Monday, November 24, 2008

Gun Control, New Orleans Style

New Orleans, a long time haven for corrupt liberals, has some very strict gun "control" laws in place. In fact, New Orleans was the first city to file suit against gun manufacturers because of the actions of criminals (something about the manufacturers being responsible for what thugs do). I'm sure that the residents of the below sea-level city by the sea will sleep better at night knowing how safe they are from violence. Gun control curbs violence, right?

Enter a little known element known as the truth: New Orleans is the single most violent city in the nation. This is not my opinion; this is a fact. This is based on the crime data reported to the FBI in 2007.

It has been long known to those that do not base their decisions purely on emotions that gun control does nothing to prevent violence and crime. One only need look at the fine example of Washington, D.C. to see that.

Way to go New Orleans! You make us all proud!


Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Obama Voters

The starstruck reaction of the average Obama voter was, at the very least, entertaining. Seeing first hand how utterly ignorant they are would be entertaining if I could forget that these individuals have placed their messiah in the Oval Office.

Media bias has been quite clear for years now, but this is yet another vivid demonstration of that bias. It's hardly surprising, but it speaks volumes about American voters, and our beloved "mainstream" media.

Friday, October 24, 2008

Texas Executions

The death penalty is alive and well in the great state of Texas. Thank God. Various whiners had put a brief damper on the most efficient state in the death penalty "standings," but Texas has bounced back.

Texas is averaging two per week, with a goal of making up lost ground after the Supreme Court halted all executions that utilized lethal injections. The halt was brief, but just long enough to create a log-jam in Texas. That's getting fixed.

One critic of the increase in the pace of executions, Alvin Kelly, said that, "It's just the way of Texas," and, "They're just killing people." Oh, yeah, Kelly sort of killed a family of three, including a 22 month old baby.

I, for one, applaud Texas for stepping up the pace. Let's clear out ALL of the stagnant death rows across the nation. The inhabitants of them have been found guilty, sentenced to die, and just linger there, wasting our money and time. Get the job done already!

I'm sure that opponents of the death penalty will label this post as offensive. It can't be nearly as offensive as having your family wiped out by one of the monsters that are scheduled to be executed.

Monday, August 25, 2008

Alaskan Stoned Killer Gets Three Years

In 2005, Timothy Wood got high on pot and then got behind the wheel of his Chevy Blazer. He crossed over the center line, and killed 53 year old Diane Bahnson. Blood tests showed that he had THC in his system, but the judge in the case ruled that due to a technical error with the blood test, he could only be convicted of negligent homicide, instead of second degree murder.

The stoner admitted his wrong-doing, and apologized to the family for killing Diane. His guilt is not in question. The judge gave him a slap on the wrist for killing a woman, based on a technical issue.

What in the hell is going on in Alaska?


Saturday, August 23, 2008

Self-deportation shocker

I.C.E., or Immigration and Customs Enforcement, has abandoned its idiotic "self deportation" program, since only eight illegal aliens have taken advantage of it. Apparently, criminals that don't give a damn about the law, or pending judgments against them, aren't eager to go back to the cesspool that they fled.
“The bottom line is, it is not effective,” said Jim Hayes, acting director of ICE's detention and removal operations. “Quite frankly, I think this proves the only method that works is enforcement.”

Well said! At least somebody paid attention to the obvious.

Here's the lowdown on illegal aliens, and their disdain for our sovereignty:

-If their mere existence in our nation is a crime, and they've ignored court orders to turn themselves in, why would they opt to deport themselves? Who's the genius that decided to waste money on this program anyway?

-The social handouts that the left wing of our government have put in place are like a giant feed trough to those that are fleeing cesspool nations south of us. Your tax dollars at work!

-Enforcing existing laws is the only solution to this problem. Passing new laws and calling them "comprehensive," is just a distraction. Build a fence, enforce our sovereign borders, and deport the illegal invaders. Our borders could even become valuable training facilities for our military personnel, while giving our Border Patrol a much needed hand.

"But Lewis, deporting them is not logistically feasible!" Putting a man on the moon is? Assemble some buses and trains, and get these people out of here. Perhaps the billions of tax dollars that they're sucking up in social handouts can fund the project...

Source article

Monday, August 11, 2008

Energy Insanity Editorial

For some time now, we've been getting the shaft in the energy department. Prices at the pump are outrageous, arab nations are giggling so hard that their ribs are sore, and our inept politicians are catering to tinfoil hat wearing whackos like the Sierra Club.

As the whackos come out of the woodwork and claim that drilling for oil is evil and will destroy our planet, where is their outcry when Russia, China and Cuba drill in those same offshore areas that the whackos claim should not be drilled? It's not bad for the planet if other nations drill there, but it's horrible for the planet if we do? I'm sure that those other nations will implement much safer practices when they drill (take a look at China's stance on the environment...pollution in China is like below sea level homes in New Orleans).

