringe when you shriek about "profiling" or "Islamophobia."
I will put my family's safety above sensitivity. I will put my country above multiculturalism.
I will not submit to your will. I will not be intimidated.
I am John Doe.
Finally, I call out for one more act of courage – who will run against Holt in 2008? Can the Republican party find a decent candidate to run against this man, who constantly votes with the hard-left of his party, a line that very few of his constituents (even Democrats) endorse?
Where is the candidate that will stand up against the sickness of Rush Holt?
EARLIER this month, six publicity-seeking imams filed a federal lawsuit against US Airways and Minneapolis/St. Paul's Metropolitan Airports Commission. The Muslim clerics were removed from their flight last November and questioned for several hours after their suspicious behavior alarmed both passengers and crew members.
Katherine Kersten of The Minneapolis Star Tribune reported last week that the imams, advised by the grievance- mongers at the Council on American-Islamic Relations, also plan to sue "John Does" - innocent bystanders who alerted the authorities about their security concerns.
Rep. Steve Pearce (R-N.M.) has introduced legislation to protect John Does who report suspicious behavior from legal liability..
Now to LGF, who tells us a little more about the congressional tiff that followed:
House Republicans tonight surprised Democrats with a procedural vote to protect public-transportation passengers from being sued if they report suspicious activity — the first step by lawmakers to protect “John Doe” airline travelers already targeted in such a lawsuit.
After a heated debate and calls for order, the motion to recommit the Democrats’ Rail and Public Transportation Security Act of 2007 back to committee with instructions to add the protective language passed on a vote of 304-121. Republicans said the lawsuit filed by six Muslim imams against US Airways and “John Does,” passengers who reported suspicious behavior, could have a “chilling effect” on passengers who may fear being sued for acting vigilant.
Rep. Peter T. King, New York Republican and ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee, offered the motion saying all Americans — airline passengers included — must be protected from lawsuits if they report suspicious behavior that may foreshadow a terrorist attack.
LGF urges us to go to the roll call vote to see which representatives are in CAIR’s pocket (121 Nays, all Democrats – what a shock!) And a quick click told us exactly what we expected:
Nays
Holt
Holt is not stupid, he is an active tool of the Islamist interests. He knows that by allowing agitators like the alleged imans above to sue witnesses, people will hesitate to report suspected terrorist activities. Holt is essentially an accessory to the next terror attack that happens on American soil, for he is supporting the rights of the Islamists to silence those who would report their murderous activites.
Better for you, your family, and your children to be dead in Rush Holt’s America than to report possible terrorist action. Death pales before multiculturalism (or Islamic rule?). It’s sick, but believe it – it’s right in the roll call….
This is not new behavior for my congressional cockroach; Rush Holt fights harder against American interests and for Islamic / terrorist interests than virtually any other Congressman in the House. Certainly, he is a huge supporter of surrendering Iraq to al-Qaeda; he relentlessly votes for withdrawal while refusing to acknowledge what the consequences might be for this country, and the Iraqi people, if we do. Coward.
Let’s try to shame our treasonous congressman with some more bravery from Miss Malkin, as she makes her vow to protect America from Holt’s allies:
You don't know me. But I am on the lookout for you. You are my enemy. And I am yours.
I am John Doe.
I will act when homeland security officials ask me to "report suspicious activity."
I will embrace my local police department's admonition: "If you see something, say something."
I will protest your Jew-hating, America-bashing "scholars." I will petition against your hate-mongering mosque leaders.
I will raise my voice against your subjugation of women and religious minorities.
I will challenge your attempts to indoctrinate my children in our schools.
I will not be censored in the name of tolerance. I will not be cowed by your Beltway lobbying groups in moderates' clothing. I will not cringe when you shriek about "profiling" or "Islamophobia."
I will put my family's safety above sensitivity. I will put my country above multiculturalism.
I will not submit to your will. I will not be intimidated.
I am John Doe.
