blogresponder

Aussies Have The Right Idea On Terrorism

2007-07-08T07:56:00.000-05:00

I just ran across this piece on how Australia is coping with the threat of Islamic Fundamentalism and Terrorism.
The US & British governments should give it a try. But I won't hold my breath.

I'll be back

CC

Harry Reid Thinks The Illegals Are Already Americans

2007-06-06T11:25:00.000-05:00

So Harry Reid has just admitted, on his own website, that the current Scamnesty is intended exactly as has been described by those of us who respect the rule of law have been saying. It is intended to make the Illegals US citizens. That is the only reason for the legislation.
Towards the bottom of the piece below it is as plain as day: "...bring the 12 million undocumented Americans out of the shadows,.."

Newsroom

June 4, 2007

Reid: In June, Democrats Will Continue To Fight To Change Course In Iraq

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada made the following remarks today on the floor of the U.S. Senate:

Over the Memorial Day recess, I attended a service at Southern Nevada Veterans’ Memorial Cemetery in Boulder City. I am grateful beyond words for the sacrifices of the men and women in uniform from Nevada and all across America. In this work period, we will continue to do everything we can to honor their sacrifice with a responsible end to the Iraq war.

During the recess week, I had the opportunity to visit with many Nevadans. The war was foremost on their minds. They also expressed concern on the burden of record high gas prices, and the need to reform our immigration laws. I assured them that those issues would be foremost in the work period ahead.

On the first day of the 110th Congress, Democrats introduced bills reflecting the ten priorities that America sent us here to address. Last Friday we concluded a seven week work period, and we have taken action on seven of those ten priorities:

We passed the toughest ethics and lobbying reform in our nation’s history.
We passed a much deserved and long overdue raise in the federal minimum wage for working people, which was signed into law last week.
We attempted to give Medicare the power to negotiate lower drug prices, but this effort was filibustered by Republicans.
We passed the recommendations of the bipartisan 9/11 Commission, after they had been pushed aside for years.
For the second year in a row, we voted to give the hope of stem cell research to millions of Americans who suffer, and will soon send that bill to the President.
We passed a balanced budget that restores fiscal discipline and puts the middle class first – cutting their taxes while increasing investment in education, veterans’ care and children’s health care.
And we began debate on the complex and crucial issue of immigration reform.
This week, we will vote on cloture and final passage of a comprehensive bill that will strengthen border security, bring the 12 million undocumented Americans out of the shadows, and keep our economy strong. In the days ahead, we will work to improve the bill to protect and strengthen family ties while improving the structure of the temporary-worker program.

How much more proof do we need?

If you click the title bar of this piece, it will take you to Reid's website so you can see it for yourself. My guess is it will be pulled down soon, so go their quickly, before it disappears.

I'll be back

CC

Fund Raising For Fred

2007-06-06T10:27:00.001-05:00

Scroll down to find a link to donate to Fred Thompson's Presidential effort.
I can't figure out how to get it on the side bar below the links. So I had to put it at the bottom.

Latest Scamnesty Bill

2007-06-05T10:44:00.000-05:00

Here is a piece I wrote the other night:

