Tuesday, October 31, 2006

John Kerry is a POS Loser; Simmons Has it Right!

I have found that longer you live, if you keep your eyes open and stay objective when making judgments, you find yourself being right more and more of the time. Usually you have to wait for things to play out a bit, but when they do you get the occasional chance to say "I told you so."

I've noticed that Rush Limbaugh, who actually has a company keeping track of these things so he has the information on hand to thwart his critics, gets to say "I told you so quite often."

Well, today it is my turn.

Have you ever seen a faster example of proof of a position than John Kerry's unbelievably stupid, snide, arrogant, elitist comment to a group of students at Pasadena City College on Tuesday night? (Oct. 30, 2006) Kerry said, on film mind you, where it was captured for posterity, that if they make the most of college, work hard, and do their studies, "you can do well. If you don't you get stuck in Iraq."

What an unmitigated, disrespectful lousy thing to say about the people who are fighting and dying so a jackass like him can live a life of luxury, leaching off his rich wife.

Take just a minute if you will and read my post from yesterday about War Criminals, the KKK, etc. Did I or did I not accurately define the Democratic machine and the real attitude toward veterans and the military?

What a piece of s...! You know, this guy is the only person I know who was a draft dodger while he wore the uniform. Sometimes, when I see someone on the national stage making a total ass of himself, I can relate to someone I knew somewhere else in my life, often during my time in the Marines.

I can do an article that starts with something like "I knew a guy like that once, ..." and go on from there.

But for the first time that I can remember, I can honestly say I never knew another guy like Kerry in the military. Not because he was in the Navy mind you, but because he was a loser, a fake, a poser, an elitist, and a draft dodger who played the system.

I have never once bought the story about his so-called heroics, because anyone who has actually been in the service knows that his actions when he actually got to Vietnam were anything but heroic. He carried that motion picture camera around with him because he wanted to emulate John Kennedy and get elected, even to the point of crewing the Swift Boats much as Kennedy had crewed the PT-109.

But there the similarity stops because Kerry did just enough to keep from getting court-martialed, got out as fast as he could, pissed all over his colleagues, crewmates, peers and the entire US Armed Forces.

Then he turns around and tries to portray himself as some kind of a hero.

I have a question for Mr. Hero in light of his revealing statements at Pasadena College. What are the chances of you coming up to Connecticut and planting a heroic kiss right on my butt, you pea-brained, knuckle-dragging, unibrowed, mouth-breathing, bottom feeding, gold-digging, scum sucking, knee walking Neanderthal?

Never mind. I don't want to catch any diseases.

And this louse holds a news conference today and blames it on Bush! Jesus. Are you kidding me? This garbage bag lets his real feelings on the military slip and he doesn't even have the courage or strength of his convictions to apologize to the troops?! He blames Bush?! You know, the president, the guy who is responsible for hurricanes, tornadoes, meteor showers etc.

But Kerry is being braced by some REAL Vietnam veterans, including Sen. John McCain and Congressman Rob Simmons both of whom actually SERVED in Vietnam as opposed to APPEARING there to boost their resumes.

Simmons, whose Connecticut District includes New London where the Coast Guard Academy is located, said Tuesday afternoon that "For Senator Kerry to imply that our fighting men and women are only serving their country because they are intellectually inferior to their civilian peers is the worst possible insult to our troops and our veterans. It is irresponsible and only serves to dampen the morale of our brave troops. Our troops, like myself, Sen. McCain and other veterans served our nation honorably and were proud to do so.

"Our service academies, such as the Coast Guard Academy, have some of the toughest admission requirements and stringent academic programs of any higher education institution in the country. Those academies produce some of our finest soldiers and I would put their intellect up against any of Sen. Kerry's supposed intellectual elite any day.

"When our country is at war and our troops are fighting in dangerous places overseas, the last thing they need to hear is a United States Senator and a former Presidential candidate tell them they are not bright enough to make it in the civilian world.

"I am embarrassed by these remarks. If Joe Courtney (Simmons' opponent in the coming election and a non-vet who has called Simmons a War Criminal) agrees with this kind of statement, he can keep John Kerry's $1000. If he disagrees and believes in our troops, he should do the right thing and return it."

Kerry, apparently still smarting after finding out two years ago that President Bush has a higher IQ than he does, says the president is afraid to debate a REAL veteran. Where on earth does Kerry propose to find one? Over at John Murtha's office? And didn't Bush debate him three times and kick his flip-floping ass? What a coward. What a bull thrower. What a disgrace to his party, his country, his family, his name, his wife and the human race.

For the record. I told you so. Kerry proved it.
Monday, October 30, 2006

War Criminals, The KKK, and Gutter Politics in Hebron

At a huge pro-Rob Simmons rally held in Connecticut this past weekend, US Senator John McCain waxed eloquently about Simmons' service to his country as a decorated Vietnam veteran, as a CIA operative, and as a Congressman.

The crowd went wild for both McCain and Simmons, who is more than just well-liked in Connecticut's 2nd Congressional District. McCain talked about service in Vietnam, and to his credit, didn't say much about himself, but rather about the heroism he witnessed from his fellow servicemen, especially those who were POWs.

The crowd was clearly there to hear the men they admire and will vote for, and it was an upbeat mood, except for one little item. During the event it was revealed that Simmons' opponent, Democrat Joe Courtney, has lately been referring to Simmons as a "War Criminal" for serving in Vietnam.

It was interesting that although there was heavy media coverage of the event, not one single reporter from the mainstream news picked up on this little item. Maybe I shouldn't say little because this comment gives the voters a huge window into the dark soul of the Democratic machine, the machine that loves to say it supports the veterans, and loves to say it wants strong national security, but in reality harbors a deep abiding hatred for all that is military and secure.

How else can you possibly explain such a comment, all these years after the Vietnam War, all these years during which the war protestors from that era have proudly strutted the American political scene proclaiming their victory over those of us who believed communism should be stopped there? How else do you explain people who are proud that the communists took South Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos and slaughtered some 4 million innocent people?

Rob Simmons a war criminal? Joe Courtney should be branded a criminal for even allowing such a thought to enter his head. Courtney, another Democrat who espouses support for the military but never served, has no standing, no credentials and no credibility to criticize Rob Simmons for serving our country.

If Courtney had anything going for him in the personality department he would hang his head, apologize and beg forgiveness. Right. No, I won't hold my breath either.

Unfortunately, while Connecticut and national Democrats claim to abhor negative campaigning and attack ads, they are no slouches at jumping on the negative bandwagon and using any means at their disposal to discredit an opponent who can beat them.

