Sunday, January 22, 2006
Another celebrity idiot? Star Who?
I'm not sure who exactly Star Jones is, or what she does (I know, I could just Google her and find out), but apparently she is some type of celebrity, as she was discussing the war on ABC's "The View".
Drudge Report has the details here.
She broke down the causes for the war against terror to some very simple reasons.
Apparently, this war simply revolves around ego and who has the biggest genitalia.
""You don't negotiate with terrorists," said Elisabeth Hasselbeck, the show's youngest host.
"You don't negotiate," Jones interrupted, "but I do think you figure out when there is a solution that's diplomatic that doesn't result in [loss of] human life. "What do we have to lose to check it out?" Star said.
"You know what?" she then added, "At some point, one of these men has to put it back in his pants and zip up the zipper at some point."
"This isn't somebody whipping it out," shot co-host Meredith Vieira.
"You know what, I'm a little tired of posturing back and forth," Jones replied."
Ms. Jones, now that's a great, articulate, and well reasoned response. "I'm a little tired of posturing back and forth."
Bottom line, when the show's co-hosts, Ms. Vieira and Ms. Hasselback, debated Jones' answers, Jones' tired of the exchange. Typical celebrity response. Ask them to actually discuss the issues instead of issuing a cute, inane sound bite, and they fold.
Thousands dead because of bin Laden, and Jones thinks it's about egos. What a buffoon.
Note on the use of the word genitalia. I'd use another word, but hey, it's Sunday, and I'm just not going there today.
Drudge Report has the details here.
She broke down the causes for the war against terror to some very simple reasons.
Apparently, this war simply revolves around ego and who has the biggest genitalia.
""You don't negotiate with terrorists," said Elisabeth Hasselbeck, the show's youngest host.
"You don't negotiate," Jones interrupted, "but I do think you figure out when there is a solution that's diplomatic that doesn't result in [loss of] human life. "What do we have to lose to check it out?" Star said.
"You know what?" she then added, "At some point, one of these men has to put it back in his pants and zip up the zipper at some point."
"This isn't somebody whipping it out," shot co-host Meredith Vieira.
"You know what, I'm a little tired of posturing back and forth," Jones replied."
Ms. Jones, now that's a great, articulate, and well reasoned response. "I'm a little tired of posturing back and forth."
Bottom line, when the show's co-hosts, Ms. Vieira and Ms. Hasselback, debated Jones' answers, Jones' tired of the exchange. Typical celebrity response. Ask them to actually discuss the issues instead of issuing a cute, inane sound bite, and they fold.
Thousands dead because of bin Laden, and Jones thinks it's about egos. What a buffoon.
Note on the use of the word genitalia. I'd use another word, but hey, it's Sunday, and I'm just not going there today.
Wednesday, October 12, 2005
Left winger rails against milbloggers for their objectivity
I started blogging because of guys like this (and the people I sat next to last November at dinner). Reading his latest rant, this time against the “bias” of soldiers writing about the war, I’m glad I decided to start and continue blogging.
I'm amazed that this guy displays so much animosity against military personnel who blog. He states that he used to be in the military. He questions their accuracy and objectivity, saying he would believe main stream media accounts before he'd believe military personnel. That's a very telling indicator of his mindset.
He obviously doesn't understand the demographics of the milblogging community. The milbloggers are not a cabal of careerists spinning the war. Most of the time, they are younger, lower ranking enlisted and officer personnel just trying to tell their stories and highlight the positive aspects of whatever campaign in which they are serving.
Why is that so hard for this left winger to understand?
I'm amazed that this guy displays so much animosity against military personnel who blog. He states that he used to be in the military. He questions their accuracy and objectivity, saying he would believe main stream media accounts before he'd believe military personnel. That's a very telling indicator of his mindset.
He obviously doesn't understand the demographics of the milblogging community. The milbloggers are not a cabal of careerists spinning the war. Most of the time, they are younger, lower ranking enlisted and officer personnel just trying to tell their stories and highlight the positive aspects of whatever campaign in which they are serving.
Why is that so hard for this left winger to understand?
Katie Couric – Clinton apologist
Ah, Katie. Still working hard to be "objectively" in favor of anything the Clinton's have done over the years while being vicious and gasp, judgmental, towards those who might actually disagree with you.
She interviewed Louis Freeh, who's written a book about his time as the FBI Director during the Clinton Presidency.
Here's one view of the interview:
"Former FBI Director Louis Freeh wasn't on this morning's Today show for very long before his credibility was immediately questioned by Couric. After her introduction and a generic 'why did you want to write this book?' query Couric pounced in just her second question: Couric: "You know many people have viewed this book in reviews and, and newspaper accounts so far as your effort to settle scores with the President. Do you think, you obviously, there's no love lost between the two of you, that's very, very clear. Do you think your personal animus might be coloring your professional perspective so much that you can't be objective about what was really going on during the administration?"
While the buzz around Freeh's book surrounds his account of the Clinton scandals Couric managed to ask just two questions about them before to asking about the FBI's pre-9/11 preparedness."
She interviewed Louis Freeh, who's written a book about his time as the FBI Director during the Clinton Presidency.
Here's one view of the interview:
"Former FBI Director Louis Freeh wasn't on this morning's Today show for very long before his credibility was immediately questioned by Couric. After her introduction and a generic 'why did you want to write this book?' query Couric pounced in just her second question: Couric: "You know many people have viewed this book in reviews and, and newspaper accounts so far as your effort to settle scores with the President. Do you think, you obviously, there's no love lost between the two of you, that's very, very clear. Do you think your personal animus might be coloring your professional perspective so much that you can't be objective about what was really going on during the administration?"
While the buzz around Freeh's book surrounds his account of the Clinton scandals Couric managed to ask just two questions about them before to asking about the FBI's pre-9/11 preparedness."
Dana Milbank, the Washington Post’s new body language expert
In yet another amazing example of just how far the MSM will go to write derogatory things about this Administration, Dana Milbank shows us that he can count the number of times the President blinked when asked questions during an interview with Matt Lauer.
Milbank then analyzes this highly scientific data and concludes that President Bush was uncomfortable and wanted to be elsewhere.
I thought we all learned about body language in the various EO, team building, and leadership classes we have attended during our careers. This is news? That the President of the United States, during a war, has a lot of things on his mind? Must have been a slow news day in Milbank's lane.
How many times did Milbank have to watch the video to determine the number of blinks? Is Milbank correct in his count? If the President had blinked only 8 times as opposed to 12 times, would that have indicated something else, say, that Milbank was full of himself?
Milbank then analyzes this highly scientific data and concludes that President Bush was uncomfortable and wanted to be elsewhere.
I thought we all learned about body language in the various EO, team building, and leadership classes we have attended during our careers. This is news? That the President of the United States, during a war, has a lot of things on his mind? Must have been a slow news day in Milbank's lane.
How many times did Milbank have to watch the video to determine the number of blinks? Is Milbank correct in his count? If the President had blinked only 8 times as opposed to 12 times, would that have indicated something else, say, that Milbank was full of himself?