Among my pet peeves with most of these amnesty bills, there are several issues that need to be addressed, that are not.
First, the building of such a short fence (400 miles?) Is not worth the money spent on it. The miles of unfenced border would need constant surveillance afterward. That would cost taxpayers dollars perpetually into the future, as border patrol agents would be needed to cover all the rest of the unfenced area. Hence, the fence/wall needs to cover the entire length of the US border with Mexico. If the situation warrants, a similar wall needs to be constructed on the North border with Canada, but that can wait until the Southern border is secured.
Second, the "Anchor Baby" issue is not addressed. Any child born inside the United States normally is automatically a citizen. That needs to be ended. Any child born inside the US to Illegal Infiltrators cannot be allowed automatic US citizenship.
Third, the penalties for hiring illegals are still not strong enough. If it is made a felony (Federal Offence) to hire illegals, with mandatory jail time for the owner/CEO of the hiring businesses, the Illegals will not so easily get a job. That will cause them to "self deport".
Fourth, the granting of any social services to Illegals needs to be immediately halted, as it is a drain on our tax base and infrastructure. This includes Education and Medical Care. In addition, it needs to be a crime to allow the housing of Illegals.
Fifth, all cities that do not help defend the US by enforcing Federal Immigration Law need to be sanctioned for this. As many cities have called themselves "Sanctuary Cities", this has not been the case up to now. The Mayors and City Councils of those cities need to be brought up on Federal charges, which would remove those individuals permanently from Public Office, as those individuals have all violated their oaths of office. Jail time is appropriate as well.
Additionally, the idea that sanctions against the Illegals somehow "violates their rights" is fictitious. The Illegals, as lawbreakers and non-citizens should be granted NO RIGHTS. They should not be allowed to sue the US government or US citizens for the actions of US those citizens or US officials, including any action performed by Border Patrol agents. As a follow-up to this, any agent or US citizens currently in jail or being sued by Illegals needs to be immediately returned to the safety of their homes and lost jobs, and fully exonerated from all of the charges levied against them to date.
The government of Mexico has allowed this invasion across their border into the US, and even encouraged it by assisting the Infiltrators with maps and information on how to get into the US and how to negotiate the US legal system. That being the case, the US needs to send a bill to Mexico for each and every illegal captured inside the US. The amount of the bill will be based on the egregiousness of the offences committed by the Infiltrator. The money to pay these bills can be taken out of the money the US pays to Mexico for the oil it buys from it.
Since the Illegals will no longer have any rights, the US government needs to send a bill to the ACLU, for all legal fees accrued to date in its efforts on behalf of the Illegals.
I don't believe any of the above items are in the current bill, and until they are, NO BILL passes the smell test for me.

I sent the above in an email to my Senators and my Congressman here in Iowa. Haven't heard from two of them. Senator Grassley did respond with an auto respose, which is the same as no response, I guess.

I'll be back

CC

Anti Infiltrator March Planned

2007-05-25T18:38:00.000-05:00

There is an anti Illegal Infiltrator march planned for this June. It is supposed to take place on June 14-15-16. Click the title of this piece to go to the website of the planners.
Sounds like a noble effort, just hope there is enough reponse. I plan to go to Des Moines on June 16 with my Mexican flag with the slashed red circle on top of it.

I'll be back

CC

Fred Barnes Is Lost On Illegals

2007-05-22T17:52:00.000-05:00

I'm watching FOX NEWS right now. It is the show called "Special Report With Britt Hume". Fred Barnes is one of the panelists. The opening subject was the latest ridiculous attempt by the Senate to fool the country into accepting the Illegal Infiltrators as OK. Amnesty, etc....You know the drill by now. Anyway, the panel was commenting on emails they had received from viewers based on the panel's discussion that occured yesterday about the latest immigration sellout.
So Fred Barnes, who pretends to be a Conservative, trys to claim that those who are against the latest immigration sellout bill are against ALL IMMIGRATION!!!!.
Hey Fred!!! If that were the case, wouldn't all those fine upstanding citizens have been lobbying Congress along those lines for years? Why are they just now "coming out of the woodwork" to state their Xenophobic (as you describe them) attitudes?
My take on it is, you are full of it, Fred. My best friend has a Mexican wife. As a matter of fact, she originally came to the US illegally. But the necessary paperwork was completed and the legal waiting time was adhered to. She is now a US citizen.
Hey Fred!! My friend and his wife DO NOT FAVOR ILLEGAL INFILTRATORS. They are in favor of loosening up the legal immigration rules to allow a more realistic number of immigrants to enter the US. But they ARE NOT IN FAVOR OF AMNESTY FOR ILLEGAL INFILTRATORS.
Your claim that the viewers and emailers who are against the latest Immigration Sellout Bill are against all immigration is specious.
Here is Chuck Grassley's (US Senator from Iowa) take on it. He emailed me personally about this issue, just today. He has what he calls his "Top 15 flaws with the latest Amnesty (yes, that's what Senator Grassley terms it, amnesty) Program. I will put up the email he sent me, and then add a couple that I believe were overlooked. Here is his email to me:

Dear Mr. C:
Greetings from Washington D.C.
The United States Senate is currently debating an immigration bill that includes an amnesty program for over 12 million illegal aliens who are in the United States. Today, I outlined the top 15 flaws with this amnesty program which is ripe for abuse and rotten for national security.
I voted for amnesty more than 20 years ago. I believed at the time that by giving illegal aliens blanket citizenship, we would solve the problem. I was wrong. We’ve now got at least 12 million people illegal aliens thumbing their nose at our laws. We found out that by rewarding illegality, we only get more illegality.
If the bill passes, the amnesty provisions would allow for illegal aliens to immediately apply for probationary status. If they are approved, the illegal alien would automatically receive a Social Security number and work authorization. In 1-2 years, once certain requirements are met by the federal government, the illegal alien can apply for a “Z” visa for himself, spouse, children and parents over the age of 65. At this point the illegal alien may legally remain in the United States while waiting for the current backlog of visa applications to be cleared. After the backlog is cleared, the illegal can apply for a greencard or renew his/her “Z” visa. For a chart outlining the amnesty process, visit my website: http://grassley.senate.gov .
Thank you for your continued support as we proceed with the immigration bill.
Sincerely,
Chuck Grassley
Your Senator

Senator Grassley’s Top 15 Flaws in the Amnesty Program:
· Probationary benefits not subject to the trigger – Probationary benefits, including work authorization, protection from removal, and a social security number are granted to illegal aliens immediately, even if the alien’s background check is not complete.
· Many criminal provisions may be waived – Numerous criminal provisions are waived for eligibility purposes. For example, an alien who falsely claims U.S. citizenship would be considered eligible for amnesty even though it’s a crime.
· Background checks taken too lightly – An illegal alien can apply for probationary status and a Z visa without thorough background checks. Immediately after the bill passes, the alien can apply for probationary legal status and receive a card even if the alien’s background check is not complete.
· Illegal aliens protected from removal – If an alien is in removal proceedings, or being detained, at the time of enactment, the alien can still apply for amnesty. Aliens who apply for amnesty cannot be detained or deported while their application is being processed, essentially giving them immunity from justice.
· Terrorists and criminals can apply for amnesty – The Secretary of Homeland Security is allowed to waive the grounds of ineligibility for those who have an outstanding administrative final order of removal, deportation or exclusion. Currently there are more than 637,000 alien absconders in the United States that have defied orders to leave.
· Taxes – Illegal aliens are required to provide the IRS information about tax payments only when applying for legal permanent residence, if that avenue is pursued. Illegal aliens can skirt the federal, state and local tax laws because its not a requirement to prove one has paid outstanding tax liabilities to get probationary or Z status.
· Limits eligibility to illegal aliens – Creates a Z nonimmigrant visa program for illegal aliens and illegal aliens only. No one else is eligible for this program, particularly those waiting their turn in line. Also, there’s no cap on the number of eligible participants.
· Indefinite renewal for Z nonimmigrant visas – Z nonimmigrant visas are valid for four years and may be renewed indefinitely. This is a disincentive for illegal aliens to pay the $4,000 penalty, touch-back to their home country, prove they’ve paid their taxes, or receive a medical exam.
· Health standards ignored – No medical exam or immunizations are needed to get a Z visa.
· No incentive to learn English – There is no English requirement to get a Z visa. Each Z nonimmigrant must only demonstrate "an attempt to gain an understanding of the English language" upon the first renewal of a Z visa. There are waivers for this requirement.
· Green card applicants not required to return to home country – Green card applications (only for heads of household, not dependents) must be filed in person outside the U.S. but not necessarily in the alien's country of origin. The alien can then reenter (same day) under a Z nonimmigrant visa because it serves as a valid travel document. There are exceptions for this requirement.
· Fines are False and Misleading – Not everyone is required to pay the $5,000 penalty. To get a Z visa, a principal alien (Z-1 or head of household) must pay a $1,000 penalty, a $500 penalty for each dependent, a processing fee, and a $500 state impact fee. Dependents must also pay a processing fee. To renew a Z nonimmigrant visa, each Z visa holder must pay a processing fee no greater than $1,500. To get a greencard, if the alien intends to pursue this route, a Z-1 nonimmigrant must pay a $4,000 penalty. Z-2 (parents and spouse) and Z-3 (children) aliens are only required to pay application fees.
· Fines won’t adequately pay for cost of amnesty – The bulk of the monetary fines are required at the end of the program. All fines may be paid in installments and waivers are available in extraordinary circumstances.
· Impact on state and local government – State impact money will be granted to states to provide services for non-citizens only, instead of providing services to all citizens impacted by the large number of illegal immigrants (school systems, health care services).
· Revocation of terrorist visas – Visas revoked on terrorism grounds would allow Z visa holders to remain in the United States and use the U.S. court system to appeal terrorism charges. The bill, including the amnesty program, does not address visa revocation for any visa holder.

