To HELL With The Polls!

It’s funny, whenever a slanted AP-Ipsos poll that over samples Democrats by 6% shows something positive for liberals you begin hearing it cited as public opinion by the left. But when you have a poll by RT Strategies showing 70 percent of Americans think that criticism of the Iraq by Democratic Senators is lowering troop morale they just keep on their merry way talking down the troops and their mission. This of course despite the recurring mantra of “We REALLY support the troops.”

NewsMax.com:

Even self-identified Democrats agreed that their Senators were damaging the war effort, with 55 percent saying their criticism hurts the troops - and just 21 percent saying it helps.

In fact here is what some of the Democratic leaders said:

“What’s happening [in Iraq] is not working; it’s a disaster,” Sen. Barbara Boxer complained Tuesday - oblivious to the damage her comments would do. “Right now, there’s an endless war,” she declared.

Reacting to President Bush’s Iraq war speech Wednesday morning, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid griped that all he heard was the “recycled [and] tired rhetoric of ?stay the course.?

“Simply staying the course is no longer an option, we must change the course. We can do better,” Reid groused.

Hours earlier, Sen. Hillary Clinton complained that she was tricked into voting to authorize the Iraq war when the White House gave her “false” intelligence on Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction.

“Based on the information that we have today, Congress never would have been asked to give the President authority to use force against Iraq,” she chided.

That’s right! TO HELL WITH THE POLLS! We don’t need no stinking polls!

If only that were TRULY the way the Democrats worked it would be nice.

Teresa “Shove It” Heinz Kerry Speaks Out

Wow, it has been a while since we’ve heard from the sugar mommy of Senator John Kerry. She’s now coming to the defense of Rep. Murtha! You’ll recall Rep. Murtha recently made headlines by pretty much telling our troops “You SUCK! You can’t win a war!”. Now Teresa Heinz Kerry is chiming in between 5 star take out and yelling at reporters.

She wrote an opinion piece in the Tribune-Democrat claiming the outrage over Senator Murtha’s comments were an

“orchestrated assault”

that

should alarm us all?

Wow. Talk about paranoid!

Uh, Mrs. Sugar Mommy, no one “orchestrated” me saying what I said and I know that it is typical for the DNC to throw their talking points all over the Main Stream Media, but it doesn’t happen here.

THK bumbles on:

“They said he had given aid and comfort to the enemy. They accused him of abandoning the troops. And one rookie representative, the most junior member of the House, so lost any decency or sense of decorum that she called Murtha a coward.?

Uh yeah Teresa, he kind of DID give aid (”to provide with what is useful or necessary in achieving an end”) and comfort (”to give strength and hope to”) the enemy by saying that our troops and our military were in capable of winning in Iraq and that we needed to bring them home. If you can say with a straight face that the enemy was not sitting there gaining hope from those statements I would LOVE to see it!

Oh, and Teresa get your facts straight, the most Junior member of the house ( Ohio Republican Jean Schmidt) did NOT call Murtha a coward. She was quoting Ohio quoted Marine Corps Reserve officer and Ohio state Rep. Danny Bubp when she said

“He asked me to send Congress a message ‘Stay the course,’” she said, “he also asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message, that ‘Cowards cut and run. Marines never do.’”

But then again it is a little harder to attack a Marine than it is a woman right Teresa? So why not take the easy way out right?

Give it up Teresa. It’s not our fault you married a self professed war criminal.

Constitutional Idiots Strike Again

Alliance Defense Fund Reports:

JEFFERSON, Ga. - An attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund has written a letter to the Jackson County School System informing them of the unconstitutionality of the district’s censorship of anything religious related to the Christmas holiday.

“Frankly, it’s ridiculous that we’re even discussing whether it’s okay to say ‘Merry Christmas.’ I’m sure just about everyone would rather have a merry Christmas than a meaningless winter holiday,” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel David Cortman, who wrote the letter to the chairperson of the board of education and the superintendent of the Jackson County School System.

Cortman wrote the letter on behalf of a teacher in the after-school program at Benton Elementary School. According to the Nov. 29 letter, the district has reportedly prohibited teachers from wearing “any pins, angels, crosses, clothing” that contain any religious connotation or affiliation, referring to any party as a “Christmas” party, or displaying a Bible in their rooms. The district has also removed certain religious Christmas songs from a “Winter” concert and censored the word “God” from another song.