If you want to understand the battle for the soul of the Democratic Party, read this
Terry Neal of the Washington Post has written an interesting article about the issues facing the Democrats in their quest to win elections against what is perceived to be a weakened GOP.
Asking if the Democrats need their own Newt Gingrich to focus Democratic philosophy and shape it into a coherent, workable action plan to win in the 2006 mid terms, Neal suggests that the Democrats need something more substantial than the current Republican scandals to focus attention on what the Democratic Party stands for and why voters should elect its representatives to power.
Of particular interest are the links to articles and websites illustrating how the more left wing factions in the Democratic Party contemptuously argue against more moderate, centrist ideas within the Party. Nothing like a good, in house brawl to shake out an organization.
Asking if the Democrats need their own Newt Gingrich to focus Democratic philosophy and shape it into a coherent, workable action plan to win in the 2006 mid terms, Neal suggests that the Democrats need something more substantial than the current Republican scandals to focus attention on what the Democratic Party stands for and why voters should elect its representatives to power.
Of particular interest are the links to articles and websites illustrating how the more left wing factions in the Democratic Party contemptuously argue against more moderate, centrist ideas within the Party. Nothing like a good, in house brawl to shake out an organization.
Veteran and affiliated groups sue Kerry over remarks and actions during the campaign
This will be interesting. The gentleman who created the documentary, "Stolen Honor," which aired during the presidential campaign and which portrayed Kerry in a very negative light, is suing Kerry and his Pennslyvania campaign manager.
The article claims that "This may be the first time in American history that a presidential candidate was sued for actions taken by him and his campaign during an election. It may also be the first time that an antiwar activist was sued, if only tangentially, for allegations made about American military personnel."
The left wing blogs were awash in venom about the creator of the documentary and Sinclair Broadcasting during that period. Now, it seems some people are fighting back in the courts. I doubt this effort will result in anything and Kerry can certainly afford the legal fees, but nonetheless this is something about which Kerry cannot be happy, if only for the continuing emphasis on not his service, but his behavior AFTER he returned from the Vietnam War.
The article claims that "This may be the first time in American history that a presidential candidate was sued for actions taken by him and his campaign during an election. It may also be the first time that an antiwar activist was sued, if only tangentially, for allegations made about American military personnel."
The left wing blogs were awash in venom about the creator of the documentary and Sinclair Broadcasting during that period. Now, it seems some people are fighting back in the courts. I doubt this effort will result in anything and Kerry can certainly afford the legal fees, but nonetheless this is something about which Kerry cannot be happy, if only for the continuing emphasis on not his service, but his behavior AFTER he returned from the Vietnam War.
Friday, October 07, 2005
Newsflash – former FBI director writes that Bill Clinton had moral and ethical problems while President
Isn’t this old news? Clinton, lack of morals and ethics, etc, etc, etc.
Still, yet another illustration of what Clinton was like in office will undoubtedly be revealed in the new book by the former Director, Louis Freeh.
“In the book, “My FBI,” he writes, “The problem was with Bill Clinton -- the scandals and the rumored scandals, the incubating ones and the dying ones never ended. Whatever moral compass the president was consulting was leading him in the wrong direction. His closets were full of skeletons just waiting to burst out.”
The director sought to distance himself from Clinton because of Whitewater, refusing a White House pass that would have enabled him to enter the building without signing in. This irked Clinton. “I wanted all my visits to be official,” says Freeh. “When I sent the pass back with a note, I had no idea it would antagonize the president,” he tells Wallace.Returning the pass was only the start of the rift. Later, relations got so bad that President Clinton reportedly began referring to Freeh as “that F…ing Freeh.” Says Freeh, “I don’t know how they referred to me and I really didn’t care,” he says. “My role and my obligation was to conduct criminal investigations. He, unfortunately for the country and unfortunately for him, happened to be the subject of that investigation,” Freeh says.
In another revelation, Freeh says the former president let down the American people and the families of victims of the Khobar Towers terror attack in Saudi Arabia. After promising to bring to justice those responsible for the bombing that killed 19 and injured hundreds, Freeh says Clinton refused to personally ask Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah to allow the FBI to question bombing suspects the kingdom had in custody – the only way the bureau could secure the interviews, according to Freeh. Freeh writes in the book, “Bill Clinton raised the subject only to tell the crown prince that he understood the Saudis’ reluctance to cooperate and then he hit Abdullah up for a contribution to the Clinton Presidential Library.” Says Freeh, “That’s a fact that I am reporting.”
Still, yet another illustration of what Clinton was like in office will undoubtedly be revealed in the new book by the former Director, Louis Freeh.
“In the book, “My FBI,” he writes, “The problem was with Bill Clinton -- the scandals and the rumored scandals, the incubating ones and the dying ones never ended. Whatever moral compass the president was consulting was leading him in the wrong direction. His closets were full of skeletons just waiting to burst out.”
The director sought to distance himself from Clinton because of Whitewater, refusing a White House pass that would have enabled him to enter the building without signing in. This irked Clinton. “I wanted all my visits to be official,” says Freeh. “When I sent the pass back with a note, I had no idea it would antagonize the president,” he tells Wallace.Returning the pass was only the start of the rift. Later, relations got so bad that President Clinton reportedly began referring to Freeh as “that F…ing Freeh.” Says Freeh, “I don’t know how they referred to me and I really didn’t care,” he says. “My role and my obligation was to conduct criminal investigations. He, unfortunately for the country and unfortunately for him, happened to be the subject of that investigation,” Freeh says.
In another revelation, Freeh says the former president let down the American people and the families of victims of the Khobar Towers terror attack in Saudi Arabia. After promising to bring to justice those responsible for the bombing that killed 19 and injured hundreds, Freeh says Clinton refused to personally ask Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah to allow the FBI to question bombing suspects the kingdom had in custody – the only way the bureau could secure the interviews, according to Freeh. Freeh writes in the book, “Bill Clinton raised the subject only to tell the crown prince that he understood the Saudis’ reluctance to cooperate and then he hit Abdullah up for a contribution to the Clinton Presidential Library.” Says Freeh, “That’s a fact that I am reporting.”
Tolerance at work – Hamas style
Hamas in Gaza. Any questions?
"A VISION of an Islamic society that bans mixed dancing and sternly disapproves of homosexuality has been given by Mahmoud Zahar, the most senior leader of Hamas in Gaza.
After controversies when a Hamas-led council halted a dance festival and Islamist gunmen stopped a rap band performing in Gaza, Dr Zahar defended the enforcement of a strict interpretation of Islam.
“A man holds a woman by the hand and dances with her in front of everyone. Does that serve the national interest?” Dr Zahar said on the Arabic website Elaph. “If so, why have the phenomena of corruption and prostitution become pervasive in recent years?”
Because of successes by Hamas in municipal polls and its likely strong showing in January’s parliamentary elections, secular Palestinians fear that it will try to impose its ultraconservative vision on them. Its Gaza heartland has no cinemas or bars, yet the West Bank has a brewery and Ramallah restaurants serve wine.