Finally, I call out for one more act of courage – who will run against Holt in 2008? Can the Republican party find a decent candidate to run against this man, who constantly votes with the hard-left of his party, a line that very few of his constituents (even Democrats) endorse?
Where is the candidate that will stand up against the sickness of Rush Holt?
วันพุธ, มีนาคม 28, 2550
Britain to Fall?
The Iranian government may be held by mad messianic mullahs, but that doesn't mean that they are necessarily stupid...with the state of the British Navy, what better time to launch an attack against their personnel? A devastating analysis from the New York Post:
IT'S been a tough month for the British Navy. On March 7, it learned that Tony Blair's Labor government was going ahead with drastic cuts in its budget and number of ships. By this time next year, the once-vaunted Royal Navy will be about the size of the Belgian Navy, while its officers face a five-year moratorium on all promotions.
If that wasn't demoralizing enough, last Friday the Iranian Navy seized a patrol boat containing 15 British sailors and Marines, claiming they'd crossed into Iranian waters. They're now hostages and may well go on trial as spies.
The latest report is that the Britons were ready to fight off their abductors. Certainly their escorting ship, HMS Cornwall, could have blown the Iranian naval vessel out of the water. However, at the last minute the British Ministry of Defense ordered the Cornwall not to fire, and her captain and crew were forced to watch their shipmates led away into captivity.
There was a question whether the Blair government would end up leaving Britain with a navy too small to protect its shores. Now it seems to want a navy that can't even protect its own sailors.
Seems like the Iranians may have found their new Jimmy Carter in Mr. Blair - he's trapped, forced by the code of EU non-violence to limit his actions to strongly worded statements and the threat of more strongly worded statements. Should he react militarily, it is in essence a rebuke of the EU ideal that all conflicts can be resolved diplomatically. By possibly saving his own sailors (which, apparently, is a job our sailors might wind up doing due to Blair's insane military cutbacks), he could be severly undermining the EU in the process. What kind of pressure is Blair facing from his neighbors in Europe not to take any action at all; to "wait it out"?
Blair and the Brits should remember 1979 - the taking of the U.S. Embassy and its staff as hostages for 444 days, while a cowardly president tied ribbons around trees and pleaded for their release, destroyed American credibility around the world for years, and created the "paper tiger" meme that led to further terrorist attacks upon our forces and institutions worldwide.
If you can't back up your words with actions, nobody will take you seriously, and then you are in some deep sh*t. Blair is in a tough spot - his soft allies in the E-Union would frown upon any military action, while Blair's own weaking of his once-vaunted Navy has made any action that much more difficult to undertake. And if he doesn't act, the sight of him standing by helplesly as British sailors are manhandled through an Islamic show trial will weaken the international position of England to a point where their influence on foreign affairs will be greatly diminished.
Not a good spot to be in, but one cannot say that events were not leading up to this moment...how Tony Blair plays the cards he has dealt himself here will affect Britain and the West for the next decade. One can only hope he holds some of that staunch British blood within him; along with some of the strength and courage that has served that one-great nation so well for so long...
Well, maybe Mr. Blair will get lucky, after all...Scappleface gives us the outcome that the Left will insist is realistic:
Iran Blinks Under 'Cordial Pressure' from Tony Blair
(2007-03-27) — Iran announced today that it would release immediately the 15 British soldiers and marines it took hostage last week to avoid further “cordial pressure and devastating pleasantries” from British Prime Minister Tony Blair.
“In this test of wills,” said Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, “we acknowledge the superior power of the adversary. We cannot withstand another onslaught of polite diplomatic language nor the withering, if unspoken, consternation we detect in the eyes of Tony Blair....
Yeah...keep dreaming....
IT'S been a tough month for the British Navy. On March 7, it learned that Tony Blair's Labor government was going ahead with drastic cuts in its budget and number of ships. By this time next year, the once-vaunted Royal Navy will be about the size of the Belgian Navy, while its officers face a five-year moratorium on all promotions.
