Saturday, May 28, 2005
Friday, May 27, 2005
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 5:19 PM
SAN YSIDRO, Calif. -- This image, released by the U.S. Border Patrol, shows the legs of a 5-year-old girl inside a party pinata that was discovered on Nov. 2, 2004 during a vehicle search at the San Ysidro, Calif., border station crossing along the U.S.-Mexican border. (04/05/05 AP photo)
Good God! I don't think I will ever be able to use a pinata again!! If America is so bad why do people go to such extremes and even put their kids at risk to get here?
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 5:15 PM
My sister-in-law sent me this naughty joke. I blame it all on her. Heh.
A farmer has about 500 hens, but no rooster and wants chicks. He goes down the road to the next farmer and asks if he has a rooster that he would sell. The other farmer says, "Yep, I've got this great rooster named Kenny. He'll service every chicken you got - no problem."
Kenny the rooster cost the farmer $3,000, but the farmer decides he'd be worth it, so he buys Kenny. The farmer takes Kenny home and sets him down in the barnyard and gives the rooster a pep talk.
"I want you to pace your self now. You've got a lot of chickens to service here and you cost me a lot of money. I'll need you to do a good job, so take your time and have some fun." The farmer points toward the hen house and Kenny takes off like a shot.
WHAM! Kenny nails every hen in the hen house, the farmer is shocked. Then the farmer hears a commotion in the duck pen and, sure enough, Kenny is in there.
Later the farmer sees Kenny after a flock of geese down by the lake. Once again - WHAM! He gets all the geese. By sunset he sees Kenny out in the fields chasing quail and pheasants.
The farmer is distraught and worried that his expensive rooster won't even last 24 hours. Sure enough, the farmer wakes up the next morning to find Kenny on his back out in the middle of the yard, mouth open, tongue hanging out and both feet sticking straight up in the air with buzzards circling overhead.
The farmer, saddened by the loss of such a colorful and expensive animal, shakes his head and says, "Kenny, I told you to take your time, now look at what you've done to yourself !"
Kenny opens one eye, nods toward the buzzards circling in the sky and says, "Shhh..... they're getting closer."
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 12:39 PM
Citizen Smash is ANGRY:
"Let’s be honest: some people are secretly delighted about the recently released FBI memos. They feel vindicated, because when they first read the Newsweek allegations, it confirmed some dark suspicions they covet regarding our military. They were openly disappointed when Newsweek retracted the story. Most will never admit it publicly, but they want the stories to be true, so they can use them to shame their political enemies.
If this describes you at all, I ask you to pause and reflect on this for a moment: in your eagerness to score some cheap partisan points, are you advancing the agenda of the same terrorists who attacked us on September 11, 2001? Consider who has the most to gain from spreading these rumors. Yes, that’s exactly what they are: rumors. The FBI memos didn’t reveal any new information – these same allegations have been floating around for over two years. A thorough reading of these “new” transcripts would leave any reasonable person doubting the sincerity of the detainees. Many of them are repeating hearsay. Others, when confronted with evidence countering their claims, admit to lying to the investigators.
Remember, most of the men in Camps X-Ray and Delta were captured in Afghanistan, while actively engaged in combat against U.S and Coalition forces. Al Qaeda doctrine calls on captured terrorists to allege torture at every opportunity, regardless of how they are actually treated. So why would any American give the words of captured terrorists more credence than those of the US military?
As a veteran and as an American, I am deeply angered that any of my countrymen would be so willing to defame our military and our nation’s honor for cheap partisan gain. The allegations may or may not be true – the Pentagon claims that are “not credible,” while the ACLU is convinced that they have concrete evidence of torture. But all other things being equal, don’t our men and women in uniform deserve the benefit of the doubt?
Or does the principle of “innocent until proven guilty” only apply to wealthy celebrities and enemy combatants?"
The saddest thing of all is that it is people within our own country not giving the soldiers the benefit of the doubt. And we all know who they are.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 7:52 AM
The Belmont Club sums the Amnesty International's Report perfectly:
"I'd have to say that Amnesty International's Report claiming the US is the world's worst human rights violator condemns itself far more than it does the United States. Anyone who has lived in the Third World or any of the places which Amnesty International purports to care about knows -- and I mean knows for a fact -- what police abuse, torture, arbitrary detention, etc. really are and that it cannot be compared in any way to the "Gulag" in Guantanamo Bay. Moreover, anyone who has lived in such places knows that the last place where victims can find practical help is from Amnesty International."