Dr Zahar condemned homosexual marriage, saying: “Are these the laws for which the Palestinian street is waiting? For us to give rights to homosexuals and to lesbians, a minority of perverts and the mentally and morally sick?”
And these are the guys to whom the EU wants to hand over $250 million. Right.
I look forward to the various gay advocacy groups in the U.S. protesting this latest example of tolerance in the Middle East, you know, just like they have protested Iran hanging those two gay Iranian teenagers.
Yes, I know there was very little protest of that barbarism by western gay advocacy groups. Much easier to beat up the U.S. for everything, isn't it?
"A VISION of an Islamic society that bans mixed dancing and sternly disapproves of homosexuality has been given by Mahmoud Zahar, the most senior leader of Hamas in Gaza.
After controversies when a Hamas-led council halted a dance festival and Islamist gunmen stopped a rap band performing in Gaza, Dr Zahar defended the enforcement of a strict interpretation of Islam.
“A man holds a woman by the hand and dances with her in front of everyone. Does that serve the national interest?” Dr Zahar said on the Arabic website Elaph. “If so, why have the phenomena of corruption and prostitution become pervasive in recent years?”
Because of successes by Hamas in municipal polls and its likely strong showing in January’s parliamentary elections, secular Palestinians fear that it will try to impose its ultraconservative vision on them. Its Gaza heartland has no cinemas or bars, yet the West Bank has a brewery and Ramallah restaurants serve wine.
Dr Zahar condemned homosexual marriage, saying: “Are these the laws for which the Palestinian street is waiting? For us to give rights to homosexuals and to lesbians, a minority of perverts and the mentally and morally sick?”
And these are the guys to whom the EU wants to hand over $250 million. Right.
I look forward to the various gay advocacy groups in the U.S. protesting this latest example of tolerance in the Middle East, you know, just like they have protested Iran hanging those two gay Iranian teenagers.
Yes, I know there was very little protest of that barbarism by western gay advocacy groups. Much easier to beat up the U.S. for everything, isn't it?
I love the way the WaPo buried Berger’s latest antics
"Former Clinton Aide Violated Probation
Berger Ticketed for Reckless Driving"
Uh, didn’t this guy Sandy Berger used to be the NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR for the President of the United States, Bill Clinton. Well yes, he was.
The "...Former Clinton Aide..." was not quite an “aide” as the Post headline says. An aide is an assistant. The NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR is definitely not an aide.
You don’t suppose the Post and its left wing editors wanted to help minimize this story do you? On the Post Web Page, this article is listed simply with the title, "Former Clinton Aide Violated Probation."
Yes, Berger, the guy who stuffed classified documents down his pants after perusing them in the Library of Congress, something which if you or I had done, would land us in jail. He got a fine probation, and the loss of his clearance.
“On Sept. 8, Berger was ordered to pay a $50,000 fine and surrender his security clearance for three years after pleading guilty to unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents. He paid the fine Sept. 9, court records show.
Berger, who served as national security adviser to President Bill Clinton from 1997 to 2001, admitted to stuffing copies of documents in his coat jacket as he left the National Archives in 2003 while preparing for questions from the Sept. 11 commission. He also admitted destroying some of the records at his office and lying about possessing them.
Officials with the Sept. 11 commission and the Archives have said that nothing was lost because the documents were logged and there were copies of all of them.”
Berger Ticketed for Reckless Driving"
Uh, didn’t this guy Sandy Berger used to be the NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR for the President of the United States, Bill Clinton. Well yes, he was.
The "...Former Clinton Aide..." was not quite an “aide” as the Post headline says. An aide is an assistant. The NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR is definitely not an aide.
You don’t suppose the Post and its left wing editors wanted to help minimize this story do you? On the Post Web Page, this article is listed simply with the title, "Former Clinton Aide Violated Probation."
Yes, Berger, the guy who stuffed classified documents down his pants after perusing them in the Library of Congress, something which if you or I had done, would land us in jail. He got a fine probation, and the loss of his clearance.
“On Sept. 8, Berger was ordered to pay a $50,000 fine and surrender his security clearance for three years after pleading guilty to unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents. He paid the fine Sept. 9, court records show.
Berger, who served as national security adviser to President Bill Clinton from 1997 to 2001, admitted to stuffing copies of documents in his coat jacket as he left the National Archives in 2003 while preparing for questions from the Sept. 11 commission. He also admitted destroying some of the records at his office and lying about possessing them.
Officials with the Sept. 11 commission and the Archives have said that nothing was lost because the documents were logged and there were copies of all of them.”
If Al Gore is serious about democracy and freedom of speech, he’ll fight this attempt by the UN and the EU to gain control of the web
But then again, he’s a Democrat. They care what these two organizations think and want to be liked by them.
This takeover by the EU and the UN is not a good thing for those interested in the free exchange of information. Neither of these organizations is interested in the growth of democracy, a true “liberal” exchange of ideas, or representative governments.
Think EU bureaucrats combined with UN influence peddlers and swindlers (oil for food, Congo sex scandals, etc). Scared yet?
From the Guardian. “You would expect an announcement that would forever change the face of the internet to be a grand affair - a big stage, spotlights, media scrums and a charismatic frontman working the crowd.
But unless you knew where he was sitting, all you got was David Hendon's slightly apprehensive voice through a beige plastic earbox. The words were calm, measured and unexciting, but their implications will be felt for generations to come.
Hendon is the Department for Trade and Industry's director of business relations and was in Geneva representing the UK government and European Union at the third and final preparatory meeting for next month's World Summit on the Information Society. He had just announced a political coup over the running of the internet.
Old allies in world politics, representatives from the UK and US sat just feet away from each other, but all looked straight ahead as Hendon explained the EU had decided to end the US government's unilateral control of the internet and put in place a new body that would now run this revolutionary communications medium.
The issue of who should control the net had proved an extremely divisive issue, and for 11 days the world's governments traded blows. For the vast majority of people who use the internet, the only real concern is getting on it. But with the internet now essential to countries' basic infrastructure - Brazil relies on it for 90% of its tax collection - the question of who has control has become critical.
And the unwelcome answer for many is that it is the US government. In the early days, an enlightened Department of Commerce (DoC) pushed and funded expansion of the internet. And when it became global, it created a private company, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (Icann) to run it.
But the DoC retained overall control, and in June stated what many had always feared: that it would retain indefinite control of the internet's foundation - its "root servers", which act as the basic directory for the whole internet.
A number of countries represented in Geneva, including Brazil, China, Cuba, Iran and several African states, insisted the US give up control, but it refused. The meeting "was going nowhere", Hendon says, and so the EU took a bold step and proposed two stark changes: a new forum that would decide public policy, and a "cooperation model" comprising governments that would be in overall charge.”
This takeover by the EU and the UN is not a good thing for those interested in the free exchange of information. Neither of these organizations is interested in the growth of democracy, a true “liberal” exchange of ideas, or representative governments.
Think EU bureaucrats combined with UN influence peddlers and swindlers (oil for food, Congo sex scandals, etc). Scared yet?
From the Guardian. “You would expect an announcement that would forever change the face of the internet to be a grand affair - a big stage, spotlights, media scrums and a charismatic frontman working the crowd.