If that wasn't demoralizing enough, last Friday the Iranian Navy seized a patrol boat containing 15 British sailors and Marines, claiming they'd crossed into Iranian waters. They're now hostages and may well go on trial as spies.
The latest report is that the Britons were ready to fight off their abductors. Certainly their escorting ship, HMS Cornwall, could have blown the Iranian naval vessel out of the water. However, at the last minute the British Ministry of Defense ordered the Cornwall not to fire, and her captain and crew were forced to watch their shipmates led away into captivity.
There was a question whether the Blair government would end up leaving Britain with a navy too small to protect its shores. Now it seems to want a navy that can't even protect its own sailors.
Seems like the Iranians may have found their new Jimmy Carter in Mr. Blair - he's trapped, forced by the code of EU non-violence to limit his actions to strongly worded statements and the threat of more strongly worded statements. Should he react militarily, it is in essence a rebuke of the EU ideal that all conflicts can be resolved diplomatically. By possibly saving his own sailors (which, apparently, is a job our sailors might wind up doing due to Blair's insane military cutbacks), he could be severly undermining the EU in the process. What kind of pressure is Blair facing from his neighbors in Europe not to take any action at all; to "wait it out"?
Blair and the Brits should remember 1979 - the taking of the U.S. Embassy and its staff as hostages for 444 days, while a cowardly president tied ribbons around trees and pleaded for their release, destroyed American credibility around the world for years, and created the "paper tiger" meme that led to further terrorist attacks upon our forces and institutions worldwide.
If you can't back up your words with actions, nobody will take you seriously, and then you are in some deep sh*t. Blair is in a tough spot - his soft allies in the E-Union would frown upon any military action, while Blair's own weaking of his once-vaunted Navy has made any action that much more difficult to undertake. And if he doesn't act, the sight of him standing by helplesly as British sailors are manhandled through an Islamic show trial will weaken the international position of England to a point where their influence on foreign affairs will be greatly diminished.
Not a good spot to be in, but one cannot say that events were not leading up to this moment...how Tony Blair plays the cards he has dealt himself here will affect Britain and the West for the next decade. One can only hope he holds some of that staunch British blood within him; along with some of the strength and courage that has served that one-great nation so well for so long...
Well, maybe Mr. Blair will get lucky, after all...Scappleface gives us the outcome that the Left will insist is realistic:
Iran Blinks Under 'Cordial Pressure' from Tony Blair
(2007-03-27) — Iran announced today that it would release immediately the 15 British soldiers and marines it took hostage last week to avoid further “cordial pressure and devastating pleasantries” from British Prime Minister Tony Blair.
“In this test of wills,” said Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, “we acknowledge the superior power of the adversary. We cannot withstand another onslaught of polite diplomatic language nor the withering, if unspoken, consternation we detect in the eyes of Tony Blair....
Yeah...keep dreaming....
วันอังคาร, มีนาคม 27, 2550
Josef Stalin Was Right…
…when he famously remarked, “When we hang the capitalists they will sell us the rope we use.”
Although Little Green Footballs is unsure whether it was Stalin or Lenin that made the comment, our man Charles adds:
Islamists won’t even have to buy the rope. The purblind multiculturalists will hand it to them and put it around their own necks.
So where am I going with this? Here – via Gateway Pundit, we get the following report:
A British-made aircraft has been sold to Iran, the first new Western-made aircraft acquired by Tehran since the 1979 Islamic revolution, an adviser to the deal said on Monday. The 10-seater Britten Norman Islander aircraft was delivered to Iran's Civil Aviation Organisation last week, said Dean Ghobadi, commercial director of PAAviation, which provides aviation products and services to Iran.
"This hasn't happened since 1979," said Ghobadi. "The Iranians are delighted and have expressed interest in a further five aircraft".
And they should be delighted! What’s next – foreign nations selling them the nuclear technology they crave in order to rule the world under a 12th century Caliphate? Oh, wait…..
