Sunday, January 29, 2006

Breaking News: Newsmen Injured in Iraq

Associated Press Writer

ABC News co-anchor Bob Woodruff and cameraman Doug Vogt were seriously injured in an IED (Improvised Explosive Device) explosion. At the time of the firefight, both men were wearing their body armor and helmets. They are in surgery right now, and their condition is unknown.

This occured 15 miles north of Baghdad near Taji. They were embedded with the 4th ID (Infantry Division) and the Iraqi Army. More news is sure to come.

A prayer never hurt, and it may even help.

Wednesday, January 25, 2006

Computer Down-Time has informed us that between 4-4:15pm PCT on Wednesday, Jan. 25, 2006, will not be accessable due to some technical glitch that they have to fix. Please come visit either before or after this time. I apologize for this inconvienence, and thank you for your patience.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006

The Doors Were Left Open And Some Inmates Escaped

Do you still believe 9/11 was a terrorist attack where 19 Arab fundamentalists on orders from laptops in caves on the other side of the world outsmarted our trillion dollar defense and intelligence network?

Radical elements in the U.S. government wanted a transformation of foreign policy and increased military spending, and in order to do so, they would need a "New Pearl Harbor" to galvanize the masses to a war agenda.

To ensure such an event, these individuals actually plotted and carried out such an attack (9/11) and killed 2,986 Americans.

I cannot think of a direr crisis in our Republic and for the future of humanity as a whole than a false flag terror attack on Americans plotted and carried out by elements in our own government for political expedience and corporate enrichment - not to mention the groundwork laid for the next world war. These killers and enablers in our government and military apparatus must be brought to justice at once. 9/11 was immensely successful in rallying the masses to a war agenda which has redistributed billions of dollars towards projects not in the interests of a humane Democracy - Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib, two wars of aggression, the Patriot Act and a clearly fraudulent election - These crimes deserve a 21st century "Nuremburg Trial".

Those are the words of someone going by the moniker of GNixon, a sometimes writer over at Kos. On February 20th 2006 he, along with a gaggle of likewise-affected moonbats wearing their tin foil hats and calling themselves "9/11 Truth activists" will convene at Ground Zero, the former site of the World Trade Center in lower Manhattan, to march against the U.S. Government’s "mass murder of 2,986 Americans on September 11th 2001".

Protesters will proceed to march to Attorney General Elliot Spitzer’s office with a letter demanding his resignation for "his failure to investigate this crime committed in his jurisdiction despite overwhelming evidence".

The rally will conclude at the office of former N.Y.C. Mayor Giuliani in Times Square, where they will deliver citizen’s warrant for his arrest for "his role in the attacks at The World Trade Center and criminal complicity in removing evidence from a crime scene".

You may remember noted theologian David Ray Griffin penned a book in 2004 entitled "The New Pearl Harbor" which blathers on for 200 pages about how the collapse of the World Trade Center towers most likely was caused by explosives placed throughout the towers, not from the plane crashes.

If you're starting to feel nauseous go over to the Popular Mechanics' article entitled "9/11: Debunking The Myths", where they examined the evidence and consulted with the experts to refute the most persistent conspiracy theories of September 11. The moonbats going to this protest probably have neither the intelligence to read the evidence nor the open-mindedness to listen to reason. Fortunately for the rest of us these types usually don't breed to excess - it's probably due to their listening to Barbara Streisand songs while watching "The Best Of Tim Robbins" on the Biography channel while thinking that George Clooney and Cindy Sheehen would make a cute couple.

Saturday, January 21, 2006

I'm So Excited About Sunday Night!

I just received an e-mail from Kevin over at the Pundit Review. Wow! They have been extended to 2 hours. This is wonderful. I love their radio program, Pundit Review Radio, Sunday night at 9pm EST on Boston’s Talk Station WRKO. As always, you can stream the show live and participate by calling 877-469-4322.

There are so many topics to cover Sunday night. Of course there will be Hillary's "plantation" performance, both pro and con, and NO Mayor's "chocolate city" remarks.

There will be some discussion about illegal aliens, because the second person has been murdered by an one who was "caught and released." Our ICE program need not exists if this what we are to look forward to as justice.

Kevin and Gregg are excellent on the topic of media bias. This weekend, we have some ammunition from none other than Peggy Noonan! Do not miss this one.

Last, but not least, in the second hour there will a discussion of the new state legislation that declares if you are a success, we do not want your jobs, your tax revenue, or your business. Of what do I speak? Tune in and find out.

To read more about the program, please go to Pundit Review here. Thank you, and I hope to hear you on the air!

Thursday, January 19, 2006

Hail Mary Play

In football a hail Mary play is when the quarterback throws a long pass toward the end zone in hope that his player will catch it or draw a penalty. It is usually seen as an act of desperation. Imagine if last week during the Colt-Steeler game (which the Steelers led in the whole way) if the Steelers stopped the game while they were up 14-3 and said "We want to negotiate a truce. The terms will be fair" and then they agreed to even the score and both teams go home. It is ridiculous because no one who is in the lead stops the game and requests a "truce."

Now there is a tape that, and let me make this clear, is REPORTEDLY (but not confirmed) from Osama bin Laden. In this tape, he tells us that his group of terrorists have been able to infiltrate our security and that the only reason they have not attacked is that they need time to get properly organized. This statement is what you would expect from the enemy whether it is true or not is another story, but we would expect him to say it. What he said after that though, gives us insight into the war on terror and its effect on Osama bin Laden and his band of killers. OBL said:

"We do not mind offering you a long-term truce with fair conditions that we adhere to," he said. "We are a nation that God has forbidden to lie and cheat. So both sides can enjoy security and stability under this truce so we can build Iraq and Afghanistan, which have been destroyed in this war.

This is very telling because the bad guys have been losing a lot of their members. We have reason to believe that some terrorists who were important to the cause were killed by us in a bombing last week. The reason that OBL wants a truce is that they are losing. His claim is that they want to rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan. Right. What they really want to rebuild is their terrorist network. They want us to give them time to recruit and train more people who want to kill us. The truce is for a period of time which means they intend to fight again.