It seems that the most recent campaign tactic by frightened Democrats is to accuse their opponent of racism, figuring I suppose that it is nearly impossible to disprove something if it doesn't exist in the first place.

This happened with Joe Lieberman in mid-October when the Ned Lamont campaign falsely claimed that Lieberman exaggerated his civil rights record. That lasted only as long as it took Lieberman to dust off some old news reels of him marching for civil rights in days gone by. Suddenly, the issue dried up like vapors in the desert.

This issue raised its ugly head again in Connecticut on a regional level. Republican Matthew M. Daly, campaigning for the 19th state Senate seat currently held by 80-year-old Democrat Edith Prague, was pounding the pavement and knocking on doors in Norwich, the only city-sized community in the district which encompasses mostly farm towns and suburbs.

Daly, 37, campaigns as a Reagan Conservative, facing the most liberal member of the Connecticut Senate, and makes no bones nor excuses for his beliefs. He is pro-Second Amendment, anti-abortion, and believes marriage is a religious, not social institution and that it should be between a man and woman.

Daly has been endorsed by the Family Institute, the Connecticut Business and Industry Association and received an "A" rating from the NRA while his opponent received an "F." He is used to seeing ultra-Liberals recoil in horror over his proposal to phase out the state income tax, and end it on pensions, Social Security earnings and military retirement income immediately.

But during his walking tour of Norwich, considered a Democrat bastion, at house after house he found himself being referred to as a radical, and then, shock of shock, horror of horrors, he started getting questions about his alleged membership in the Ku Klux Klan.

It was then that Daly realized the level that his opponent's campaign staff will stoop to in the effort to defeat him. It was then that he realized his campaign has had more of an impact on the district than he realized.

It has been widely rumored for quite some time in the 19th District that Edith Prague is not well, physically I mean here, and that she may not serve out another term if she is elected. The rumor has it that she supposedly has already hand-picked her successor, and had figured she could win on name recognition alone if she ran a non-campaign and gave Daly no chance for publicity. It may be only a rumor and it has been heard in previous campaigns too, but the fact is, Prague has done little to no hard campaigning this year, and obviously hoped that strategy would work.

That came to a screeching halt in early October when Daly debated her in the Norwich City Hall and Prague revealed that she wanted to reinstall toll booths on state highways to generate more income. This, mind you, in a state where the budget surplus now tops $1 billion.

That proposal went over like a lead toilet seat and Daly has since been getting far more attention than his opponent would like. Letter writers have questioned her wisdom, and especially her memory in light of the horrendous deaths that occurred at toll plazas in Connecticut in the past, and led to their removal.

People are asking how such a drastic move can be justified in a state where the budget surplus is a one followed by nine zeroes?

Prague has long enjoyed a pass from the media which dutifully wrote about her toll plaza proposal but since has been silent. But Daly has been getting attention nonetheless, and obviously someone in the Prague camp is worried about it.

Daly said he expected negativism and mud-slinging from his opponent. On Oct. 28 she was quoted in the Hartford Courant falsely claiming that Daly had mocked her age in the aftermath of the debate and would pay for it with the senior citizen vote.

In fact Daly never mentions Prague's age, and even solicitously helped her mount the one-step riser where the podiums were located for the debate. He has been overwhelmingly polite to her and opened the debate with comments that the campaign was about issues, and how for once voters have a clear choice between political philosophies.

But then there is the KKK claim. Did I mention that Daly is a Roman Catholic, and that his core beliefs stem from his religious upbringing? Do you have to be reminded that the KKK was as anti-Catholic (papists) as it was anti-black and anti-Semitic?

Even Democrats should know that! But that doesn't stop some of them from spreading filth, if it helps their cause.

But I guess we shouldn't be all that surprised at the Democrats or Edith Prague. Many in Connecticut still remember the incident where someone's dog had been leaving regular deposits on the rugs at the State Capitol in Hartford. There were two suspects - a Seeing-Eye Dog belonging to a blind Republican staffer, and a Shih-Tzu belonging to none other than Sen. Prague.

Prague staunchly defended the Shih Tzu and darkly hinted that the dirty deed was just the kind of thing a Republican would do to discredit her. But Capitol Republicans had the goods, a surveillance tape that left no doubt about the identity of the phantom pooper.

Prague feigned shock, awe, surprise and dismay. But I don't remember her apologizing to the Republican who owned the Seeing-Eye Dog. Republicans were outraged, but the media, which as I said earlier, has been giving Prague a pass for years, let the matter drop out of site.

Try doing one bad thing in your life that catches the media's attention and then deleting it from every single story ever written about you from that moment on. It is nearly impossible and I guarantee it will follow you to your grave.

Unless you are a Democrat in this great land of ours. Then it is entirely feasible that you can spend every day of your life wallowing in the sewer, but as far as the media is concerned you are as fresh as a daisy and every story about you will say so.
Friday, October 27, 2006

Time For A Smack Down in Fat City

Violence has escalated yet again in Iraq and the core of the agitation again appears to be Muqtada Al Sadr, a rotund, self-important, self-ordained cleric, self-declared leader of a Muslim Shiite sect that has morphed into a full-scale terrorist army.

It appears that in their efforts to spread the essence of the all-peaceful, beneficent and humankind-loving aspects of their brand of the Muslim religion they also have to wipe out all the other denominations. The Sunnis in particular are targets since they held power in Iraq while Saddam Hussein was in charge and we all know what that means.

So the Sadr Army as it is called has been on a rampage lately, blowing themselves up with total abandon, and trying to take as many of their countrymen along for the ride as possible. Since US troops are trying to keep the peace in that area long enough for some cooler heads to prevail, and a true coalition government to take hold, we are losing our people as well.

War is full of tragedies, intended and otherwise, but one of the true tragedies of this war is that Al Sadr is even alive at this stage of the game and creating so much havoc. It also is incomprehensible considering the extent of the damage he is causing that we haven't just shot the fat SOB and been done with it.

What do our talking heads at the State Department think is going to happen if we take him out ... people will get mad at us, riot for a few days and burn some of their stuff? Hell, those guys will do that if they don't like what their wives made them for dinner that night, so what do we care?

We had Al Sadr, who by-the-way had a murder warrant out on him for killing a rival cleric, in our grasp three years ago, but against the advice of every person who ever was in a dirty fight, we allowed him to go free. I still don't understand why, but we did and this is what we get for showing him the true Christian spirit.

Al Sadr has proclaimed himself to be a cleric, primarily because his father was a cleric. But his father actually went to school to study his religion, and was an integral part of the structure.

Al Sadr is one of those guys who thinks he can live off of the deeds of his father, even though he never accomplished a tenth of what his father did. We can only wonder if his father would have preached this level of violence and destruction as a means of spreading his religion.