Lenin, too, was right - just replace Soviet/Communist with Arab/Islamist:
Capitalists the world over and their governments will, in their desire to win Soviet market, shut their eyes to the above-mentioned activities and thus be turned into blind deaf-mutes. They will furnish credits, which will serve as a means of supporting the Communist parties in their countries, and, by supplying us, will rebuild our war industry, which is essential for our future attacks on our suppliers.
In other words, they will be laboring to prepare their own suicide....
Although Little Green Footballs is unsure whether it was Stalin or Lenin that made the comment, our man Charles adds:
Islamists won’t even have to buy the rope. The purblind multiculturalists will hand it to them and put it around their own necks.
So where am I going with this? Here – via Gateway Pundit, we get the following report:
A British-made aircraft has been sold to Iran, the first new Western-made aircraft acquired by Tehran since the 1979 Islamic revolution, an adviser to the deal said on Monday. The 10-seater Britten Norman Islander aircraft was delivered to Iran's Civil Aviation Organisation last week, said Dean Ghobadi, commercial director of PAAviation, which provides aviation products and services to Iran.
"This hasn't happened since 1979," said Ghobadi. "The Iranians are delighted and have expressed interest in a further five aircraft".
And they should be delighted! What’s next – foreign nations selling them the nuclear technology they crave in order to rule the world under a 12th century Caliphate? Oh, wait…..
Lenin, too, was right - just replace Soviet/Communist with Arab/Islamist:
Capitalists the world over and their governments will, in their desire to win Soviet market, shut their eyes to the above-mentioned activities and thus be turned into blind deaf-mutes. They will furnish credits, which will serve as a means of supporting the Communist parties in their countries, and, by supplying us, will rebuild our war industry, which is essential for our future attacks on our suppliers.
In other words, they will be laboring to prepare their own suicide....
วันจันทร์, มีนาคม 26, 2550
Global Warming Roundup!
There is very little in the way of irony coming out of Duluth these days:
DULUTH, Minn., Feb. 27 (UPI) -- Officials from the Global Warming 101 expedition in Canada have confirmed that team member Elizabeth Andre has been evacuated.
Andre was reportedly evacuated after suffering frostbitten fingertips while setting up camp on Canada's Baffin Island.
The 1,200-mile expedition to visit five native villages, led by Ely's Will Steger, is part of an effort to call attention to global warming, Minnesota's Duluth News Tribune reported.
Temperatures were below zero Saturday night when Andre suffered the frostbite....
DULUTH, Minn., Feb. 27 (UPI) -- Officials from the Global Warming 101 expedition in Canada have confirmed that team member Elizabeth Andre has been evacuated.
Andre was reportedly evacuated after suffering frostbitten fingertips while setting up camp on Canada's Baffin Island.
The 1,200-mile expedition to visit five native villages, led by Ely's Will Steger, is part of an effort to call attention to global warming, Minnesota's Duluth News Tribune reported.
Temperatures were below zero Saturday night when Andre suffered the frostbite....
To that, I can add nothing whatsoever....
Now the folks in the letters section of today's New York Post have some choice words for The Goracle:
Global warming is the biggest scam since global cooling....
....it is a campaign to stop and turn back economic progress, thus stopping the continuous increase in the health, wealth and well-being of humanity as a whole.
It is a tragedy in the making for the 21st century.
Watching Gore testify on Capitol Hill, I thought I was looking at a designated hitter on a Major League Baseball roster.
He was more bloated than his teammates, took swings at the opposition, to the delight of his hometown fans, and he never had to field his position.
And why are there still some holdouts who still believe that the earth is round, that planets orbit the sun, and that global warming is overhyped leftist, luddite propoganda? CBS's website pushes the "All Conservatives are Stupid" meme:
The easy answer is that Republicans are just tools of the energy industry. It's certainly true that many of them are....
The truth is more complicated — and more depressing: A small number of hard-core ideologues (some, but not all, industry shills) have led the thinking for the whole conservative movement.