The indication that they can not lie or cheat is a joke because they lie and cheat every time they open their mouths. Does Baghdad Bob ring a bell. If that was not lying i do not know what is and how is it any thing other than cheating to use women and children as shields? We have these cowards on the ropes and we need to keep hammering them. We need to keep killing them until they are no longer effective and we are succeeding in that endeavor.

Make no mistake about it, there are people like Kerry and Murtha who will say we need to discuss the truce. They will tell us to listen to what the man has to say. They will want us to believe that it is the honorable thing to do. The honorable thing for us to do is to kill the enemy until they are all in hell where they belong.

Cross posted at Big Dog's Weblog

Tuesday, January 17, 2006

SCOTUS OK's 'Doctors' Right to Murder'

In a 6-3 opinion handed down today, the US Supreme Court gave permission to Oregon doctors to kill their patients. They call it 'assisted suicide' now. However, in Sweden, we have already seen the abuses.

When you are elderly, unable to pay for your bed, someone else needs your bed, etc, then they kill you. THEY decide when your life is over, and the family has no say. There is no recourse. Is this what we want in the land of the free and the home of the brave?

Hugh Hewitt was discussing this very issue on his talk radio program, but in a different perspective. He was speaking with John Eastman (from a university, I forgot the name. I think it was Chapman? It is in California.)

They were discussing the merits of the commerce clause, the prescription drugs issues (one of many the government needs to come to grips with as to if they have the authority to regulate it,) and the differnce in the dissenting opinions.
"Proponents of physician-assisted suicide will, no doubt, claim this ruling rejuvenates their tired argument that there is 'dignity' in taking your own life - an argument that Americans have increasingly rejected. The truth is that the court did not condone physician-assisted suicide at all," said Earll.

Today's decision was simply about the federal government's authority to regulate narcotics, not a justification of assisted suicide," she concluded.
To be continue, no doubt.

Sunday, January 15, 2006

Alito's Hearings: The Real Scoop on Pundit Review

Are you interested in finding out what really happened at the hearings for Justice Alito? Well, here is the latest scoop by the people that were actually there. Tune in at 9pm EST. The links will help you streamline, and it is free!
Tonight on Pundit Review Radio we will close the loop on the Alito confirmation hearings. We will also talk to a blogger who was invited by the Republican National Committee to attend the hearings and cover them live. Matt Margolis, founder of Blogs for Bush and GOP Bloggers will join us to discuss this interesting strategy of inviting bloggers and their readers to have a first hand account of the hearings. What else is behind this strategy? A desire to go over the heads of the dreaded MSM? We’ll find out. Is there any doubt that the political elites understand the importance/impact of blogs?

Pundit Review Radio
Sunday Evenings, 9pm est
Streaming live at
Call us toll free at 877-469-4322

Pundit Review Radio is where the old media meets the new. Each week Kevin & Gregg give voice to the work of the most influential leaders in the new media/citizen journalist revolution. This unique show brings the best of the blogs to your radio every Sunday evening at 9pm EST on AM680 WRKO, Boston’s Talk Leader.
Please give them a call with your questions, statements, recommendations, etc. Remember to be polite. Thank you, and have a great weekend!

Saturday, January 14, 2006

Who Is It Now

Let a bunch of terrorists fly planes into American buildings and kill 3000 people and we get a lot of tough talk from countries like Germany, France, and Russia but when it comes time to put up or shut up they are more likely to shut up. They had a lot to worry about because they were in up to their elbows in the oil for food scandal and since many weapons were found in Iraq that came from them it is no wonder they opposed our invasion. When America used intelligence from all over the world to assess Iraq the Democrats accused us of cooking the books and fabricating a case for war. Now, the countries who would not step in are in a very awkward position. They face a closer to home terrorist threat and they are nervous.

Iran has restarted its nuclear program. Only an idiot believes they restarted because they never stopped. They have been working on this stuff all along and I would say they have progressed further that we think because they are making a lot of noise indicating they are not worried about other countries. They might even already have a nuke and are looking for a reason to use it. Whatever the case, the intelligence that surrounds this does not include any from the US (or at least none publicly acknowledged). All the reported intelligence came from that side of the world.

The thing is, the other countries are now worried that Iran might pop a nuke in their butts. They should be worried because the terrorist running Iran has made it clear he would wipe Israel off the map. Strange how when it is in their back yards they are more concerned and willing to take action. When the US was talking about UN security council sanctions (in addition to the many resolutions) there was indications that some of the permanent members would vote against us. One vote stops the action. Now, we have them wanting (along with us) to go to the UN for sanction. I know we will vote with them but it would be nice to screw them by voting against. Maybe this is why Merkel from Germany was here. She is afraid the US will not back them because they did not back us. After all, the nuke problem over there does not affect us directly. It is unlikely they have a missile that could hit us. I think we should let Germany, France, and Russia make their own decisions and fight their own wars, if any, in Iran.

Why should we get involved? We have our own business to tend to in Iraq and we should not be the lead on the one in Iran. The other countries are more affected, let them develop a coalition and go fight while we sit back and say how terrible they are and that they lied and people died blah blah. Yeah, that is it. We should tell them we will consider their position in the UN and will vote with them if we can. Then we can tell them we do not agree with them invading Iran because there is no connection between Iran and nuclear terrorism since they have never attacked anyone with nukes. We can tell them that if they do go to war we can not commit our troops and that we will criticize them and the elected leaders daily about the hundreds of thousands of people they killed even if they did not.

It is really strange how a country's position changes when it is in danger. We warned that leaving terrorist regimes unchecked would lead to trouble but no one listened. Now, they are making the same claims about Iran that we made about Iraq. Funny how the focus changes. So have fun, let us know if it gets too tough.


Cross Posted at Big Dog's Weblog

So Cut Down The Trees

For years the environmentalists have had this theory of Global Warming. It could not be proven and there was no concrete evidence but they ran with it anyway. The liberals tend to do that with things they like such as evolution. That theory has holes in it but is taught in schools while "Intelligent Design" is not taught because it is espoused by religions and can not be proven. We have heard the different theories that Global Warming is caused by too many gasses trapped in the atmosphere and in effect trapping light which turns to heat energy. Then, when scientists said the air was cleaner than before we were told that too much sunlight was adding to Global Warming. Now we have another culprit in the Global Warming debate and it turns out it is not mankind (though sunlight can not be controlled by man we were at fault for having cleaner air). That culprit....plant life.

