Saturday, December 20, 2008

Rewriting the Narrative of Detainee Abuse

The Corner reports:

Republicans on the Senate Armed Service Committee, hitting back at Levin over the supposedly bipartisan Committee report on detainee treatment and the impression it has created.

The impression created by Sen. Carl Levin and the media by the 'Executive Summary of the Senate Armed Services Committee inquiry into the Treatment of Detainees in U.S. Custody' is that the administration's policy intentionally approved of illegal treatment of detainees. This has been the left and the media's narrative all along and it's nice to see Republicans step up to the plate and correct that narrative.

The statement from U.S. Senators Saxby Chambliss, R-GA, James Inhofe, R-OK, Jeff Sessions, R-AL, John Cornyn, R-TX, John Thune, R-SD, and Mel Martinez, R-FL, members of the Senate Armed Services Committee says in part: (emphasis mine)

Throughout our history, even in the gravest of circumstances, the United States has embodied the ideals of individual freedom and liberty. This nation adheres to the principle that all detainees in U.S. custody must be treated humanely and in accordance with applicable law. The fallacious assertion, made in recent newspaper editorials and other media outlets, that illegal treatment of detainees was an intentional or necessary result of administration policy is irresponsible and only serves to aid the propaganda and recruitment efforts of extremists dedicated to the murder of innocents and the destruction of our way of life.

I would hope that at least a few Democrats would also see the harm to America by promoting a false impression that our government intentionally approved of illegal treatment of detainees. But no, it is more important to them to denigrate this Republican President than to care about lies that promote American hate around the world.

This is not to deny that there were isolated incidents of illegal treatment. There were. But those committing those offenses were caught and punished. (emphasis mine)

The latest inquiry into detainee treatment by the Senate Armed Services Committee breaks little new ground – merely reiterating the findings of at least 12 previous independent investigations, which reported that certain isolated and limited incidents of detainee abuse occurred in the handling of detainees in U.S. custody. The implication, however, that this abuse was the direct, necessary, or foreseeable result of policy decisions made by senior administration officials is false and without merit. It is counter-productive and potentially dangerous to our men and women in uniform to insinuate that illegal treatment of detainees resulted from official U.S. government policies.

Read the entire statement here.

As The Wall Street Journal reports:

Not one of the 12 nonpartisan investigations in recent years concluded that the Administration condoned or tolerated detainee abuse, while multiple courts martial have punished real offenders. None of the dozen or so Abu Ghraib trials and investigations have implicated higher ups...

Did you get that? Not one of the investigations concluded that Bush or higher ups approved or tolerated detainee abuse. The left loves to blather on and on about how Pres.Bush has hurt America's reputation in the world, when it is they themselves that promote false narratives that fuel the hate for America and it's President. The ridicule and hate that the left has fosted upon Pres. Bush these last eight years has given those around the world an excuse to hate us. The left has always promoted any movie, news story, or false impression that humilated or denigrated our President, not to mention our military. And when those tatics worked, and many in the world did come to hate us, they think they can just blame Bush and ignore the fact that it was they themselves that brought this hate upon all of America.


I'm sure you have seen Blagojevich's press conference by now. What an actor. Seriously. He should have gone for the stage. I wonder how many hours he practiced that speech. Just the right tone. Just the right inflection.
It was a brilliant performance.

It reminded me of when Clinton shook his finger at the American people and declared, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman." So emphatic. So sincere.

Are they good actors or just amoral sociopaths with no conscience? Both men seemed to have no sense of shame.

When he quoted the Rudyard Kipling poem, I seriously thought I might throw up.

We have got to stop electing these shiny, articulate, robopoliticians. It just has to stop.

Friday, December 19, 2008

The Holiday Buzz Tree

This my daughter's best friend. I think it perfectly illustrates the Holidays at College. Heh.

Brief and to the point.

That's how I like it.

The President of Americans For Tax Reform sent this letter to Pres. Bush regarding the Bailout.

I would say, "LOVE IT," but that would be too wordy.

Facebook Jihadists

That's right. They want to invade facebook. I figure we can "poke" them until they run screaming from the computer.

Online jihadists have already used YouTube, blogs and other social media to spread their propaganda. Now, a group of internet Islamic extremists is putting together a plan for "invading Facebook."

"We can use Facebook to fight the media," notes a recent posting on the extremist al-Faloja forum, translated by "We can post media on Facebook that shows the Crusader losses."

"We have already had great success in raiding YouTube," the poster adds. "American politicians have used Facebook to get votes, like the house slave Obama."