I'll rebut that using Neil Boortz's words:
For the most part leftists use this "stupid" tactic in order to avoid actually having to intellectually engage with someone who thinks differently than they. After all ... you really don't have to consider the opinions offered by someone who disagrees with you if you can successfully and falsely brand them as ignorant.
Take that, you liberal idiots !
Finally, the truth comes out...the cause of all global warming? The lovely blogger Annika ! Yes, it's all horribly, horribly true...in her own words:
...the graph for average daily visits to my blog looked frighteningly familiar. By consulting my scientific sources (i.e. I googled it) I was able to find a graph showing the recent increase in average global temperatures.
Sure enough, when I superimposed the two graphs, an inconvenient truth emerged.....
Yea gads, we are all dead men....
A Blogiversary !
So it has been exactly two years since I started this blog - the so-called “blogiversary”, if you will...
I’ve seen some bloggers practically dislocate their shoulders patting themselves on the back on this occasion; not quite my style. But I will say that I started blogging really as a way to get my thoughts on the world as it is (and as it should be) out of my head and onto “paper”, virtual though it may be. Blogging became a way to vent, more than anything else. I thought I would eventually spend out my frustration, and become bored with writing for an invisible audience, leaving my URL to die on the vine, more a snapshot of a few months in my life than anything else.
Turned out different than I expected, like so much in life…I enjoyed it more than I thought; and what started out as a hobby now borders on an obsession; one that I occasionally need to force myself to walk away from.
Bottom line – nothing’s over; hopefully I’ve just begun (which is a strange thing to say on my 904th post!).
And a big thanks to the thousands upon thousands whom have stopped by to pay a visit; to read, to write, to sneer…I have actually learned from my comments that there are more people than I thought who can respectfully disagree based upon solid argumentation; I’ve enjoyed some of that give and take tremendously; it has broadened me and tempered me.
And the most important thing that I have discovered, to my great relief, is that there is a vast number of intelligent Americans on both side of the aisle who actually do dissect issues and make value judgements that are part of a thought-out process. The talking heads in the mainstream media bemoan the “ignorant Americans” whom they claim pay no attention to the travails of the world today; yet the mere existence of the blogosphere, “run” almost entirely by private citizens, debunks that myth (or is it a conceit?). The average blogger speaks for more people than your run-of-the-mill newspaper columnist or televised talking head (and generally writes better as well); and that simple fact has given me renewed confidence in America’s ability to chose wisely, and correctly…
And finally, thanks to my fellow bloggers for the occasional link; the fact that I have written something that another would think to recommend is the highest compliment I can think of.
Again, my very humble thanks.
Now, back to work…
I’ve seen some bloggers practically dislocate their shoulders patting themselves on the back on this occasion; not quite my style. But I will say that I started blogging really as a way to get my thoughts on the world as it is (and as it should be) out of my head and onto “paper”, virtual though it may be. Blogging became a way to vent, more than anything else. I thought I would eventually spend out my frustration, and become bored with writing for an invisible audience, leaving my URL to die on the vine, more a snapshot of a few months in my life than anything else.
Turned out different than I expected, like so much in life…I enjoyed it more than I thought; and what started out as a hobby now borders on an obsession; one that I occasionally need to force myself to walk away from.
Bottom line – nothing’s over; hopefully I’ve just begun (which is a strange thing to say on my 904th post!).
And a big thanks to the thousands upon thousands whom have stopped by to pay a visit; to read, to write, to sneer…I have actually learned from my comments that there are more people than I thought who can respectfully disagree based upon solid argumentation; I’ve enjoyed some of that give and take tremendously; it has broadened me and tempered me.