The Democrat led legislative branch with the uber-high approval rating (yes, even worse than Bush's rating) has come up with a brilliant strategy. They intend to unveil an 84 billion dollar subsidy for experimental energy sources. Since they've shown themselves to be so skilled at spending our (yes; yours and mine, not their) money, I'm sure we'll see the government buying, or subsidizing, pet rocks, reactors that run on pocket lint, and other, equally idiotic schemes. The Goracal will probably be sponsoring wind powered cars before too much longer...

Congress' next big plan? Tax the hell out of oil companies. I'm not a business major, but if I were a betting man, I'd put my money on those oil companies passing the taxes on to their customers. This will have the effect of...wait for it...INCREASING prices at the pump, not decreasing them. Maybe our enemies have spiked the water supply to the Capitol building with I.Q.-lowering toxins; stranger things have ocurred.

We have enormous oil assets off our coasts and in Alaska. Congress refuses to allow their use by us, but turns a blind eye while many of those assets are being harvested by slant drilling that those fun folks from Russia and China are engaging in. We have the materials and technology to greatly increase our use of nuclear energy for electricity. It has been the safest and cleanest form of energy in many communities for years now. Don't believe it? Look up the industrial fatalities, and cancer rates surrounding nuclear power plants versus fossil fuel power plants.

This is a recurring, and large problem. Our elected, and appointed, tormentors are not doing anything to help matters, and much to hinder things. Increasing taxes, expanding government programs, hindering businesses, catering to environmentalist whackos...sounds like a certain party has shifted into overdrive.

Thursday, August 7, 2008

Small Justice for Compean and Ramos

While our Border Patrol Agents, Compean and Ramos, rot in prison for shooting a drug smuggling invader in the buttocks, the invader (who was repeatedly given immunity to testify against our Agents in a U.S. court) has finally received a bit of punishment for his crimes.

Osvaldo Aldrete-Davila was a repeat offender at the time of the Compean and Ramos trial, a fact that the prosecutor hid from the jury. That particular pinhead, Johnny Sutton, had to keep re-writing the immunity deal for Davila, because Davila kept getting caught with many hundreds of pound of drugs in his stolen vehicles while smuggling the crap into the U.S.

Rep. Dana Rohrbacher (R, CA) had the following choice words describing Sutton's disgusting tactics:

"The fact Sutton's office knew Davila was a multiple offender prior to the Compean and Ramos trial and moved to keep that information from jury in order to punish the good guys for procedural mistakes, is an absolute disgrace."

Rohrbacher nailed it! Many have pointed out that the shooting of Davila was indeed nothing more than a procedural mistake, not a violation of law. Other law enforcement agencies would allow the use of deadly force under the exact same circumstances.

While Ramos and Compean are serving their 11 and 12 year sentences (respectively), Davila was sentenced to 9 1/2 years in a federal prison.
I think that the Border Patrol needs to work on their marksmanship and weapons handling training. Had Ramos and Compean's shooting been more effective, no immunity in the world would have allowed the drug smuggling invader to testify against them. It could have possibly kept two more hard working agents on the force, and saved the taxpayers a heap of money.

Friday, August 1, 2008

FCC Gets One Right

Amazingly enough, the FCC actually made a common sense-based decision, and voted to censure Comcast Corporation for their attempts at copying China's model of internet censorship.

For those that don't know what I'm talking about, just do a news search for Comcast. Comcast has been blocking their customers' access to sites and applications, such as Bit Torrent. Bit Torrent is a file protocol that allows users to share large files over the internet. Comcast claimed that they were trying to protect other customers from "bandwidth hogs." I guess Comcast thinks that their customers are stupid; torrent file exchange software runs in the background, is slower than other internet file exchange protocols, and doesn't use up much bandwidth at all. Comcast was trying to play net nanny, and stop users from sharing audio and video material that might be copyrighted. Oh yeah; they also tried to hide their actions from their customers.

In a remarkable decision, the FCC chose to say, "Sit down Waldo; don't try to do our job for us." Kudos to the FCC for getting one right. Don't start the back slapping yet though; Comcast will probably try another method of protecting their customers from themselves before the dust settles.

Read the Washington Times article here.

UPDATE: I received an email saying the equivelent of, "But Lewis, why do you favor the government interfering in business affairs?" To that person, and others, I say that I am NOT a big fan of the government interfering in business. However, if you read the article, you'll see that the FCC "censured (reprimanded)" Comcast. They also are the reason that Comcast's customers even know what Comcast was up to. In this particular instance, I think that the FCC actually did something worthwhile, vice their usual nanny approach. While I think they're a bloated, useless group, it is indeed refreshing to get our money's worth out of them once in a while.


I find it infinitely amusing, and somewhat disturbing, that liberals will condemn the use of labels and stereotypes out of one side of their mouths, while labeling conservatives as racists, bigots, islamophobes, homophobes, religious zealots, and intolerant, out of the other side of their mouths.

