Monday, January 31, 2005
Proud of My President
This made me grin ear to ear!
"January 30, 2005 -- BAGHDAD — The man replacing the mayor of Baghdad — who was assassinated for his pro-American loyalties — says he is not worried about his ties to Washington.
In fact, he'd like to erect a monument to honor President Bush in the middle of the city.
"We will build a statue for Bush," said Ali Fadel, the former provincial council chairman. "He is the symbol of freedom."
If that didn't put sKerry and his bloated buddy Kennedy's panties in a wad, nothing will! Ya gotta love it!
We Were Right About Iraq!
Are sKerry's comments about Iraq's election following the same formula as he and others of his ilk used to get us out of Viet Nam? Well, John F'ing sKerry, Viet Nam was mishandled by your dumocrap president LBJ, it was begun with good intentions by another of your donk presidents', JFK. The difference with then and now is the outcome. This time we won, sKerry. This time the people of Iraq have won, and have voted, and are welcoming democracy in great numbers! Unlike your commie buddies' triumph over our best efforts in Nam. They only won because we gave up, partly due to your deceptive efforts. Well, sKerry, this time we're NOT GIVING UP! The will of the people is not going to give up this time. We have the internet, and we don't believe your garbage anymore.
Where We Went Wrong
Terrorism has flourished like a weed that goes untended. It went untended on President Reagan's watch. I learned part of the reason it went untended while watching Geraldo on Fox News interview Reagan's Asst. SecDef Korb. This dork still doesn't get why we are in the ME! No wonder he gave Reagan the kind of advice he did. It must have gone something like this, "Ignore them, it'll [terrorism] go away." Well Mr. Korb, you were wrong then, and you're wrong now. Hell, you were even wrong before the election! Were you hoping no one remembered this interview, Mr. Korb?
"And the Iraqi Governing Council doesn't want to have sovereignty until when?
The Council would like to have sovereignty now. But the members cannot agree on who should be in charge. They rotate the presidency now. They don't want to write a constitution themselves because of the various different viewpoints. They're afraid it would not have much legitimacy if it is not done by elected people. [They were right, Mr. Korb. No one would have given credence to a document written by unelected representatives.]
There is, of course, some merit in that argument.
There is. The problem you face is that we are trying to do this too quickly. You cannot go in and completely change a society in a year. It just cannot be done. We should have known that before we went in. We didn't think it would be this difficult. We thought we'd be greeted as liberators, and that the people would take charge of their own security and go ahead and begin the transition to democracy. They don't have the security situation under control yet. So it is very hard to do very much of anything." [Tell that to the Iraqi people who voted yesterday, Mr. Korb. Wrong again!]
Of course, President Bush #41 allowed the weeds to grow as well. In December 1988, a passenger jet, Pan Am Flight 103 was blown up over Scotland. As Ann Coulter states in her book, "How to Talk to a Liberal (if you must)", President-elect George Bush claimed he would continue Reagan's policy of retaliating against terrorism and , but did not." Reagan had retaliated to other incidents, including capturing the hijackers of the Achille Lauro, and later bombed Qadafi's palace in retaliation. Ann goes on to say, "Without Reagan to gin her up, even Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher went wobly, saying there would be no revenge for the bombing." Apparently the go-ahead was issued with impunity, as Saddam invaded Kuwait in 1990.
As our President knows, you can't ignore terrorism, and perhaps you can't completely eradicate it, but you can revolutionize and democratize the breeding grounds of terrorism. With a free market system, and the ability to dictate the conditions of their own futures, where terrorism is now breeding, it will soon wither and die as a weed would do, with the right kind of herbicide. Our military is the pesticide for terrorists.
Sunday, January 30, 2005
Congratulations, Courageous Iraqis
On this day, their first free election in decades, the brave Iraqi people are turning out in droves to cast their ballot freely! They were told that they would be killed if they voted, yet they are braving the suicide bombers to vote their choices....yes CHOICES! No more will they have ONE name on the ballot with a yes or no box, and the "yes" pre-marked, being handed to them. Our friend, Alaa, at The Mesopotamian, is proud of his people, and grateful to the American people for our own sacrifice,
"My condolences to the Great American people for the tragic recent losses of soldiers. The blood of Iraqis and Americans is being shed on the soil of Mesopotamia; a baptism with blood. A baptism of a lasting friendship and alliance, for many years to come, through thick and thin, we shall never forget the brave soldiers fallen while defending our freedom and future."
Sam, at Hammorabi, is celebrating too! Sam has a troll who posts comments on his site, who apparently is a victim of the BBC's brainwashing. RobinH writes, "You think this election will make a difference? How can it be democratic when it is secret who you vote for?Don't be too optimistic about the relevance and consequences of this election!" Poor Sam must suffer such fools, so the rest of us can wish him well. Thank goodness Sam has "truth", a Kurdish commenter. He/she (?) is giving a terrific blow by blow of what is happening in Iraq. He reports on one reporter, telling us, "One of the Arab Sat reporter shocked said to see people turning out to vote in the al-Yarmok as this area considered hot spot ,it is strange thing .........you are strange not the thing !wait and see !" Truth likes making fun of naysayers!
Interestingly, another commenter pointed his fellow commenters to a report that the Beebs (BBC) is retracting and apologizing for some of it's erroneous reporting here. Could it be that Iraq's health minister "outing" them had anything to do with their apology? MSM just can't get away with anything anymore!
"Iraq's health minister said the BBC misinterpreted the statistics it had received and had ignored statements from the ministry clarifying the figures."
Checking The Jerusalem Post, one sees a hopeful sign in the headline, yet the story is more about Sunni/Shi'ia concerns, than optimism. I have learned from the multitude of Iraqi bloggers that I read, that Iraq is, and has always been, primarily secular. Though the Shi'ia are the majority, they are often married to Sunnis, or are otherwise related. Unlike other ME countries, they don't see the world as being either/or, but rather that they are simply Iraqis. This gives me hope that they will have a secular administration which will leave religion where it belongs, in mosques, churches and temples.
You can rest assured, Damascus and Cairo are nervous, and the House of Saud is rethinking its situation. We'd rather buy our oil from a secular democracy, than from a despotic theocracy.
Congratulations, Iraq. [For a round-up of activites, emotions, reactions to the election, check out Jeff's blog.]
Thank you, Mr. President, for your clarity of vision & purpose.
When Clinton was in the White House, social security was in crisis, but somehow because we have a Republican in the White House, it's no longer a crisis, according to lefty Paul Krugman.