I just laugh they are now calling Obama a "house slave." Yeah, being the leader of the free world, with all the power that includes, and hundreds at your beck and call and yet you are still a "house slave." Could these people be any more moronic?

The al-Faloja poster suggests seven "brigades" work together within Facebook. One will distribute videos and writing of so-called "martyrs." Another will spread military training material. Most of them will work in Arabic, presumably. But one of the units will focus just on spread English-language propaganda through Facebook.


He Will Be Our President Too

Paul at Powerline reminds all of us on the right side to remember not to treat Obama the way the left treated Bush. Unlike many on the left, we will see Obama as OUR President too, because although we don't agree with him, he will be the leader of the free world. That means some stupid band can't go overseas and bash him on foreign soil. That's right, I'll get mad about that too, even it is about Obama. That means we won't want a moronic movie made distorting his words and denigrating him while he is in office. We won't give terrorists talking points to repeat on tapes given to news agencies.

Here are some excerpts:

Pray that President Obama achieves greatness in office. Our overriding concern must always be the country we love, not the success of a party or an ideology.

Be loyal in your opposition. As my blog partner Scott Johnson puts it, paraphrasing Steven Decatur: "May he always be in the right; but our president, right or wrong."

Don't hate.

Don't obsess.

Read the rest. Good advice. Because we don't want to fall into the same pit of hell the left did with Bush, always being critical and crude, never giving credit where credit is due, and spreading lies just to create a negative narrative.

Naturally Obama will do things we don't like. Our criticisms should be on issue and never personal. If he does things we like (like some of his appointments so far) then we need to give credit there.

It reminds me of what my 11 yr old said to me after Obama was elected. Every night we include Pres. Bush in our prayers. He asked me if we were going to include Obama when he became President. I said, of course! I told him we need to pray that Obama will do the right things. Keep in mind that my son thinks that Obama's stance on abortion is so unacceptable he can't comprehend how we could elected someone that doesn't understand the gift of life. How we could have elected someone who thinks it's ok to destroy unborn children. My son sees it in the most simple terms. Other issues can't really be explained to him. He also wouldn't care about them much. But babies he can relate to.

Anyway, I could see him wrestle with this thought of praying for Obama. I told him that Christ asked us to love even those who hate us, even our enemies. He said, "you are right. We will pray for him. Do you think we could just say, 'God bless our President?' and leave off his actual name? God will know who we are talking about after all. I just feel good when we pray and his name might depress me."

I had to laugh.

But it's true. An Obama Presidency might depress us, but we still need to stand strong on our principles, and we can do that without over the top rhetoric and mean ugly criticisms. We can pray for the best for our country.

h/t dave bones

Thursday, December 18, 2008

Good Stuff From Pres. Bush

Bush drives the left insane and he makes conservatives angry. We think he isn't conservative enough and the left thinks he is way too far right. But it's nice sometimes to remember why we voted for him. He is a man of principle. From The American Enterprise Institute, first on the culture of life and stem cell research:

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I told the American people I believe in a culture of life. I believe a healthy society is one that protects the most vulnerable among us. And clearly, the most vulnerable among us are those who aren't born yet. Obviously, abortion is a very controversial subject, and it's one that creates a lot of emotions.

I try to diffuse the emotions by saying, look, good people disagree on the issue, I understand that. But throughout my presidency, I have tried to help advance the culture of life. And one of the really classic tensions between the culture of life is that with science. And it's -- Leon Kass instructed me throughout this process that tensions existed for a long time, and will continue to exist.

And the fundamental question with stem cells is, do you destroy life to save life? And it's a difficult issue for a lot of people. I came down on the side that there are other opportunities available to save lives other than the destruction of life. And secondly, I was concerned about using taxpayers' money that would end up destroying life. There's a lot of people in our country that don't want their money spent for that purpose.

I developed a policy which I thought sounded rational. And that is there have been some stem cells lines already developed, embryonic stem cell lines developed prior to this decision, therefore we should go forward with research on them -- but from that point forward, no destruction of life with federal money. Since then, adult skin cells have been used to develop the equivalent of embryonic stem cells. And so science has advanced, and at the same time, we were able to stake a claim for the culture of life. It was a very emotional issue. And that's what happens when you confront controversial topics.

And I believe the President should have a core set of beliefs and stand on those beliefs.