Regardless, I have been saying for years now, and I thought I was saying it to the right people, that there is a way to take Al Rotundo out of the picture without even harming a hair on his roly-poly head, but no one seems to be taking the hint. So let's just get this out in the public arena and see if it flies.

As many of you are aware, there is a strict prohibition in the Muslim religion for eating or touching any product that comes from a pig, since a pig is considered the ultimate unclean animal. (The Jewish religion has a similar prohibition, but it is not quite as strict in some circles. Personally, I think it is a millenniums-old response to trichinosis, a terribly painful disease that came from eating uncooked pork, and which is no longer an issue in most areas of the developed world, thanks to the invention of fire and antibiotics, but that is another issue.)

In the Muslim world, the prohibition on touching a pig or any pork product is so extreme that to do so carries the penalty of preventing the person who does the touching from entering Muslim paradise. In other words, touch or be touched by anything that comes from a pig and kiss those 72 virgins good-bye forever.

Many of us also are aware of the story making the rounds on the internet about the American General Blackjack Pershing dealing with Muslim insurgents in the Philippines during the Spanish-American War. Pershing is said to have lined up 50 insurgents for execution, and ordered the firing squad to shoot 49 with bullets dipped in pigs' blood. Then they were dumped into a grave where they were covered with the offal, intestines, blood and body parts of slaughtered pigs.

The one who wasn't executed was allowed to return to his brethren to spread the word. He did.

After that, things went quiet in that part of the world for 50 years or so.

I have Googled this story, and while it can't be determined that Pershing himself was on the scene, his commanders certainly were and it did happen.

So here is what I have been proposing in private.

First we assemble a highly skilled squad of snipers. OK, the Marines, Army and Navy all have such teams in place so we can check that off.

Next, we make a film of them prior to going out on their missions, sitting around a campfire, where a pot is full of liquid pig fat and blood.

The squad members, who have their faces shrouded just like the Sadr army does, ritualistically dip their bullets into the liquid fat and blood, then go out on the mission.

The mission is not to shoot Al Sadr, just to shoot his bodyguards and other members of his army, with bullets dipped in pigs' blood and pigs' fat.

Now, I am not a scholar of the Koran by any means, but I did read a section of it recently that says the ban on touching pig parts comes into play if the touching is done intentionally.

So, to take away any doubt, we give the film of the snipers preparing to shoot their targets with bullets dipped in pig fluids to Al Jazeera, the PR firm that films Al Qaeda bombings and other terrorist acts. We encourage Al Jazerra to broadcast the film around the Muslim world, so there can be no doubt that anyone who follows Al Sadr is going to be shot with bullets dipped in pig fluids.

That should settle the intent issue.

Then we make good on our promise. We shoot those fanatics, we film our guys doing it, and we broadcast the film so every single one of their friends and family members know that the late, great terrorist is now in the Muslim version of hell and will remain there forever.

Then let's see how long Al Sadr can keep his army intact.

Extreme? Chancy? Maybe. But it sure as hell has to be better than what we're doing now.
Thursday, October 19, 2006

Why Don't I Know What's Happening in Iraq??

What is going on in Iraq, and why don't I know the answer? I mean, of all the people who should be able to speak with a certain authority on the state of events in a war, I should be somewhere in the upper percentages of the list. But I don't have an answer when asked that question these days and that is dead wrong.

NO, this is NOT about my ego. It may sound like it, but this really is about the information coming out of Iraq, or lack of information coming out of Iraq.

To justify my point, let's recap. I served in the United States Marine Corps for a total of eight years, in a combination of active, reserve, and inactive reserve status.

I fought in Vietnam. I flew 300 combat missions as a helicopter machine gunner and participated in limited ground fighting on the Quang Tri perimeter. I have studied war in-depth for more than 30 years since and have a better than average understanding of what some things mean, as opposed to people who have neither served nor studied, but are very good at parroting what someone else tells them.

But I don't know what is going on in Iraq. All I know from the news lately is that US casualties are up sharply this month, but I'm not sure why or what level of successes we may be having.

I got a bit of a glimpse from the news last night that said our guys are clearing out bad guys in some really bad neighborhoods, and that there has been some bitter fighting in some of these operations. Then I hear today that our top General on the ground in Iraq says things haven't been going as well as he had hoped and these operations haven't been as successful as he wanted so we're going to do something else!


Look, I'm not trying to be negative here, but we should have a regular series of updates on the war that give us some kind of indication of how we are doing, and where we are going. I am NOT talking about datelines or milestones, just progress reports.

We seem to be rudderless in Iraq, and if I feel that way, seeing as how I support us being there, and support the President for sending US forces there in the first place, (see previous posts) then how can we expect other Americans who WANT to support the president, to stay optimistic?

We all understand that casualties are a fact of life in war, and we grieve, individually and as a nation for the loss of life that has been inflicted on us by the terrorists. But we at least need to know that we're getting those bastards back!

We don't even know how many of them are dead after five years, while we get a minute by minute update on American and coalition deaths. Their PR guy says 4000, but that is a figure that only works to his advantage. The real number could be three to ten times that amount, or maybe even more. What the hell is that all about?

I read somewhere that a General over there doesn't want to release enemy casualty figures because that was done in Vietnam and that means it was done wrong! God forbid that we point out that most things the military did in Vietnam were done right! The media back then had a field day calling the military leaders liars because they didn't produce piles of dead communists to back up their attrition claims.

But the military is well aware that according to our former enemies, 1.4 million communist North Vietnamese troops died in that war, in addition to the entire 75,000 man Viet Cong guerilla army. So why would we not want to show our own country and the assholes supporting the terrorists, that the media back then was full of elitist, racist liars who succeeded in getting some 4 million innocent southeast Asians murdered as a result of their duplicity?

Why would we want to hunker down and hide from these same media people and their spawn, instead of showing the American public that we are in fact kicking ass.

Let's take a quick walk down memory lane and review World War II for a moment.

After the attack on Pearl Harbor we suffered some losses in naval battles, and also on land in North Africa, as well as Italy. But overall we prevailed and the public knew it.

We drove across North Africa and drove the Nazis out, similar to driving across Afghanistan and ousting the Taliban. Yes, yes, I am well aware that some of them have come back, but this isn't a fixed army, fixed national enemy type of war we are fighting so some of that is to be expected. Those that have drifted back to Afghanistan are getting their butts kicked too.

After North Africa the US invaded Sicily, then Italy proper, then Normandy. We had some bad battles, like Anzio and the Battle of the Bulge that inflicted enormous casualties on Allied troops. But we persevered, came back after these reversals (defeats to some historians) and continued on toward victory.