“Jackson County school officials are attempting to prohibit teachers from expressing any religious aspect of Christmas. Classroom decorations may no longer include nativity scenes and angels. Jackson County has gone so far as to prohibit the common greeting ‘Merry Christmas,’ and also now refers to the Christmas break as ‘Winter Break,’” Cortman wrote.

Can these idiots that are in charge of our children NOT read? The First Amendment CLEARLY says:”Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” and because of the 14th Amendment this is also required of states as well “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States”

School choice solves this problem but you’ll never get these social engineers in the education system to agree to that since it means that their “public” school classrooms will be almost empty. And then they will have no power.

President Bush, You’re Still Missing The Point!

I was listening to some of President Bush’s speech about border security on 790 AM, KNST in Tucson, Arizona. As a resident of a border state, as well as living in a city rather close to the border, this issue is of great concern to me.

As I was listening to what President Bush was saying, some of it sounded like he was actually listening to the American public for a change. But, while he opposes granting amnesty, he’s doing exactly that.

A quick definition for amnesty is:

A general pardon granted by a government, especially for political offenses. - Dictionary.com

A Kansas City Star article states:

Bush said any comprehensive package should include tougher enforcement and a temporary-worker program. His plan would let workers stay in the country for up to six years, after which they would have to return home. Temporary workers would not be on a special track toward citizenship.

[emphasis added]

Why does a comprehensive package need to include both? A temporary-worker program grants people who are illegally in this country legalized status. No matter how good and hard-working these people are, they are still here illegally.

And, as the definition of amnesty clearly states, this temporary-worker program will pardon the illegal activity already done by those here in this nation illegally. This isn’t a “that depends on what your definition of the meaning of the word ‘is’ is” kind of thing. By giving a temporary-worker program, you thus make legal what was once illegal.

I understand that America puts out the carrot on a stick for those to come over here illegally. America does have to look at herself and accept some of the culpability. I think that the general American public has accepted that and wants something changed.

Even though Mr. Chertoff is correct when he stated that it is not practical to deport every illegal alien in this country, it is even less practical to legalize them all. It also sends a very wrong message to those who respected our nation’s laws enough to go about coming here the right way.

To legalize those who have no right to be here is comparable to legalizing marijuana since there is no way to actually enforce the laws anyway. Of course, the police cannot knock on everyone’s door or pull every car over loooking for marijuana. But, the police can arrest you when you are caught with marijuana.

The same goes for being an illegal alien. Of course the INS, or whoever they are now, cannot go to every door or every worksite looking for illegal aliens. But, they can get search warrants for places they reasonably believe do employ or harbor illegal aliens and thus arrest them. Of course, many are going to slip through the cracks and never get caught. At least they will not be legalized.

So, yes President Bush, we need to strengthen our borders and we need to do something to fix our immigration problem. We do not need to have a temporary-worker program that rewards illegal behavior. It is amnesty, by any definition.

Joe Lieberman … A Man Without A Party

Lieberman and I don’t see eye to eye on every issue and I have been quick to criticize him when he is wrong (just like I do with EVERY politician) but Senator Lieberman is truly a man without a party to call home.

He is too liberal on domestic issues for even the left hand side of the Republican Party and he is by far too intelligent on the concepts of war for the mainstream of the Democratic Party to embrace him. He is about as close as you can come today to a Kennedy Democrat. And he has very little company in the party apart from Zell Miller.

Today Lieberman estranged himself even further from the rabid base of the Democratic Party, by telling a few truths about Iraq - mainly that we have to stay until the job is finished. Someone get the fainting couch and the smelling salts … Democrats are being over come by the vapors across the country at these words.