Really. Who can take these Amnesty people seriously?
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 6:55 AM
The Guardian Unlimited has this:
"Scientists in America have found the first evidence that common chemicals used in products as diverse as cosmetics, toys, clingfilm and plastic bags may harm the development of unborn baby boys.
Researchers have long known that high levels of substances called phthalates have gender-bending effects on male animals, making them more feminine and leading to poor sperm quality and infertility. The new study suggests that even normal levels of phthalates, which are ubiquitous, can disrupt the development of male babies' reproductive organs."
Weird. And something I have never heard here.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 6:42 AM
Thursday, May 26, 2005
Got this e-mail from GOP.com:
Recently, some Democrats are falsely claiming that abortions have increased during President Bush's time in office. Not true. As this recent article from FactCheck.org points out, abortions have fallen under the Bush Administration.
FactCheck debunks the claim, made most recently by Howard Dean this past Sunday, and by Sens. Hillary Clinton and John Kerry in recent statements.
The report indicates those eager to criticize President Bush picked up on a claim based on incomplete and inaccurate data:
This claim is false. It's based on an an opinion piece that used data from only 16 states. A study by the Alan Guttmacher Institute of 43 states found that abortions have actually decreased... The claim that abortions are rising again can be traced back to an opinion piece by Glen Harold Stassen, an ethics professor at Fuller Theological Seminary... Stassen's broad conclusion wasn't justified by the sketchy information he cited, however. Furthermore, a primary organization he cited specifically as a source for historical data now contradicts him, saying abortions have continued to decline since Bush took office.
The Guttmacher Institute is no fan of the Administration's policies - they were 'founded in 1968 in honor of a former president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America', and describes [their] mission as being 'to protect the reproductive choice of all women and men in the United States and throughout the world.'
But even they had to admit the Administration's policies are working. 'Had Stassen's numbers proven accurate, the Institute would have reported and widely publicized a rise in abortion rates,' said [the Institute's Leila] Darabi. 'But facts are facts.'
We urge you to set the record straight. Get the truth about the Democrats' misleading claim here.
Next, please forward this message to your friends, and contact your local talk radio shows. Let your community know that these false claims by Democrat opponents will not be tolerated.
Dave RexrodeDirector of Conservative Development Republican National Committee
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 8:50 PM
Wednesday, May 25, 2005
John McCain just made a bet that will either give him the '08 nomination or condemn him to political extinction. A risky gamble for this guy. But say what you like about him, taking chances is what he does best.
He is betting that this compromise with the Democrats will get all the judicial nominees that we wanted through with no filibuster (or a filibuster that makes Democrats look like they broke a deal, which would be excellent for us) and we didn't have to use the nuclear option and we look like reasonable negotiators.
If this works, then McCain will look like a hero. If it doesn't, then he is toast for the '08 nomination. But his odds are looking pretty good. If the Democrats threaten a filibuster when a clearly qualified judge comes up, then the Republicans look like they have a clear right to use the nuclear option. No amount of cartoonish ads are going to change that.
For social conservatives nothing is more important than getting a strict constructionist on the Supreme Court. If this happens and we win-
So does McCain. Mark my blog.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 8:09 PM
Airborne Hog Society describes another fascinating day in "Paradise." (It's one of our soldiers......a must read)
Update: I was just informed by a fellow blogger that the soldier above is a old chat room buddy of mine from Townhall.com chat room! Schmed! Shame on you for not letting me know who you were!!!
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 1:59 PM
A scary look into the future if a gay gene is detected. Heh.
Bill Clinton fails to cancel large dinner reservation. How white trash of him!!! h/t Richard.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 1:22 PM
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 10:55 AM
Tuesday, May 24, 2005
I'm going to repost some stuff from my early blogging for new commenters. Some things need to be repeated. This one is from Nov. 15th, 2004.
I'm in a mood today so watch out.