All the while, we were taking back the Pacific, island by island, with Marines, soldiers and sailors seeing some horrendous fighting and casualties. (Check out the movie Flags of Our Fathers, that just came out. More Marines died in a month on Iwo Jima than all the casualties in the five years of fighting the War on Terror.)

That didn't mean Americans didn't care or didn't grieve. The country was badly wounded in that fighting. But Americans compared that suffering to the overall drive to a final victory and knew that we had to endure those horrible death rates or ultimately be enslaved and murdered by Japanese militants and German Nazis.

What we got in WWII, The Big One, was a steady stream of good news to offset the casualties. We had discernable progress and victories. Why aren't we getting at least that much now?

There are signs all over the place that many things are going well for us. We haven't been attacked on the homeland since 2001, but have stopped numerous attempts to kill more American civilians.

We don't see the so-called Arab Street erupting in violence over issues that would have resulted in huge riots, death and destruction only a decade ago.

We managed, through the efforts of John Bolton and others at the Untied Nations, to get a coalition of nations including China and Russia,to condemn and impose harsh sanctions on the North Koreans for exploding A-bombs. Obviously we are succeeding on many fronts.

In fact, as far as the UN goes, John Bolton must be getting the job done since the Dems still want to shut him down permanently. I heard this on the news the other day and couldn't believe my ears. This was right around the same time that Genius John Kerry said that the Clinton Administration can't be blamed for helping North Korea build nukes because the Clinton's gave them Uranium, and bombs are made from Plutonium. (See previous post on Plutonium as a by-product of uranium fission in nuclear power plants.)

So right away another Genius who gets his marching orders from Kerry, which should tell you plenty about the overall mental capabilities in that camp, starts demanding that Bolton get fired.

Who is going to replace him? Albright?

We might as well surrender right now if that happens.

What we need here, is some news. Real news, not feel-good propaganda, that shows not only the difficulties of the fighting, but the progress we are making too. Without that, the voting public is rudderless, in a life imitates life scenario.

I believe most Americans want to support the troops, the president and the war. But the administration can't ask that of people unless they get some regular, reliable updates on what is happening. They can start by telling me.
Monday, October 16, 2006

Send a poor kid (John Kerry) to college

One last item about John Kerry's appearance on Fox News Sunday. (See yesterday's post.)

When being questioned about the North Korean nuclear bomb test, Chris Wallace asked Kerry about the Clinton administration providing nuclear energy technology to Kim Jong ILL's regime.

Kerry looked down his patrician nose at Wallace and uttered with total disdain and contempt "Chris we gave them URANIUM. They are using PLUTONIUM in the bombs!"

Wallace blinked, as I would have too, probably for the same reason. I was of the opinion that plutonium is a by-product of nuclear energy reactors but I didn't have the info at my fingertips so I didn't go into it until I had my facts clear.

Here are the facts:
Plutonium: a fission energy source
Plutonium is a by-product of the fission process in nuclear reactors, due to neutron capture by uranium-238 in particular. When operating, a typical LWR (light water reactor) nuclear reactor contains within its uranium fuel load about 325 kilograms of plutonium, with plutonium-239 being the most common isotope. Pu-239 is fissile, yielding much the same energy as the fission of a U-235 atom, and complementing it.

Well over half of the plutonium created in the reactor core is "burned" in situ and is responsible for about one third of the total heat output for a LWR. Of the rest, one sixth through neutron capture becomes Pu-240 (and Pu-241), the balance emerges as Pu-239 in the spent fuel.

Plutonium and Weapons
It takes about 10 kilograms of nearly pure Pu-239 to make a bomb. Producing this would require 30 megawatt-years of reactor operation, with frequent fuel changes and reprocessing the 'hot' fuel. Weapons-grade Pu is made by burning natural uranium fuel to the extent of ...(effectively 3 months.)

Thanks to www.ask.com for sending me to this site: http://www.uic.com.au/nip18.htm.

So Kerry's condescension notwithstanding, when we hear about a specific length of time going by before this or that country has enough plutonium to create a bomb, it is directly related to how many nuclear reactors that country is operating, how much energy they are producing and thus how much weapons grade plutonium emerges from the spent uranium.

Someone, please get Kerry a scholarship to a real college where they teach real information that is usable in the real world. Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton have been on the nuclear fuel bandwagon for decades and now we know why. Under the guise of providing clean, peaceful energy, they actually are spreading the tools for making nuclear bombs.

And we want Kerry to be where in 2009? How about anyplace except at the new president's swearing in ceremony in Washington, D.C.?
Sunday, October 15, 2006

Photo Op of a Flip-Flop; John Kerry on Fox News Sunday

John Kerry's comments on Fox News Sunday this week on the international situation as it reflects Bush Administration policy reminded me of that joke about looking up something in the dictionary and seeing someone's photo next to the definition.

If you looked up 'flip-flop' you would see an up-to-date photo of Kerry. I bet there also would be a referral as in: See B.S.

I have been a FNS fan for a couple of years now, ever since I quite watching CBS Sunday Morning. I had watched that show since back when the late Charles Kuralt was the host, but Charles Osgood, who took over for Kuralt, became far too partisan even when the feature wasn't about politics, and I became disenchanted.

I was mentioning this to a friend some time ago and she in turn said that if I wanted to get an even review of the political scene with equal opportunities to comment from both sides I probably would be happy with Chris Wallace and the panel of commentators on FNS.

I tried it one Sunday morning and haven't looked back.

Now, about Kerry. It came as no surprise that he would bash the Bush Administration. That is what passes for intelligent debate on political issues in the Washington, D.C., circles these days, and Kerry never impressed me as being all that intelligent.

He wanted to be seen as the overwhelming intellectual favorite in the 2004 race. But then it was revealed that George Bush actually had a higher IQ than Kerry so the issue was dropped.

But today's was one of those shows that should be archived, like the ones back in the 70s when Kerry debated fellow Vietnam veteran John O'Neill on the Dick Cavett show and got his ass kicked even though he brought along a partisan audience to give the impression he was really scoring points.

Today, Kerry bashed Bush for going it alone in Iraq, (yes I know, we do have a coalition in Iraq, but according to the Kerry Theory it isn't the right coalition because it doesn't include the French) then bashed him again for seeking international consensus on Korea. Then he brought up that B.S. line about there being seven times more US troops in Afghanistan than in Iraq, apparently meaning we should have lots more troops in Afghanistan, totally ignoring the fact that our duties are being shared and in many cases taken over by the NATO alliance.

So, rather than seeing that in the light of international cooperation and taking some of the stress off of our military, he says Bush "cut and run" in Afghanistan.