"President Bush's claim that we must privatize Social Security to avert an imminent crisis has evidently fallen flat. So now he's playing the race card. "
A couple of points here, Mr. Krugman: a) The president never said the crisis was imminent. He said it is inevitable. One of the things you folks on the left refuse to give him credit for, is that he is not a president like your buddy Clinton, who talks a big talk, but doesn't actually tackle the hard work for fear of being unpopular. Social Security has a long term problem, and it's going to take guts to fix it, and b) It is a fact that life span numbers support the fact that a black man will live to receive less social security than a white man, and as it currently stands, his family will not receive the fruits of his labor because it is not inheritable. The President's plan would allow the family to inherit the savings portion. This plan is already being used by federal employees, but you lefties refuse to admit it! The race card is something you on the left recognize, because you beat us GOP types with that club all the time.
You use a federal government employee to prove your point? Hmmmm. Wonder which side he's on?
"Let's start with the facts. Mr. Bush's argument goes back at least seven years, to a report issued by the Heritage Foundation - a report so badly misleading that the deputy chief actuary (now the chief actuary) of the Social Security Administration wrote a memo pointing out "major errors in the methodology." That's actuary-speak for "damned lies."
In fact, the actuary said, "careful research reflecting actual work histories for workers by race indicate that the nonwhite population actually enjoys the same or better expected rates of return from Social Security" as whites."
The problem with that argument is not just that the actuary never showed where those Heritage Foundation numbers were wrong, but asserted "careful research", while never showing said research. Mr. Krugman, the Heritage Foundation backed up their research with numbers. Where are yours, or your federal government union employee, the actuary's number?
Krugman goes on to assert;
"The persistent gap in life expectancy between African-Americans and whites is one measure of the deep inequalities that remain in our society - including highly unequal access to good-quality health care. We ought to be trying to diminish that gap, especially given the fact that black infants are two and half times as likely as white babies to die in their first year." [emphasis mine]
This is the one argument that really makes me crazy. They love to blame this sort of thing on the evil right for not wanting to continue to throw good money after bad into welfare, rather than to blame the failure of the welfare state that tore apart black families. The policies of the left are directly responsible! For decades they have been treating the inner-city problems by saying every election cycle "we'll take care of you". When President Bush calls this soft racism, he is dead on RIGHT! And guess who agrees with him? Bill Cosby! Of course, the left does not appreciate having their soft racism pointed out to them,
"These are the acts of a true philanthropist. But the Springfield initiative has aroused what can only be called the feudal mentality of several politicians.
"There is a protocol in dealing with a community you're not part of, and in this case, it was ignored, and that's an insult to my community," said Rep. Benjamin Swan (D.-Springfield). "We want Bill Cosby to understand that he cannot simply waltz into a community and say fancy words about remedying our problems," opined City Councilor Bud Williams and School Committee member Marjorie Hurst."
All of this is really right out of Ann Coulter's book, "How to Talk To A Liberal (If You Must)",
"At a loss whenever anyone argues back, liberals have a number of strategems to prevent conservatives from talking. They shout conservatives down (a la Mr. Williams), unplug reports' microphones; edit conservatives' answers (a al the actuary and Krugman)...."
No wonder the left is scared spitless of blogs and talk radio, not to mention Ann Coulter.
Saturday, January 29, 2005
God Was Watching
Tragedies, be they accidents or maliciously caused, always seem to have stories worth telling.
On Second Thought
I may have to watch the Oscars after all, just to see these!
Friday, January 28, 2005
Things in Iraq
Laura Ingraham introduced her listeners to a new blog I'd not known about; Lone Star Times. One of the contributors to this site was on the phone with Laura, from IRAQ! This intrepid soul, Edd Hendee, has lots to say about the truth of what is happening in Iraq.
"Col. Miller had told me of one thug with an AK47 was shooting while holding a child in front of him as a shield. The Marines took care of that one in a typically effective way – 2 snipers put this plan together in seconds – the first shot the wall next to him which startled him and he dropped the child. The second sniper put a round between his eyes. Marines love good shooting as they are all riflemen.
More stories from a tank commander who told of the insurgent thugs putting a small child in the back of a booby trapped car. The cries of the child did attract the Marines but they efficiently cleared the vehicle and were protected when it was set off and vaporized the “bait”. The Marines were unhurt.
The nature of this enemy has been revealed to me by countless first hand accounts from Marines who were there. You would have to TRY not to report those facts for them to be omitted; I’ll leave you to your own conclusion. When I left Houston with a message from Joe Reynolds for the 1/23 Marines he said, “Good luck….and good hunting.” Joe has been there and understands the mission. We have begun to understand the enemy."
Keywords here, for me, are "TRY not to report those facts for them to be omitted". You mean like the reprehensible FAT (they're both reprehensible) Massassachusetts (sic) senator's tirade? [I cannot imagine that the people of the State of Massachusetts are not embarrassed by this traitor, and their continued voting record that returns this disgrace to office! He should be brought up on charges.] Why should any of us in the blogosphere be surprised by the agenda of the MSM and the left? Of course they are not going to let us know the truth about the evil ones that the fat slob dares to stand up and crow in defense of, to any audience who will listen.
The idea that no one has come out against the tirade of Kennedy is worrisome to me. Is the Democrat party that berift of decency? How would this Marine appreciate their cowardice? As for Senate leadership, someone should move to censor this piece of garbage.
The good news? I found another blog with it's finger on the pulse of truth. All in all, a very good day.
If you have any doubt as to Shrillary's intent to run for election in 2008, google "Hillary Clinton". You will come up with, at the very least, 1,810,000 hits. The first is her senate website, the second is her biography via the White House site, by virtue (loosely used in this sense) of her having been first lady (ick). But then you'll come on hillary.org, hillary2000.org, which is undergoing "work", friendsof hillary.com, etc.
That was not my first clue. That came in my earlier post about her softening her position on abortion. When all the gasps of her faithful were sounded, she of course returned to her original position to reassure her base, you'll note.
However, let's not overlook her '06 re-election bid for the Senate seat she currently holds. Most observers would tell you that she's a virtual shoe-in, but she may have a bit of a race on her hands if Westchester County District Attorney Jeanine Pirro decides to run against her.
"This wouldn't be just a battle," longtime Pirro friend and Westchester radio station owner Bill O'Shaughnessy told the Daily News. "It would be a catfight, and my money would be on Jeanine."
"There'll be more interest in this than in 'Desperate Housewives,'" he added."
This should be fun to watch. Of course we cannot discount the donks' ability to stuff their ballot boxes, but if she can't hold on to her current seat, she'll find it more difficult to justify receiving the nod for presidential candidate of her party.
A Word About The GOP's Version of Zell Miller
Christy Todd-Whitman has released her Bush-bash book just as the President is being sworn in. Patrick Ruffini has some observations about her book that should keep you from wasting your hard earned dollars on it.