And the most important thing that I have discovered, to my great relief, is that there is a vast number of intelligent Americans on both side of the aisle who actually do dissect issues and make value judgements that are part of a thought-out process. The talking heads in the mainstream media bemoan the “ignorant Americans” whom they claim pay no attention to the travails of the world today; yet the mere existence of the blogosphere, “run” almost entirely by private citizens, debunks that myth (or is it a conceit?). The average blogger speaks for more people than your run-of-the-mill newspaper columnist or televised talking head (and generally writes better as well); and that simple fact has given me renewed confidence in America’s ability to chose wisely, and correctly…
And finally, thanks to my fellow bloggers for the occasional link; the fact that I have written something that another would think to recommend is the highest compliment I can think of.
Again, my very humble thanks.
Now, back to work…
วันอาทิตย์, มีนาคม 25, 2550
DEBKA reports...
...that the recent siezure of 15 British sailors is only the first of many upcoming Iranian reprisal actions:
Our military sources report that Middle East and Persian Gulf nations as well as the US and UK are bracing for further Iranian marine, air or terrorist operations in Iraq and other places in reprisal for the sanctions measure before the UN Security Council in New York. On the ready too are the Saudi armed forces and some Israeli air and naval units.
According to Iranian sources the 15 British Royal navy seamen and marines which an Iranian warship seized with their commando craft Friday, March 23, will be put on trial.
DEBKAfile’s military sources say the incident was but a pretext. According to incoming intelligence, Tehran plans to release a series of reprisals after sanctions are approved...
President Mahmoud Admadinejad’s last-minute cancellation of his appearance before the Security Council is further indication that Tehran gave up on diplomatic maneuvers for pre-empting the sanctions resolution and, assuming their approval was not preventable, turned instead to ramping up military tensions.
....Thursday, DEBKAfile reported exclusively a rendezvous Wednesday between the French nuclear carrier Charles de Gaulle and its task force with the USS John C. Stennis in the Arabian Sea Wednesday for joint missions....Its arrival raises to four the number of Western aircraft carriers cruising within striking distance of Iran...
The Charles de Gaulle is accompanied by French Task Force 473, which consists of five warships....
Oh boy, here we go...does Admadinejad believe it is 1979 all over again?
And could he actually be right?
And I am surprised, truthfully, that more folks have not referenced this little summertime war as fairly analogous to the actions we are seeing from Iran today....
Our military sources report that Middle East and Persian Gulf nations as well as the US and UK are bracing for further Iranian marine, air or terrorist operations in Iraq and other places in reprisal for the sanctions measure before the UN Security Council in New York. On the ready too are the Saudi armed forces and some Israeli air and naval units.
According to Iranian sources the 15 British Royal navy seamen and marines which an Iranian warship seized with their commando craft Friday, March 23, will be put on trial.
DEBKAfile’s military sources say the incident was but a pretext. According to incoming intelligence, Tehran plans to release a series of reprisals after sanctions are approved...
President Mahmoud Admadinejad’s last-minute cancellation of his appearance before the Security Council is further indication that Tehran gave up on diplomatic maneuvers for pre-empting the sanctions resolution and, assuming their approval was not preventable, turned instead to ramping up military tensions.
....Thursday, DEBKAfile reported exclusively a rendezvous Wednesday between the French nuclear carrier Charles de Gaulle and its task force with the USS John C. Stennis in the Arabian Sea Wednesday for joint missions....Its arrival raises to four the number of Western aircraft carriers cruising within striking distance of Iran...
The Charles de Gaulle is accompanied by French Task Force 473, which consists of five warships....
Oh boy, here we go...does Admadinejad believe it is 1979 all over again?
And could he actually be right?
And I am surprised, truthfully, that more folks have not referenced this little summertime war as fairly analogous to the actions we are seeing from Iran today....
วันเสาร์, มีนาคม 24, 2550
The New York Times Discovers "The Jersey Guys"
...and without even taking a breath, spits out their disdain for the state's highest-rated radio daytime talk duo:
Craig Carton and Ray Rossi think mental illness is hilarious and Asian-Americans are best mocked with sing-song Chinese accents. The men, hosts of an afternoon radio show called “The Jersey Guys” that is heard here on WKXW (101.5 FM), favor adjectives for politicians that have to be bleeped out.