He also trotted out that tired old concept that Iraq was NEVER the central point of the War on Terror and that since we went there, Al Qaeda has branched out into sixty some countries around the globe. This ignores all the evidence by people who really are smart instead of being able to recite nonsense by rote, that when Al Qaeda was being hounded out of Afghanistan in 2002 it moved operatives, leaders and equipment to Iraq. There Saddam Hussein gave them sanctuary, medical care, security and training facilities to set up a new launching point for continued attacks on the west.

This also ignores all the evidence that Al Qaeda was an international terrorist organization long before the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on the US, with cells in dozens of countries including ours.

But for the all-time best example of a Kerry flip-flop I have to vote for the clip Wallace showed with Kerry on the rim of the Grand Canyon (yeah I know, but I'm not going there today) saying his vote on invading Iraq was the right vote, and Kerry then trying to explain his classic "I voted for it before I voted it against it" or was it "I voted against it before I voted it for it"?

Kerry now tries to explain that explanation of his opposing votes by saying ... oh hell, I'm not sure what he really was saying. By then it had gotten so convoluted I couldn't follow it any longer. And please don't respond that I can't follow Kerry's reasoning. It wasn't reasonable.

No, Kerry has gotten to the point where his positions can best be described by the adage "If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, blind them with your bullshit."

Wallace noted that Kerry is "actively considering" a second run for the presidency in 2008, which Kerry acknowledged and said he has historical precedence for another shot, referring to such late great politicians as Ronald Reagan, Richard Nixon, and ... oh yeah, Henry Kissinger???!!!

OK, anyway, Kerry may want another shot at the White House, and this time he says he'll be a lot more forceful against the Swift Boat vets, led by O'Neill, who last time revealed Kerry's duplicity in hyping his nearly non-existent Vietnam War record. More forceful than filing lawsuits against individual vets, most now in the 60s and 70s, who have REAL medals for REAL wounds and bravery, who had the temerity to criticize him? Wow, can't wait to see that!

Kerry, if you really plan another run then release your Form 180. Let's see if it's true that you got a Dishonorable Discharge for collaborating with the enemy and had to wait for Jimmy Carter to give you a pardon as has been alleged in public for years now.

Run for president again? Well, after seeing him on FNS today all I can say is "Go Kerry." Man, if he does, these columns will write themselves and I can go back to selling books.
Friday, October 13, 2006

George Bush, Stop the North Korean Genocide!

Have you seen the TV commercial that takes blaming George Bush for everything bad in the world out beyond the stratosphere, the one that says George Bush Stop the Genocide in Darfur?

As if the deplorable situation in that unfortunate African country started just after he took office, and as if previous American administrations had nothing to do with it? Good grief, give me a break. The situation there has been developing for decades and it was ignored for years here in America before the current rush to exploit it for political purposes. This is just sickening, and I seriously doubt that commercials like that one or any others like it will have a meaningful impact on public sentiment.

If the world really wants a strong police force to step in and stop sectarian, religious, racial and ethnic violence whenever and wherever it rears its ugly head then the Untied Nations should start acting and stop talking.

But it won't and the vicious bastards who perpetrate these atrocities will go on unchecked, and they do so because they are acting on a truth rather than a marketing concept. That truth is simply that the United States can't and won't respond to every atrocity in every country in the world.

The truth is we don't have the military forces to do so, and the American public would never support such a role anyway. And the truth is that the Untied Nations is just a paper tiger and feel-good organization for out-of-work foreign political operatives.

But we do have an opportunity to do some good in a place the American public can and probably will support, so I am hereby calling on President George Bush to STOP THE GENOCIDE IN NORTH KOREA! Once again Kim Jong ILL, the nutcase in charge of the poorest, most pathetic, downtrodden modern country on the face of the earth has spit in everyone's face, and once again the Untied Nations is nattering and hand-wringing and once again absolutely nothing will be accomplished.

For a day or so after ILL may have set off an atomic bomb, or not depending on which scientific readings and monitoring devices you believe, everyone was expressing shock and outrage and angrily threatening to really, really do something about it this time. Everyone was on board - until they actually sat down and wrote something up and then - surprise, surprise, surprise, China and Russia started having misgivings.

Yeah, because they can't actually punish one of their puppets for doing what they told him to do in the first place, now can they? And how much punishment can you impose on a country where the leader eats and drinks like a pig while the populace gnaws at tree trunks hoping to get nutrition out of the bark?

No, to make this work we have to accept some basic facts. The first is, ILL doesn't give a hoot about the welfare of the people in the poorest, most ignorant, downtrodden, hopelessly illiterate modern country on the face of the earth.

He only cares about his own sorry rear end, and getting every single thing he can for himself at the expense of everything and everyone else, at home and abroad. He plays the puppet to the Chinese and Russians because they need a surrogate to hassle the United States and the Untied Nations, where everyone really knows what is going on but due to a complicated set of B.S., or excuse me, diplomatic rules, they all make believe North Korea is acting on its own.

But make no mistake about it. He is pulling the strings more than it would appear and if China or Russia gets in his face anytime after he turns weapons technology into actual weapons, he won't hesitate to radiate their cities too.

Thus, for the US to intercede here, we have to approach this situation from the standpoint of what can we do to him that will get his attention, but that won't put further stress on the already devastated populace.

So we have to ask ourselves, what does Kim Jong ILL want that we can take away? Well, he is a drunken pervert with a known affinity for French wine, cognac, and Scotch whisky, as well as porno movies. So what do we do? Bomb his wine cellar, stem the flow of cognac and convince the Scots not to export to his country? Hey, whatever it takes.

We could use magnetic interference devices to scramble all his porno films and jam any TV signals that would give him access to Skin-A-Max. We could really freak this guy out, and the best thing about freaked out madmen is that they act even more irrationally which gives everyone else, included spineless UN diplomats, a reason to euthanize him (like that one?) like a rabid dog.

That, in the final analysis is the best solution we have for dealing with a drunken, perverted schizo.

The blame game that is going on in Washington, D.C., isn't getting anything done either, and it is long past time to get something done. Yes, Ex-President Bill Clinton and his administration have some responsibility because they really did trust a manipulative, perverted, mentally ill jerk, and gave him nuclear technology, equipment and money based on his promise to use it only to develop electricity.

Clinton gave ILL the tools, and accepted the promise from a madman that they would only be used for peaceful purposes. This makes Ex-Secretary of State Madeline Albright and Bill Clinton two of the most gullible people to ever lead the United States.

I guess considering the elitist background of most Clintonites they can't be blamed for not knowing when they were being scammed, since ILL started working on developing a nuclear bomb almost before the ink was dry on the agreement. But scammed they were and as a result a screwed-up national leader is on the verge of having nuclear weapons.