Wednesday, January 26, 2005
Homespun Bloggers' Question of the Week X
I was reluctant, at first glance, to join in this week's question at Homespun Bloggers, but was shamed into it by reading The Redhunter, and also felt in need of lighter fare by my previous post. This weeks question is;
"I've notice that a seemingly large proportion of the blogosphere is composed of "cat bloggers." What are the political parties your cats belong to, and how did you derive their determination? Please reply for each cat, with examples. If you do not own a cat, could you post on how you think cats determine their political affiliations (purely speculative, I know), or why cat owners are such nuts for their cats?
Dog owners: You know dogs are either Greens or Whigs. Please explain the Greenness or Whiggery of your dog(s)."
The first portion of the question I would have to answer in the past tense, as I currently do not house (notice I didn't say "own") a cat. I am, however dictated to by a Chinese Pug. The Munchkin, as he is known, is obviously a lib. He insists on spending the preponderance of the day sprawled on my lap, or being stroked by my husband as he watches the news. Sometimes he will find a sun spot to lounge in. When we leave him on his own, he redefines "separation anxiety" with screams that scare the neighbors. To avoid being turned in to the authorities for cruelty to animals, we generally put his "condo" into the car, and include him in our travels. When we cannot take him, he stays at Rob Carey's Pet Resort. Did I mention they have suites with color tvs, four poster beds, and their own pool in their own yard?
As evening draws near, and we are preparing our cocktails, he takes that as a signal to make himself known to the world, having slept his requisite 23 hours. As we open the door for him to go out to protest to the world, his paranoia surfaces. He begins by threatening the door...meaning he snaps at it as though it were a conservative who is restraining his egress. As the door shuts, he races to see who else might want to disagree with him. First he goes to the edge of the patio and watches the street. As soon as a car passes, he barks ferociously at it for having the audacity to waste gasoline! Once his general protest is over, in about 20 minutes time, his "work" for the day is over. He again wants the lap (anyones' lap will do) to repose on.
Maybe I should consider a cat instead.
A Word About Suicide
I know a thing or two about the effects of suicide. My father committed suicide when he was only 49. My husband's wife (before me) committed suicide. I have had two close friends who shot themselves. One thing I know about suicide, is that it is the most selfish act one human being can perform. The pain and suffering of anyone who knew the perpetrator, or loved them, is something from which one never recovers.
I remember reading a book by Dr. Loehr and his wife, Grace Wittenberger-Loehr years ago. She is purportedly a psychic who could read past lives, and could communicate with the deceased. Dr. Loehr had some credibility with me, having learned he is both a biologist and a doctor of divinity, and had written a book which was lauded in both the religious and scientific communities as being "scientific proof that there really is a power to prayer". As I remember, the book was entitled "Life After Death". It made the case that one who commits suicide was not expected on "the other side", and was doomed to wander in a fog-like condition until their ordained time came, or until their loved ones prayed for their way to be "lighted into the next realm". It's been many years since I read the book, but it really did stick with me, because I read it shortly before my father committed suicide. I remember dropping the phone and dropping to my knees and praying that he see the Christ Light.
Having said that, I will comment of the horrendous accident that happened in Glendale, CA today. The individual who wanted to commit suicide, and parked his car on the tracks was the epitomy of how selfish is one who contemplates suicide. He left the car, but did not remove it from the tracks, and is now charged with the deaths of 10 humans who more than likely never had the thought of suicide in their heads! My prayers go out to those families.
And I won't forget the 31 brave Marines who died in an apparently weather-related tragic crash in Iraq today. They and their families are in my prayers as well.
Where's The Outrage?
I have spent two hours this morning trying to find a transcript of Klan Kleagle Byrd's speech at yesterday's hearing on Dr. Condoleeza Rice's confirmation. Nothing yet, but someone HAS to get out there and find it, because the MSM isn't going to tell folks about the "nigger" passages of that speech. I heard it yesterday, and I want the entire context. My memory of it is he said something about "I've known lots of white niggers in my time, too." Nothing on the news coverage, yet if the "n" word had been used by a Republican (not going to happen), it would have been screamed from every news outlet for the next MONTH!
What the Senators Boxer, Kennedy, and Byrd have said about this woman is shameful, and is going to cost them some black votes in '06, mark my words!
You have to ask yourself, "why would they treat her like that?" Why? For campaign contributions. For face time on the news. For the chance to beat on the Bush administration;
"Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) took her opposition to Condoleezza Rice to a new front: She has used it in a fundraising pitch to Democratic donors. The pitch went out Tuesday evening.
On behalf of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, Boxer referred to Rice’s “misleading statements leading up to the war in Iraq and beyond,” and implored donors to “put the brakes on four more years of misdirection in Iraq and reckless policies at home” by helping elect more Democrats next year."
The President and Dr. Rice let them continue to make themselves transparent to the American people, and quietly smile. They know that the donk's continued lunacy will cost them at the polls in November of 2006.
Tuesday, January 25, 2005
Shrillary the Chameleon = Warning!
Senator Clinton is at it again!
"Clinton, in a speech to about 1,000 abortion rights supporters at the state Capitol, firmly restated her support for Roe v. Wade.
But then she offered warm words to opponents of abortion and said that faith and organized religion were the "primary" reasons teenagers abstained from sexual relations. "
I cannot let her blend in, I've got to "out her" every chance I get!
UPDATE: Want to hear the rest of the story? After she offered the above, causing some in the audience to gasp, she went on to blame the rise of 8 states' abortion numbers on...who else? President Bush, of course! That got her audience back on her side.
"Speaking at a pro-abortion rally in Washington attended by about 1,000 abortion advocates, while hundreds of thousands of pro-lifers marched to protest abortion, the wife of the president who vetoed a ban on partial-birth abortion charged that President Bush has caused an increase in abortions because he is not fully funding family planning programs."
It couldn't be, Shrillary, the 8 years you and your partner spent in the White House, and trying to make everyone believe "oral sex" was not really sex, could it? Could it be the general lax morality you and others of your ilk have pushed on the American public for decades, could it? Putting more money into a fund for family planning does not give parents back the right to teach their children their moral values which your public school program turns around and undoes, Senator Clinton.
Did you notice the part of that quote that said,
" about 1,000 abortion advocates, while hundreds of thousands of pro-lifers marched to protest abortion"
As a pal of mine said the other day, "Even a dog would learn something by this time." And they keep saying we're the dumb hicks!
The War on Terror
The next time someone tells you the President "made up this war", show them this;
''It is vital that we take every possible action ourselves and in concert with other nations designed to assure against acts of terrorism,'' Nixon wrote in asking his secretary of state, William Rogers, to oversee the task force.