They produce about 10 to 30 percent of the annual methane found in the atmosphere, according to researchers at the Max-Planck Institute for Nuclear Physics in Heidelberg, Germany.

So the fact that we have more trees now than a hundred years ago indicates that reforestation has increased greenhouse gasses? Wow, all those environmentalists who went around spiking trees and committing other acts of eco-terrorism were actually responsible for more plant life being left to kill us. The loggers seem to have had it right from the start.

Perhaps we need to rethink this Kyoto idea and stay really far away from it before other countries forbid us from growing flowers and shrubbery. God forbid you plant a tree on Arbor Day, you might end up in the gulag. Of course, this could turn out to be junk science like the rest of it. Who knows, maybe they got the Korean Cloning specialist (whose research would have saved Superman) to do the research.


Cross Posted at Big Dog's Weblog

Liberals, The Same Everywhere

The one thing about liberals that is constant is that they are the same everywhere and that includes outside the boundaries of the US. They are quick to judge people, quick to suggest corrections, and quick to denigrate people if they are not like the "normal" people. Take, for instance, the leader of the Russian Liberal party and what he had to say about Condoleezza Rice:

"If she has no man by her side at her age, he will never appear," Zhirinovsky ranted on. "Condoleezza Rice needs a company of soldiers. She needs to be taken to barracks where she would be satisfied.

"Condoleezza Rice is a very cruel, offended woman who lacks men's attention," he added. "Such women are very rough. … They can be happy only when they are talked and written about everywhere: 'Oh, Condoleezza, what a remarkable woman, what a charming Afro-American lady! How well she can play the piano and speak Russian!'

"Complex-prone women are especially dangerous. They are like malicious mothers-in-law, women that evoke hatred and irritation with everyone. Everybody tries to part with such women as soon as possible. A mother-in-law is better than a single and childless political persona, though."

Vladimir Zhirinovsky appears to be infatuated with Ms. Rice as a black woman and suggests that she should be raped by a bunch of soldiers to be satisfied. He is suggesting that a group of men having its way with women is what they [the women] need to have the proper attitude and to be less assertive. Now we can understand how guys like Dick Durban and Howard Dean can say the things they do. It is ingrained in them from the roots of their communist buddies. When a guy who praises Hitler, suggests Russia take Alaska back, and encourages the use of nuclear weapons makes statements that are very similar to the rhetoric of the American Democratic party, one needs to question how long that party will survive in this country.

Kennedy and ole' Vlad would get along great discussing the treatment of women. Throw in a Gary Hart, Bill Clinton, and Gary Condit and you have a real old fashioned gang bang club. I have money on Rice being able to kick the snot out of any of them, including the Russian. Mater of fact, while;e we are talking about what people need, I think he needs a good ass kicking.


Cross Posted at Big Dog's Weblog

Friday, January 13, 2006

Denzel and the Troops

This was e-mailed to me, and I thought you might appreciate it.

Don't know whether you heard about this, but Denzel Washington and his family visited the troops at Brook Army Medical Center, in San Antonio,Texas (BAMC) the other day. This is where soldiers who have been evacuated from Germany come to be hospitalized in the United States, especially burn victims.

There are some buildings there called Fisher Houses. The Fisher House is a Hotel where soldiers' families can stay, for little or no charge, while their soldier is staying in the Hospital. BAMC has quite a few of these houses on base, but as you can imagine, they are almost filled most of the time.

While Denzel Washington was visiting BAMC, they gave him a tour of one of the Fisher Houses. He asked how much one of them would cost to build. He took his check book out and wrote a check for the full amount right there on the spot.

The soldiers overseas were amazed to hear this story and want to get the word out to the American public, because it warmed their hearts to hear it.

The question I have is why does: "Alec Baldwin, Madonna, Sean Penn and other Hollywood types make front page news with their anti-everything America crap; and Denzel Washington's Patriotism doesn't even make page 3 in the Metro section of any newspaper except the Local newspaper in San
Indeed. Where are you? Hello? Anyone out there? Hmm...

Really Mr. Dean?

In my Federalist Patriot email I saw this interesting quote from Howard Dean in regard to the Jack Abramoff scandal.

"There are no Democrats who took money from Jack Abramoff, not one, not one single Democrat. Every person named in this scandal is a Republican. Every person under investigation is a Republican. Every person indicted is a Republican. This is a Republican finance scandal. There is no evidence that Jack Abramoff ever gave any Democrat any money. And we've looked through all of those FEC reports to make sure that's true." —DNC Chairman Howard Dean

The Federalist Patriot goes on to ask about a few people who have received some of the money. I wrote a post about this so if Howie wants to do a little research on the subject he can go here and get a list of the 40 Democrats who have taken Abramoff money.

Or maybe it really is as the Patriot puts it:

True to form, many Democrat beneficiaries, like Minority Leader Harry Reid, have no intention of returning the money they received from Abramoff because they maintain that the contributions were perfectly legal. Apparently, the only dirty money is that which Abramoff gave to Republicans.

Cross posted at Big Dog's Weblog

Ted Kennedy As Reported By The federalist Patriot

I mentioned in a previous post that Ted Kennedy had a lot of nerve to discuss women's rights or any issues involving women given his history with women. Many of you know that I view Kennedy as nothing more than a womanizing drunkard who killed a woman and used his influence and wealth to cover it up. This is from the Federalist Patriot (in an email) and basically espouses my views (except I would never insult an alien that way):

You heard it here first: Ted Kennedy, the Democrat Party mascot, is a tone-deaf alien from a distant galaxy. How else to explain his impudent inquisition into the integrity of our nation's next Supreme Court justice, the Honorable Samuel Alito?

In Senate Judiciary Committee hearings this week, Kennedy actually asserted that the nominee's association with a conservative Princeton alumni group two decades ago should disqualify him from a seat on the High Court.

Well, it's not as if Judge Alito is a spoiled trust baby who got kicked out of Harvard for cheating. Nor is he a United States senator who got drunk, drove a young female campaign worker to her death, then chose not report it to authorities until the next day, and then, only after calling his lawyer, concocting an alibi and developing a strategy to contain the political fallout.