Now here is what my opposition was. I agree with Senator Grassley. But I have a few more problems with the bill:

I oppose the Senate immigration deal. It still rewards the Infiltrators
for crossing into the US illegally. I have read nothing about the "anchor
babies" in this new deal. Any child born to illegals within US borders
should not receive US citizenship status. All costs related to Mexican
illegals should be passed along to the Mexican government. This includes
incarceration and social costs. This means US should send a bill to Mexico
for every illegal who is apprehended inside the US. The money can be
taken from the money that would go to payments for Mexico's oil. Local
governments who call themselves "sanctuary cities" should have all Federal
funds denied for their communities. In addition, the city councils and
mayors of such cities need to be arrested and imprisoned, for a minimum of
five years, with no possibility of parole. They need to be put into
lockups alongside the illegals they so greatly love. The fence should
travel the entire length of the border, not just 200 miles. In addition,
the fence should be able to be effective standing on its own, without the
need of extra agents to patrol it.

I'll be back

CC

Time To Put The Dems' Feet To The Fire

2007-04-29T06:39:00.002-05:00

There are a couple of guys who have established a new website to watch over the new majority in Congress. The Majority Accountability Projest is new, and the intent is to point out the stuff that's going on behind the scenes that the Dems don't want you to see. Click the title bar to check it out!

I'll be back

CC

Bill Maher On Guns/Iraq

2007-04-25T21:19:00.000-05:00

I am watching Bill Maher on HBO, and the commentary has run to the Cho killings at Virginia Tech. Bill admitted that he owns a gun, and doesn't want the Dems to take it away. But in his next sentence, he claims that the NRA wants people to have hollow point bullets and the right to own "Assault Rifles".
First, the NRA has stated that the hollow point bullets are not an issue.
Second, there is no such thing, (in reality) as an ASSAULT RIFLE. Anybody who can define what that is, is full of crap. The only thing different from "assault rifles" and the semi-automatic hunting rifles available to everybody throughout the country is the appearance of that weapon. Just because a weapon looks like it is a military weapon, it becomes an "assault rifle".
On Iraq, Bill has agreed with Harry Reid that the Iraq war is lost. Stupid is as stupid does.
There are numerous blogs that have pointed out that the soldiers in Iraq think that Reid (and Maher) should shut up.
Here is an excellent analysis of Reid's stupidity.
Senator Reid should at least be censured by the Senate. For the good of the country, he should resign.