''It is equally important that we be prepared to act quickly and effectively in the event that, despite all efforts at prevention, an act of terrorism occurs involving the United States, either at home or abroad,'' the president said."
Dating back as far as 1972! Surprise, surprise; it was the GOP who realized it then, too! It's about time we faced the challenge! Thank God we have a president who is willing to face it.
Monday, January 24, 2005
Not In Crisis?
Am I the only one who is sick and tired of people saying that Social Security is not "in crisis"? Even George Will, a sometime conservative working for ABC, and a syndicated columnist, told Laura Ingraham this morning, that the program was "not in crisis". Anyone who has been paying attention knows that Social Security is in long-term trouble. So wait a minute, should we wait until it IS in crisis to fix it? I am grateful that we have a president who is willing to bite the bullet and do something about it.
In my own case, if I had to count on it for my livelihood, I'd starve to death. I was a stay-at-home mom and spent many years self-employed, to enjoy much in the way of benefits from it. If I had had the money that I DID pay into the system, and I had been able to invest it, I would be living in comparative luxury for the rest of my days. The smart ones of my generation realized that years ago, and planned accordingly.
Again, I will remind you of the dirty little secret the donks do not want us to know: The feds, i.e., federal employees, already have a working version of what President Bush is proposing! And they LOVE IT! They are making money off the fruits of their labors, and paying into the system. The beauty of it is that the invested portion, a percentage of the FICA, is inheritable by your family. For those who do not live to see a dime from social security, their families will have the benefit of the program to sustain them. Social security is not an inheritable program.
The shame of this topic is that the donks see this issue as their ticket back into power!
"Democratic pollster Mark Penn opened his Georgetown home on Inauguration Day to an informal meeting of the party in exile, including Sen. Hillary Clinton and her husband, the former president. The consensus among partygoers was that Democrats were doing better at undermining the Bush Social Security plan than Republicans had been at this stage in tearing down the Clintons' 1993 attempt to re-engineer American health insurance. "This could be the comeback battle in which Democrats recover both their souls and their political energy," writes liberal columnist Robert Kuttner. "They could hand Bush a rare, humiliating defeat that breaks his winning streak and exposes Republican divisions." (Emphasis mine)
Not if I have MY WAY! The donks cannot be allowed to win this one! I want my kids to have the ability to access this program! Workers in today's market need the president's program. I don't care how old they are, I'm still a MOM, and I will be among the bloggers that make LOUD NOISES about this issue! OFTEN!
UPDATE: While the donks scream "not in crisis", let's take a look at what Slick Willie had to say "back in the day"! From his 1999 "State of the Union" address, he said the following:
"Our fiscal discipline gives us an unsurpassed opportunity to address a remarkable new challenge -- the aging of America. With the number of elderly Americans set to double by 2030, the baby boom will become a senior boom. So first, and above all, we must save Social Security for the 21st century.
Early in this century, being old meant being poor. When President Roosevelt created Social Security, thousands wrote to thank him for eliminating what one woman called the "stark terror of penniless, helpless old age." Even today, without Social Security, half our nation's elderly would be forced into poverty.
Today, Social Security is strong. But by 2013, payroll taxes will no longer be sufficient to cover monthly payments. By 2032, the trust fund will be exhausted and Social Security will be unable to pay the full benefits older Americans have been promised. "
So what is the difference in the MSM coverage then, and now? Clinton was a democrat.
Sunday, January 23, 2005
A Must Read!
After a comment by a reader of Dagney's Rant, I was moved when I found this article.
"Can America free the whole world? Perhaps not all at once, and certainly not by force. Force is useful for combatting excrescences of force: for bringing down specific tyrannies, for visiting justice upon those who have struck the innocent, and for undoing a "clear and present danger" before it can reap a deadly harvest. In other venues, example is a more potent and incisive tool. We have plenty of that, too. "
The entire piece is recommended reading to everyone. It's quite an eye-opening and thought-provoking read. (hat tip: Bunker Mulligan)
It really made you sit up, and take notice to what Michael's comment had to say from my last post;
"Hmmmm... yeah, like they scrapped the slightest notion of Christianity as being part of Europes Heritage from the EU Constitution. And in my aape-country socialist lawmakers are pushing hard - and likely succeeding - to scrap state-paid wages to laymen helping our elderly priests. On the other hand, they are pushing equally hard to pay the wages of Imams, of whom 50% are virulently anti-western."
Thanks for the Heads Up, Michael! It should be a wake up call to us all.
Friday, January 21, 2005
DiFi & Boxer
In the past week, we've seen Diane Feinstein come out in favor of Dr. Condoleeza Rice, while her fellow CA legislator, Barbara Boxer came out like her dog namesake at Dr. Rice. I found myself asking, "what's up with that? Those two are generally in lock-step with one another." Then I remembered who their mutual mentor is; Hillary Rodham-Clinton! Now remembering Shrillary's modus operendi (sic), I realize that the tactics of DiFi and Boxer were right out of a Shrillary play book! Boxer just got re-elected, so she's safe. Voters have short memories. But DiFi is going to be up for re-election, and she cannot afford to have California voters remember her treating Dr. Rice in a manner they might disapprove of...voila! I now understand!
Then I hear that Shrillary is making speeches in favor of the President's faith-based initiative, I know that the female chameleon is at it again! She watched the election, she saw how important faith is to the American voter, and she's is up for election in '06, not to mention her presidential bid in '08!
"There is no contradiction between support for faith-based initiatives and upholding our constitutional principles," said Clinton, a New York Democrat who often is mentioned as a possible presidential candidate in 2008."
You're right, of course, Senator Clinton, but please tell that to your base. Of course, if you do, they'll come unglued at the seams! Remember your base, Ms. Clinton? The ones who want to take "God" out of everything in America?
The way I see the tactics of these lefties is, rev your base when your seat is safe, a la Boxer's rant at Dr. Rice, but be sweet and sound like a Republican if you are going up for re-election soon. Have I got that right? And will the American voter buy it? I hope not.
Thursday, January 20, 2005
What A Great Day!
The President gave a speech that will go down in history as one of the greatest inaugural speeches of all time! He made me proud to be an American. [When I saw him get out of the limo with Laura to walk along the parade route just now, I admit that I was shocked...and not just a little bit afraid! I was relieved to see them safely back inside their armored limo.] His speech brought out so many points that the left simply cannot believe;
"America will not impose our own style of government on the unwilling. Our goal instead is to help others find their own voice, attain their own freedom, and make their own way. "
The left says, "yeah, right" and they say, "what if they don't want a government like ours?" Okay folks, that means that people of some countries might like being tortured for disagreeing? Come ON!