Only an extraterrestrial could wield so much power over the minds of some Bay Staters, willing them to re-elect him to the Senate in perpetuity. Perhaps they are "Manchurian constituents," but we digress.

Kennedy is a real piece of dung and it should be an embarrassment to every person from his state to know he represents them. What did Massachusetts do to deserve the punishment of Kennedy and Kerry?

Cross posted at Big Dog's Weblog

Democrats Not Keeping Word

When Samuel Alito was nominated the President wanted him to have the hearings before Christmas. Arlen Specter said that was not realistic and suggested the first week of January. The Democrats said they wanted to push it back a week until the 9th. Specter agreed so long as the Democrats realized they were invoking their right to delay up front and could not use it on the back end. Today, Specter said they would continue with the original schedule and what do you know, Leahy said that it would be better to wait a week. Everyone will be in their home states for celebrations on Martin Luther King's birthday and will not be back in time. They are supposed to be at work Tuesday morning so how will they not be back in time and are they being charged leave if they are not there?

Then Leahy said that his side was not ready to vote. I wonder how this could be since they have all made it pretty clear they have made up their minds. They are all going to vote no and the Committee vote will, in all likelihood, come down to party lines. There is an issue that is still lingering and that is the Democrats might filibuster. I think the donks want to delay this a week and then filibuster so that the nomination will not be complete by the State of the Union Address, as the President wishes. So Specter should go to Leahy and they should work out a compromise. The Chairman will delay the vote a week so long as every member of the Committee on the left agrees not to filibuster and puts it in writing. They need some blood oath that indicates the Senator will not run for reelection if he signs not to filibuster and then the Democrats filibuster.

Specter needs to get hard with these elitist pigs like Schumer and Kennedy and make sure they know who is in charge. If they will not agree to the terms then they need to be at work bright and early Tuesday morning to vote in Committee and to follow the original schedule.

Sam Alito deserves an up or down vote and it is up to Specter to make sure that happens by preventing the donks from hijacking the process.

Cross posted at Big Dog's Weblog

Thursday, January 12, 2006

The Thai Insurgency: Two Years On

In Thailand there are 247 villages under the control of insurgences. While the government is touting 190 arrests, not convictions, this does not even equal 1 insurgent per village. If we had a crime rate that low, I do believe we would celebrate the LACK of crime, not the capture of the criminals. That is not to equate terrorists with criminals, but the facts are stubborn things.
US terrorism expert Zachary Abuza has told The Australian that the Muslim insurgency [Jemaah Islamiah-linked terrorists in southern Thailand] could spread from the hinterland to beach resorts, such as Phuket, frequented by Western tourists. ...

"We continue to receive reports that terrorists are planning attacks against a range of targets, including places frequented by foreigners," the DFAT website warns. But the threats have been more specific, with past intelligence acknowledging that the areas of Phuket, Pattong Pattaya, Bangkok and the island of Samui could be targeted. ...

In the past 10 days, 19 people - five of them policemen - have been killed in attacks in southern Thailand.

While a raid by militants two years ago on a weapons depot in Narathiwat province is generally regarded as the start of the Muslim insurgency, Dr Abuza said the violence had been spreading, albeit slowly, for several years.

Dr Abuza has warned that there are insurgent leaders who want to take terrorism to the next level, and they could be helped by JI or whatever form al-Qa'ida might take, by attacking places such as Bangkok or Phuket.
Neil Fergus, the chief executive of Intelligence Risks, and terrorism expert Rohan Gunaratna all contributed this article by Natalie O'Brien of The Australian. The article is dated January 11, 2006.

In the meantime, there has been reports of more explosions in Thailand, however I was unable to source any information on that. However the Prime Minister of Thailand, Mr. Thaksin Shinawtra has put together a plan within the Ministry of Information and Communications Technology which will seek to inspect the usage of roaming mobile phones.

There is mention of a terrorist attack that had used 'sim' cards from Malaysia to detonate a bomb. While the PM does not believe there is available enough power in the relay stations in neighboring countries to transmit such a call, he has asked the ICT Ministry to investigate the issue.
Air Chief Marshal Khongsak Wanthana (คงศักดิ์ วันทนา), the interior minister, said the call was made in an overlapping area between Thailand's and Malaysia's border, and both countries would find ways to prevent such calls.
Credits due to Thais News.

It would appear other countries want to save their own hides, so to speak. When death is crouching at their door It is a pretty good motivator. Do you think maybe now they will understand why the United States does what it needs to in order to protect her citizens? Well, it was just a thought.

At Counter Terrorism, Zachary Abuza has written a very detailed and serious article on this situation. (Yes, he is the man who was interviewed at the beginning of this article.) He sees this from a perspective that only people without voices hold. He believes this is a type of religious war, but not in the same way as many may ponder.

Many of the people who are being murdered by this group are Muslim. It is a war within Islam.
According to The Nation, “Ninth Police Region records show that more than half of the non-security personnel assassinated over the two years are Muslims. In Pattani, Muslim casualties number 330 against 141 Buddhists; in Yala it is 222 to 99; and in Narathiwat the figures are 1,406 to 237.”

Very simply the militants are ideologically and religiously motivated; they are trying to impose a very austere and intolerant form of Islam on their society and they countenance no opposition to this. They are going after not just collaborators, or individuals who receive a government salary, but also Muslim clerics who perform funeral rites for murtad – or apostates; or teachers who work in schools that have mixed curriculums. [continue reading]
It is very sensible and leaves one thinking, "What if they make it over here? What if they are here already here? Am I prepared to defend my country, my neighbor, myself?"

These are just a few questions you should answer very seriously, you have not already. Remember, other Muslims have the greatest risk to their lives by other Muslims. We must help those who are innocent.

Hat tip to Zachary Abuza at Counter Terrorism.

Wednesday, January 11, 2006

Rumors of Osama bin Laden's Death

I have been hesitant to release this article because there have been so claims made before that were not true, so please take this with a grain of salt. It would be wonderful if true. Unfortunately, it would not change anything.