Conservatives usually label liberals as....well...liberals.

Saturday, June 28, 2008

Truth in Media

I've long held the belief that most media outlets are about as trustworthy as the guy that runs the shell game at the carnival. Most news channels, papers, websites, etc, spin stories the way they'd like the "facts" to appear.

Ever marvel at the various articles that use creative headlines to grab your attention, or instill an opinion? Here's one for you: "Boy Decapitated by Batman Ride at Georgia Six Flags." That headline would lead me to believe that the ride itself is inherently dangerous, and some horrible accident befell a passenger...not so. Turns out that the teenager hopped a couple of fences and was subsequently struck by the ride. Get it yet?

That's just the latest drivel coming from the AP. I wonder if they "reutered" some pictures for the story...

Monday, June 16, 2008

Southern Symbols

Which flag do you look at and think, "U. S. Civil War?" I believe most would say the the one on the left. My partner, Lewis, claims that it is not a symbol of the Civil War.

The flag on the right was the actual Confederate Flag. So if the "Rebel Flag" that we easily recognize is not even the Confederate Flag, why all the fuss?

Could it be in the manner that it is displayed? I suppose that if I saw the paint scheme of the General Lee displayed as a prom dress, I might object.

. . . but if that same symbol of southern rebellion was presented in a more tasteful way, I would nod in approval.

The popular argument is that the Rebel Flag is associated with the Civil War, so it symbolizes (maybe even glorifies) slavery. A weak argument.

I do, however have to argue with my partner's claim that the slavery was not the main issue of the Civil War. Spin it anyway you want. Economics? The Southern economy was reliant on the cotton trade, made possible by slave labor. State's rights? The South was arguing for their right to continue the practice of slavery.

So, what was my point? Sorry, I've been in Iraq for a little while now. Maybe I should stop downloading bikini photos.

Friday, June 13, 2008

Illegal Immigration-- Charlie Daniels Style

The below piece was written by Charlie Daniels in April of 2006, amidst the demonstrations perpetrated by illegal immigrants, and those that support them. There are a couple of aspects of this article that are pretty pathetic. Number one: He's right. Number two: Not a damned thing has changed since he wrote it. The original can be found here.

Charlie Daniels is not "politically correct," and he never sugar-coats things. If this rubs you the wrong way, perhaps you should reevaluate your personal definition of "illegal."

Mexican Standoff 04/03/06

I don’t know how everybody else feels about it, but to me, I think Hispanic people in this country, legally or illegally, made a huge public relations mistake with their recent demonstrations.

I don’t blame anybody in the world for wanting to come to the United States of America, as it is a truly wonderful place. But when the first thing you do when you set foot on American soil is illegal, it is flat out wrong and I don’t care how many lala land left-heads come out of the woodwork and start trying to give me sensitivity lessons.

I don’t need sensitivity lessons. In fact, I don’t have anything against Mexicans. I just have something against criminals, and anybody who comes into this country illegally is a criminal, and if you don’t believe it try coming into America from a foreign country without a passport and see how far you get.

What disturbs me about the demonstrations is that it’s tantamount to saying, “I am going to come into your country even if it means breaking your laws and there’s nothing you can do about it.”

It’s an “in your face” action and speaking just for me, I don’t like it one little bit, and if there were a half dozen pairs of gonads in Washington bigger than English peas it wouldn’t be happening.

Where are you, you bunch of lilly livered, pantywaist, forked tongued, sorry excuses for defenders of The Constitution? Have you been drinking the water out of the Potomac again?

And even if you pass a bill on immigration it will probably be so pork laden and watered down that it won’t mean anything anyway. Besides, what good is another law going to do when you won’t enforce the ones on the books now?

And what ever happened to the polls guys? I thought you folks were the quintessential finger wetters. Well you sure ain’t paying any attention to the polls this time because somewhere around eighty percent of Americans want something done about this mess, and mess it is and getting bigger everyday.

This is no longer a problem, it is a dilemma and headed for being a tragedy. Do you honestly think that what happened in France with the Muslims can’t happen here when the businesses who hire these people finally run out of jobs and a few million disillusioned Hispanics take to the streets?

If you, Mr. President, Congressmen and Senators, knuckle under on this and refuse to do something meaningful it means that you care nothing for the kind of country your children and grandchildren will inherit.

But I guess that doesn’t matter as long as you get re-elected.

-Charlie Daniels

Wednesday, June 11, 2008

Flag Burning Emotivism

I debated whether or not to post this, but eventually decided that I'd rather catch a bit of hate mail from the perpetually offended crowd than bite my tongue.

A recent flap in Redding, California over flag burning caused me to ponder the entire significance of flags. Are they sacred? Do they hold some special powers?

A high school principal, who had been debating the disbanding of his school's newspaper, decided to go ahead and do just that after the student editorial staff placed a picture of a burning American flag on page one. Perhaps that was the straw that broke the camel's back. He immediately caught tremendous flak over his stifling of free speech (see the story here). Flags are inanimate objects, and they are nothing special, right?