In the Wall Street Journal Mr. Lieberman talks about Iraq in terms no modern liberal wants to hear (sorry you’ll need a subscription to read it). He says

“The Iraqi people are in reach of a watershed transformation from the primitive, killing tyranny of Saddam to modern, self-governing, self-securing nationhood

but warns it will not happen if

“the great American military that has given them and us this unexpected opportunity is prematurely withdrawn,”

But he goes on, talking in a foreign language to liberals

“It is a war between 27 million and 10,000; 27 million Iraqis who want to live lives of freedom, opportunity and prosperity and roughly 10,000 terrorists who are either Saddam revanchists, Iraqi Islamic extremists or al-Qaida foreign fighters who know their wretched causes will be set back if Iraq becomes free”

Remember folks this is AFTER his 4th trip in a little over a year and a half to the region that he is saying this. And this contrasts highly with the psychobabble spewing from the mouths of ivory tower elitists who have not ever set a foot in Iraq or who have a vested interest in manufacturing a United States failure. Vietnam anyone?

“We are fighting on the side of the 27 million because the outcome of this war is critically important to the security and freedom of America. If the terrorists win, they will be emboldened to strike us directly again and to further undermine the growing stability and progress in the Middle East.”

And just to show that he is REALLY on the ball he takes a shot not only at Democrats but yellow spine Republicans as well looking to make themselves appear more appealing to leftists to secure reelection.

“I am disappointed by Democrats who are more focused on how President Bush took America into the war in Iraq almost three years ago, and by Republicans who are more worried about whether the war will bring them down in next November’s elections, than they are concerned about how we continue the progress in Iraq in the months and years ahead

BRAVO!

Not always right, but dead on on this issue Mr. Lieberman. At least there are still some members of the Democratic Party that have a sense of honor and pride in America.

Ta Da! MORE OIL!

A lot of people, conservatives included, thought that I was way off my rocker when it wrote my article A Tale of Mythical Proportions back in September putting fears of “price gouging” to rest. Even though that article settled the argument, there were still many that wanted to continue on with the argument any way.

It was a simple explanation of Supply and Demand. And it is something that many cannot grasp because of its simplicity. I have also said for years that if you try to artificially inflate the price (and profits) you get more people jumping in trying to reap the benefit and by consequence increase the supply of a good which in turn decreases price.

That too draws the ire of many people even economic conservatives. Well this is someone else telling you it too:

continued higher price of crude oil “puts in place a new set of dynamics, where smaller and smaller companies can come in and open up the capped wells profitably. California remains the fourth-largest oil producing state in America, and while our fields are considered mature fields, the new technologies may end up extending production another 15 to 20 years longer than expected.” - John Martini, CEO of the California Independent Petroleum Association

This article also talks about something else I have been accused of “making up” over the years and that is that our capped oil wells are not empty:

Wells that are 45 years old are being put back into production, with many wells in Los Angeles having been shut down after only 20 or 25 percent of the oil was extracted, reported the Associated Press. Current technology permits up to 50 percent of the reserves in a well to be drained before the well is capped. While California has some 3,000 abandoned wells, oil experts are predicting that all of them may soon be operating again.

Uh huh … now maybe some of you will actually listen?

I’ll Believe It When I See It

President Bush today said

“I oppose amnesty. Rewarding those who have broken the law would encourage others to break the law and keep pressure on our border.”

while presenting the outline of his plan to deal with the illegal immigration problem in America. He also said

“catch and release has been the government’s policy for decades. It is an unwise policy and we’re going to end it.”

Tough talk from a President that has taken his good sweet time at addressing this major issue. I hope that President Bush gives me reason to praise him on this issue. I’m really looking for a reason to trust him on the issue of border security.

Read the entire speech here.

Ok Here Is The Letter…

I’ve been getting a lot of moonbat emails about how I was misquoting Prof. Daley and helping to conducted a political witch hunt on him along with the rest of the “vast right wing conspiracy.”

Posts like:
John Daley Chickens Out
and
John Daley - Typical Liberal
have really gotten some of the lefties that stumble upon this blog (but too ashamed to actually post their responses) in a tizzy

So here is the text of the letter provided by WorldNetDaily.

Enjoy!