The Times needs to discredit our locals, because they dared to use the public airwaves to express opinions in opposition to those found on their editorial pages:
Two weeks ago, Mr. Carton and Mr. Rossi started “Operation Rat a Rat/La Cucha Gotcha,” a listener-participation game that encourages people to turn in friends, neighbors and “anyone suspicious” to immigration authorities.
They introduced the segment with mariachi music and set the campaign to end on May 5 (Cinco de Mayo), a well-known Mexican holiday.
Well, what is wrong with that? Why shouldn't people be encouraged to notify the authorities when they are in the presence of lawbreakers? Oh, I see - because it is a law that the Times feels shouldn't be enforced. The only thing that should be enforced, according to their mindset, is higher taxes levied against the likes of middle class New Jerseyans like yours truly - taxes that are deployed to give benefits to illegal immigrants within the state that even I, a law-abiding citizen, cannot enjoy.
Then the Times tries to drum up an imaginary outcry against the Jersey Guys, but finds only one supplicant stupid enough to do their bidding:
Here in New Jersey, where 15 percent of the population is Hispanic, reaction to the show has not exactly been positive.
“Scapegoating and stereotyping Latinos does nothing but give bigoted individuals a platform to make ethnic slurs and racist comments,” said Assemblyman Wilfredo Caraballo of Newark, calling the campaign a “publicity stunt” that could incite violence against Hispanics.
Sounds like Caraballo has been reading from the CAIR handbook - protect criminals by accusing those whom would pursue them of imaginary, uncommitted crimes.
And alas, the Times could find no justice, no solace, no groveling when the Jersey Guys held a news conference:
But anyone expecting an apology was sorely disappointed when Mr. Carton and Mr. Rossi held an on-air news conference a few hours after Mr. Caraballo’s comments. Seeking to profit from the recently ignited firestorm, the Jersey Guys gathered a corps of journalists, most of them Hispanic, in their Trenton studios and gleefully refused to back down.
After calling Assemblyman Caraballo a “pathetic liar,” Mr. Carton repeated his call to deport every illegal immigrant in the country. “If you’re here illegally, you are breaking the law — no better, no worse than the guy who robs the liquor store or the guy who waits to case your house out and robs you of your belongings,” he said. “You are a criminal.”
He went on to blame illegal immigrants for the state’s high property taxes, problems with uninsured drivers and violent crime....
Seems as if the Times is trying to make the Guys look crazy. But they're not - they're right about the effects of unbridled illegal immigration into the state. The Times offers no evidence to counter Carton's comments, only snide inferences (like "seeking to profit")- the last resort of a man (or paper) that has lost the argument. They essentially admit it here:
Judging from the cascade of congratulatory calls, the men have tapped into an angry vein in the state, where, according to 2005 census figures, 20 percent of all residents are foreign born, the third highest rate in the country. “This is an invasion,” said one caller, Carmen Perez, who said she had come to this country as a 3-year-old. “I would deport most of them.”
They end off this hatchet-type journalism by warning vaguely about the retributive forces of "Hispanic anger". But the Times, who calculates all things on race, is assuming that all Latinos think alike. What about the unfairness to those Hispanics who came to this country via a tortuous immigration system, worked hard, followed the rules, and got resident status/citizenship? How supportive are they of those who try to skip the line by taking an illegal route into this country? Why does the Times assume these honest Americans will stick up for the cheaters and liars, just because they are from the same hemisphere? This is a racial calculation by the Times, and one that will not hold up as real-life events unfold....
The very fact that the Jersey Guys have driven state officials and politicians into blinding fits of rage is a good thing in a place where virtually no public officials are held accountable for their actions. We support the Guys and 101.5 here, and praise their unwillingness to back down to the media or race-hustlers like Caraballo. Don't give up the fight!
Craig Carton and Ray Rossi think mental illness is hilarious and Asian-Americans are best mocked with sing-song Chinese accents. The men, hosts of an afternoon radio show called “The Jersey Guys” that is heard here on WKXW (101.5 FM), favor adjectives for politicians that have to be bleeped out.