Michael Ledeen, author of The War Against the Terror Masters, claims to have it on good authority that Osama bin Laden is dead.

Kathryn Jean Lopez of National Review Online (NRO), using Michael Ledeen's sources, has written a compelling article with which one could conclude there are massive changes about occur.

If they are for the better, and let's hope they are, this will be a good thing. If not, we may be heading into (if not already in) WWIII. Either way, it is time to have this discussion.

After all, some people do not believe we are at war, some do, and the others are choosing their side. With little time left, you are urged to consider the times. Consider history. Consider your loyalties. Then have a nice day.

Monday, January 09, 2006

New Counter

If you have noticed, there is a new count on each site. That is so we can tell which site is actually attracting an audience! The sites with groups that are not attracting visitors, maybe we could do more to help our fellow members? Maybe we could have a round-up on our homepage! Just a thought.

For the visitors, we sure would appreciate it if you would add us to your blogroll. It is just like starting over again! OMG, to see a 5 after seeing 42,000 hits could be depressing! lol. Please write about our site, and if you'd like to join one of them--contact me, Rosemary. Thanks much. Have a great day.

Why We Have The Second Amendment

The Second Amendment is probably the second most debated item in the Bill of Rights after the much maligned First Amendment and the fiasco surrounding Church and State. The founders realized we needed the citizenry to be armed to prevent tyranny from its own government. They also realized that the government and its police forces do not protect people because they are reactionary. You never see the police show up 5 minutes before a crime but they are almost always there after one. One other reason that we have the right to keep and bear arms is to prevent our country from being invaded and taken over from enemies external or from within. That is the part that deals with a well regulated militia (which is not exclusive to the keep and bear part). Unfortunately, those who would exact governmental tyranny are always attempting to disarm law abiding citizens. If they ever succeed it will be the demise of our country and our culture. Terrorist leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi has made that abundantly clear in his latest statement.

Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, speaking for that coward Osama bin Laden, (who has rarely been seen since the US lit a fire under his ass) says there are two conditions for the end of Holy War:

"First, chase out the invaders from our territory in Palestine, in Iraq and everywhere in Islamic land.

"Second, instal [sic] sharia (Islamic law) on the entire Earth and spread Islamic justice there (...). The attacks will not cease until after the victory of Islam and the setting up of sharia," he swore.*

This radical islamofascist is not content with having the Islamic lands free of "those who worship the Cross"* but will not be satisfied until Islamic law and justice is imposed upon the Earth. We have seen the result of Islamic law and justice and it usually involves cutting off someone's head. These cretins would impose their will upon the Earth, a statement that shows the left that our leaving Iraq will not end the terror, and they would push the world back in history where those deemed unworthy are executed and people are denied basic rights for something as inane as simply being a woman. If there was ever any doubt that Murtha, Kennedy, Kerry and the rest of the liberals have it wrong by insisting that pulling out of Iraq will end the violence against the US, this statement should clear that up.

Those of us who believe in the Second Amendment know why it exists and the statement of this terrorist should send a shiver down the spines of every thinking being and enlighten those who oppose the right to keep and bear arms. I know one thing for sure. If the terrorists come around here trying to impose Islamic law they will learn the law of Smith and Wesson. I can promise a lot of them will be looking for their virgins after such a fool hearty adventure.


Cross Posted at Big Dog's Weblog

Friday, January 06, 2006

Pundit Review Presents Law Prof. Bainbridge

I have the privilege of introducing to you an excellent couple of gents who rock my world every Sunday night at 9pm EST! Gregg and Kevin are the Pundit Review. Below is the information for this Sunday's program. Hope to hear you calling in!
One of the best aspects of the blogosphere is the fact that subject matter experts share their passion and deep knowledge with the rest of us. The arguments that will be made both for and against Judge Samuel Alito during the Supreme Court confirmation hearings in a few weeks are already being hashed out among Law Bloggers.

When you make blogs a part of your news diet you get not just this valuable insight from sharp legal minds, you get tomorrow’s news today.

Tune into Pundit Review Radio this Sunday evening at 9pm EST for a preview of the coming battle over Judge Alito and his potential confirmation to the Supreme Court. We are honored to have as our guest one of our favorite Law Bloggers, Professor Stephen Bainbridge of UCLA Law School.

  • Sunday, 9pm EST
  • Streaming Live at WRKO
  • Call us toll free with questions, 877-469-4322

  • About Pundit Review Radio

    Pundit Review Radio is where the old media meets the new. Each week Kevin & Gregg give voice to the work of the most influential leaders in the new media/citizen journalist revolution. This unique show brings the best of the blogs to your radio every Sunday evening at 9pm EST on AM 680 WRKO, Boston’s Talk Leader.
    Bizzy Blog will be interviewed by Pundit Review at 10 am EST SATURDAY morning. Tune in. The interview should be at least 1/2 hour.

    Update: Let me make a correction. Gregg and Kevin will be on the air from 8 am until noon Saturday morning. Bizzy Blog will be on at around 10:10 am. They are still scheduled to be on air for about half an hour. Don't forget to tune in! Thank you.

    Wednesday, January 04, 2006

    The Fiction Age

    There was a story released last night about the 13 miners trapped in West Virginia that was incorrect. It was devastatingly incorrect, but was it the fault of the media? Apparently, not this time.

    Three hours after the news of the men surviving, it was reported they had not indeed survived. One man has survived with lung damage, but he did not suffer any brain damage (as far as is known.)

    There is a rumor you may have heard that someone overheard the rescue workers and relay the news of their survival to the rest of the people. This did not happen. ABC News Correspondent Vic Rapner (sp?) explained this morning on Doug McIntire's radio talk show that it was the Mining Company that stated the men were alive.

    This has not been cooberated, and I have sent this information to
    I have found an article which explains what happened. Remember, this is still speculation.

    There are now rumors that some people are blaming this tragedy on President Bush. I cannot cooberate them, but let us hope this is not true. This is neither the time nor the place to be playing politics. (Remember, this is Sen. Robert Byrd's state.) This is very pathetic politics if you have to snipe at one another without regard for the grieving.

    Update: It does not take the Democrat Party any time at all to bring disgrace to itself. While people are mourning and trying to understand what happened with the reporting and why this tragedy happened, the Democrats were busy trying to find anything way they could to blame this on President Bush.