November 13, 2005

Dear Rebecca:

I am asking my students to boycott your event. I am also going to ask others to boycott it. Your literature and signs in the entrance lobby look like fascist propaganda and is extremely offensive. Your main poster “Communism killed 100,000,000″ is not only untrue, but ignores the fact that CAPITALISM has killed many more and the evidence for that can be seen in the daily news papers. The U.S. government can fly to dominate the people of Iraq in 12 hours, yet it took them five days to assist the people devastated by huricane Katrina. Racism and profits were key to their priorities. Exxon, by the way, made $9 Billion in profits this last quarter — their highest proft margin ever. Thanks to the students of WCCC and other poor and working class people who are recruited to fight and die for EXXON and other corporations who earning megaprofits from their imperialist plunders. If you want to count the number of deaths based on political systems, you can begin with the more than a million children who have died in Iraq from U.S.-imposed sanctions and war. Or the million African American people who died from lack of access to healthcare in the US over the last 10 years.

I will continue to expose your right-wing, anti-people politics until groups like your won’t dare show their face on a college campus. Real freedom will come when soldiers in Iraq turn their guns on their superiors and fight for just causes and for people’s needs — such freedom fighters can be counted throughout American history and they certainly will be counted again.

Prof. John Daly

The “X” Hits The Fan?

WorldNet Daily Reports that CNN has fired a switchboard operator that tried to justify placing a big black “X” over Vice President Cheney’s face during a live news broadcast.

A Turner switchboard operator was fired today after we were alerted to a conversation the operator had with a caller in which the operator lost his temper and expressed his personal views ? behavior that was totally inappropriate. His comments did not reflect the views of CNN. We are reaching out to the caller and expressing our deep regret to her and apologizing that she did not get the courtesy entitled to her. - Laurie Goldberg, senior vice president for public relations with CNN

The call an be heard at the Daily Pundit.

In the call the operator calls President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney “liars”. I wonder if he thinks CNN should place a big black “X” over the face of former President Bill Clinton since he did admit to perjuring himself (i.e. lying) or any number of Democrats who said things like:

“The only answer to aggression and outlaw behaviour is firmness. . . He (Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983.” - National Security Adviser Sandy Berger (February 18, 1998)* confirmed by snopes.com

“And that is why, along with Senators McCain, Lieberman, and Hutchison, I am circulating among our Senate colleagues a letter to President Clinton, urging him, in consultation with Congress, consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take effective actions, including if appropriate, the use of air strikes, to respond to the Iraqi threat.” - Senator Carl Levin of Michigan (October 6, 1998)* confirmed by snopes.com

“As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.” - Representative Nancy Pelosi CA (December 16, 1998)*

“I believe in negotiated solutions to international conflict. This is, unfortunately, not going to be the case in this situation where Saddam Hussein has been a repeat offender, ignoring the international community’s requirement that he come clean with his weapons program. While I support the President, I hope and pray that this conflict can be resolved quickly and that the international community can find a lasting solution through diplomatic means.” - Representative Nancy Pelosi CA (December 16, 1998)

“There has never been an embargo against food and medicine. It’s just that Hussein has just not chosen to spend his money on that. Instead, he has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction, and palaces for his cronies.” - Secretary of State Madeleine Albright (November 10, 1999)

“We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the Middle East. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them.” - Senator Carl Levin (Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee) (September 19, 2002)

“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.” - Senator Ted Kennedy MA (September 27, 2002) (source) *Years Teddy? YEARS! So you admit that you knew ‘years” (i.e. more than one) that this was a threat? What year exactly was that? 2000? 1999? 1998? And WHO was President then? Hmmmmmmm?

“The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability. It is now October of 2002. ” - Senator Robert WV (October 2002)

“I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security and that of our allies in the Persian Gulf region. And I will vote “yes” because on the question of how best to hold Saddam Hussein accountable, the Administration, including the President, recognizes that war must be our last option to address this threat, not the first, and that we should be acting in concert with allies around the globe to make the world’s case against Saddam Hussein.” - Senator John Kerry MA (October 2002)

“If we do wind up going to war with Iraq, it is imperative that we do so with others in the international community, unless there is a showing of a grave, imminent ? and I emphasize “imminent” ? threat to this country which requires the President to respond in a way that protects our immediate national security needs.” - Senator John Kerry (October 2002).