Since flags, and their destruction, display, etc, are considered free expression that should not be infringed upon, why is there so much uproar over the confederate flag? Many folks in the south still enjoy flying that flag, as it represents (to them) their southern heritage and culture. To a few others, it is "offensive," and even "oppressive." I thought flags were powerless pieces of cloth; is that not the case?

Is there a double standard here? Perish the thought! I'm not from the south, but in my readings and such, I've not come across any credible evidence that the confederate flag was designed and incorporated in order to support or represent slavery. While slavery may have been one of the issues of the Civil War, did every soldier that fought for the Confederacy promote or support slavery?  Hard to say, but to most folks in the South, the battle flag represents the South, period.

While it might be trendy, and even monetarily beneficial (see: Al Sharpton), to claim "victim status," by screaming racism at the drop of a hat, it's certainly getting boring as hell. This whole mess over the confederate flag is over-inflated, and needs to be put to rest. It is indeed only a piece of cloth that represents a certain region of our country, and it's culture. It does not stand for slavery, no matter how much those that blame skin color for their woes would like it to.

Tuesday, June 10, 2008

Stranger in a Strange Land

The cultural differences between Middle Eastern and American society go far beyond religion. It is quite obvious that Islamic beliefs and Christian fundamentals are major factors in our current global conflict. However, I would argue that there is much more involved in why we are struggling to find peace with the Arab world.

The Arabic language is full of rhetoric and repetition. Americans are direct, to the point. We say what we mean and we generally mean what we say. We use a good bit of slang and jargon, but the point is usually made once during communication. Arabic literature and speech, and speech and literature are filled with excessive, repetitive, redundant statements and over explained ideas. Extremes in emotional expression and length of dialog are common in the languages of the Middle East.

The concept of productivity and the importance of time management are completely alien to the Iraqi citizen. The Arabic phrase, In Shallah (As God wills it) is the common answer to most requests involving a deadline. It’s the equivalent of saying, “Maybe,” or, “If I feel like it.”

Ask any American serviceman who has been deployed to Kuwait or Iraq and they can probably provide you with a story or two of bizarre cultural behavior. The list is long, but I mention these few examples because I only recently realized them through my experience working with Iraqi's.

A recommended reading list from U. S. Central Command includes the book, “The Arab Mind,” by Raphael Patai. In it, he gives a literary example of how the Middle Eastern culture views their fellow man.

“I and my brother against my cousins, I and my cousins against the world.”

Can we create a treaty or security agreements between such polar opposite nations? Should we have to compromise against a country we defeated? What do you think when you see Army Commanders kissing a Koran as an apology for a soldier who was just trying to BZO his weapon?

Is our strategy in Iraq creating a safer America or are we just making a futile effort to change a culture that has been around longer than any other civilization in the world?

Monday, June 9, 2008

Gun Control Shocker

An article in The Baltimore Sun has stated the obvious: Gun control does not prevent violence. I quote:
"The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released a study in 2003 admitting that there are no scientific data to prove gun-control laws are effective in preventing violence.

The National Academy of Science agreed a year later in its analysis titled "Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review"

What a shock! Apparently, those evil and scary guns aren't really to blame. It would seem that violent people are actually the problem. That's quite a radical concept (for some).


Saturday, June 7, 2008

Texas Absurdity

It never fails to amaze me that large groups of people will actually subscribe to certain forms of nonsense. What's even more astounding, is that these people will readily reach into their pockets, and pull out whichever "victim card" is most handy at the moment. I'm speaking, of course, about Democrats. Nobody is ever to blame for their own actions; it's always the fault of the oppressive Republicans!

In The Dallas Morning News, there's an interesting article about the outcry of Democrats over an upcoming voter ID bill in the state legislature. The Democrats claim that it will "discriminate against" certain potential victim groups that may be less likely to carry identification with them. I'm not sure who, exactly, is less likely to go conduct official business of some kind without carrying any form of photo ID, but that's their own foolishness.

Republicans in the Texas legislature have argued that the bill will help prevent voter fraud, and stem the tide of illegal immigrants voting in that state's elections. Democrats seem to think that it's their solemn duty to protect the forgetful folks from their own foolishness, however, and are painting the bill as mean spirited and discriminatory. What a hoot!

While Democrats' determination to portray anyone and everyone as a potential victim is impressive, it's still amazing that some people actually believe such nonsense. Granted, most politicians are about as trustworthy as the guy running the carnival shell game, but some seem to stand out more than others.

Tuesday, June 3, 2008

Interesting Quotation

In light of the Democratic choices for the 2008 presidential elections, I thought I'd post a quotation. Since both candidates are openly against the components that are mentioned, I thought it was an appropriate quote. Sleep tight!