This time it isn't at the lefties. I noticed from the start of my blogging that the "big time" bloggers, those who get the most hits and attention ( and you know who you are ) were all Republican, or some kind of converted libertarians. And that's fine. But then came all this "Jesusland" stuff. The vile and hatred of Christians from the left made it obvious why Bush had won. I read many many well known blogs defending us Christians, making fun of the left and it's moronic image of Christians. I appreciated that, really I did. These blogs were glad we were on their side. But it seemed at the beginning of the defense of us, you always said "I am not religious but,....." And that is fine too. Because Christian faith in and of itself cannot be forced. It must be freely chosen or it is no faith at all.
Stick with me here, because I DO have a point.
I heard a story on Rush today. He was playing an audio of Tina Brown's show. The audio had Tina talking about a piece she wrote regarding a dinner party before the election in New York where she and the elite among us were discussing how to beat Bush. Suddenly a waiter serving them boldy stated, "Well, I am from the suburbs and I am voting for Bush." I had to laugh. Can you imagine their faces? I would love to have seen it..... "The peasant speaks!!!! How dare he! Off to the dungeon!!!
"The point of Tina's story was that the democrats had to come up with a strategy to win over the voters from the suburbs, "the little people," if you will. You know, the ones who do their own yardwork and wash their own clothes. THOSE people. Rush pointed out that this is the elites problem. You don't figure out a strategy for these people. You have to know them. You have to know what their values are. You have to know what they believe.
Now where am I going with this? The same can be said of many of the conservative bloggers about people of faith. Powerline, Glenn Reynolds, LGF, Wizbang and the rest. You don't know or understand Christians (or those of deep faith from other religions) too well, or you wouldn't dismiss our concerns on social issues. The idea of Arlen Spector as head of the judiciary committee doesn't bother you a bit, yet it horrifies us. Another 'moderate' supreme court judge seems fine to you. Good God! Look what the moderate ones have brought us so far. If all you seem to care about are the economic issues, then we become the Republicans the democrats imagine us to be, greedy and self involved.
This is what we, people of faith, care about on social issues:
Listen up class. Look at the board.
1) Abortion. Yeah, you are all mostly guys and you don't care. Your use to it ..blah blah blah... Well, we are sick of 4000 unborn children being destroyed everyday in this country, so sick of it that we are even willing to compromise. How about giving us what just about every reasoned American agrees on...First trimester only, unless the life of the mother is in danger, parental consent for minors, 24 hour waiting period, and informed surgical consent. What??? You didn't know that abortion is the only surgical procedure in the country where there is no informed consent? Where a doctor is not required to tell you about the procedure beforehand. You didn't know a 13 yr old could get an abortion and her parents need never know??? That's because you haven't been paying attention. That's because you don't give a damn.
2) No gay marriage. Not because we hate gays, not because we are homophopic. We have gay friends and relatives we adore. And I shudder at what the fashion industry would be like without them. ;-) We don't want marriage re-defined. It is the foundation of our society and it's hard enough to keep it together as it is. It opens the pandora's box of unions and we all know it. All issues of rights regarding property, inheritance, children ect.. can be handled legally and we all know that too.
3) Pornography. Yeah, your guilty of looking at it. We know. Your a grownup, you want to look at it, go for it. But the internet is in our homes and our kids are seeing things you wouldn't want to expose your dog to. We want it restricted, we want it mandated and required that all pornography sites must verify that an adult is the one looking at the website. I don't give a rat's butt about credit card and privacy issues, I care about our children. And they are being damaged beyond belief by what Johnny next door is pulling up on his computer and showing your 9 yr old, while at your house your nice safe computer software and firewall sit idle.
4) Faith based iniatives. Being the sister of a recovering alcoholic, I know a little about this. I believe and most studies show that recovery programs that are run by people who do the work out of love for God's children, and not a government paycheck, do a MUCH better job at helping and sustaining the recovery of the addicted person. These iniatives work better at helping those in welfare programs and homeless programs for the same reasons. Welfare was suppose to be a stop gap program, not the billion dollar fraud industry it is today. You don't stop the vicious cycle of poverty by rewarding it. Yes, there are many job training programs that work well run by the government, but when it comes to personal responsibility, the Church and other faith based programs teach those who are struggling with life how to be strong. A government check does the opposite. The government should have a role in helping those TRULY in need, the elderly poor and the impoverished children. But those addicted, in need of fatherly guidance, in need of clothing and food, in need of caring and shelter. These can be addressed by people of faith or even those just willing to help mankind out of love from their own atheist heart. The transition cannot happen overnight, but DANG..... let it begin.