Can you imagine the scene in the North Korean capital just minutes before that bomb went off?

ILL had just finished off a bottle of Johnny Walker Red and was screaming at his minions to get him a bottle of the Blue, which some scotch drinkers say is Johnny Walker's best product. He is swirling the ice cubes in his drink glass, taking big slugs every few minutes and muttering to himself "Bush my ass. Screw the Chinese. Hey Russia, how do you like those apples!"

"General, give me that button and don't you dare touch it first."

Then after a few more snorts, he starts giggling uncontrollably and flicks the switch, uttering one of those eternal statements that the media records for all posterity, "Hey Albright! Eat my shorts!"

But Clinton administration failures notwithstanding, we also have an obligation to do something substantive, now, and this falls into George Bush's lap. Want to see his approval numbers skyrocket? Forget this Untied Nations crap and take some definitive action, unilaterally or whatever. Just do it, and do it right! America doesn't care about the Chinese reaction, or the Russian reaction, and most Americans are sick to death of Kofi Anan and his duplicity. So just go get the damn job done!

This is the opportune time to finish the job that was started in 1950. History shows the MacArthur was right in wanting to finish the war instead of settling for a truce, and Truman's containment plan, which Eisenhower went along with, only delayed the inevitable.

But unlike the 1950s when China was an all-out enemy, that country now has more reasons to not resupply or support the North Koreans. We have full diplomatic relations with China, ongoing business arrangements, and they really are hard pressed to define any benefits to their country stemming from continued support of North Korea.

I keep hearing about the North Korean army, a million strong and how difficult it would be to fight so many troops. Terrain-wise yes, and Seoul, the capital of South Korea, also is vulnerable - to a point. But this is a million-man army that is on the verge of starvation, and the bulk of the soldiers are in the army because they are forced into it, and it represents their best shot at getting food for their families.

Take that into account, along with the fact that to defeat us they have to move out into the open en masse, where we have gazillions of weapons especially designed to eliminate troop formations and suddenly it isn't so formidable. What do you say to a quarter-million screaming North Koreans running headlong at Seoul?

Four words. MOAB. (Oh go look it up.) For the purposes of this column Mother Of All Bombs will suffice.

The point here is, diplomacy hasn't changed a thing in more than 50 years. Whackos are still whackos and letting these fools influence human actions and thus human history amounts to being as off the wall as they are.

Sometimes you just have to fight the schoolyard bully. Sometimes the schoolyard bully is not the biggest guy in the schoolyard, just the craziest. But whack-jobs bleed just like normal people. It is time for ILL to bleed.
Monday, October 09, 2006

Ill and Green Bean Tag Team the West with Nukes; North Korea Loves the Bomb and Iran is Next

International nut cases Kim Jong Ill and Green Bean Almandine are rejoicing over the North Korean nuclear test Sunday night, and in doing so are demonstrating one of the basic principles of combat against multiple enemies.

Anyone who has had to fight more than one person at a time knows that you never, NEVER, let them get you between them. You always fight one at a time and keep the other antagonist on the opposite side of your immediate opponent. Which means you have to be agile as well as powerful, and you have to fight on the move rather than from a fixed position.

But what we are seeing is an international version of Monkey in the Middle and unfortunately the US is the monkey. You can bet that now that KJ Ill has the prize, the other whack job, GB Almandine will do something to get our attention next and have us running back his way!

Meanwhile, China, Russia, the WTM and the Muslim extremists are sitting on the sidelines laughing their asses off at our ineffectiveness. Know how to put an end to this?

When the ball goes back to Almandine run up and kick KJ Ill in the privates! Hard. And when he goes down, keep kicking him, hard, in every vital spot you can find, until he is dead.

THEN turn your attention to GB Almandine. Want to have some real fun? Get a camera ready so you can have a shot of the look in Almandine's eyes when he suddenly realizes his ally is gone and he is next!

Talk about the dawn of realization! Should be great to use in the next round of political ads.

Meanwhile, the Untied Nations is calling for emergency sessions and planning on marathon talk fests, all of which is reminiscent of Shakespeare's "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

Personally I'm calling my stock broker right away and telling him to invest heavily in textile and paper stocks. Why? Because the hand-wringers and whiners are going to be emotional to the max for the next couple of weeks and are going to go through handkerchiefs and tissue paper like you-know-what through a goose.

Probably should invest in tree companies too. The reforestation that is going to be necessary after this round will be monumental.

On a related point, I would make a note to our so-called 'friends' in China's leadership too. If you guys, starting with Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao actually think that somehow, someway you are going to benefit from this you are in total denial. Yeah, I know, Jiabao laughed his ass off about the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on the US and joked about the Japanese deaths in the World Trade Center, and got big laughs and applause from other leaders of Asian nations.

But you may well want to rethink that philosophy. Just because KJ Ill is oriental and you are oriental means nothing. There is no brotherhood of race here. Remember the history of relations between China and Korea. Chilling isn't it?

Thinking that somehow you can control this nut just because it serves both of your purposes to oppose and weaken the US is to believe that you really have an ally in Oh, Russia for instance. Think about it.

Rasputin says he is your ally now, but has Russia ever really been an ally of China? Even during the cold war you guys had far more troops on the Russia-China border than you did in Vietnam.

The world will not benefit from a nut job walking around with a nuclear weapon. The danger is only multiplied when you consider the scenario with two nut jobs walking around with nuclear weapons.

And I don't care if it was a big bomb or a small bomb that North Korea detonated, as some journalists have been discussing.

A big bomb is supposed to be primitive and thus the thinking goes, less dangerous.

Really? A spear is primitive too, but you'll have a hell of a time getting anything done today with one sticking right through your middle.
Saturday, October 07, 2006

Exactly what (who) is the Religious 'Right?' Muslim Extremists, Christians, Jews?

Well now, here we are in day ten thousand of the latest scandal involving (enter a name) from (enter a state) the disgraced (enter Congressman, Senator, aide, bureaucrat, media target, cabinet member, bystander, wannabe, or known brain-dead, promiscuous, incurably diseased celebrity) and while the media is running what's his name into the ground, the War on Terror is continuing unabated and uncovered.

Did you know that Muslim extremists have been rioting and burning in Belgium? Or that a murder trial is in session in Scotland in the case of some disadvantaged Muslim men who kidnapped a "white" boy off a street in Edinburgh, dumped him in their silver Mercedes (told you they were disadvantaged) then stabbed and burned him to death? Did you know that? I did, but only because I check in over at the Atlas Shrugs blog every day to keep up on the War on Terror.