And do you know how much the anti-war left hates this;
"America's influence is not unlimited, but fortunately for the oppressed, America's influence is considerable, and we will use it confidently in freedom's cause. "
I can almost hear the shrieking here, in the middle of my 82% GOP county! And this one is a painful reminder of what the Clinton administration and the UN have done for years;
"America will not pretend that jailed dissidents prefer their chains, or that women welcome humiliation and servitude, or that any human being aspires to live at the mercy of bullies."
Did you hear that Kofi Annan? Slick Willie? And how about you Jennings? A friend of mine was IM'ing me that she'd heard your coverage was all about how the President didn't look upset or shaken at the morons protesting him, and you didn't understand why. Here's why, Peter;
"America's belief in human dignity will guide our policies, yet rights must be more than the grudging concessions of dictators; they are secured by free dissent and the participation of the governed. "
As my last post noted, these folks still do not get it. Harry Reid was heard to say on an interview today, that the reason they lost was that they didn't get into the heartland enough to get their message out. You mean the message that you support sucking out the brains of unborn babies, Mr. Reid? Or do you mean the message that you want gay marriages to be legitimized? I know lots of folks in Nebraska, Iowa, Ohio, Texas, Tennessee, Oklahoma, and other "rural" areas who got your message. And they want no part of it, Mr. Reid!
And the most important sentence that will put the donks into braying rages is this one;
"Self-government relies, in the end, on the governing of the self. "
Self-governing? A foreign concept to the left! Can you hear their rage? Their upset that he would actually believe that circumstances [abusive relationships, post partum depression, forgot to use a condom, "I didn't mean it", "weight runs in my family", or more likely, "McDonalds made me fat"] do not mean that you are absolved of your sins by one of their manufactured reasonings? No wonder they hate this man!
One of the things that I have noticed about the left is that they always judge others by THEIR value system! It is the root of why they keep coming up with all these ridiculous conspiracy theories! It's what THEY would do, so of course, Bush must be doing it. Is it any wonder they don't understand our president?
Thank you, President and Mrs. Bush, for a delightful and heartwarming day!
The Donks Just Do Not Get IT!
Senator Van de Putte thinks children's grades should be connected to their body fat mass. No REALLY, I am serious! Here is the e-mail I just sent this Texas state senator (D, of course);
"Senator Van de Putte,
With all due respect, I must heartily disagree with you that the school, or the government, have anything to do with a child's weight. Concerns of that sort are the purview of parents, not government. That is what you Democrats have difficulty understanding. And that is why you keep losing elections. Stay out of the private lives of your consituency. You folks are just getting loonier and loonier!"
What is wrong with these folks that they cannot see that most of America just rejects their nuttiness? They treat someone like Dr. Rice, who is held in the highest esteem of most of America, with utter disdain. Boxer [she doesn't have enough of my respect to justify the use of her title] called her a liar twice in two days! I hope her constituents in California remember that the next time Boxer comes up for re-election. Apparently Daschle's experience taught them nothing.
As we celebrate the President's election today, the donks are lining up to begin taking shots at the everything the President has planned for the coming term. Guess we'll have to give them another lesson in 2006.
And a note to the Republicans in the Senate; the first time we see y'all looking like you are going to take the advice of minority leader Harry Reid to be more contrite, we're going to jump all over you! Make sure your faxes have plenty of paper, your phones in good working order, and your e-mail boxes cleaned out, because you will be hearing from us!
Wednesday, January 19, 2005
I was shocked to see that Senator Rick Santorum was behind in the polls for re-election! Come on, Pennsylvania! You failed us in the Presidential elections, so get behind this guy! We can't afford to lose senators like Santorum. His ethics make up for the lack of same in Arlen Specter! Don't let the union goons steal this one, like they did the presidency! We could have asked for a recall in PA, and probably could have proven that it should have sent it's electoral votes to President Bush, but unfortunately we did not. So we need to be sure that Santorum gets a fair fight! Donate to Santorum here.
And learn why it's so important here;
"Santorum is the No. 1 target of national Democrats," Madonna said. There is no Republican the Democrats want to beat like they want to beat Rick Santorum"
It's not too late to plan for '06, and you can bet the donks know that!
MSM & The Left Are At It Again!
Remember hearing about the Marine who was killed in a shoot-out with the cops in California? Remember all the ranting about his having trauma from Fallujah? Remember the hysteria of how the military was damaging to lives due to this trauma? Read the truth here! And if you have not read Hugh Hewitt's new book, "Blog" (which the lefty loons perpetrating these lies obviously have NOT) you need to read it!
Sorry MSM goons and lefty loons, there's a new gang on the block checking out all of your lies! It's called bloggers and the internet!
Tuesday, January 18, 2005
Stories About Texans
We had fun this past few days, meeting up with Winter Texans we hadn't seen since last spring. We keep an RV trailer on our little piece of Gulf Waters RV Park, and meet folks from all over the country. Sue and Charlie are Winter Texans from New York [upstate], and it was good to renew our friendship. As we were visiting, our next door neighbors, Winter Texans from New Jersey stopped over to join in the chatting. My husband and I had to sit back and chuckle as these northeasterners discussed their "Texas encounters". John, from NJ, related a story that happened shortly after they had arrived in Port A. They were driving rather slowly, trying to locate the post office, when a car whizzed by them, and turned into what turned out to be the post office. They turned in behind the car, and parked. As they were getting out of the car, the lady from the car that had whizzed past them came over, and apologized profusely for her driving behavior. John didn't think a thing about it, he's used to rude drivers. But he was shocked that she felt she needed to apologize! That's a Texan!
Both couples chatted about a number of exchanges they'd had with Texans, and how unfailingly polite and friendly they've found them to be. No slam on AZ, but Charley and Sue stopped wintering in Arizona because of the rudeness they encountered for the sin of having New York license plates. John and Tanya actually bought their car in Texas so they could get a Texas plate for the months they are here, rather than take the chance of someone demeaning them for being from New Jersey! Interesting how friendly folks in flyover country are!
As my husband and I both love to say, "We weren't born here, but we got here as fast as we could!"
I just get home, and TA DA, there's another Symposium question at Homespun Bloggers. [I've GOT to get a laptop!]
"What are your predictions for the elections in Iraq? Will there be violence? What will the government look like? Will it be legitimate, liberal, and capable of accomplishing anything? And what effect will the election have on the U.S.?"