And you may not agree with his immigration stance, but he is right on the money on this, and we Republicans would do well to pay attention:

I'm a little concerned about the tone of the immigration debate, labeling our party as "anti"-people. It's one thing to say they want the border enforced, and I understand that. But if a group of people think that a political party is against them, it doesn't matter what else you stand for. And the tone, in my judgment, at times got to be "anti." At one point in our history we had too many Jewish people and too many Italians. I don't know if you remember that. And it was -- I'm just confident people were saying, I can't believe this is the America that I came to live in where I'm "anti" -- people are "anti"-me.

And so we're going to have to work, like, with the Latino vote to say, we care about you, we hear you, and we share your values -- faith and family, small businesses, military vets or, you know, disproportionate -- more Latinos serve as a percentage of their -- of population in the military than any other group, if I'm not mistaken.

A Good Afternoon in Baghdad

We returned to the Baghdad Ballet School to deliver some gifts that were generously donated by a similar school in Mobile, Alabama. It was a great afternoon and I got a chance to interact with a lot of the kids. I laughed because the only English that they could speak was to sing the "ABC song" and count to ten, which they did relentlessly. I taught the boys how to do an "Obama-style fist-bump", as well as thumb wrestle. American culture is good for a lot of things. I walked away smiling. It was a good afternoon in Baghdad.
One more little personal insight from over there. From The Gun Line:
A few days ago, I escorted a working party of young Iraqis who were day laborers… They were all young, and they reminded me so much of any typical American teenager, trying to get through life, chatting away about girls, and sports, and the latest fashions… I felt very encouraged that these young fellows would be the ones to wake up and realize how full of potential their futures are. They will be the ones to take charge of their communities, and decide that they would not allow themselves to be manipulated by religion, by politics, by other countries… “We Won’t Get Fooled Again…” by The Who seems appropriate right now… Perhaps it will happen. I hope it does…

We’ll see if I’m as optimistic at the end of the tour as I am now, but, right now, I am where I need to be, doing what I need to be doing…

I’m happy to be here.
He's right, you know. It is that young generation that will decide. A future that is different from the past.

Shoe drama continues...

Yeah, the guy who threw the shoes at Bush is having a bit of an attack of conscience:

Majid confirmed to Fox News that Muntadhar al-Zeidi has asked the Iraqi president for a pardon, and expressed "regret and sorrow" for his behavior.
"It is too late to now to regret the big and ugly act that I perpetrated," al-Zeidi wrote, according to Majid.

Hey, at least he is admitting it was a big and ugly act.

A Christmas Wish

One of the founders of Smart Girl Politics has a sad and tender request:

Many of you may remember my dear friend, Chris Garman, who lost her battle with breast cancer 2 years ago. When she was first diagnosed with breast cancer, she was pregnant with her third child. Her doctors didn't think Chris would live through her pregnancy without treatment, so they took a chance & gave her chemo while shewas pregnant. Chris survived her pregnancy & had a beautiful, healthy little girl named Hannah Faith.

Chris died when Hannah was three.

Hannah is now five, and this breaks my heart all over again, but In October, Hannah has been diagnosed with glioblastoma multiforme, a rare and incurable brain tumor. She was given about 12 weeks to live. She was going to be the flower girl in a wedding in May, but was diagnosed a week after she was asked.

Right now she has lost most of her motor skills. She is confined to bed and cannot really do anything or play with the gifts she is getting from
people, but she LOVES getting cards - she has gotten so many from people she does not know and jus t loves to have grandma read about the people who send them and see their pictures and is so proud of all her cards. Her room is just filled with cards.

When asked what she wants for Christmas she said she wants to see how many Christmas cards she can get. Many people have passed this wish along to their churches, prayer groups, friends and family. There are school groupswhere children are making her cards. People are including pictures so she can see who it is that is sending her the card.

If you would like to help with her wish, please send her a card at:

Hannah Garman
704 Orchard Rd
Lititz, PA 17543

Sometimes in the rush and materialism of the season, we forget how blessed we are. So send an extra card, go hug your children and tell them you love them. Life is but a whisper. Listen closely to it and relish it.

Not the Change They Were Expecting

*See update at bottom of post.