I'll be back

CC

New Anti Terrorism Website

2007-04-08T15:12:00.000-05:00

I've been doing a lot of surfing around the net today. Click the title bar for another new website that exposes the linkage between CAIR and terrorism.
Cool site!!

I'll be back

CC

Recommended Website

2007-04-08T14:01:00.000-05:00

I just discovered another eye opening website on the Islamic threat. Click the title bar to go to The American Congress For Truth. Don't get the title wrong, however. The person who runs it is originally from Lebanon, and has a story to tell.

I'll be back

CC

The Lawless Protest Again

2007-04-08T08:30:00.000-05:00

In Los Angeles there appears to have been another outpouring of sympathy for the lawbreakers from South of the Border. Click the title bar for the report from BBC.com
Using terms like "unfair" and "people are so frustrated", the amnesty crowd was up in arms again, demanding citizenship for everybody. Just great. Let's give it to the Terrorists as well, while we are at it.
Who cares about the law? I care about the law. Illegally infitrating across the border is a crime. Unless that changes, these people should never be allowed to become citizens.
What is unfair about asking people to obey the law? Those of us who think this situation is a travesty are the ones who deserve to feel frustrated.

I'll be back

CC

Another Fred Thompson Link

2007-03-15T09:49:00.000-05:00

Here's another link to Senator Thompson's voting record.

I'll be back

CC

Fred Thompson's Voting Record

2007-03-15T09:33:00.000-05:00

I have found a link, here that gives a short overview of Mr Thompson's voting record while in the US Senate.
Check it out!

I'll be back

CC

Who's Fred Dalton Thompson?

2007-03-15T08:44:00.000-05:00

If you watch the NBC show Law & Order you know the face. You know the deeep voice, the straightforward, no nonsense character of the DA. The actor is Fred Dalton Thompson, former US Senator from Tennessee. Mr Thompson served two terms and then stepped down voluntarily to take up acting full time. He is the conservative candidate who has been missing from the scene for the Republican Party for quite some time now. (Sorry to Tom Tancredo).
I suggest that everybody who wants a real conservative; one who is pro life, pro 2nd Amendment, and against rewarding illegals for breaking US law, to take a look at Mr Thompson. He is considering running for President of the United States.
Apparently he appeared on FOX over the weekend, and a groundswell of support seems to be coming.
There is an online petition that will be sent to Mr Thompson, here.
If you are tired of the Dems in office (already), but don't care for the RINO candidates currently available for the GOP, click the link and vote!

I'll be back

CC

PS As more information becomes available, I will post it asap.

Another Clinton Lie

2007-03-12T07:37:00.000-05:00

The other day Hillary went to Selma, Alabama to get out the Black vote. She claimed she was affected deeply in high school by Martin Luther King, in a speech he gave.
Kind of strange how Dr. King's speech made Hillary be part of the Goldwater group in 1964. Read the piece from Bob Novak on Townhall.com. (Click the title bar for the link). It will be interesting to see if Barack Obama's people pick up on this.

I'll be back

CC

2nd Amendment Vindicated, 31 Years Late

2007-03-10T09:59:00.000-06:00

This Breitbart piece is welcome news to those who hold their 2nd Amendment rights to be sacred. The draconian anti gun laws of Washington, DC have finally been found to be in violation of the 2nd Amendment. Click the title bar as a link. Go
herefor the actual document in pdf format.

Here's a taste:

To summarize, we conclude that the Second Amendment
protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. That right
existed prior to the formation of the new government under the
Constitution and was premised on the private use of arms for
activities such as hunting and self-defense, the latter being
understood as resistance to either private lawlessness or the
depredations of a tyrannical government (or a threat from
abroad). In addition, the right to keep and bear arms had the
important and salutary civic purpose of helping to preserve the
citizen militia. The civic purpose was also a political expedient
for the Federalists in the First Congress as it served, in part, to
placate their Antifederalist opponents. The individual right
facilitated militia service by ensuring that citizens would not be
barred from keeping the arms they would need when called forth
for militia duty. Despite the importance of the Second
Amendment’s civic purpose, however, the activities it protects
are not limited to militia service, nor is an individual’s
enjoyment of the right contingent upon his or her continued or
intermittent enrollment in the militia.