"America, is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within." ... Joseph Stalin

Sunday, May 25, 2008

Iraq Perspective

With Memorial Day only 24 hours away (in this part of the world), I thought I'd put a wee bit up about the war in Iraq. Here's a couple of figures that the whiners seem to perpetually overlook:

Who would have thought that the U.S. is actually more dangerous to Americans than Iraq is? I think that somebody actually compared Baghdad to Detroit...and was then embarrassed by the comparison. What a shock.

Have a nice day!

P.S. Enjoy your cookouts, but please remember what this long weekend is all about.

Friday, May 23, 2008

Guns Don't Kill People, I Do!

A car dealership in Butler, Missouri is making waves with their offer to throw in a "Free gun" with the purchase of an automobile. Max Motors' ad campaign has some fine print, but the concept remains: they're offering a gun to go with the car.

I'd like to know why this is a big deal? Why am I reading about this in the news thousands of miles away? If they offered a baseball bat with a car purchase, would that be a big deal?

It's downright shameful that guns have a bit of a negative aura about them in today's society. That's the European influence creeping in. Far too many people can't seem to remember that we left Europe for a reason: Freedom. Now, once again, the influence of Europe is eroding our freedoms. It's now not "chic" to talk about owning a gun (oooh! scary!). Laws in many states inhibit our right to own these simple tools.

Our nation is producing an alarming number of citizens that are afraid of firearms. I'm not sure why that is. They should be more afraid of their own bodies. More people are killed every year by cancer, heart disease, and diabetes than are killed by firearms in this nation. Don't even look at automobiles; they top guns in the fatality department every year too.

Those whose decision-making process is ruled by emotion would like the rest of us to believe that guns are bad. Guns are as bad as shovels, hammers, axes, trucks, or any other tool. Any of those are capable of being used as a deadly weapon. Where's the outrage when a child kills somebody with a car?

All of this hoopla about guns is getting tiresome. I wish the emotional dolts that live in ignorance would move back to their beloved Europe.

Friday, May 16, 2008

The Horror of Truth

I read an interesting article about our President being decried over the discussion of appeasement. Our President, George W. Bush, dared to tell an Israeli audience that terrorists are bad. For that, he was decried as an attacker of Obama...God forbid...

Why? Our President dared to call out those that would appease the terrorists, and laid the cards on the table:
“We have an obligation,” he continued, “to call this what it is: the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.”
GW dared to compare the appeasers of terrorists to the appeasers of,GASP, Nazis! How dare he!?
“Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along,”

I'd like to ask the same of those that compare our President to Hitler. Granted, their comparisons are based solely on emotional leaps to conclusions, but I digress. Why is Bush being bashed for comparing terrorist appeasers to Nazi appeasers?

You can read the entire article here.

Some of the professional victims, and those that enable them, have claimed that our President's words are a direct attack against Obama. What a hoot! I can see it now...a lame duck President goes to Israel to attack a lame candidate...who would have thought?

It's all a moot point, since he's right. Terrorists are bad, those that would appease them are bad, and stating that publicly has, somehow, become bad...I don't get it.

Saturday, May 10, 2008

Quick Notes

Just a couple of details, if you'll allow me. My counterpart, Hans Bret, has recently deployed to Iraq, so he may be slow to post any material on here. Not that either of us have been extremely active in our posting, but you get the point. He does get occasional opportunities to check his email, and peruse the internet briefly, so if you'd like to send him some encouragement, feel free to do so.

A nifty little blog titled The Dick List pointed me toward an interesting article over at, of all places, the Huffington Post. I usually steer clear of that mess, since it's infested with whackos, but this article was actually a breath of fresh air. You can click here to see it. It addresses the absurdity of Islam, and the equal insanity of the west's response to it. I highly recommend it.

Monday, May 5, 2008

Playing Softball With Iran

The New York Times reports that Hezbollah is training terrorist insurgents in Iran, to attack U.S. troops in Iraq. I'm just shocked, shocked I tell you! You can read the article here. I'm not sure if anybody is really surprised about this, but I am wondering why we continue to play softball with Iran. We hem and haw, while they actively support the killing of our troops. We fart around while they strive to build a nuke. Am I the only one that sees this as, well, um, foolish? Perhaps we could send an even clearer sign of weakness to our enemies, but I doubt it.

Writing in the Wall Street Journal, Faoud Ajami has interesting things to say about this situation. He acknowledges that we've pussyfooted around for far too long:
"We tell the Iranians that the military option is "on the table." But three decades of playing cat-and-mouse with American power have emboldened Iran's rulers. We have played by their rules, and always came up second best.

Next door, in Iraq, Iranians played arsonists and firemen at the same time. They could fly under the radar, secure in the belief that the U.S., so deeply engaged there and in Afghanistan, would be reluctant to embark on another military engagement in the lands of Islam."

I love the analogy of "flying under the radar," since that's exactly what our planes should be doing when delivering their clear response (of the 2,000 pound, guided variety) to the imams in Tehran. You can read that article here.