Why is the gay community so upset that Pastor Rick Warren set to speak at Obama's inauguration? It might have something to do with this letter he sent out in support of Prop 8:

"For 5,000 years, EVERY culture and EVERY religion -- not just Christianity -- has defined marriage as a contract between men and women. There is no reason to change the universal, historical definition of marriage to appease 2% of our population. This is one issue that both Democrats and Republicans can agree on. Both Barack Obama and John McCain have publicly opposed the redefinition of marriage to include so-called 'gay marriage.' Even some gay leaders, like Al Rantel of KABC oppose watering down the definition of marriage...Of course, my longtime opposition is well known. This is not a political issue, it is a moral issue that God has spoken clearly about. There is no doubt where we should stand on this issue...This will be a close contest, maybe even decided by a few thousand votes. I urge you to VOTE YES on Proposition 8 -- to preserve the biblical definition of marriage. Don't forget to vote!"

Now, one might point out that Obama has always said he was against gay marriage, so what's the surprise?

The surprise is that the liberal and gay community thought he was just saying that to get elected. The Democrats have always had a "wink, wink" thing with their Presidential candidates. They may denounce the "religious right," but have no problem with the Clintons, Pelosi, and Obama talking about God and faith. Why? Because they know they don't mean it. It's that simple. Their attitude always has been, "Say what you need to to get elected and be perceived as moderate, but we know you are on our side."

It seems Obama is disappointing the liberals over and over and he hasn't even taken office yet:

Millions of us stood up and shouted, handed out fliers, talked to our neighbors, donated hard-earned money, and drove people to the polls for Change. We screamed, hugged, kissed, and cried when we learned Change had come to America. We knew Change wouldn't come overnight, that it would take time, but we were excited that we had elected a man who was open to Change, who said he wanted to consider real people's needs while in the Oval Office. We eagerly awaited the first hints of Change, as the president-elect's transition developed.

And now, we have reason to worry that Change is not coming to America after all.

A politician being a politician. Did they really expect unicorns and rainbows? Seriously?

What has Obama done so far that has them riled? His appointments:

...there's Hillary Clinton herself, our soon-to-be secretary of state, who voted to authorize the invasion of Iraq, who has been called "a hawk among hawks," who pointed approvingly at humanitarian interventionist actions like the one her husband initiated in Kosovo in 1999. Obama's team of advisors includes several other returnees from the Clinton administration, such as Michele Flournoy, Susan Rice (recently named US ambassador to the UN), Richard Holbrooke, Anthony Lake, and Madeleine Albright, all of whom have been neoliberal hawks to one degree or other.

While a return to Clinton-era foreign relations is a certainly a change from destructive Bush-era policies, it is not Change writ large. Not to mention the fact that another segment of Obama's national-security squad is rounded out by center-righties with firm Bush-era roots, such as Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who will stay on as a holdover from the Bush administration, and national-security advisor-designate Jim Jones, a former advisor to John McCain.


On the economy, as well, Obama has made some critical missteps. It's not just that Lawrence Summers, Obama's pick for head of the incoming White House National Economic Council, is a Clinton-era economist who oversaw the same policies that got us into the financial mess we're in today (or that his record on gender equality is iffy-at-best). Two of Obama's largest policy backpedals have been economic.

First, he adopted a more cautious stance on rolling back tax cuts for people making more than $250,000 a year — rather than taking the bold step of repealing those, he now says he'll just let them expire as scheduled at the end of 2010. Then, citing the sharp decrease in oil prices from this summer's record levels, he shelved his plan to tax oil-company windfall profits.

While anything that slows the "progression" of the "the progressives," we should not get our hopes up. Obama's past (such as we know) is very far left, which is why the far left loved him so much. From abortion rights to gun control he has voted to the extreme. But what Obama always understood is that we live in a time of perception. Obama desperately wants to be perceived as someone who brings us together.

I think that Obama will soon discover that being President in this day and time requires more than the image of being a leader. It will take actual leading. Leading does not mean that decisions will be popular.

As I see Obama now, my biggest worry isn't about appointments or even promoting and implementing leftist ideas. My biggest worry is that he will discover that he is in way over his head and bad decisions will come from that.

While Obama making leftists mad may make conservatives feel a bit better, it doesn't overcome his inexperience and his basic belief that government can solve our problems.

Obama has been showered with love and affection from his supporters and from the press for over 2 years now. It will be interesting to see how he handles the criticisms that comes with simply being a leader.

*Update: Whoa, RWN has the reaction to Pastor Warren from the netroots. I think they are a bit upset. I love how anyone who disagrees with them is "a preacher of hate." It's such a joke. You can like or dislike Rick Warren (I'm not particularly fond of him) and you can agree or disagree with him, but no reasonable person could call anything he says or does hateful. It's absurd. Being against gay marriage doesn't make you a hater. It makes you one who disagrees. That's it. Over the top rhetoric diminishs any point one is trying to make. The netroots should keep that in mind.