    The Boston Globe, on page 2, has written words right out of the Democrats mouths. When did they do the research? Who told them to do the research? Why were they not sharing their condolences? Is the Party so morally bancrupt with hatred for our president that they would rather forget the people?

    I will leave that judgement up to you. Please read the article in its entirety. That is so you can keep it in context. I find it rather saddening, personally. They used to stand for something. They used to love this country. I do not see this anymore. Maybe you will. If you do, please share it with me.

    Hat tip to Kevin at the Pundit Review. Please read his article on this situation. He has several facts about the differences in administrations between Clinton and Bush. One of them is the fact that more people died in 2000, 48, than in 2004, 28. He wrote a very compelling and thoughtful article.

    Civil Liberties News Roundup

    White House Calls ACLU a "Special Interest" Group-WND

    The White House spokesman Scott McClellan: "The ACLU – this is one of the special interest groups that Democrats in the Senate are trying to appease because they want to weaken and undermine the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act is vital to saving lives. … It has also met an important commitment to protect people's civil liberties."

    Is the ACLU a special interest? Certainly. I couldn't find any Democrat rebuttals defending the ACLU on this one. They show their support with their votes in Congress.

    Chaplain on Hunger Strike Against Navy Policy-WND

    Lt. Gordon James Klingenschmitt says he will not eat until the president takes action to allow him and other chaplains the freedom to pray and preach without diluting God to a one-size-fits all deity.It's been two weeks since he participated in a protest outside the White House, asking President Bush to sign an executive order allowing military clergy to pray according to their own faith traditions.

    "They taught mandatory lectures there to all chaplains, that you cannot pray to your God, you have to pray to the civic god," Klingenschmitt explained. "The Muslim chaplain can't pray to Allah, a Jewish chaplain can't pray to Adonai, a Roman Catholic can't pray in the name of the Trinity, and I couldn't pray in Jesus' name in public. They only let us do that in private. If it's in public, they tell us to just pray to God and say, 'Amen.'"

    WH spokesman Scott McClellan referred questions to the Defense Department.

    ACLU Sues Over Student's Right Not to Stand for Pledge - Fla. Sun-Sentinel

    A Boynton Beach, FL. teenager has engaged the ACLU to sue his school, after being "ridiculed and punished" for not standing to the pledge of allegiance.

    "This lawsuit is not about the Pledge of Allegiance," said Howard Simon, executive director of the ACLU of Florida. "It is about his right to choose not to stand to recite the Pledge of Allegiance."

    It seems more like a lack of discipline in the schools, and students going to any lengths to avoid doing what they're told. The same applies to this next one...

    Rep. Tom Tancredo Asks ACLU to Support Student's Right Not to Stand for Mexican National Anthem

    Congressman Tom Tancredo (R), citing the ACLU's stated opposition to the words "under God" in the pledge of allegiance, asked the ACLU to defend a student who refused to stand for the Mexican national anthem at a cultural awareness program. The Mexican anthem contains the lines, "For in heaven your eternal destiny, has been written by the hand of God."

    Rep. Tancredo's press release is linked in this item's title, suggesting that he wasn't expecting any help for his constituent from the ACLU. Again, I think both the kids should have stood, if the faculty told them to.

    ACLU Giving Cameras to Film Police - STL Today

    The local ACLU chapter is giving video cameras out to residents of the city's north side, attempting to document civil rights abuses.

    Sgt.Kevin Ahlbrand, president of the St. Louis Police Officers Association, said: "We don't expect any negative reports to come out of videotaping. Our members are under the assumption that in today's society, they should assume that any time they're in public, they may be being videotaped."

    Perhaps the ACLU could ask the local people to film the criminals, instead of the cops? --Stipulating that there are many more criminals than criminal cops to film, of course. The ACLU doesn't appear to subscribe to that belief.

    Hat tip to STOP THE ACLU

    Crossposted at LEAVWORLD

    Monday, January 02, 2006

    Risen's Book Hits Stores

    Mr. Risen, the writer who broke the story of the NSA wiretaping terrorists in our country, has written a book based upon many anonymous sources. In his book, he discloses the name of a person who went to Iraq on the behest of the CIA.

    If we have learned anything, we have learned that anyone working with the CIA within the past 5 years is under a shield of the law written in 1982 against disclosure of their identity. Any person knowingly revealing that person's identity has comitted a felony. Have a nice time in your cell with Bubba, creep.

    Allow me to explain. If you want this country to lose this war, you are an enemy. Is that clear? I hope so. It does not mean you have to agree with every policy. Loose lips sink ships. People with loose lips should not be working in the press business where they can profit off our dead heroes. I will not hold my contempt from showing. you disgust me. [continue reading].

    Miners Trapped in Collapsed Mine-W. Va

    It is possible that lightning ignited the explosion that trapped 13 miners deep underground on Monday, January 1, 2006. The rescue crew was deterred from providing search and rescue procedures 12 long hours by the smell dangerous gasses. [continue reading].

    Note: I would like to credit Bill for spoting a spelling error. Thank you, Bill.

    Earthquake Update: US Military Aid

    While many of us have moved forward with our lives, especially during the new year, many of the people in Pakistan are finding harder and harder to move forward. After that horrific earthquake, they are still without shelter, food, aid, and many other things we take for granted.

    Fortunately, however, our USA Military is on the ball, and they are doing whatever is possible to aid in this humanitarian project.
    The U.S. Air Force continued to support Pakistan-led earthquake recovery operations by airlifting much-needed supplies into the devastated region December 23-30.

    Three U.S. Air Force C-130 Hercules flew in more than 41,000 pounds of food, water, medical supplies, aircraft parts and construction materials in response to requests from Pakistan’s government. [read more].
    That is one arm of the government to which I can honestly say I am proud. Thank you, guys and gals. Keep up the good work.