I am not going to answer this directly, because I would rather use my energy encouraging the Iraqi people to go to their polling place and vote. It is more important for them to show that they choose to be democratic by voting, than giving in to the terrorists and staying home, for fear of their lives. It is the desire for freedom that will ultimatly win the day for the Iraqi people, but if they do not have the sincere desire for it, it will never last. As we Americans know, freedom is NOT free! It is something that must be fought for, then earned, and then nurtured consciously!
It would be unfair of me, as an American, to directly answer that question, because we Americans have allowed groups like the ACLUnatics to erode our own freedoms for years! They have tried, and in many ways, succeeded in taking God out of our lives, even though our own Constitution guarentees our rights to freely express our religions, or not to express any religion if we so choose.
We have allowed judges to take away laws that we, The People, have voted into law. We are not guarding our own freedoms well enough for me to dare answer such a question for another people.
So instead, I will pray that the Iraqi people are as brave and as bright as those I have come to know at Iraq the Model, and other Iraqi blogs, and that they will do what must be done to insure their country's future. From today's post, they are going the right direction! And more good news from Iraq can be found here.
I also want to plug the new Homespun Blogger's Radio. I haven't linked to it officially yet, but will be doing that soon. I look forward to being a contributor in that venue as well, as soon as learn how....? Thank goodness my blogging pals are so patient with my lack of computer nerdiness!
Other responses to this question are;
Friday, January 14, 2005
Question of the Week
Homespun Bloggers posed an interesting question this week, "What, in your opinion, are the moral responsibilities of the individual citizen in the United States (or your own country) today and how do you believe people should act upon (or react to) those perceived responsibilities?"
As a citizen of the United States, I feel that the most important responsibility I have as a citizen is to honor the foundation my country was built upon, i.e., the Constitution. It is to defend against those who would tear my country apart with ideas like Janeane Garofalo's, when she was quoted in NewsMax's November 2004 magazine as saying, "Our country is founded on a sham: Our forefathers were slave-owning rich white guys who wanted it their way. So when I see the American flag, I go, "Oh my God, you're inslulting me." That you can have a gay parade on Christopher Street in New York, with naked men and women on a float cheering, 'We're her, we're queer!' - that's what makes my heart swell. Not the flag, but a gay naked man or woman burning the flag. I get choked up with pride."
As our forefathers would say, "I will defend to the death" her right to say that, but I would prefer that she were as educated as the young Kuwaiti man, Ahmad, whom I wrote about yesterday, who wrote in his college essay,
"I completely disagree with Dye and Zeigler’s contention that the founding father had ONLY their best interests at heart and that that the constitution of the United States was a progressive document for its time compared to the aristocratic monarchies of Western Europe (excluding Britain). The American constitution worried monarchs in Europe. The right for men to choose their own representatives was unheard of in the rest of the world. Yet in a young country which freed itself from the shackles of the greatest empire of the time. The founding fathers were stalwart heroes who led the brave young men of this great land and in order to establish a democracy maybe not a direct or perfect democracy but one that guarantees the freedom of its citizens. It is ludicrous to assume that a direct democracy can succeed in the United States. Yet in the last ballots of November 2nd 2004 the people of the United States DID get a chance of influencing their political decisions in their country and that is thanks to the US constitution established by the great men of America like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. "
Realizing what this country is about takes some guts. It takes more than a cursory look at the present day scene in America. It requires educating oneself in all facets of what America is today, and how she got here, complete with warts and all. What is fundamentally true about America is the basic goodness throughout her, that makes me proud to be American.
Another responsibility I have as an American is to be vigilant. To notice a truck which says it is of a company, but has, for some mysterious reason, the company phone number covered up. It requires that I pick up my cell phone, and call the "powers that be". It is my responsibility to let someone in law enforcement know when I see a "tourist" along the Riverwalk in San Antonio taking pictures of the underbelly of a bridge going across it, rather than the beautiful sites all around him.
We live in a time that to "be responsible" as a citizen, whatever country we live in, is to be vigilant. The ACLU has been threatening our freedom in America for too long. It has tried to remove the free expression of religion from every walk of life. They would have us believe that the Constitution bans religion, rather than protecting it. It is time we tell them, ENOUGH!
I think that the most important responsibility of all is that I remember daily to thank God for being born in the most wonderful country on earth, and that we try to help every country who wants to emulate the freedoms we enjoy in America, to become a successful democracy.
We aren't perfect, but we're living as close to it as can be found on earth.
Thursday, January 13, 2005
Where do we get these guys? An oft heard refrain from anyone who deals with the United States Marine Corp. What they are accomplishing in Iraq is unbelievable...by the MSM, that is. Not unbelievable to me at all! The boots on the ground are accomplishing what all the UNnecessary Diplomats could achieve in 10 years of meetings!
"The main objective behind our patrols is to simply make a presence, police the area, improve relations and gather intelligence from sources about any insurgent activity in the area,” said Staff Sgt. William R. Gilman, 1st platoon commander, Company B, 1st Battalion, 23rd Marine Regiment, and a 33-year-old from Dallas. “Before this country can hold elections, it’s important that we help make the population feel more safe and secure. Villagers may be hesitant to go to the polls if they feel terrorists could attack them or their children. In addition to other operations, by patrolling on a frequent basis we are sending more than just a message of order and security.”
These Marines represent what is great about our country! Makes one wonder why the left hates America so much! Hearing Teddy "The Sot" Kennedy scream "quagmire" for two days, might sound good to his lefty buds, but it also give succor to the terrorists in Iraq. How the fine folks in Massachusetts can continue returning this walrus to office is beyond me!
What is unbelievable to me, is that the greatest champions of our Constitution, and our country, are people who were not born here. Did you hear the one about the Kuwaiti youth, age 17, who received an "F" from his history professor, and was threatened with withdrawal of his visa if he did not get "psychiatric help" for his refusal to believe the professor's contention that America was a terrible place?
"My parents still remember what it was like for us during the invasion. Waiting for long hours in line for a few pieces of bread. We had darkness 24 hours a day from the burning oil wells. My two uncles are still traumatized from being kidnapped and tortured in Iraqi prisons. Most of all we remember our one-week-old baby cousin who died while the Iraqi invaders were stealing incubators from hospitals to sell them for profit. The Americans by contrast came in to liberate us and asked for nothing in return. I love this country for the freedom it provides and for rescuing Kuwait’s liberty in the first Gulf War. 12 Years later, America once again has selflessly protected my country and my people by removing Saddam Hussein.
I arrived in the United States for the first time 5 months ago with tremendous enthusiasm to study the political institutions and history of this extraordinary country. "
Read his story, and tell me why we still support, with OUR tax dollars, colleges who employ these anti-American professors? Whatever happened to TREASON? Isn't this SEDITION? It turns my stomach that these kinds of professors have access to our mushy minded youth! It perpetuates the problem! When are we going to demand that they lose their jobs? When are we going to pull our tax dollars out of a system that produces more anti-American sentiment?