But unless you knew where he was sitting, all you got was David Hendon's slightly apprehensive voice through a beige plastic earbox. The words were calm, measured and unexciting, but their implications will be felt for generations to come.
Hendon is the Department for Trade and Industry's director of business relations and was in Geneva representing the UK government and European Union at the third and final preparatory meeting for next month's World Summit on the Information Society. He had just announced a political coup over the running of the internet.
Old allies in world politics, representatives from the UK and US sat just feet away from each other, but all looked straight ahead as Hendon explained the EU had decided to end the US government's unilateral control of the internet and put in place a new body that would now run this revolutionary communications medium.
The issue of who should control the net had proved an extremely divisive issue, and for 11 days the world's governments traded blows. For the vast majority of people who use the internet, the only real concern is getting on it. But with the internet now essential to countries' basic infrastructure - Brazil relies on it for 90% of its tax collection - the question of who has control has become critical.
And the unwelcome answer for many is that it is the US government. In the early days, an enlightened Department of Commerce (DoC) pushed and funded expansion of the internet. And when it became global, it created a private company, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (Icann) to run it.
But the DoC retained overall control, and in June stated what many had always feared: that it would retain indefinite control of the internet's foundation - its "root servers", which act as the basic directory for the whole internet.
A number of countries represented in Geneva, including Brazil, China, Cuba, Iran and several African states, insisted the US give up control, but it refused. The meeting "was going nowhere", Hendon says, and so the EU took a bold step and proposed two stark changes: a new forum that would decide public policy, and a "cooperation model" comprising governments that would be in overall charge.”
Does this AP/Reuters photographer collaborate with the terrorists in Iraq?
Looks that way.
Take a look, read the information provided, and view the photos. Seems like a good argument has been made that Bilal Hussein might be really close and friendly with the enemies of his fellow Iraqis. Bet BBC just loves this guy.
Take a look, read the information provided, and view the photos. Seems like a good argument has been made that Bilal Hussein might be really close and friendly with the enemies of his fellow Iraqis. Bet BBC just loves this guy.
Thursday, October 06, 2005
If you were listening, the President just told you…
…what this war is all about.
Islamic fascism.
“WASHINGTON -- President Bush accused Islamic militants on Thursday of seeking to "enslave whole nations and intimidate the world" and charged they have made Iraq their main front.
"The militants believe that controlling one country will rally the Muslim masses, enabling them to overthrow all moderate governments in the region and establish a radical Islamic empire that spans from Spain to Indonesia," Bush said. The president has been stepping up his defense of his Iraq policy in the face of declining public support for the war and a crucial test in Iraq with the Oct. 15 constitutional referendum.
In a speech before the National Endowment for Democracy, Bush likened the ideology of Islamic militants to communism. And he said they are being "aided by elements of the Arab news media that incites hatred and anti-semitism."
"Against such an enemy, there's only one effective response: We never back down, never give in and never accept anything less than complete victory," Bush declared.
He spoke as recent polls show declining American support for the war that has thus far claimed more than 1,940 members of the U.S. military. His Iraq policy faces a crucial test in Iraq's Oct. 15 referendum on a new constitution, a vote that Bush has said terrorists will try to derail.
"We are facing a radical ideology with inmeasurable objectives to enslave whole nations and intimidate the world," Bush said.”"
Meanwhile, Moonbeam Gore is upset that the Democrats no longer have a monopoloy on information dissemination in America. More on that later. But, just to give you a head start on why we should be glad this gentleman did not become President, go here. Then start asking about Gore's focus.
Islamic fascism.
“WASHINGTON -- President Bush accused Islamic militants on Thursday of seeking to "enslave whole nations and intimidate the world" and charged they have made Iraq their main front.
"The militants believe that controlling one country will rally the Muslim masses, enabling them to overthrow all moderate governments in the region and establish a radical Islamic empire that spans from Spain to Indonesia," Bush said. The president has been stepping up his defense of his Iraq policy in the face of declining public support for the war and a crucial test in Iraq with the Oct. 15 constitutional referendum.
In a speech before the National Endowment for Democracy, Bush likened the ideology of Islamic militants to communism. And he said they are being "aided by elements of the Arab news media that incites hatred and anti-semitism."
"Against such an enemy, there's only one effective response: We never back down, never give in and never accept anything less than complete victory," Bush declared.
He spoke as recent polls show declining American support for the war that has thus far claimed more than 1,940 members of the U.S. military. His Iraq policy faces a crucial test in Iraq's Oct. 15 referendum on a new constitution, a vote that Bush has said terrorists will try to derail.
"We are facing a radical ideology with inmeasurable objectives to enslave whole nations and intimidate the world," Bush said.”"
Meanwhile, Moonbeam Gore is upset that the Democrats no longer have a monopoloy on information dissemination in America. More on that later. But, just to give you a head start on why we should be glad this gentleman did not become President, go here. Then start asking about Gore's focus.
Theft is theft - eminent domain siezures only make it legal
Whether it’s the government stealing your land is irrelevant. Eminent domain may be legal, but it's frequently not right. See the previous statement.
Michelle Malkin highlights a landgrab by Democrats in New Jersey. It’s not pretty. The rest of the entry describes how eminent domain continues to be abused in other places in America.
As I’ve said before in this space, sooner or later, these eminent domain land grabs, authorized by political cronies and influence peddlers, will end in violence. Fortunately, a number of state legislatures are working to correct the errors of the recent 5-4 vote in the Supreme Court (of note, it was the liberals who all voted for the government to sieze your property to increase the tax base).
This organization seems to be part of the wave combatting this legal theft by local and state governments. http://www.castlecoalition.org/
The mainstream media debacle in New Orleans
Given the inaccuracy and bias displayed by this substantial deployment of media to cover Katrina, how can you trust anything these people say about the war and our enemies? Bottom line, you cannot.
And Gore wants us to allow more of these types on the air?
“Lt. Gen. Russel L. Honore, commander of Joint Task Force Katrina, said that reporters got bogged down trying to tell people how bad the situation was rather than "gathering facts and corroborating that information."
Amazing how opininions and bias get in the way of objective journalism by MSM types.
And we are worried about American education?
In Russia, the young adults do not even know who Lenin was.
From James Taranto in "Best of the Web."
"Rodney Dangerfield Revolutionary. The hunk of meat formerly known as V.I. Lenin "has been lying in state on public display" for eight decades, the New York Times reports, but these days the bygone Bolshevik can't get any respect:
"Lenin," mused Natasha Zakharova, 23, as she walked off Red Square on Tuesday, admitting that she was not quite sure whose body she had just seen. "Was he a Communist?""
The New York Times reviews the ongoing debate in Russia about Lenin and whether or not his remains should remain in Red Square.
From James Taranto in "Best of the Web."
"Rodney Dangerfield Revolutionary. The hunk of meat formerly known as V.I. Lenin "has been lying in state on public display" for eight decades, the New York Times reports, but these days the bygone Bolshevik can't get any respect:
"Lenin," mused Natasha Zakharova, 23, as she walked off Red Square on Tuesday, admitting that she was not quite sure whose body she had just seen. "Was he a Communist?""