    (Op-Ed by Bos'un) Who are the Dems for: Addendum

    Here is the exchange between CHRIS WALLACE, host of "Fox News Sunday" and senators, Republican Mitch McConnell and Democrat Charles Schumer. Chris Wallace discussed the controversy about that NSA domestic spying program and the growing debate in Congress over giving the president the powers to win the war on terror while also protecting our civil liberties with McConnell and Schumer. This is the exchange:

    WALLACE: Senator Schumer, let me try to wrap this up, because there are other areas I want to move on to. The one other part of this which Senator McConnell has talked about is the Justice Department is going to have a criminal investigation to try to find out who leaked this information. Now, the ACLU says that's cracking down on a courageous whistleblower. How do you feel about the idea of investigating and prosecuting the leaker in this case?
    SCHUMER: I think that there should be an investigation. Whenever classified information comes forward, it should be looked at. You know, whenever classified information is leaked, there ought to be an investigation, because it could endanger our security. Having said that, let's not prejudge. Was this somebody who had an ill purpose, trying to hurt the United States, or might it have been someone in the department who felt that this was wrong, legally wrong, that the law was being violated, went to the higher-ups, they did nothing - now it's clear that Mr. Comey and others, serious people who are hardly left-wing ideologues, had doubts about the program - and then, in exasperation, went to the media?
    WALLACE: Senator Schumer, you're certainly not going to say exasperation is an excuse for leaking classified information.
    SCHUMER: No, no, no. I am saying the type of punishment, the type of investigation - there are differences between felons and whistleblowers, and we ought to wait till the investigation occurs to decide what happened. But I will say one other thing, Chris. To simply divert this whole thing to just looking at the leaker, and saying everything else was fine, is typical of this administration. Instead of examining a problem and saying maybe there's a problem, let's come together and reason on it, they try to divert attention and blame somebody. And that, while it should be pursued, is not the main issue here.
    WALLACE: Senator McConnell, I'll give you 30 seconds to respond to that.
    MCCONNELL: Chris, can I just make one more quick point? I mean, this is selective outrage here. The Democrats, of course, were completely outraged in the Valerie Plame case that allegedly a classified matter was leaked. And here, you know, the national security was not endangered in that situation. But here, where clearly we're talking about intercepts with people who are communicating internationally and potentially plotting another 9/11, they don't have apparently the same kind of outrage.
    SCHUMER: Well, we have to...
    MCCONNELL: This is a much more important investigation and should go forward. And I applaud the Justice Department for beginning it.

    You can get the complete transcript of the exchange and the rest of "Fox News Sunday" HERE

    Bob at Crazy Politico's Rantings, has some additional comments about Schumer and hit the proverbial nail on the head in his article: Let's Use Chuck's Logic. As we say at a Seattle Mariner's game, "There you have the Magnolia Moment!"

    Technorati tags: , , , , , , , ,

    Sunday, January 01, 2006

    (Op-Ed by Bos'un) Who are the Dems for

    Sounds like Chuck Schumer, Democrat, New York, is beginning to lay ground work for the defense of releasing of classified information on the National Security Agency secret wiretapping program. What are his motivations? According to Schumer, "There are differences between felons and whistleblowers, and we ought to wait til the investigation occurs to decide what happened" in an article, "Schumer Wants to Know Motivation Behind NSA Leak."

    My question to Schumer is, "What exactly is the difference between violations of the law in regards to national security and leaking classified material to the press?"

    With Schumer's logic, one would have to say that it was completely alright for Sandy Burger to stuff classified material in his underpants and socks and walk out of national archives. Perhaps one should pardon John Walker and his son, Michael, for stealing national security information and selling it to the Russians. After all, Walker was just trying to secure his retirement account and Michael was influence by his fathers mis-judgement. Schumer would like us to look into the motivations for the crimes rather than the crimes themselves.

    Give me a break. Schumer seems to be suffering from "liberalism is a mental disorder" disease.

    While looking at yet another confusing statement by Schumer, we have to remember the controversy surrounding Schumer and his staffers. According to the Weekly Standard, back in September, Schumer expressed outrage at the nomination of John Roberts to the Supreme Court when news broke that the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, which he chairs, had a small problem. Both Newsday and the New York Post reported that the DSCC was in illegal possession of the credit report for Maryland's Republican Lieutenant Governor Michael Steele. Two of Schumer's staffers, Katie Barge and Lauren Weiner, used Steele's Social Security number to fraudulently get his credit history. Schumer kept Barge and Weiner on the payroll long after the story broke. What was their motivation besides criminal misconduct? Incidently, Schumer had campaigned against Wheaties price-gouging, exorbitant ATM fees, and also sponsored legislation to protect corporate consumer data. Schumer had been busy pressuring legal publishers to block snoopers from accessing Social Security numbers online.

    So, he campaigned for one thing and his staffers violated the very ethics that he said he was for. There is something wrong with that picture.

    One should closely examine Schumer's past conduct and evaluate how he has swarted supreme court nominations, his support (or lack there of) the war efforts, and one should look at his record on supporting the war on terrorism. We may find that Schumer lags behind in most issues and continues to stay on the wrong side of history. Schumer is either ill informed, has very dense staffers and advisors who cannot get it right, or, perhaps he does not know what he is doing. For sure, the ethical hypocrisy of today's Democrats knows no bounds and Schumer is just a small part of a rather large problem. I'll let you be the judge.

    Technorati tags: , , , , , , , ,

    Newdow Wants Atheism To Be Official Religion Of The US

    Michael Newdow, the atheist lawyer who has decided that his wishes are more important than greater than 90% of this country has now filed a suit to have "In God We Trust" removed from our currency. The absence of a belief in religion is atheism, which the Supreme Court has, ironically, ruled a religious belief. Therefore, Newdow wants his religious belief to be the one upheld by the government which is truly a violation of the First Amendment. As I have stated many times, Congress is not making a law establishing a religion (has anyone seen such a law enacted by Congress?) and GOD is not a religion. God is the Deity in whom many religions believe. The money does not say We only trust in the God Christians, or Jews, or Muslims, worship, it says in God indicating the God that any religion believes in.

    Our founders had deep rooted religious beliefs (mostly Christian) and the founding documents mention God as the Creator. God is mentioned in a number of our historical documents and now Newdow wants to wipe out a couple hundred years of religion to favor atheism. This man has to be stopped but it is expected the 9th Circus Court will side with him. The issue is expected to end up before the Supreme Court where I am sure they will interpret the Constitution correctly and leave the national motto on our currency. This will not stop Newdow who will find some other cause to involve himself in and attempt to further erode the Constitutional rights of the citizens of this country to participate in the free worship of religion, any that they so choose, including none.