Wednesday, January 12, 2005
Last night on Hugh Hewitt's radio show, he opined that bloggers were being soft on Dan Blather. I hated the idea that that might be true, especially since we [meaning those of us who are hunters] have had a gripe about this clown since the 60's. I spent today trying to find the program where Dan Blather RAPED the American hunter. I kept using "Red October" as my google search clue, until tonight when my husband reminded me that the actual piece was called "The Guns of Autumn". Voila'! I found it! In fact I found quite a number of folks who remembered that particular slam job on the hunting populace of the USA!
The truth is, hunters are the most avid environmentalists of all, and the most responsible. Anyone who watched Fox News tonight saw evidence of that, with the rescue of a doe by deer hunters! For instance, witness Ducks Unlimited, or any number of other animal habitat preservation groups and their success in their combined endeavors.
Yet this liberal shock jock insisted on portraying hunters as blood thirsty Atilla the Huns! NOT! My husband knew dozens of the outfitters and guides who were interviewed in "good faith" during the process of making this expose', though that was not how Blather described it, and they were outraged at the way they were portrayed! Their comments were taken out of context, and were "creatively edited", a la Michael Mooreon, to exhibit an image that this uber-lib wanted to be portrayed! Disgraceful!
The really pathetic part of this whole issue is that the parent company that Blather worked for at the time, also owned the magazine "Field and Stream". Never once did the so-called "unbiased" Dan Rather go to their editorial staff for conference or contradiction, let alone TRUTH!
So why are we surprised that this outlawed Texan [gag] is such a poor excuse for a human being!?! He is just continuing his long and disgraceful career! The big difference is that now we have a way to expose him!
Tuesday, January 11, 2005
Finally Sandy Bergler Gets His Day in Court!
If you are like me, you have been wondering for months how Sandy "Docs in his Socks" Berger could have gotten away with stealing documents out of the National Archives! But alas, it is another case of MSM's lack of coverage! Thanks to Matt Drudge, we now have the story!
"The "Socks Docs" probe forced Berger, who was President Clinton's national security adviser, to step down as Democrat John Kerry's top foreign-policy adviser last summer.
"It may have been off the front pages, but the investigation has been active," said a source with knowledge of the probe."
See, I should have had more faith in John Ashcroft! But then if you are a regular reader, you know I do not trust many of the bureaucratic institutions' employees, even if they have a "good guy" at the top! These entrenched union loyalists in our government are no friend to Republicans!
What really bugs me is the first sentence of the following;
"Berger has also acknowledged that he destroyed some documents — he says by accident.
It's unclear if he destroyed documents with handwritten notations that don't appear on other copies.
Some Republicans, such as House Speaker Dennis Hastert, have charged that Berger pilfered the documents because they were embarrassing to Clinton and Clinton aides such as Berger."
Dennis Hastert speaks what the rest of us believe! That he was covering Slick Willie's behind, and he'll probably take the fall. Seems like the Teflon King may skate yet again....unless Sandy sings! Wishful thinking, I know. He knows the wrath of Shillary first hand!
More from Hollyweird!
The November 2004 issue of NewMax magazine highlighted a few of the reasons that America has ignored so many of Hollyweird's movies. Such notables as Janeane Garofalo were spotlighted on the cover with a quote from this monumental airhead as saying, "Our country is founded on a sham: Our forefathers were slave-owning rich white guys who wanted it their way. So when I see the American flag, I go 'Oh my God, you're insulting me.' That you can have a gay parade on Christopher Street in New York, with naked men and women on a float cheering, 'We're here, we're queer!' - that's what makes my heart swell. Not the flag, but a gay naked man or women burning the flag. I get choked up with pride." This is the kind of lunacy that is being produced by kids who have been schooled in history by our present day school systems! They started the "dead white men" history classes back in the 60's, and unless you had a teacher with some scruples, you might have her opinion about our founding fathers. The rest is just freaky, and needs no further comments.
Now we know why the top grossing movies in 2004 were either about Jesus or had cartoon characters; The Passion, Shrek 2, The Incredibles.
I loved the old movies made during World War II, and watched them on TV as a kid every chance I got. That was back when Hollywood still loved America, but as this article points out, the trend turned during Viet Nam and Hanoi Jane's activism. To their great shame, I might add. There are some who courageously stand up for our great nation, but they have had to reach a pinnacle where they can proclaim their beliefs. Patricia Heaton, of "Everybody Loves Raymond" is one of those who is heroic enough to even say she is pro-life. We all know of Charlton Heston's pro NRA stance, but did you know Tom Selleck is too? Denzel Washington has been in San Antonio a number of times, handing purple hearts to hospitalized veterans. Knowing the President cannot be everywhere at once, he offered to help in this heartrending duty. Mel Gibson gambled everything and won...much to the dismay of Hollyweirdos! Ben Stein is quoted in the piece as saying "I hear a lot of people saying to me, 'I'm a Republican too', or 'I'm a great fan of George Bush.' By not means the majority, but plenty of them. Hollywood is changing."
I couldn't find a link online to this article at Newsmax.com, so I apologize for not sharing the entire article.
Monday, January 10, 2005
Disenfranchising the Military
The next time some liberal loonie tells you "voters were disenfranchised", agree with them, where the State of Washington's gubantorial race is concerned, at the very least! We can debate Pennsylvania and Ohio on another forum, but for now let's look at Washington;
"More than 300 military personnel who were sent their absentee ballots too late to return them have signed affidavits saying they intended to vote for Mr. Rossi. Some 1 out of 20 ballots in King County that officials felt were marked unclearly were "enhanced" with Wite-Out or pens so that some had their original markings obliterated. "
This is not only reprehensible, but the people of the State of Washington should all stand up and demand another chance to vote on their governor! This is a travesty! That men and women who are overseas fighting for us should be denied the right to vote is beyond comprehension! Why aren't the election officials in King County and other democrat run counties being brought up on fraud charges?
It sounds like the new media is making some headway in righting this obvious wrong;
"A poll taken last week by Seattle's KING-TV found that by a 20-point margin state residents back a new election, and by 53% to 36% they don't think Mr. Rossi should concede.
Seattle Times columnist Joni Balter says the attack on the vote count by Republican-leaning media "is by now a near-military operation--air, land and sea." She blames radio hosts Kirby Wilbur, John Carlson and Mike Siegel for keeping listeners updated and in a constant state of outrage. "There's a lot to be outraged about," responds Mr. Carlson, an unsuccessful candidate for governor in 2000. "Last week, I did 13 out of my show's 15 hours on the election and people wanted more."