The New York Times reviews the ongoing debate in Russia about Lenin and whether or not his remains should remain in Red Square.
Why is it ALWAYS the ACLU and the Democrats who try to protect sex offenders?
Read about this law in California which protects sex offenders at the expense of the public.
Then read on about how the Democrats on the committee responsible for public safety do not seem much concerned about that topic. Nor do their ACLU allies.
"Nevertheless, the ACLU opposes AB 438, and Assembly members Mervyn Dymally (D., Compton), Jackie Goldberg (D., L.A.) and committee chair Mark Leno (D., San Francisco) all voted no. For representatives serving on a public safety committee, these three seem oddly unconcerned with public safety. Mr. Dymally lately has been arguing that it's wrong to deny illegal immigrants driver's licenses, but this is probably just the latest blip in a long career of entitlement politics. Ms. Goldberg and Mr. Leno, however, seem to have a particular habit of positioning themselves against anyone trying to promote an orderly civic environment in California."
ACLU, Dems, Sex Offenders - an interesting combination in California.
Then read on about how the Democrats on the committee responsible for public safety do not seem much concerned about that topic. Nor do their ACLU allies.
"Nevertheless, the ACLU opposes AB 438, and Assembly members Mervyn Dymally (D., Compton), Jackie Goldberg (D., L.A.) and committee chair Mark Leno (D., San Francisco) all voted no. For representatives serving on a public safety committee, these three seem oddly unconcerned with public safety. Mr. Dymally lately has been arguing that it's wrong to deny illegal immigrants driver's licenses, but this is probably just the latest blip in a long career of entitlement politics. Ms. Goldberg and Mr. Leno, however, seem to have a particular habit of positioning themselves against anyone trying to promote an orderly civic environment in California."
ACLU, Dems, Sex Offenders - an interesting combination in California.
Wednesday, October 05, 2005
First they came for Winnie the Pooh and Piglet…
...maybe they'll come for Doonesbury next. No, odds are the offended ones will go after the creators of this great cartoon, Cox and Forkum.
So much for "tolerance." Since Winnie and Piglet are "offensive", they must be purged. Jeez.
Mark Steyn has more.
Hey America, are you listening?
Mark Steyn writes about how the Islamofascists keep trying to kill everyone and why in "Islamist way or no way."
“That's why they blew up Bali in 2002, and last weekend, and why they'll keep blowing it up. It's not about Bush or Blair or Iraq or Palestine. It's about a world where everything other than Islamism lies in ruins.”
Let that sink in a bit. These terrorists attacks against civilian tourists are not about Israel, Palestine, Iraq, or anything which the apologists for Islamic fascists say are “legitimate” concerns.
“…nobody seriously thinks what happened in Bali has anything to do with Iraq. There are, in the end, no root causes, or anyway not ones that can be negotiated by troop withdrawals or a Palestinian state. There is only a metastasising cancer that preys on whatever local conditions are to hand. Five days before the slaughter in Bali, nine Islamists were arrested in Paris for reportedly plotting to attack the Metro. Must be all those French troops in Iraq, right? So much for the sterling efforts of President Jacques Chirac and his Prime Minister, Dominique de Villepin, as the two chief obstructionists of Bush-Blair-Howard neo-con-Zionist warmongering these past three years.”
The Islamofascists do not want to “coexist” with us. They want us, and our society, dead or converted, to their fascist social structure.
Remember the scene in Independence Day in which the President has a short conversation with the captured alien which Will Smith shot down? The President asks, “What do you want?”
The alien answers, “we want you dead.”
The same goes for the Islamofascists. They want us dead. Time to stop thinking otherwise and fight this war for the future of western civilization. We've found our root cause.
“That's why they blew up Bali in 2002, and last weekend, and why they'll keep blowing it up. It's not about Bush or Blair or Iraq or Palestine. It's about a world where everything other than Islamism lies in ruins.”
Let that sink in a bit. These terrorists attacks against civilian tourists are not about Israel, Palestine, Iraq, or anything which the apologists for Islamic fascists say are “legitimate” concerns.
“…nobody seriously thinks what happened in Bali has anything to do with Iraq. There are, in the end, no root causes, or anyway not ones that can be negotiated by troop withdrawals or a Palestinian state. There is only a metastasising cancer that preys on whatever local conditions are to hand. Five days before the slaughter in Bali, nine Islamists were arrested in Paris for reportedly plotting to attack the Metro. Must be all those French troops in Iraq, right? So much for the sterling efforts of President Jacques Chirac and his Prime Minister, Dominique de Villepin, as the two chief obstructionists of Bush-Blair-Howard neo-con-Zionist warmongering these past three years.”
The Islamofascists do not want to “coexist” with us. They want us, and our society, dead or converted, to their fascist social structure.
Remember the scene in Independence Day in which the President has a short conversation with the captured alien which Will Smith shot down? The President asks, “What do you want?”
The alien answers, “we want you dead.”
The same goes for the Islamofascists. They want us dead. Time to stop thinking otherwise and fight this war for the future of western civilization. We've found our root cause.
Calvin and Hobbes – It’s been 10 years?
The 3 volume set, The Complete Calvin and Hobbes, was released for sale Tuesday. Don't tell Favorite Wife, but I ordered a set.
The WaPo carried a great article in the WaPo about the strip and the writer, Bill Watterson. As I read the article, just thedescriptionss of the comic strips themselves brought back some pleasant memories. Nicely written article by Neely Tucker, who obviously understands the attraction of reading Calvin and Hobbes. For once it seems, an MSM reporter actually has some expertise about what is written. OK, yes, since the reporter likes the comic strip he/she obviously lacks objectivity, one of my usual complaints about the MSM. But hey, we are talking comic strips here, not how the MSM totally blew the Katrina coverage.
In an amazing coincidence, the Stars and Stripes stopped carrying Calvin and Hobbes as of 1 October. Something about, it's no longer being created, yada, yada, yada. The Stripes has started a number of new comic strips, most of which seem to have been created by people living in dark, depressing worlds where they use a lot of charcoal.
Monday, October 03, 2005
Donald Sutherland, left wing crybaby and Bush hater
For goodness sakes, is this really the guy I once watched in Kelley’s Heroes?
No, can’t be. Oddball had a pair. "Woof, woof."
Sutherland the actor is nothing but a left wing, Hollywood whiner. We are at war, and he’s on Baghdad Broadcasting Corporation crying about Republican Nazis. Jeez. Get a grip instead of giving aid and comfort to the enemies of our nation.
“At one point during the session, Sutherland started crying: "We stolen our children's future... We have children. We have children. How dare we take their legacy from them. How dare we. It's shameful. What we are doing to our world."
Sutherland now plays some cretin in the new left wing Hillary Clinton ad staring Geena Davis which masquerades as a TV show. Reading this embarrasing rant about Sutherland certainly doesn’t make me want to watch the show (incidentally one of the writers used to work for Hillary – no coincidence there, right?).