Who's running for RNC Chair?

Politico has the guide:

Mike Duncan– As the current committee chair, Duncan knows the party’s insiders better than anyone else in the running. And while his present term in office has left Republicans with mixed feelings – his prolific fundraising doesn’t quite make up, in some leaders’ minds, for the GOP’s devastating November losses – he’s ended on a strong note thanks to Saxby Chambliss’s victory in the Georgia Senate runoff and the GOP’s two House wins in Louisiana.
Most of all, Duncan is benefiting from a divided field of opponents who haven’t developed a consistent critique of his leadership and against whom he could quickly become an unobjectionable consensus candidate.
“If there was a movement that could push Duncan out, I think it would be identifiable at this point,” said one Republican strategist who expects Duncan to be reelected. “I just do not get the feeling that there is going to be some great change.”
Saul Anuzis— Among the field of candidates seeking to become the anti-Duncan, Anuzis stands out for his energetic campaigning and his emphasis on technology. The Michigan GOP chair announced his bid on Twitter and has been hammering away at the theme of tactical innovation. Multiple Republicans noted Anuzis’s big, colorful personality – he rides a Harley-Davidson and sports a goatee as an asset in a race where candidates are struggling to distinguish themselves from an ideologically homogenous field.
Anuzis has also rolled out more public endorsements than any other candidate, drawing heavily on support from blue states like New Jersey and Connecticut and shaping a perception that his candidacy is picking up steam.
“If I had to assign momentum in what has been a very, very sleepy race, I’d assign it to Anuzis,” said another Republican strategist.
Anuzis’s weakness? Michigan has been very tough ground for the GOP in recent cycles, and the support he’s receiving from Republicans back home may not be quite enough to kick voters’ suspicion that he just hasn’t delivered the wins an RNC chair needs.

Michael Steele—Steele, a former state party chair who served as Maryland’s lieutenant governor before losing a Senate race in 2006 to then-Rep. Ben Cardin (D-Md.), is essentially tied in second place with Anuzis. Steele announced his candidacy on Fox News Channel’s “Hannity and Colmes” to great fanfare, touting his skills as a political communicator at a time when Republicans lack a high-profile leaders on the national stage.
Steele’s campaign hasn’t gone quite the way he expected it to, according to some Republicans, who believe Steele expected his star power to carry him farther than it has in a race in which many RNC members would prefer to elect one of their own.
And though he’s consistently reaffirmed his commitment to conservative social positions, his association with the moderate Republican Leadership Council has some RNC members uneasy.
“I don’t think there’s any question that he is personally pro-life. I think the only question is how he views the role of social conservatives within the party,” said James Bopp Jr., the influential social conservative who serves as national committeeman for Indiana.
But despite these hiccups, Steele seems destined to make it to the finish line with the clout to make it through multiple ballots. And if he can edge out Anuzis on the first vote he could give Duncan a run for his money.
Katon Dawson– Running a little behind his fellow challengers, but still mounting an energetic and serious campaign, is South Carolina Republican Party Chair Katon Dawson. With a better win-loss record than Anuzis and a closer rapport with RNC members than Steele or Blackwell, Dawson could ride a wave of conservative and Southern support into the late stages of balloting – particularly if the Blackwell-Benkiser gambit falls flat.
The Palmetto State Republican is billing his campaign as a vehicle for outside-the-Beltway competence and emphasizing the need to return control over the RNC to successful state-level leaders – a message that’s certainly in tune with the mood on the committee.
Dawson’s major obstacle is, in a word, Southernness. At a moment when some are labeling the GOP a regional party, Dawson may not look (and sound) like the change the GOP needs. And his critics are only too eager to hype up a damaging story that Dawson belonged to an all-white country club as recently as last summer.
Ken Blackwell– The former Cincinnati mayor and Ohio secretary of state entered the RNC campaign late – on December 5 – and has lagged behind the other contenders. While his candidacy hasn’t exactly caught fire, it got a potentially significant boost this week in the shape of his partnership with Benkiser, who could help Blackwell appeal to the significant social conservative bloc on the committee.
Blackwell has also moved forward with a series of moves that appear designed to capture the RNC’s fiscal conservative vote, receiving the endorsements of publisher Steve Forbes and Club for Growth head Pat Toomey. Endorsements don’t necessarily pack much of a punch in an internal election like this one, but every little bit helps.
Like Steele, however, Blackwell’s not a member of the RNC and he still faces skepticism about both his qualifications and his viability. The Ohioan still has some catching up to do in this race and a running mate alone won’t do the trick.
“He’s a very plausible candidate,” said one member of the RNC, who cautioned: “He’s neither fish nor fowl. He’s not a figure with national prominence and he’s not a figure with experience keeping the trains running on time.”
Chip Saltsman– A former chairman of the Tennessee Republican Party and campaign manager to Mike Huckabee, Saltsman has more to gain than any other candidate from a protracted, multi-ballot knife fight for the chairmanship. The 40-year-old has been running a vigorous race against more established candidates, though he’s had to distance himself from the Huckabee campaign in a race where no one wants to support a stalking horse for 2012.
Saltsman knows he’s an underdog, but as a student of GOP politics he also knows that once an RNC race gets past the first or second ballot, all bets are off. If Saltsman can become a second- or third-choice candidate for a significant number of RNC members, and survive the first ballot, he could try and follow the Jim Nicholson path to victory. Yet even if he is unsuccessful, he’s established himself as a name to be taken very seriously in years to come.
I lean toward Michael Steele, but really only because I heard him speak at the Americans for Prosperity conference in Austin and I was very impressed.