We all need to keep our eyes peeled in every future election for fraud, because the only way these people can win an election, is to CHEAT! I know we can count on our fellow bloggers to do just that!
"In his new book, "Blog: Understanding the Information Reformation," radio host and law professor Hugh Hewitt calls the new media a form of "open-source journalism" in which gatekeepers can no longer control what reaches the public. Readers and listeners interact with bloggers and talk show hosts so that a free market of ideas and information can emerge. "Blogs analyzed the Washington state election shenanigans in a more sophisticated and comprehensive way than the mainstream media," he told me. "When a swarm of blogs and new media focus on a story it can fundamentally alter the general public's understanding of an event or person. Ask John Kerry, Trent Lott, Tom Daschle and soon-to-retire CBS anchor Dan Rather if they think the new media changed people's perceptions of them."
I can hardly wait until my copy of Hugh's book gets here!
Sunday, January 09, 2005
Upon hearing of the generosity of some of Hollywierd's denizens, in particular Leonard DiCaprio's $1 mil donation to the UNICEF lUNatics, and discovering a new blog today, I was struck by two things: [hat tips: NewsMax newletter, and Bunker Mulligan]
1) The UNscrupulous is being financed by Hollywierd morons and our government, and I am outraged.
2) No wonder these people are symbiotic! They're all corrupt.
As evidence, I offer the following:
"More Hollywood Snubs of Gibson's 'Passion'
by Govindini Murty
It seems Hollywood just doesn't want to accept Mel Gibson's record breaking "Passion." Dismissing the tremendous success of "The Passion of the Christ" as a fluke, Hollywood critics and awards shows continue to snub Mel Gibson's biblical masterpiece.
This week the Producers Guild of America announced its nominees for Best Picture of the Year, and "The Passion" was notably absent. The PGA also failed to nominate Mel Gibson, Bruce Davey or Steve McEveety for its Darryl F. Zanuck Producer of the Year Award.
Some speculate that this was due to "The Passion's" "conservative politics" - an ironic thought, in that Darryl F. Zanuck was a conservative who produced such Biblical epics as "David & Bathsheba" and "The Egyptian." Such ironies are rife in Hollywood today.
More bad news for "Passion" this week: In its "Oscar: Special Report" Variety also announced the hottest contenders for the Best Actor and Best Screenplay Oscars.
Again, anyone associated with "The Passion" was notably absent. Jim Caviezel, who delivered the year's most impressive performance in the demanding role of Christ, was completely ignored.
Instead, Variety gave acting kudos to Gael Garcia Bernal for his role as Che Guevara in "The Motorcycle Diaries," Kevin Bacon for his role as a pedophile in "The Woodsman," and Liev Schrieber for his role as a psychotic conservative politician in "The Manchurian Candidate."
Last month the Golden Globes completely shut out "The Passion," denying it even a single nomination.
The Hollywood Foreign Press Association, the organization behind the Golden Globes, instead gave nominations to "Vera Drake" (about a kindly abortionist), "Kinsey" (about the discredited sex researcher), and "The Sea Inside" (about a paraplegic's campaign to be euthanized).
In addition, the nation's top film critics have ignored "The Passion" and other quality films in their "Best of 2004" lists, simply because of perceived conservative "Red State" themes.
Roger Ebert of Ebert & Roper at the Movies, Kenneth Turan of the LA Times, Joel Morgenstern of the Wall Street Journal, A.O. Scott of the New York Times, Richard Schickel of Time Magazine, and the prestigious National Board of Review all ignored "The Passion" in their Top Ten Lists.
In order to correct this imbalance, the Liberty Film Festival - Hollywood's first openly conservative film festival - has announced its own "Best of 2004" list.
Believing that Hollywood and its institutions have grown pitifully out of touch with the American public, the Liberty Film Festival honored twenty conservative films that exhibited a "high level of craftsmanship, a willingness to challenge the status quo, and a celebration of liberty." Best Narrative Film went to "The Passion" directed by Mel Gibson, Best Documentary Film went to "In The Face of Evil: Reagan's War in Word & Deed" directed by Stephen K. Bannon, and Best Short went to "Submission," directed by slain Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh.
One hopes that as alternative Hollywood continues to grow, liberal Hollywood will realize that it can't continue to ignore the mainstream values of average Americans. If the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences ignores "The Passion" in its Oscar nominations, it runs the risk of alienating the American public - and diminishing what was once a fine institution into a sad irrelevancy. Then only a new wave artists and intellectuals - who share mainstream America's values - will fill the void left in Hollywood's wake.
Govindini Murty, Co-Director of the Liberty Film Festival, lives in Los Angeles."
I urge you to put The Diplomad on your favorite reading list. The author says he/she is a Republican employee of the State Dept....a difficult thing to accomplish! Very informative reading, and further illustrates complaints I've made against that corrupt body for the life of this blog!
Saturday, January 08, 2005
Maybe, but this sight makes me cackle with glee! A commenter, Gindy, noted that Clinton and Boxer are damaging the party. [As I noted just now as I popped over to get her link, she wants to know who said, "I came here as a slave, now I want the right to vote". If any of you were watching the spectacle the donks made of themselves as they certified the electoral college, you will know the answer to that question. Have we had "slavery" in the lifetime of Sheila Jackson Leigh?] Damaging the party? They have made the once great Democrat party look like the National Socialist Party! They have caved in to their kook constituents, and do not so much as slightly resemble Democrat patriots of old. As another commenter mentioned not too long ago, "You are now in that once great Democrat Party. We are known to the world as Republicans! " [Hat tip; Rosemary ]
The sight of Boxer's tears is the ONLY evidence I have seen that the dumocraps realize they LOST! Not just the presidency, but the house and senate! Most of them, notably UpChuck Schumer, Ted "The Sot" Kennedy, Harry "The Geek" Reid, still act as though they hold the majority position, and make demands of GOP representatives and senators to cooperate with them. Translated? They still want us to CAVE! Reid couldn't even deliver his own state of Nevada, but he makes demands for concessions as though he were the majority leader, not the MINORITY! Guess he didn't learn from Puff Daschle's lesson.
Driving through Texas highways, I have seen ample gloating by way of many huge yard signs proclaiming "Bush/Cheney '04" proudly, months after the election. My husband tried to throw mine out, but I saved it! Should the need arrive, I will proudly display it again.
So my message for today, GLOAT! And keep it up until these losers figure out they LOST! And don't forget to FAX, e-mail, or call your Republican Senators and Representatives every time they appear to have forgotten that WE WON!