There is no way to tap dance around the fact that Iran is actively supporting the attacks on our troops. They continue to get a pass, and it's frustrating as can be. I'm not sure why we're not hurling cruise missiles at Iran, the way we used to do so with Iraq, but I suspect that it's due to our current posture. We may not be best aligned to conduct large scale military operations against Iran at the moment.

I'm hoping that changes, and changes very soon. Enough is enough. I would like to see clear military pressure being put on Iran. I would like to see us demonstrate the only thing that the inhabitants of that country (and more to the point, their leaders) understand: military might. I don't think that we need to launch a full scale invasion of Iran, but we need to be prepared to, in order to follow up our limited air strikes.

Your thoughts?

Friday, April 25, 2008

Questioning Libya's Credentials

While it may surprise some, Libya does indeed hold a seat on the U.N. Security Council. Now, before you immediately shout, "That's absurd!" look at the reasons behind it. Libya is a sovereign nation, and giving Libya greater legitimacy could curb the influence of terrorist organizations in Libya.

These may sound like good reasons, but isn't Libya a bastion of terrorism? CNS News has an interesting article about this issue, with a twist.
"A day after Libya's deputy envoy compared Israel's actions in the Gaza Strip to those of the Nazis -- sparking a walkout by several ambassadors -- Ibrahim Dabbashi went a step further Thursday, telling reporters that Israel's policies were in fact "worse" than those of the Nazis in their concentration camps."
I'm not sure if Dabbashi is high on drugs, or if he truly expects the rest of the world (excluding Iran and Syria) to buy this stuff. Giving a nation like Libya a spot on the Security Council is like giving Charlie Manson parole, a chain saw, and the key to a nursing home; any guesses as to what he would do?

My favorite part of the article is when a high ranking person that actually possesses a set of intact testicles, Israeli Ambassador to the UN Dan Gillerman, says, "This is what happens when the security council is infiltrated by terrorists." GASP! Did he really say that out loud?

I can't imagine that Dabbashi's antics really come as any surprise to anyone. I'd still like to buy Gillerman a beer.

Friday, April 18, 2008

American Embassy in Iraq

NBC news sensationalized this story about the expense and expanse of the new American Embassy on Iraq. I guess I shouldn't be surprised, but the criticism of the facility seems to parallel the issue of our military presence.

The State Department and the Department of the Defense are two different entities. There are over 170 U.S. Embassies in foreign countries and yes, they are expensive to build and operate. We dropped over $300 million in the late 80's on our embassy in Moscow.

Is it really unreasonable to have a gym, a pool, and housing for a closed compound that will be a home to 600 people?

Reporter Andrea Mitchell states " makes it look like the US will be occupying Baghdad forever." Occupying? Oh Andrea, The US is NOT occupying Iraq. Can someone tell NBC that the occupation of Iraq ended in June 2004? Yes we still have a large military presence there, but if you are going to report on it, get your facts straight.

Supreme Court Exercises Common Sense In Death Penalty Ruling

Apparently, death can potentially be painful. Amazingly enough, our Constitution does not mandate that executions (gasp...death penalty!) be completely painless. Despite the efforts of the more sensitive folks, the Supreme Court has ruled that lethal injection is okie dokie:
"The Supreme Court yesterday upheld Kentucky's use of lethal injections for death-row inmates in a 7-2 vote, describing the process as "more humane" and ending a national halt on executions.

Opponents had argued that the three drugs used to render an inmate unconscious, then paralyze him and finally induce a heart attack — sodium pentothal, pancuronium bromide and potassium chloride — constituted cruel and unusual punishment if not properly administered. The drugs have been used in more than 1,000 lethal injections.

Justice Ginsburg, in writing the minority opinion, said it was "undisputed" that the second and third drugs used in Kentucky's lethal injection protocol would cause "a conscious inmate to suffer excruciating pain" if not properly administered."

Well, let us hope that Ginsburg's grasps at straws are unfounded, and that no inmate that has been sentenced to death suffers an improperly administered dose of pain killers. That would break my heart! I'm still trying to figure out why Ginsburg is discussing the effects of the drug on a conscious inmate...isn't that what the first drug is for? Silly me.

This debate could go on for centuries. Executions do indeed get botched from time to time. This is not a new concept. Making death completely painless is not the solution to this problem. The Constitution doesn't guarantee painless execution as it is. Standardizing executions is what we truly need. We need to administer executions by a mechanical means that can be regulated and standardized (and publicized). If the death penalty was completely painless, how great of a deterrent would it be? Let's not get started on the lack of deterrent effect due to long times spent on "death row." That's another post in itself.


Thursday, April 17, 2008

Imaginary Amendments

The Constitution of the United States of America madates a separation of church and state, right? Wrong! The First Amendment to the Constitution states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise therof." Nowhere does it state that a coach who bows his head during his athletes' student led prayers is in violation of anything:
"A federal appeals court ruled a New Jersey high school football coach who bowed his head while students on his team led prayer broke the law. The school concluded while it could not infringe on the students' constitutionally protected right to pray, it could limit the actions of coaches, who are public employees and whose participation allegedly would violate "the separation of church and state."