The Times needs to discredit our locals, because they dared to use the public airwaves to express opinions in opposition to those found on their editorial pages:
Two weeks ago, Mr. Carton and Mr. Rossi started “Operation Rat a Rat/La Cucha Gotcha,” a listener-participation game that encourages people to turn in friends, neighbors and “anyone suspicious” to immigration authorities.
They introduced the segment with mariachi music and set the campaign to end on May 5 (Cinco de Mayo), a well-known Mexican holiday.
Well, what is wrong with that? Why shouldn't people be encouraged to notify the authorities when they are in the presence of lawbreakers? Oh, I see - because it is a law that the Times feels shouldn't be enforced. The only thing that should be enforced, according to their mindset, is higher taxes levied against the likes of middle class New Jerseyans like yours truly - taxes that are deployed to give benefits to illegal immigrants within the state that even I, a law-abiding citizen, cannot enjoy.
Then the Times tries to drum up an imaginary outcry against the Jersey Guys, but finds only one supplicant stupid enough to do their bidding:
Here in New Jersey, where 15 percent of the population is Hispanic, reaction to the show has not exactly been positive.
“Scapegoating and stereotyping Latinos does nothing but give bigoted individuals a platform to make ethnic slurs and racist comments,” said Assemblyman Wilfredo Caraballo of Newark, calling the campaign a “publicity stunt” that could incite violence against Hispanics.
Sounds like Caraballo has been reading from the CAIR handbook - protect criminals by accusing those whom would pursue them of imaginary, uncommitted crimes.
And alas, the Times could find no justice, no solace, no groveling when the Jersey Guys held a news conference:
But anyone expecting an apology was sorely disappointed when Mr. Carton and Mr. Rossi held an on-air news conference a few hours after Mr. Caraballo’s comments. Seeking to profit from the recently ignited firestorm, the Jersey Guys gathered a corps of journalists, most of them Hispanic, in their Trenton studios and gleefully refused to back down.
After calling Assemblyman Caraballo a “pathetic liar,” Mr. Carton repeated his call to deport every illegal immigrant in the country. “If you’re here illegally, you are breaking the law — no better, no worse than the guy who robs the liquor store or the guy who waits to case your house out and robs you of your belongings,” he said. “You are a criminal.”
He went on to blame illegal immigrants for the state’s high property taxes, problems with uninsured drivers and violent crime....
Seems as if the Times is trying to make the Guys look crazy. But they're not - they're right about the effects of unbridled illegal immigration into the state. The Times offers no evidence to counter Carton's comments, only snide inferences (like "seeking to profit")- the last resort of a man (or paper) that has lost the argument. They essentially admit it here:
Judging from the cascade of congratulatory calls, the men have tapped into an angry vein in the state, where, according to 2005 census figures, 20 percent of all residents are foreign born, the third highest rate in the country. “This is an invasion,” said one caller, Carmen Perez, who said she had come to this country as a 3-year-old. “I would deport most of them.”
They end off this hatchet-type journalism by warning vaguely about the retributive forces of "Hispanic anger". But the Times, who calculates all things on race, is assuming that all Latinos think alike. What about the unfairness to those Hispanics who came to this country via a tortuous immigration system, worked hard, followed the rules, and got resident status/citizenship? How supportive are they of those who try to skip the line by taking an illegal route into this country? Why does the Times assume these honest Americans will stick up for the cheaters and liars, just because they are from the same hemisphere? This is a racial calculation by the Times, and one that will not hold up as real-life events unfold....
The very fact that the Jersey Guys have driven state officials and politicians into blinding fits of rage is a good thing in a place where virtually no public officials are held accountable for their actions. We support the Guys and 101.5 here, and praise their unwillingness to back down to the media or race-hustlers like Caraballo. Don't give up the fight!
สมัครสมาชิก:
บทความ (Atom)