Wednesday, December 17, 2008

Without Palin...

...who would even want to go to

ComScore says that traffic to the joint venture between News Corp.’s (NWS) Fox and GE’s (GE) NBC fell 10.8 percent from October to November, dropping from 5.3 million unique visitors to 4.8 million...
This makes plenty of sense: Hulu was one of two places were you could (legally) see the “Saturday Night Live” Sarah Palin clips, which were huge sensations. The other one,, dropped a whopping 50 percent–from 14.1 million to 7.2 million, comScore says.

via Mary Katharine Ham

Just keeping the love in his heart

What does a Governor do who has been caught on tape cussing and selling Obama's Senate seat? The world is against you and your hair has become a SNL joke. What do you do?

You run.

Not away. At least we don't think so.......

I think I'd buy a treadmill.

Time Magazine and Their Obama LoveFest

From the Weekly Standard blog:

NBC's First Read did some counting and discovered that Barack Obama, Time's person of the year, appeared on 27 percent of the magazine's covers in 2008. If you include mentions of Obama's name along with his face, the figure shoots up to 48 percent.

That and $650 million dollars. I don't know how we ever imagined we had a chance.

Gitmo Lawyers

Here is an excellent piece on how "chic" it is to be a lawyer for Guantanamo detainees. The most prestigious law firms want this on their resume:

Last year, at a dinner at Washington's Ritz-Carlton hotel, the National Legal Aide Defender Association bestowed its "Beacon of Justice Award" on 50 law firms for their pro bono work on behalf of the detainees.

These firms in turn are joined by law professors from Stanford, Yale and Northwestern right on down to Fordham.

Did you get that? 50 law firms. Not lawyers, law firms. Literally hundreds lawyers are involved. And then they pat themselves on the back, giving each other awards at fancy high priced award dinners for their pro bono work. It's enough to make one want to hurl a shoe.

So let's look at the other side. Let's look at the lawyers working on behalf of the government to keep us safe. 60 or so Justice Department lawyers are handling the bulk of the legal load of 200 Gitmo detainees filing for habeas corpus in federal district courts. But as the article points out, no big time law firms are offering their service pro bono to help them keep us safe. No, it's much more PC and honorable somehow to help those accused of being a danger to America.

The imbalance was illustrated by a scene last week at the federal courthouse building in Washington, D.C. There Judge Thomas Hogan was to consider rules governing the habeas corpus petitions of the detainees. That meant half a dozen Justice Department lawyers waiting in a room packed wall-to-wall with high-priced partners -- many backed up by legions of associates, outside legal experts, human-rights centers, and concerned law students.

Isn't this a perfect example of why we hate lawyers so much?

The bottom line? "dozens of the world's most dangerous men now have their own legal Dream Teams."

h/t BigDog

8 months in jail for...adultery

Can you imagine that here? We would have to open all our sports arenas to hold on the "convicts."

Believe it or not this happened in a non-Muslim country. This was South Korea and one of it's best known actresses was given a suspended prison sentence of eight months for adultery.

Tuesday, December 16, 2008

Oh dear...