This, blogger boys, are why we are called "compassionate conservatives."
The left has resisted these programs because the people needing help might....Actually.....Become.....CHRISTIANS!!!!! OMG!! THE HORROR!!!! And here is the big secret of Christians.... shhhh...... don't tell......*whisper* We actually spend most of our time ministering to those who need help in soup kitchens, need programs, nursing homes, and pregnancy crisis centers ect... We don't sit around rubbing our hands together trying to figure out how to blow up abortion clinics or make signs saying "God hates fags." IN FACT, (now this is a super secret!!!) WE are as HORRIFIED by those people as the left are. (Don't tell. What would the left write about if they knew?) But you knew that, right? Now, all we asking is a little payback here. We waited in line hours to vote for the man that best represented our values. Maybe you don't give a flying squirrel about them, but we do. We gave what you wanted, we had your back, now you have ours.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 7:42 PM
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 8:36 AM
Patrica Owens may get her vote, but the Democrats are way too happy for this to be any kind of win for us. Jeff G. says it better than I ever could (except for the heroin part)
I'm not sure which career is worse here.
Someone tell these people that movies are not real.
This is truly odd, especially the last sentence.
How do these things happen in the first place?
You GO girl!!!
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 8:13 AM
Monday, May 23, 2005
Victor Davis Hanson gives us a look at what a speech of George W. Bush's would have looked like the day after Sept. 11th, if he would have predicted what actually has happened since:
"Ours is not a war on Muslims or the Arab world. Rather, we are in a struggle against a new fascism that resorts to terror. Osama bin Laden must distort Islam and deflect blame onto the United States for the self-inflicted miseries of the Middle East, created by its own illiberal dictatorships.
"Therefore, American strategy is three-pronged:
"We will hunt down terrorist cells in the United States that due to our laxity have already infiltrated the West."
America will remove rogue regimes abroad that have funded and supported these killers.
"In their places, the United States will support consensual governments to ensure a third choice other than just Islamic theocracy or brutal dictatorship.
"First, we must go on the offensive. In less than a month, our forces will go to faraway Afghanistan and remove the Taliban within six weeks upon arrival. From that victory, democracy will follow for all Afghans, regardless of tribe or gender.
"Some regimes openly sanction terrorists. Others have entered into secretive alliances with them. Saddam Hussein has violated all his past international agreements and murdered thousands of his own and others across his borders. The Senate no doubt will sanction his removal because he is an enemy of the United States, subsidizing anti-democratic terrorists from the West Bank to Kurdistan.
"In the space of three week's time, we can liberate Iraq from Saddam's Baathist nightmare and stay on to help the long-suffering Iraqi people secure their freedom under a new democracy.
"Pakistan has been hostile, but its cooperation is vital to dismantle Al Qaeda. We must win President Musharraf over to the side of civilization and prod him to reform. Such cooperation is fraught with danger. It demands the exposure of the nuclear proliferator Dr. A.Q. Khan and the cessation of his efforts to spread nuclear weapons worldwide. If we are successful, in the next four years most of the leadership of Al Qaeda will be scattered into hiding, apprehended or killed.
"Democracy is a human aspiration and thus contagious. After our successes in Afghanistan and Iraq, America may well see democratic awakenings in Lebanon, Egypt and the Gulf states.
"Such reform could serve as an inspiration to peoples even as far distant as the former Soviet republics and Ethiopia. Syria must and will leave Lebanon to the Lebanese. It is also past time for Col. Gadhafi in Libya to come clean about his dangerous arsenal. Europeans should join us in stopping the nuclear plans of theocratic Iran.
"Yasser Arafat corrupted elections in Palestine. He embezzled billions from his own citizens, subverting all his commitments to peace. Arafat must be shunned and his subsidies cut off. Only that way can fair elections return to the West Bank. The American government certainly will no longer see him as a representative of the Palestinian people.