While most of us have been distracted by the American Terrorist Media's latest diversion, the terrorism war has been going on full blast in many places including Iraq, and it is creeping closer and closer every single day.

Here on the diversion front I heard some commentators intoning the other day that the latest scandal involving what's his name is sure to keep the Religious Right at home, which will do very nicely in reminding George Bush that they have the real keys to power in this country and he better not forget it.

Remember when he almost got beat by Al Gore because the Religious Right stayed home? (Don't get me started on that Florida crap. I was there, 90 percent of what was reported in the national media, before it morphed into the ATM, was bull and I can prove it.)

All these renewed references to the Religious Right got me to wondering, just who are these people? And what religion do they follow? And when they say 'Right' do they mean as in 'correct' or are they talking about a direction or leaning or position?

If they are the Religious Right as in correct, what religion do they follow and who decided that this religion is more right than another? I grew up in the Methodist Church thanks to my mother, with occasional forays into Presbyterianism thanks to my Scottish father, but I also made a point of visiting my Catholic friends' churches at times, and knew Jewish kids who were pretty solid on their point of view too.

I didn't know any Muslim kids at that time, but I did meet Muslims, Buddhists and Hindus in my adult years, as well as people from other less widespread religions. It was really odd, but I kept meeting people I liked regardless of their religious beliefs and I kept meeting people I disliked regardless of their religious beliefs, so this whole Religious 'Right' issue has me a bit perplexed.

I don't want to be throwing water on anyone's fervor either, but it has occurred to me that if God has decided there is a proper way to worship Him (unless Him is Her or asexual) and God has dictated not only rules, but punishments for disobeying said rules, isn't it just a tad heretical to go around saying you and only you are responsible for inflicting God's punishment here on earth? I mean, after all, if it is God we are talking about, don't you think the all-seeing, all-knowing, omnipotent Supreme Being would want to impose His (Her, Its)retribution on non-believers Himself (Herself, Itself)?

I mean, if you are God, what constitutes enjoyment or appropriate use of your time? Seems to me that making the occasional point that one and only one being is omnipotent would be a regular part of the agenda, and if some mere mortal was inserting himself between the Almighty and enjoyment, it might not be the best place to stand on the celestial plane.

Personally, I wouldn't be in favor of standing next to said mortal either, similar to say standing next to Muqtada Al Sadr as in being his bodyguard or devout follower if some non-Muslim says enough is enough and starts spraying the area with bullets dipped in pigs' blood every time he appears in public.

Nope. I figure that the God I was brought up with really means it on the omnipotent front and it is my job to live my life fully and effectively and any judgments on whether I was successful will be rendered by a much higher authority at a date to be determined. I believe that mortals presuming to play God here on earth are just plain senseless when looked at from an eternal point of view.

In other words I do what I can to live a good life and stay out of areas I have no chance of ever understanding.

So what does it mean if members of the Religious 'Right' stay home at election time? Are they imposing God's will as they see it, and by doing so are they being hypocrites? Or are they making a political statement through their religious beliefs and if so is that hypocritical, not to mention cutting off their noses to spite their faces?

Whew, this gets deep.

Here is what I am going to do. I am going to vote on Election Day. I am going to vote for a Governor, a US Senator, a US Congressman, a State Senator and a Sate Representative. I already know who I am voting for and have for months now. In each case I generally agree with the positions of the people who will get my vote, although in each case I sometimes disagree with them, literally all of them, but overall I think they fit my viewpoints best.

Then I will come home and wait to see if I am in the majority or minority this year. If the people I vote for win, I will say a special thanks in my own way, in my own space and time. If they don't, I will wonder whether there was something more they could have done to get their views across, or whether there is something wrong with my viewpoint, or whether it is just a matter of demographics and timing.

Either way, I will get up the next day, do my job, and live my life. Regardless of the outcome, I won't shoot anyone, kidnap anyone, stab anyone or burn anyone and blame it on God. That may not give me any special claim to religious accolades, but it will make me 'right.'

You can figure out which way I mean by that.
Wednesday, October 04, 2006

Pelosi, Reid: Hypocrisy or Penis Envy?

Oh, my God, a US Congressman has been discovered harboring impure thoughts about a young man working as a Congressional page!

And this time, the Congressman is a REPUBLICAN! Kill him! Beat him! Castrate him! Drag him through boiling oil! Tar and feather that SOB and ride him out of town on a rail!

Yeah, and while you're at it, overlook similar flagrant abuses of power by Democrats in previous times, and FIRE DENNY HASTERT TOO! WHAT THE HELL, DISBAND CONGRESS, BRING IN THE COMMIES, GIVE THE TERRORISTS SOME TALKING POINTS AND A SEAT AT THE TABLE! IT'S ARMAGEDDON!!!

The level of hypocrisy the opposition party in Congress has descended to in the Mark Foley issue is enough to gag a maggot. And they even use Bill and Hillary Clinton to back them up. Are you kidding? Do the Democrats running their side of the zoo actually think the rest of America has lost its collective memory? Cigar anyone?

And if I see Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid on TV one more time pretending to take the moral high road when they represent one of the most immoral, corrupt, power-driven, envy-stricken political parties since the Roman Senate murdered Caesar, I swear I'm going to do something drastic!

I'm not kidding this time! I agree with Rush Limbaugh. It is time to unite behind the innocent who are being dragged into this through no fault of their own. It is time to fight back. It is time to act.

In fact, I may go beyond what Rush has suggested. I may go to extremes here. I may just follow the lead of the Democrats in this matter and turn their tactics right back on them. I may have to fire off a sternly worded rebuke, recall my envoy at the capital, I may even IMPOSE ECONOMIC SANCTIONS!! That'll fix those hypocrites over at the networks, just like it did to their buddies Saddam and Fidel.

Not one person I have talked to since the Foley scandal broke has a whit of sympathy for him. They believe he violated his office, his personal responsibilities, his duty to his country, his state, his district, his party, his family, himself, and most certainly his responsibility to the young people who go to our nation's Capitol to learn first-hand about the inner workings of government.

As many other commentators have noted in the past few days, there is a huge gap between homosexuality and pedophilia. Violating the trust of our children is an inexcusable offense, and nobody, but nobody, is buying this "I'm a closet alcoholic, and I'm checking myself into rehab," crap either.

The only reasons that entering treatment for addiction to prescription pain medication worked for U.S. Rep. Patrick Kennedy back in May after a highly publicized car crash near the Capitol that the congressman said he cannot recall, are because he is: 1) A Kennedy; and 2) A Democrat.

The media gave him a pass just like it has given generations of Democrats a pass whenever a moral breach arises. It doesn't matter what a Democrat does as far as the American Terrorist Media is concerned, it is excusable, even if it is the most heinous, extreme crime imaginable.