"We're back to burning books in Germany," Sutherland said of NBC's editing out of Kanye West's comment on Bush during a hurricane relief telethon.”
My question: Do the Germans know this? If not, contact Donald Sutherland for details and locations of these book burnings.
No, can’t be. Oddball had a pair. "Woof, woof."
Sutherland the actor is nothing but a left wing, Hollywood whiner. We are at war, and he’s on Baghdad Broadcasting Corporation crying about Republican Nazis. Jeez. Get a grip instead of giving aid and comfort to the enemies of our nation.
“At one point during the session, Sutherland started crying: "We stolen our children's future... We have children. We have children. How dare we take their legacy from them. How dare we. It's shameful. What we are doing to our world."
Sutherland now plays some cretin in the new left wing Hillary Clinton ad staring Geena Davis which masquerades as a TV show. Reading this embarrasing rant about Sutherland certainly doesn’t make me want to watch the show (incidentally one of the writers used to work for Hillary – no coincidence there, right?).
"We're back to burning books in Germany," Sutherland said of NBC's editing out of Kanye West's comment on Bush during a hurricane relief telethon.”
My question: Do the Germans know this? If not, contact Donald Sutherland for details and locations of these book burnings.
We owe Debra Burlingame a tremendous debt
Contrast the focus and spirit of Debra Burlingame with the sniveling of Donald Sutherland.
Ms. Burlingame exposed the effort of the left wing to turn a proposed 9/11 memorial at the WTC into yet another “hate America” project.
Governor Pataki ended the left wing scheme the other day by cancelling the project. Heck, even Hillary came out against the project, which shows you just how anti-American and hateful it truly was.
“Ms. Burlingame's face, never inscrutable, reflects afresh some of the fury she must have felt at the time. Composure is only a part of her arsenal. "Anger can be very, very productive, as long as it's focused and you don't lose your mind. After the London bombings [in July], someone asked me, 'Have we become complacent? Do you miss 9/11, when people had more unity?' And I say, 'No, no, no. What I miss is the anger. And the clarity. That's what I miss... "”
Ms. Burlingame, we too miss the anger over 9/11. The left wing has certainly forgotten about it, and I think a great deal of the country has as well. Thank you for helping us remember how this war began on 9/11 and for blocking left wing attempts to make us feel guilty about our history.
Ms. Burlingame exposed the effort of the left wing to turn a proposed 9/11 memorial at the WTC into yet another “hate America” project.
Governor Pataki ended the left wing scheme the other day by cancelling the project. Heck, even Hillary came out against the project, which shows you just how anti-American and hateful it truly was.
“Ms. Burlingame's face, never inscrutable, reflects afresh some of the fury she must have felt at the time. Composure is only a part of her arsenal. "Anger can be very, very productive, as long as it's focused and you don't lose your mind. After the London bombings [in July], someone asked me, 'Have we become complacent? Do you miss 9/11, when people had more unity?' And I say, 'No, no, no. What I miss is the anger. And the clarity. That's what I miss... "”
Ms. Burlingame, we too miss the anger over 9/11. The left wing has certainly forgotten about it, and I think a great deal of the country has as well. Thank you for helping us remember how this war began on 9/11 and for blocking left wing attempts to make us feel guilty about our history.
“The EU…is very firm on this position.”
Gaining control of the Internet that is.
NOT Iranian nukes, Islamic fascism, UN incompetence or any other number of major problems facing this world.
No.
The EU is going to be “firm” on being able to assign .edu or .com suffixes to your internet addresses.
When has the EU been firm on anything aside from bureaucratic squabbling and blaming the U.S.?
Focus people, focus. Now, about that little problem with allowing Turkey in the EU, Islamic fascism, arms sales to China, a resurgent dictatorship in Russia, etc, etc, etc.
NOT Iranian nukes, Islamic fascism, UN incompetence or any other number of major problems facing this world.
No.
The EU is going to be “firm” on being able to assign .edu or .com suffixes to your internet addresses.
When has the EU been firm on anything aside from bureaucratic squabbling and blaming the U.S.?
Focus people, focus. Now, about that little problem with allowing Turkey in the EU, Islamic fascism, arms sales to China, a resurgent dictatorship in Russia, etc, etc, etc.
Why does President Bush keep walking away from tough fights?
Harriet Miers? For goodness sakes. Just go here and read. Depressing.
She donated money to the Al Gore campaign in 1988. Yes, she’s a bedrock Republican isn’t she? Yes, I know, people change. That's why I continue to be optimistic about many of my relatives. Anyway....
Conspiracy theory: Bush expects a tough fight on Miers, perhaps a loss, given her lack of a track record and judicial experience. A tough, ugly fight over Miers will force the Democrats to expend a great deal of venom. Following a gracious withdrawal by Ms. Miers for the good of the country, Bush will bring in the true conservative nominee and dare the Democrats to fight a second battle. They won’t have the horsepower, or consensus, to do so, and Bush can therefore really stick one to the Dems. Karl Rove will mastermind this plot.
Wishful thinking on my part?
She donated money to the Al Gore campaign in 1988. Yes, she’s a bedrock Republican isn’t she? Yes, I know, people change. That's why I continue to be optimistic about many of my relatives. Anyway....
Conspiracy theory: Bush expects a tough fight on Miers, perhaps a loss, given her lack of a track record and judicial experience. A tough, ugly fight over Miers will force the Democrats to expend a great deal of venom. Following a gracious withdrawal by Ms. Miers for the good of the country, Bush will bring in the true conservative nominee and dare the Democrats to fight a second battle. They won’t have the horsepower, or consensus, to do so, and Bush can therefore really stick one to the Dems. Karl Rove will mastermind this plot.
Wishful thinking on my part?
You think so?
I love this headline on the WaPo Web Page: “Debate over whether to rebuild New Orleans district may expose tensions over race, poverty.”
As you link to the article itself, the subtitle becomes, “Race and Class Frame Debate on Rebuilding New Orleans District.” Well, that certainly is a bit more clear, and a bit less surprising.
Now, Ceci Connelly does raise some good points in the article.
“Yet even some liberal activists, people who have worked to buoy the fortunes of the Lower Ninth, are beginning to talk favorably about clearing it away -- if residents are well compensated and given suitable housing elsewhere.
"It would be negligent homicide to put people in the Lower Ninth," said Russell Henderson, a veteran community organizer who has formed the Rebuilding Louisiana Coalition. "If you put people back in there, they're going to die."
But scraping away the Lower Ninth would most certainly change the already delicate equations of racial and economic politics in one of America's poorest cities, a city that was 67 percent black but is likely to have a smaller black majority once it is resettled. LSU's Colten fears middle-class Gentilly and wealthy Lakeview -- just as prone to severe flooding -- will nevertheless be rebuilt, while the Lower Ninth is abandoned.
The temptation will be to "open up spaces where there has been a lot of poverty," similar to the urban renewal projects of the 1960s, he said: "Those were seen as a way of cleansing a problem. It didn't eliminate poverty; it just moved it."