RuPaul dressed as both Obama and Michelle to promote his/her? new show "RuPaul's Drag Race." Yes, it's all about dressing in drag. This photo just makes me laugh.
via Fox

I'm offended

Many dogs are trained to help the disabled, sniff out drugs, and rescue us. But most of them simply love us unconditionally.
I'm offended by anyone who is offended by dogs. If there is anything on this earth more awesome than dogs, I am not aware of it.
h/t Dan Collins


I don't think many Americans are aware of the extreme tactics used against men and women of science who dare to question man made global warming.

The Lone Star Times has a partial list of what these people have had to go through. It will stun you.

The AP recently put out this hysterical article on global warming quoting Stanford University biologist Terry Root, "We are out of time. Things are going extinct."

Here is some reactions to that article.

American Daily has more:

Over 650 international scientists are out of the closet and articulating their dissent over the folly of man-made global warming bull excrement.

Here is a link to the Intro and full Senate report.

My chronic criticisms (of over a decade) are insignificant. However, others (far more credentialed and knowledgeable) are finally being heard.·

“It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.” - U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA.

“Warming fears are the worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to know what the truth is; they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.

Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever, says,“…Global warming has become a new religion.”

Frankly, the problem (which most pols are scared spitless to admit is a problem) is the same challenge scientists now face. Atmospheric physicists James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh, noted, “Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined.”

To me that last point is the one that boggles the mind. It has come to the point that if you are a scientist or researcher and don't agree with the man made global warming crowd, then you are threatened and ruined in your career. Unbelievable.

This just seems typical of the left to me. You either agree with us or we will make you agree with us.

If we can't have frank discussions within the science community over things such as this, then we are doomed to ever really learn from our environment or ourselves. When political agendas censor any dissent or disagreement, then we have lost the ability to effectively examine this world in a true scientific way.

Monday, December 15, 2008

Top Time Editor Quits to Become Biden's Press Secretary

As Newsbusters points out, is this really a job change?

And if you had any doubt that the MSM is in the pocket of Democrats, take a look at those who have simply shifted jobs a bit this year:

CNN reporter Aneesh Raman who signed with the Obama campaign in September

ABC reporter Linda Douglass who in May signed up as an Obama strategist and spokesman

Former "Dateline" anchor Jane Pauley who toured the country campaigning on Obama's behalf

ABC News anchor Carole Simpson who teamed up the Hillary Clinton campaign during the Democratic primaries

CNN reporter Andrea Koppel who signed up with a left-wing PR firm in February

Kate Albright-Hanna, a producer with CNN who crafted web video strategy for Obama while working at the network

That's funny right there....

Blago's hair inspiration? Clearly "Simpsons pre-Kent Brochman anchor Scott Christian."

via Gawker

via GOC

Unions used to not suck....

...but now they do. It's that simple.

Michael J. Totten in Iraq

Riveting reading. Seriously. Go.


Enough already. Do they have to show that clip on the news over and over and over and over? The news is reporting what the crazy journalist said (also over and over), but not what happened afterward. No surprise there.

Like the fact that the Iraqi press corp apologized and said that he did not represent Iraqis. Like the fact that the other journalists in the room took off their shoes and beat the guy with them. Like the fact that this guy used to end his broadcasts for Al-Baghdadia television with "Live from occupied Baghdad." I suppose in a free Iraq they have their own Keith Olberman.

No, all that most Americans will hear is what the crazy guy said in insulting the President.

I will say after watching the tape, the secret service should be ashamed. Slow does not begin to describe their reaction.

*Adding this regarding the journalist:

His colleagues in the Baghdad office of Al-Baghdadia said Zaidi had long been planning to throw shoes at Bush if ever he got the chance.

"Muntazer detested America. He detested the US soldiers, he detested Bush," said one on condition of anonymity.

Hating America and our soldiers and the left gleefully delights in this. They just cannot see that by disrespecting our President, the journalist disrepected America. They never disappoint that way.

Blagojevich? Pretty much crazy

I figured as much:

Blagojevich, 52, rarely turns up for work at his official state office in Chicago, former employees say, is unapologetically late to almost everything, and can treat employees with disdain, cursing and erupting in fury for failings as mundane as neglecting to have at hand at all times his preferred black Paul Mitchell hairbrush. He calls the brush "the football," an allusion to the "nuclear football," or the bomb codes never to be out of reach of a president.

Many who know the governor well say that as Blagojevich's famed fund-raising capability has shrunk in recent months and as his legal bills have mounted after years of federal investigation, he seems to have transformed from what Fritchey considered callous into something closer to panicked or delusional.