What in the world does a high school coach bowing his head have to do with Congress passing laws? Absolutely nothing. Once again, a chosen few are grasping at straws in a feeble attempt to protect us from ourselves. How pathetic.


Saturday, April 12, 2008

Stupidity On a Grand Scale

Apparently, there are more important things in life than raising a child with a strong moral, which gang should that child "claim" when they learn to walk and shoot.

I was unsure of the seriousness of the article when I saw the headline but, remarkably, it was a real story. A couple was actually fighting over which gang their child would eventually join. The "father" is a member of the "Westside Ballers," while the alleged mother is a member of the "Crips." How quaint.

The father ended up storming into the mother's place of employment and causing a scene (and some damage to property) and was later arrested. I'm still wondering what the proper etiquette is for rival gang arguments, which caliber of weapon is most appropriate, etc.

I've heard it said in the past that we should require licensing in order to breed; these two people are a strong argument in favor of that idea. Perhaps we'll luck out, and these two will manage to get themselves added to the short list for the Darwin Awards before they can breed any more.

You can read the full article here.

Friday, April 11, 2008

You're paying the bill

Both the Star Tribune and 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS published a story about Tarek ibn Ziyad Academy, or TIZA.

Azad Zaman is a Muslim Imam, and the executive director of the school. The Minnesota school is sponsored by the California based organization, Islamic Relief USA. TIZA receives state and federal funding while allegedly functioning as an Islamic school. Zaman claims that the school does not violate state or federal regulations concerning separation of church and state.

"The questions came after substitute teacher Amanda Getz taught at TIZA last month and told the Star Tribune about things she observed that day that shocked her.

"I've been in a lot of schools and I've never been in a school where they had washing rituals, or they had prayer, or where they had a room where you had to take your shoes off," Getz said.

"It is most likely that this substitute teacher was sadly mistaken," said Zaman.

"We're required under the federal guidelines to allow students to pray when they wish to do so. And as Muslim students, they're allowed to pray around 1:30 p.m., so we allow them to do that," Zaman explained.

"TIZA requires all students to learn Arabic as a second language, as well as English."

"State law requires the school to fly an American flag during school hours, however no flag flies outside of TIZA Academy."

"Zaman told 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS he didn’t know how to work the flagpole."

I don't really want to pay the taxes to support legitimate public schools. I certainly don't want to pay for the operating expenses of an Islamic mosque.

Thursday, April 10, 2008

Does Anybody Care About the Olympics Anymore?

It's no surprise that countless groups are in an uproar over the lack of human rights in China and Tibet. I'm not sure why they appear surprised that a far left government doesn't embrace human rights, but I digress...The Olympic games are slated to be held in China, and the professional victims are nearly up in arms over it.

San Francisco, that bastion of freedom (just ask the Marines), had to have police officers escort the runners carrying the Olympic torch; protesters made it too dangerous for the runners. Protesters in Paris (yes, French people actually stood up for something) caused the torch to actually be extinguished. Hillary has even asked our President to boycott the opening ceremony.

All I can do is ask, "Why?" What possible good do these protesters think they are doing by soiling an age old gathering of amateur athletes? The debacle of Olympic boycotts should have taught us a lesson (as should the rest of Carter's presidency). Apparently, some groups are very slow learners. The only thing that Olympic boycotts accomplish is skewing the competition. Aside from that, it accomplishes absolutely nothing.

All of the people that are readily making asses of themselves over the Olympics will look back on this and, unless they're too high on drugs to think clearly, realize that they wasted their time and efforts. Cooler heads will prevail and, thankfully, allow our athletes to compete in the Olympic Games. Does anyone even care about the games anymore? These protesters need to realize that their beef is with the Olympic Committee, and not the runners carrying the torch.

Tuesday, April 8, 2008

Hyper-sensitivity Vs. Common Sense

The Chicago Sun Times has an interesting article (get it here) about one of Obama's delegates being asked to "step down." Linda Ramirez-Sliwinski has been asked to step down from her post as one of Obama's delegates over a remark that she made to her neighbor's children.

When Ramirez-Sliwinski looked out of her window and saw her neighbor's two children playing high in a tree, she feared for their safety. Instead of ignoring it, she went outside and told them to,"quit playing in the tree like monkeys." What was so awful about that? The neighbor and her children are....gasp!...African-American!

Here's a tasty tidbit from the article:
"'The tree was not on Ramirez-Sliwinski's property," Carpentersville Police Commander Michael Kilbourne said. "Linda Ramirez-Sliwinski said she saw the kids playing in the tree and didn't want them falling out of the tree and getting hurt. She said she calls her own grandchildren 'monkeys,' " Kilbourne said."