"Despite our historic relationship with Saudi Arabia, American troops will leave the kingdom. Saddam soon will no longer pose a threat, and we must distance ourselves from a Saudi monarchy whose rogue princes have funded terrorists.
"None of this will be easy, given our past appeasement of terrorists, the world's dependence on Middle Eastern oil and the global distrust of American force.
"Congress will debate this agenda. We must await its vote of approval before moving against both the Taliban and Saddam Hussein. This administration shall stand for election in three years — and so the wisdom or folly of these risky policies will be determined by the American voter.
"The Taliban ruler Mullah Omar and Saddam Hussein are formidable. Their removal halfway around the world may cost hundreds of American lives. Yet if we act forcefully now, we can fight the suicide bombers and autocrats on their own turf. That way, in the days ahead we will lose far fewer Americans in this war abroad than we have yesterday in peace at home. Only this difficult road ensures that in four years we will not witness a repeat of yesterday's mass murder on American soil."
"Had the president promised or even predicted such things after Sept. 11, most of us would have dismissed him as utterly unhinged. But that is precisely what has come to pass.
It is now time to concede it was not entirely a coincidence, and that President Bush was not a "Pink Panther"-like Inspector Clouseau who bumbled about the Middle East, overturned a few things and ended up accidentally accomplishing what legions of "experts" never could."
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 4:07 PM
RightWing News has a good point here. Why can't the Democrats be honest about what they are?
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 9:56 AM
Awww....poor babeeee....do you want your mommy???
Give me a freakin break. This man tortured and murdered people on a whim and we are suppose to worry about him being in his underwear or not having too good of conditions in prison? When they start putting him feet first into a shredder, let me know. via Riehl World. (who also has exclusive video of Saddam...*wink*)
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 7:53 AM
Sunday, May 22, 2005
The Belmont Club has an excellent take on the Newsweek/NY Times news coverage or what they see as important news. Here is an excerpt:
"We live in a strange world where the Beslan story vanishes in weeks while Abu Ghraib lives on for years. Maybe it reflects the inherent importance of the stories but it more probably demonstrates the media's ability to prolong the life of some stories while ignoring others. I hope it is not impertinent to observe that the media's demeanor towards terrorism bears more than a passing resemblance to cheap cowardice; but though outwardly similar it really springs from a high-minded idealism, deep courage and profound learning. Or so I hope."
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 8:57 PM
Washington's Post has this article by James Watt (former secretary of the interior under Reagan): "The Religious Left's lies."
Referring to Bill Moyers of PBS fame, Watt says this:
"Last December Moyers received an environmental award from Harvard University. About three paragraphs into the speech, after attacking the Bush administration, Moyers said: "James Watt told the U.S. Congress that protecting natural resources was unimportant in light of the imminent return of Jesus Christ. In public testimony he said, 'After the last tree is felled, Christ will come back.' Beltway elites snickered. The press corps didn't know what he was talking about. But James Watt was serious. So were his compatriots out across the country. They are the people who believe the Bible is literally true -- one-third of the American electorate if a recent Gallup poll is accurate."
I never said it. Never believed it. Never even thought it. I know no Christian who believes or preaches such error. The Bible commands conservation -- that we as Christians be careful stewards of the land and resources entrusted to us by the Creator."
Watt does goes on to say that Moyers has apologized to him, but I would like to know how it is that a well known man so outrageously lies to a Harvard University crowd no less and probably has everyone who listened to him that day still believing it, and has made no public statement apologizing for his lie.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 8:28 PM
"Leaving the left I can no longer abide the simpering voices of self-styled progressives -- people who once championed solidarity"
Here is an excerpt. But YOU MUST READ THE WHOLE THING! Especially you lefties!!!
"All of this came back to me as I watched the left's anemic, smirking response to Iraq's election in January. Didn't many of these same people stand up in the sixties for self-rule for oppressed people and against fascism in any guise? Yes, and to their lasting credit. But many had since made clear that they had also changed their minds about the virtues of King's call for equal of opportunity."
H/T to Jill.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 8:09 PM