“There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources ? something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.” - Senator John D. Rockefeller IV (October 2002)

“When Saddam Hussein obtains nuclear capabilities, the constraints he feels will diminish dramatically, and the risk to America’s homeland, as well as to America’s allies, will increase even more dramatically. Our existing policies to contain or counter Saddam will become irrelevant. Americans will return to a situation like that we faced in the Cold War, waking each morning knowing we are at risk from nuclear blackmail by a dictatorship that has declared itself to be our enemy. Only, back then, our communist foes were a rational and predictable bureaucracy; this time, our nuclear foe would be an unpredictable and often irrational individual, a dictator who has demonstrated that he is prepared to violate international law and initiate unprovoked attacks when he feels it serves his purposes to do so.” - Senator John D. Rockefeller IV (October 2002)

“The global community - in the form of the United Nations - has declared repeatedly, through multiple resolutions, that the frightening prospect of a nuclear-armed Saddam cannot come to pass. But the U.N. has been unable to enforce those resolutions. We must eliminate that threat now, before it is too late.” - Senator John D. Rockefeller IV (October 2002)

“I am forced to conclude, on all the evidence, that Saddam poses a significant risk.” - Senator John D. Rockefeller IV (October 2002)

“Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration’s policy towards Iraq, I don’t think there can be any question about Saddam’s conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts.” - Congressman Henry Waxman CA (October 2002)

“What Saddam has done in the (4 years since UN inspectors left) is not known for certain - but there is every evidence, from the dossier prepared by the Prime Minister of Britain, to President Bush’s speech at the United Nations, that Saddam has rebuilt substantial chemical and biological weapons stocks, and that he is determined to obtain the means necessary to produce nuclear weapons.” - Congressman Henry Waxman CA (October 2002)

“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001.” - Senator Hillary Clinton (October 2002)

Somehow I doubt this hack would think the same thing about an “X” over the faces of these “liars”.

You’ve Talked Long Enough! How About Actually Doing Something?

When President Bush makes an overnight visit to Arizona on Monday, he is expected to talk tough about the border. - East Valley Tribune

[emphasis added]

President Bush, you have been the President for over five years! How much talking are you going to do? Are you actually listening to Americans who say we need our borders secure now?

This fluff piece about the Border Patrol might make you feel more secure:

The 2004 Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act calls for adding 2,000 agents in each of the next five years, subject to funding.

[emphasis added]

Subject to funding? Did I read that right? How can anyone tell me that something as important as actually securing our borders (which will probably take a lot more than an extra 2,000 agents a year for the next five years) is “subject to funding”?

While Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act puts enough window dressing out there to make lemmings happy, it still doesn’t do enough.

The attrition rate for Border Patrol agents has risen from 10 percent last year to 14 percent now and is expected to hit 20 percent by the end of fiscal 2002, Bonner said. Among immigration inspectors, the current attrition rate of 10 percent could reach 15 percent by the end of the year, he said. - Gov Exec.com

So, those new agents are supposed to pick up the slack of those who have left, and have taken their experience with them? Well, I guess that can only happen if there is enough funding. We can’t take away from pork-barrel spending, now can we?

Back to the first link about President Bush merely addressing the border issue. According to the article:

At his side will be two of his top advisers on those issues ? Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

I have my suspicions about any person who would thank La Raza for their support in his nomination. La Raza means “the race,” and it would be just as racist if it were some group of white people looking out for their “race.” I sincerely doubt La Raza wants any part of Atzlan secure.

Secondly, we have Mr. Chertoff:

In defending President Bush’s so-called “guest worker” program for illegal aliens ? which critics have dubbed an amnesty program ? Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff says it’s just not practical to deport the millions of foreigners in the country illegally.

“The cost of identifying all of those people and sending them back would be stupendous. It would be billions and billions of dollars,” Chertoff told Sean Hannity on the Fox News Channel program “Hannity & Colmes” last night. - World Net Daily

So, instead of spending money to actually try to punish those who have broken the law, Mr. Chertoff, let’s spend the money to reward their illegal behavior. That ought to teach people to not invade our country again!

Or, you can let your agents actually do their job and indentify lawbreakers and send them back home. However inpractical it may sound, that is what we taxpayers pay them to do.

President Bush, you are doing a splending job of fighting the war on terror overseas! Please do not make it all for nought when terrorists find a way into our nation and kill more of our people. You cannot have homeland security until you secure the homeland. Quit talking about it and actually do it!