Police? Police? Why on earth were the police involved? This is the most asinine situation that ever made the news-- yet another prime example of someone hoping and searching for something to potentially be offended about. Ramirez-Sliwinski was given a citation for disorderly conduct. I hope she learned her lesson. Next time, if those that she is concerned about are easily offended (or their idiotic parents are), leave them be and let them fall!

I'm From the Government, and I'm Here to Help

To some, those words would sound comforting, for some strange reason. That should be Hillary's campaign slogan. She's already made it clear that she'll do everything in her power to repeal Bush's tax cuts. We all know that those tax cuts only benefit the rich (like me)!

The Wall Street Journal had an interesting piece (see it here) regarding the Clintons and taxes. It describes how the Clintons not only made almost 110 million dollars over the last eight years, but how their "charitable" contributions (and tax deductions) were mostly to Clinton run charities (that haven't paid out much money at all).

Hillary was quoted as saying, "We didn't ask for George Bush's tax cuts. We didn't want them, and we didn't need them," and with tax breaks like theirs, they indeed didn't need them.

In the "pot calling the kettle black" department, the article points out how Hillary has been crying out against the wealthy ever since she began her Presidential bid. With the Clintons being in the top %.01 of America's wealthy, they "know of whom they speak."

The end of the article makes a keen suggestion when discussing Hillary's plan to repeal the tax cuts:
"If the former first lady feels so strongly that she should pay more taxes, we suggest she lay off the middle class and instead write a personal check to the U.S. Treasury for the difference between the Clinton and Bush tax rates. She and her husband can afford it."

Monday, April 7, 2008

Let's Have a War

Our great leaders of America have long picked a variety of topics to wage war on. The War on Poverty, The War on Crime, The War on Drugs. Now we have the War on Terror. What a ridiculous little tagline to incite fear and political policy support from the public.

Isn't it obvious that the perpetrators of 9/11 are our enemies?

Haven't we always fought against militant groups that used violence to forward their ideological goals?

I don't need a scary title to remind me that the United States has battles to fight. I don't need a sexy mantra to coerce me to serve my country.

Unfortunately, when the fear and excitement ensued by the word "terror" fades, leaders will need to give it a new name. What's next on the list to keep Americans nervous?

Hollywood Ignorance

Does ignorance plague Hollywood? It would seem that when it comes to politics and foreign affairs, it's either ignorance or insanity.

Thor Halvorssen has an interesting article ( available here ) that discusses some Hollywood icons' seemingly insane love affair with Hugo Chavez. Of particular curiosity is the alleged reasoning of actor Sean Penn. Halvorssen writes:

"I assumed Penn was probably ignorant about the human rights record in Venezuela in that he broke off relations with the San Francisco Chronicle in mid-January calling them a "lamebrain paper" over their use of the word "dictator" to describe Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. "

Dictator seems to be an apt word, given Chavez's tactics, including the forceful subduing of any who speak against his socialist mantras. When questioned about his blind support of Chavez, Penn reacted in true Hollywood fasion:

"On Oscar night Penn and I [Halvorssen] had an unpleasant exchange about the political prisoners of the Chavez government which he ended by walking away and repeating, like a mantra, the name of one of the evening’s Academy Award recipients, “Daniel Day-Lewis,” over and over again in what seemed like the equivalent of a child putting his hands over his ears and belting “la-la-la-la-la-la! I can’t hear you!” Undaunted, I scribbled a note inviting him to learn more about the appalling stories of Venezuelan dissidents in prison for doing nothing but criticizing the government. The invitation is still open."

While Penn isn't the only curiously misguided person in Hollywood, he does seem to be the most entertaining, and I'm not talking about his movie performances. What makes Hollywood such a bastion of cluelessness? I believe that it's mostly due to the fantasy lives that most actors, actresses, and successful directors live. Many of the Hollywood elite are raised as wealthy, or at least very well off, children, and grew up in households that than conservative (think 1960's era, and southern California). Upon making their own way in Hollywood, they became grossly wealthy by continuously playing fictional roles (aka: lying). I suspect that many of them have merely lost touch with reality. They've grown incredibly rich, while, in most cases, remaining mostly uneducated and ignorant in regards to politics and foreign affairs.

It's absurd to assume that actors and actresses, who have spent the majority of their adult lives submersed in the fantasy world of Hollywood, could have much to offer in terms of astute political commentary. Of course, this is not completely true, but seems to be more of the norm than an exception.

Sean Penn, you need to turn up the voltage on those shock treatments buddy; they're not working.

Fitna Parts One and Two

This is the movie by Geert Wilders that has Muslims in an uproar. It dares to...wait for it...point out what the Koran says! How awful! Actually, it is quite awful; see for yourself. It also has footage of Muslims stating their goals very clearly...goals that the good folks at CAIR will readily deny (as will most Democrats that want to "establish dialog" with the Muslim community)

Part One

Part Two