Lolita Reed Glass is suspicious that property owners such as her mother will be offered $5,000 for land that is resold for $500,000. Dubbed a "Betsy baby" because she was born nine months after that hurricane brought water to the eaves in the Lower Ninth in 1965, Glass grew up hearing how her mother and seven older siblings punched a hole in the roof to escape the deluge. When they returned, her father added three bedrooms, a bath and laundry onto the pale-blue shotgun house to accommodate his growing family.”
The left wing and the Democrats will be torn between their desire to do the right thing (for the right reasons), which I believe mandates moving these unfortunate residents to new locations and ensuring they receive fair value for their homes and property (yes, even if they do not have adequate insurance) and the fear that by moving so many Democratic voters out of this area that the Democrats will lose political power in the area (as if that would be a bad thing).
This will be a fascinating situation to watch develop and I’m sure we will see the usual fair minded Americans of all races and political outlooks weigh in on the debate.
I, for one, will be outraged if they give these unfortunate people only the tax assessed value of their homes and property and then turn around and sell the land to developers for outrageous sums. That would seem a bit like a rather perverse form of eminent domain in the face of this tragedy.
Finally, I would appoint a Federal Task Force to specifically oversee the expenditure of funds on this project and Katrina relief in general. The Democratic politicians in Louisiana have shown themselves over time to be, how shall we say, less than ethical when it comes to the use of public funds. Why provide these Louisiana politicos another chance to feed at the public trough at our expense?
As you link to the article itself, the subtitle becomes, “Race and Class Frame Debate on Rebuilding New Orleans District.” Well, that certainly is a bit more clear, and a bit less surprising.
Now, Ceci Connelly does raise some good points in the article.
“Yet even some liberal activists, people who have worked to buoy the fortunes of the Lower Ninth, are beginning to talk favorably about clearing it away -- if residents are well compensated and given suitable housing elsewhere.
"It would be negligent homicide to put people in the Lower Ninth," said Russell Henderson, a veteran community organizer who has formed the Rebuilding Louisiana Coalition. "If you put people back in there, they're going to die."
But scraping away the Lower Ninth would most certainly change the already delicate equations of racial and economic politics in one of America's poorest cities, a city that was 67 percent black but is likely to have a smaller black majority once it is resettled. LSU's Colten fears middle-class Gentilly and wealthy Lakeview -- just as prone to severe flooding -- will nevertheless be rebuilt, while the Lower Ninth is abandoned.
The temptation will be to "open up spaces where there has been a lot of poverty," similar to the urban renewal projects of the 1960s, he said: "Those were seen as a way of cleansing a problem. It didn't eliminate poverty; it just moved it."
Lolita Reed Glass is suspicious that property owners such as her mother will be offered $5,000 for land that is resold for $500,000. Dubbed a "Betsy baby" because she was born nine months after that hurricane brought water to the eaves in the Lower Ninth in 1965, Glass grew up hearing how her mother and seven older siblings punched a hole in the roof to escape the deluge. When they returned, her father added three bedrooms, a bath and laundry onto the pale-blue shotgun house to accommodate his growing family.”
The left wing and the Democrats will be torn between their desire to do the right thing (for the right reasons), which I believe mandates moving these unfortunate residents to new locations and ensuring they receive fair value for their homes and property (yes, even if they do not have adequate insurance) and the fear that by moving so many Democratic voters out of this area that the Democrats will lose political power in the area (as if that would be a bad thing).
This will be a fascinating situation to watch develop and I’m sure we will see the usual fair minded Americans of all races and political outlooks weigh in on the debate.
I, for one, will be outraged if they give these unfortunate people only the tax assessed value of their homes and property and then turn around and sell the land to developers for outrageous sums. That would seem a bit like a rather perverse form of eminent domain in the face of this tragedy.
Finally, I would appoint a Federal Task Force to specifically oversee the expenditure of funds on this project and Katrina relief in general. The Democratic politicians in Louisiana have shown themselves over time to be, how shall we say, less than ethical when it comes to the use of public funds. Why provide these Louisiana politicos another chance to feed at the public trough at our expense?
New book believes Islamic fascism poses a threat similar to the Germans and Nazism during WWII
A new book by Toney Blankley theorizes that Islamic fascism poses a threat similar to the Germans and Nazism during WWII.
Tough to disagree with the sentiment expressed by Blankley in his book, “The West’s Last Chance: Will We Win the Clash of Civilizations?”
The Washington Times has carried excerpts. A few highlights:
He is very concerned about “Eurabia.” He should be. He believes that if European governments do not begin to respond to Islamic fascism within their cities and countries that Europeans will respond in a vigilante fashion. I believe he gives the Europeans too much credit for recognizing the issue and for having the courage to take action as required.
“The radical Islamists are able to rationalize concessions to modernity with ancient-sounding mumbo jumbo while still sounding like authentic fundamentalists, the only true voice of Islam.
The Nazis overwhelmed German society with these methods 70 years ago. There is building evidence that the radical Islamists are moving ever more successfully down the same path -- particularly within the younger generations in Europe and, to a lesser extent, in the United States."
He views current Islamic fascism as a “post modern” issue, stating these fanatics frequently advocate what Islam believes immoral in order to facilitate the continuance of jihad.
I just ordered it from Amazon.com. Light October reading on the future of our civilization.
Tough to disagree with the sentiment expressed by Blankley in his book, “The West’s Last Chance: Will We Win the Clash of Civilizations?”
The Washington Times has carried excerpts. A few highlights:
He is very concerned about “Eurabia.” He should be. He believes that if European governments do not begin to respond to Islamic fascism within their cities and countries that Europeans will respond in a vigilante fashion. I believe he gives the Europeans too much credit for recognizing the issue and for having the courage to take action as required.
“The radical Islamists are able to rationalize concessions to modernity with ancient-sounding mumbo jumbo while still sounding like authentic fundamentalists, the only true voice of Islam.
The Nazis overwhelmed German society with these methods 70 years ago. There is building evidence that the radical Islamists are moving ever more successfully down the same path -- particularly within the younger generations in Europe and, to a lesser extent, in the United States."
He views current Islamic fascism as a “post modern” issue, stating these fanatics frequently advocate what Islam believes immoral in order to facilitate the continuance of jihad.
I just ordered it from Amazon.com. Light October reading on the future of our civilization.
There is no excuse for this in modern America
None.
I’m sorry, but I have no sympathy for Fantasia Barrino and her claims of being illiterate at the age of 21.
She says she cannot read. How did this happen? Doesn’t she have responsibility for this? Who and what system enabled her illiteracy?
I’m sorry, but I have no sympathy for Fantasia Barrino and her claims of being illiterate at the age of 21.
She says she cannot read. How did this happen? Doesn’t she have responsibility for this? Who and what system enabled her illiteracy?
Tuesday, September 27, 2005
Chris Mathews and NBC News – Stuck on Stupid
Congressman King takes Mathews and the MSM on. And knocks them out.
Radioblogger uses Mathews' interview with King to show just how pompous these left wing TV pundits can be.
Congressman King, towards the end of the interview, reminds Mathews that President Bush may have few more things to do that are more important than watching Mathews and his cronies on TV.