Blagojevich, incredulous prosecutors say, still spoke in his recorded conversations in the past six weeks of the possibility of remaking his political future and running for president, perhaps in 2016.

That aspiration was nothing new.

At points in early 2004, Blagojevich was scheduled to appear with Senator John Kerry, the Democratic presidential nominee, at a community center in Evanston and a junior high school in Quincy. Blagojevich seemed confident, said two former employees, who refused to be named out of concern that their comments could jeopardize their current work, that he would soon be selected as Kerry's running mate (a notion an aide to Kerry's campaign says was never under consideration). At the time, there seemed only one problem: Blagojevich was uncertain he wanted to be a No. 2.

Behind the scenes, though, members of Blagojevich's staff saw a different man: one who was deeply concerned about his appearance (particularly his signature black hair, which he ignored suggestions to change) and who usually worked from his home or his North Side campaign office and could often be seen, mid- or late-morning, making a six-mile run trailed by his security team.

"God forbid you make a mistake," said one longtime former employee. In December 2003, the employee recalled, Blagojevich flew into a rage because he thought he was late for a holiday tree-lighting ceremony in Springfield, and his two young daughters — who were visiting with Santa Claus in the parlor of the Governor's Mansion — did not have their shoes on yet. "You're trying to sabotage my career!" the employee recalled Blagojevich screaming at staff members, as he charged into the parlor. "You're the worst!"

Sunday, December 14, 2008

Bush in Baghdad

Don Suber makes the best point in his recent article, "Bush In Baghdad." Bush's trip to Baghdad reminds us that 24 million people were liberated in Iraq. Liberated from the kind of horror we Americans only see in slasher movies. But the press ignores this fact. The point Suber makes so perfectly is that the left loves to talk about how we should "do something" about the genocide in Darfur. What was a happening in Iraq was the same sort of evil and Bush...did something.

The left thought Iraq would be another Vietnam. I hate to say this, but I believe it, they wanted it to be another Vietnam. They wanted us to fail. For purely political reasons. The MSM went along with them. Reporting every day when things were going badly. But when things turned around and the surge was an obvious success, the press essentially stopped reporting on Iraq. Obama and the left stopped talking about Iraq. Success was not what they wanted so they refuse to acknowledge it, even now.

Suber ends with this:

Bush is in Iraq for the 4th time. A military victory has been achieved. A political one has as well as the Iraqi Parliament has done something our Congress has not: Agreed on an energy policy.

We removed one of the bloodiest dictators on Earth, a man who invaded Iran and Kuwait and who paid terrorists to terrorize Israel. We did what Bill Clinton wanted to do in Bosnia: Liberate a people.

Back on The Bus

Warner Todd Huston at Publius' Forum has a great article on how those "thrown under the bus" during the Obama campaign have apparently been dragged out from under it, dusted off, and quietly allowed back on. The media has nothing to say on the matter, as I'm sure they wouldn't have if a Republican had done the same.

Here are a few examples:

William Ayers. "Since the election, for instance, terrorist William Ayers has since come out and confirmed that he and Obama were closer than Obama claimed during the campaign — and Obama has not contradicted that statement. Back in the bus for Ayers."

Robert Malley. "Robert Malley has been given a new life with Obama after having been chucked under the bus for campaign appearances. Malley came under fire during the campaign when it was discovered he was an Obama foreign policy adviser. The reason that Malley was looked upon askance was because of his past stated support and close relationships with the terror group Hamas. Malley “voluntarily” quit the Obama campaign when his ties to Hamas became an issue. Back then he was under the bus. However, just after the election, Malley seems to have been sent to the Middle East by Barack Obama as his envoy to Syria and Egypt. So, Malley was hauled back into the bus."

Susan Power. "In March of ‘08, Samantha Power “voluntarily” quit the Obama campaign over an off-the-cuff remark she made to a British journalist. She called Hillary Clinton a “monster” over how she was carrying on her campaign in comparison to the purportedly clean way her candidate was operating his. The comment gave the supposedly clean Obama campaign a black eye of sorts. (Video of Power’s “resignation“)
So, off she went after embarrassing the candidate."

But that was then. NOW she is back on Obama’s team as if nothing ever happened.

As the Associated Press reports:

State Department officials said Friday that Samantha Power is among foreign policy experts the president-elect’s office selected to help the incoming administration prepare for Clinton’s anticipated nomination as secretary of state.

Obama is hoping no one will notice his gestures during the campaign were nothing more than that..gestures to get elected. He meant none of them. And no one will notice because the media won't report them.

h/t BigDog