Likewise it doesn't matter what Republicans do, no matter how serious or even trifling, the ATM will pillory them and call for the resignation of the entire party if they think they can get away with it.

Mark Foley should be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of all applicable laws. Period. This is not negotiable, and I see nothing to joke about concerning his actions.

But fire Speaker of the House Denny Hastert? Puhlease. By all accounts Hastert was told of some questionable but non-threatening and non-sexual emails between Foley and the pageboy last spring and passed the word to Foley to knock it off!

But somewhere along the way there also were text messages, so-called IMs or Instant Messages, that were far more explicit, but that Hastert never saw. But somebody else saw them, because somebody else, a DEMOCRAT maybe, saved them, printed out copies of them, and released them to the media when it was politically expedient.

Which means someone out there really does need to get fired for ignoring the safety and well-being of our Congressional pages.

That brings us back to Pelosi and Reid. I think they're protesting too much. I think they're trying to divert attention from their own shortcomings, and other pressing matters that really concern our nation's security, like making John Bolton's appointment as ambassador to the Untied Nations permanent for instance.

I think there may just be a hint of jealously there. I hear Pelosi going on about being a mother and grandmother and I'm not sure, but there just may have been a catch to her voice when she hit that 'grandmother' note. Maybe she wishes that once, just once, or just once more, someone young and good looking would pay a little attention to her.

Maybe deep down inside, she and Reid are jealous over a pasty-faced, pudgy, middle-aged Republican getting all the attention while they are getting none. AWWWWWWW. Group hug everyone, group hug. Hurt feelings on board.

If the Democrats in Congress, and in state and local parties around the country for that matter, want the true support of the American public, and not just inherit the system by default, they would take the real high road in these matters and start offering some real solutions. Otherwise, all I see is opportunism leaping at a chance to blame the other side for failures that are systemic, not restricted to just one party.

And as I said in a previous post, these things have a way of blowing up right in the faces of those who point fingers and yell the loudest. It doesn't matter which side you are on, if you fight in the sewer, you are going to get dirty.
Sunday, October 01, 2006

Dems' Hypocrisy on Foley Can Backfire; CIA Agent Bares All

It is without question repugnant that a Republican member of the House of Representatives, Mark Foley of Florida, used his position to get a line on possible sexual targets among the ranks of male teenagers working as Congressional Pages.

Foley should be investigated to determine if he violated any laws during his exchange of graphic emails with a boy who was 16 at the time, and his decision to step down from the Congressional seat he disgraced should be only the first result of this gross violation of personal, parental and voter trust.

But even though I too have questions about the Republican House leadership, such as who knew what, when they knew it, and what they did about it, the Democratic side of the aisle, led by Nancy Pelosi, D-CA, and Jane Harman, the ultimate Monday Morning Quarterback, who also happens to represent Democrats in California, would do themselves a huge favor by taking the high road on this issue instead of attempting to turn personal sleaze to their political advantage.

I say this not because of politics, but because of humanity and the realities of human nature. To be more specific, if a pedophilic homosexual was discovered in the Republican ranks of Congress, you can bet your sweet bippy that there are more out there and some of them are bound to be Democrats. I strongly condemn what Foley was up to, but this could explode into a witch hunt with only a little prodding, and in any witch hunt the innocent are bound to get hurt as well as the guilty.

In my opinion, if there are more pedophiles, homosexual or heterosexual, using their positions in government to get a line on possible prey, they should be rooted out and thrown out regardless of their party affiliation. I am NOT attacking people based on their sexual identities here; I AM attacking people who prey on children.

History is replete with instances of people hiding the true nature of their sexual appetites behind images of charity, power, politics and religion, so we shouldn't really be surprised when a case like this arises.

It happens. It is humanity. But for the moment, we should remember that the core definition of a Conservative Republican doesn't include pedophilia, any more than does the core definition of a Liberal Democrat.

I believe that in general Americans are pretty tolerant people and are content with letting people be who they are, so long as members of the majority aren't cornered by activist types who have an agenda to push, and invariably take that agenda over the top. Essentially, Americans are world-wise and for the most part don't make the differences between us a reason to single anyone out for persecution.

I don't believe in bashing anyone for any reason, but especially based on gender, sexual identity, ethnic background or genetic blueprints.

It should be noted though, that in my world I am the one who decides what my children will be taught about sex, and when they are taught about it. Most people seem to agree with this approach and if left to my own devices I will teach in a way that dispenses information without dispensing bigotry.

But I take umbrage when someone with a different agenda attempts to usurp my rights and responsibilities as a father.

This is exactly what happened in Congress, and by all means it should be delved into and resolved. But in the meantime, Ms. Pelosi and Ms. Harman should take a big step back and get a few deep breaths before they continue to push their attack agenda.

This one, ladies and gentlemen, will blow up in your faces and you would do well to remind yourselves of the adage that people who live in glass houses ... etc.

Let's Hear It For The CIA

Did you happen to see former CIA operative Michael Scheur, the author of Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror, and the former chief of the CIA's Osama bin Laden Unit, on Fox News Sunday?

He was on a panel with another author, plus a Bill Clinton apologist and Chris Wallace, talking about the interview Wallace had with Clinton on that show last week, and Clinton blowing his top when asked if he had done enough to hunt down and kill Bin Laden.

Scheur came right out and said what many people believe but are too afraid to say in public "Bill Clinton and Sandy Berger lied!"

Wow! How often do you see that come out of Washington? And this guy didn't tiptoe around it either. He came right out and laid his cards on the table. He blew holes through all the posturing and spinning and other diversions that surround this issue.

Look, we all know that a lot more could have and should have been done in the anti-terrorism arena going back two decades now. But so many people, the above-mentioned Ms. Harman especially, have nothing to offer in the debate except Monday Morning Quarterbacking.

Their entire existence seems to revolve around finding fault with anything anyone else does, especially if that anyone else is George Bush. But you never, and I mean never, hear about other options or better battle plans. Just constant sniping, carping, complaining, whining and hand-wringing.


Well, we finally got it straight from a guy who was there, saw it all, has the documents, and knows exactly what was going on. Scheur has not exactly been a George Bush cheerleader in past interviews either, by the way. But he blew through the wall of crap that the American people have been handed daily for the past three years like a tank through tissue paper.

Loved it. Great show, great guest and it was absolutely refreshing to hear a guy tell it like it really is.


hypoctite sm

Granny Snatching


Signed author copies


NEW! e-Book Available on Amazon

Masters of the Art

Masters final cover
Personalize inscription


NEW! e-Book Available on Amazon and Barns & Noble

Blog Archive





Popular Posts