[Full disclosure. A close friend gave me a copy of Chris Mathews book, autographed, a few years ago. I read it, and enjoyed it.]
More left wing inaccuracies from the New York Times
This time on education.
This NYTimes reporters must have learned his math from Krugman, “America’s looniest liberal pundit.”
This NYTimes reporters must have learned his math from Krugman, “America’s looniest liberal pundit.”
While we are talking about how the media misrepresents things
Let's talk Louisiana. Murders and Deaths in the Superdome, or lack thereof.
Total number of dead during Katrina: Wrong.
Total number of dead in the Superdome: Wrong.
Who is at fault: Wrong (Sorry, MSM - the hurricane wasn't Bush's fault).
Even the left wing LA Times is criticizing its fellow “professionals” and how they reported the events in New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina.
"Mayor C. Ray Nagin told a national television audience on "Oprah" three weeks ago of people "in that frickin' Superdome for five days watching dead bodies, watching hooligans killing people, raping people.""
Now there’s a surprise, Mayor Nagin said something stupid? Wow, who would have thought that after watching him on TV for the past month?
"Journalists and officials who have reviewed the Katrina disaster blamed the inaccurate reporting in large measure on the breakdown of telephone service, which prevented dissemination of accurate reports to those most in need of the information. Race may have also played a factor.
The wild rumors filled the vacuum and seemed to gain credence with each retelling — that an infant's body had been found in a trash can, that sharks from Lake Pontchartrain were swimming through the business district, that hundreds of bodies had been stacked in the Superdome basement."
I don’t understand the “Race may have played a factor" comment.
Is the LA Times implying that the MSM, left wing reporters have racist tendencies? That the left wing MSM reporters allowed their own biases to influence how they reported the news? That the left wing MSM reporters may even be, in reality, biased against people of color?
Just checking. Left wingers, just like MSM journalists, could never be biased.
Total number of dead during Katrina: Wrong.
Total number of dead in the Superdome: Wrong.
Who is at fault: Wrong (Sorry, MSM - the hurricane wasn't Bush's fault).
Even the left wing LA Times is criticizing its fellow “professionals” and how they reported the events in New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina.
"Mayor C. Ray Nagin told a national television audience on "Oprah" three weeks ago of people "in that frickin' Superdome for five days watching dead bodies, watching hooligans killing people, raping people.""
Now there’s a surprise, Mayor Nagin said something stupid? Wow, who would have thought that after watching him on TV for the past month?
"Journalists and officials who have reviewed the Katrina disaster blamed the inaccurate reporting in large measure on the breakdown of telephone service, which prevented dissemination of accurate reports to those most in need of the information. Race may have also played a factor.
The wild rumors filled the vacuum and seemed to gain credence with each retelling — that an infant's body had been found in a trash can, that sharks from Lake Pontchartrain were swimming through the business district, that hundreds of bodies had been stacked in the Superdome basement."
I don’t understand the “Race may have played a factor" comment.
Is the LA Times implying that the MSM, left wing reporters have racist tendencies? That the left wing MSM reporters allowed their own biases to influence how they reported the news? That the left wing MSM reporters may even be, in reality, biased against people of color?
Just checking. Left wingers, just like MSM journalists, could never be biased.
No blood for oil, but who cares if we kill more in smaller cars?
Not the left wingers, that’s for sure.
From Jay Nordlinger in National Review Online:
"In the ongoing category of Only Thomas Sowell Could Have Written That: “Many of the same people who cry ‘No blood for oil!’ also want higher gas-mileage standards for cars. But higher mileage standards have meant lighter and flimsier cars, leading to more injuries and deaths in accidents — in other words, trading blood for oil.”"
"Brutal."
For the record, Favorite Wife and I do not own an SUV. We do own two foreign cars that go REALLY fast (Actually, three, but Favorite Daughter does not go fast in hers/mine). Some of my friends and relatives, however, do own SUVs. I still love them and do not consider them unpatriotic for using gas at prodigious rates or for endangering me in a side crash as their bumper plows through my side window, side air bag, and side of my head.
From Jay Nordlinger in National Review Online:
"In the ongoing category of Only Thomas Sowell Could Have Written That: “Many of the same people who cry ‘No blood for oil!’ also want higher gas-mileage standards for cars. But higher mileage standards have meant lighter and flimsier cars, leading to more injuries and deaths in accidents — in other words, trading blood for oil.”"
"Brutal."
For the record, Favorite Wife and I do not own an SUV. We do own two foreign cars that go REALLY fast (Actually, three, but Favorite Daughter does not go fast in hers/mine). Some of my friends and relatives, however, do own SUVs. I still love them and do not consider them unpatriotic for using gas at prodigious rates or for endangering me in a side crash as their bumper plows through my side window, side air bag, and side of my head.
Some real fine young men in Central Florida…
... allegedly attacked their female middle school classmates on the bus, then allegedly used cell phones cameras to document their crimes. Apparently these young heroes attend Tavares Middle School, in Lake County, Florida. Kind of stupid too, don't you think?
Another interesting aspect of this debauchery, aside from the fact that these scum are being charged with a felony, and their ages (12-14), is the fact that the news channel website published their photos. These criminals are juveniles. I was surprised to see the photos.
What must pass for cogent thought in the minds of people of this age who would do something of this nature? Can you imagine what they think of girls and women if they are willing to do something like this now? What type of culture developed pigs like this? What will they be like as they "mature?"
Worse, how many more of this type are out there?
I’m sure this has nothing to do with illegal immigration
"In L.A., immigrants bypass English"
Quoting from the article, “In California, Spanish is more important than English, [said] Paik. "I haven't found any inconvenience because I don't speak English.”
Maybe that situation should change, or do we want to become like the Balkans?
Quoting from the article, “In California, Spanish is more important than English, [said] Paik. "I haven't found any inconvenience because I don't speak English.”
Maybe that situation should change, or do we want to become like the Balkans?
A great description of how unions are failing, increasing your costs, and become more partisan
By Mickey Kaus at Slate
Money paragraph.
“"Historically," as Yglesias notes, unions have selflessly helped Democrats solve a number of national problems (Social Security, medical care for the elderly, civil rights, worker safety, unemployment insurance). Unfortunately, what's left are the national problems where this New Deal pairing didn't work because unions actively stand in the way of solutions. Two of these problems, in particular, are among our biggest: a) Unionized teachers stand in the way of the educational changes that might ameliorate our twin education crises (inner city disaster and suburban mediocrity). And b) unions stand in the way of the best solution to the welfare problem….”
Money paragraph.
“"Historically," as Yglesias notes, unions have selflessly helped Democrats solve a number of national problems (Social Security, medical care for the elderly, civil rights, worker safety, unemployment insurance). Unfortunately, what's left are the national problems where this New Deal pairing didn't work because unions actively stand in the way of solutions. Two of these problems, in particular, are among our biggest: a) Unionized teachers stand in the way of the educational changes that might ameliorate our twin education crises (inner city disaster and suburban mediocrity). And b) unions stand in the way of the best solution to the welfare problem….”