    The US has had enough of this guy and the manner in which he allows his hatred for his ex-wife to spill over to the rest of us. He is a scurvy little spider spinning his web bigger and bigger to capture and erode the fabric upon which our society was founded. It is time to reject this loser and the losers on the 9th Circus.

    As usual, the ACLU is involved and you can bet it is for the money they make off the taxpayer. We will be better off without Newdow and the ACLU. How on Earth did we ever make it before they were around to tell us right from wrong?

    Read it here.

    Posted at Big Dog's Weblog

    Yet They Say There Is No Attack On Christianity

    We just went through the Christmas season and all the anticipated hatred spewed by hate groups who want to remove Christ from Christmas. When Bill O'Reilly went on the air and said there was an attack on Christmas he was made out to be a nut. Rush Limbaugh says that the attack has been there for years but now Christians are fighting back so the left just simply states there never was an attack. I view the attack on Christmas, and yes there is one, as an extension of the attacks on Christianity that take place everyday. This is done under the guise of separation of all religions from state (something not espoused in the Constitution) but when you break it down, Christians are the people who are usually censored.

    Now comes this new show from NBC called The Book of Daniel. It is supposed to give us an accurate portrayal of Christian life and how Jesus fits into it. Read the following and tell me if this is not an attack on Christian values and in addition, a cheap shot at Republicans:

    NBC considers new show featuring a completely dysfunctional family a positive portrayal of Christ and Christians
    Dear Wayne,
    On January 6, NBC will begin a new series entitled The Book of Daniel.

    While the public has not seen the program, NBC is promoting "The Book of Daniel" as a serious drama about Christian people and the Christian faith. The main character is Daniel Webster, a drug-addicted Episcopal priest whose wife depends heavily on her mid-day martinis.

    Webster regularly sees and talks with a very unconventional white-robed, bearded Jesus. The Webster family is rounded out by a 23-year-old homosexual Republican son, a 16-year-old daughter who is a drug dealer, and a 16-year-old adopted son who is having sex with the bishop's daughter. At the office, his lesbian secretary is sleeping with his sister-in-law.

    NBC and the mainstream media call it "edgy," "challenging" and "courageous." The series is written by Jack Kenny, a practicing homosexual who describes himself as being "in Catholic recovery," and is interested in Buddhist teachings about reincarnation and isn't sure exactly how he defines God and/or Jesus. "I don't necessarily know that all the myth surrounding him (Jesus) is true," he said.

    NBC considers The Book of Daniel a positive portrayal of Christ and Christians.

    Now the media and the anti-Christian coalitions out there can tell us all they want but this show is a direct attack on Christians and their values. I am not indicating that there are not homosexual Republicans or clergy who have sexual affairs or even that there are not Christians who are gay. I am merely stating that this show is an attack on the values of Christians using those things that Christians (and Republicans) oppose as an item of reality within the family depicted by the show.

    I imagine if we had a show about The Book of Mohamed and it featured little Habib growing up learning to manufacture bomb vests while daddy was out deflowering little boys in the village and mommy was forcing her little girls to keep their bodies covered and to be subservient to men there would be an uproar like you have never hear. Look at how the movie The Passion of the Christ got the Jews all up in arms. Yet, we can continue this attack on Christians because it is the "right" thing to do.

    You can read about it here (includes actions you can take).

    Posted at Big Dog's Weblog

    Eye on Pundit Review

    This afternoon's post is written by Gregg and Kevin of Pundit Review.

    Tonight on Pundit Review Radio we will take a look at the big stories of 2005 and highlight the impact of the new media.

    Winter of 2004

    We will take a look at the role of the new media in the Social Security debate.

    Spring 2005

    We had the Newsweek/Ko'ran controversy. The heat that was placed on Newsweek by the New Media led to their eventually moving off their denial to a full apology.

    This story impacted us directly, with WRKO deciding to fire Newsweek International’s radio program on Sunday evenings and replacing them with a show by and about bloggers. What a delicious irony. Thanks Newsweak!

    Summer 2005

    What a busy season for bloggers. They played a tremendous role in two tragedies, the London bombings and Hurricaine Katrina. In each case, new technology and citizen journalists were providing the quickest, freshest information, perspective, survival stories and photos.

    This summer we also had the Dick Durbin trilogy where he compared US troops behavior to that of the Nazi’s, Soviets and Pol Pot. The new media (blogs, talk radio, cable news) gave life to the story, moving Durbin from unapologetic to silent to tears on the floor of the Senate. We are looking forward to the Oscars this Spring to see how he does.

    Autumn 2005

    In the wake of Katrina we saw the rise of Porkbusters, a grass roots initiative led by bloggers like NZ Bear, Instapundit and Mark Tapscott (all former guests on Pundit Review Radio) designed to get politicians to give up pork projects to help them pay for Katrina relief. The campaign picked up speed all fall. Click here to see which politicians joined and which said no.

    In December, VP Cheney passed the tie-breaking vote on $50 billion in budget cuts. Without question, Porkbusters played some role in this.

    Winter 2005

    Right now law blogs are providing tomorrow’s news today on the upcoming Alito hearings. Subject matter experts, constitutional law profs, practitioners, and partners at major firms are providing their insight and analysis for anyone who wants to read it.

    When you do, you understand Alito’s rulings and his judgment, and you will have heard the background/context against the attacks which will come. Every argument against Alito has already been hashed out on law blogs, usually in highly communicative ways that are easy to absorb. What a fabulous resource for political junkies who are interested in such things.

    Finally, we have two special awards to give out tonight



    Check us out tonight, 9pm EST
    Streaming Live on WRKO
    Call us toll free 877-469-4322

    I usually write about Gregg and Kevin myself, but this was just too juicy. These guys are hot, they are on the mark, and they are not even all that partisan!

    Please give them a listen to, and let them know how they did. I ask you to be polite if you disagree with them. They are big boys. They can handle it, but for me, please, just be civil. That is all I ask.