I'll be back

CC

GOP Turncoats In House Vote

2007-02-17T16:24:00.000-06:00

Yesterday the US House of Representatives (I use the term loosely) gave basically a vote of no confidence to President Bush and his Iraq troops surge plan. Voting was mostly along party lines, with 17 Republicans (again I use that designation loosely) voting along with the Dems.
Click the link to visit the House website with the roll call vote listed. The GOP members are in standard type, with the Dems in italics.
Say what you want about the way the war has been run, but remember, the troops need to support of all of our citizens, including members of Congress.
Keep the names in mind when the next election rolls around.

I'll be back

CC

Dems Showing Their True Colors In Earmark Debate

2007-01-15T05:39:00.000-06:00

Senate majority leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has already become the target of GOP sponsored legislation as a result of possible conflicts of interest in lobbying done by his relatives.
Click the title bar and see how quickly the newly annointed have fallen.

I'll be back

CC

Israel To Bomb Iran?

2007-01-07T09:58:00.000-06:00

So Israel may be planning a preemptive nuclear strike on Iranian nuclear facilities in reports out of England. This is being reported on FOX NEWS this morning. In my mind, it is necessary.
But David Asman, the host of the show had this "expert" on who said it was a bad idea. The guy's name is PJ Crowley. Apparently he was an advisor to George Bush sometime in the past.
Anyway, Crowley says it is a bad idea for Israel to bomb Iran, because..get this..
"It would be an act of war". And even better, it would "destabilize the Middle East".
I'm not sure what rock this clown came out from under, but the last I checked, Iran has said it will destroy Israel. Those sound like fighting words to me. And it doesn't seem possible to destabilize an area of the world that is already about as unstable an area that exists.
He didn't even understand the idea that Israel may have released the information on purpose to get Iran to stop producing the bomb.
It's beyond me why FOX gets these morons on the air, especially since they are paid for their appearances.

I'll be back

CC

Help Fight The ACLU & Illegal Infiltrators

2006-12-30T07:30:00.000-06:00

The city of Hazelton, PA has enacted ordinances making it a crime to knowingly hire illegals, as well as several other similar laws. Click the title bar to go to their site. There you can read the ordinances and make a donation to help them fight the ACLU in its attempt to bully this town into submission.

I'll be back

CC

ISG Bipartisan? So What

2006-12-08T08:57:00.000-06:00

David Limbaugh has a fine piece (click the title bar) on why the Iraq Study Group's recommendations don't matter, and why the Dems will insist that they do.

Europe Shows Iran Who's Boss, Sort Of

2006-11-23T12:50:00.000-06:00

Click the title bar and read how Europe is dealing with the misdeeds of Iran's crazy government.
Too bad it's not about their nuclear ambitions.

I'll be back

CC

Dems Running From Kerry

2006-11-01T07:20:00.000-06:00

With John Kerry again suffering from Foot In Mouth Disease, an Iowa candidate for congress has asked the Senator to stay away from Iowa. Kerry made a comment in a speech telling members of the military that if they weren't educated, they would end up in Iraq. Kerry has further compounded the problem by refusing to apologize for it.
What's interesting to me about all this is that Kerry scored lower on his AFQT than Mr Bush did. They both entered the service at about the same time, so the tests were similar. The AFQT is the Armed Forces Qualifications Test, given to all who enter any branch of the military.
Kerry is taking on the role that President Bush has, that of a pariah in his own party.

I'll be back

CC

Alcoholics Rejoice!!

2006-10-31T18:27:00.002-06:00

Click the title bar and see what I'm spouting about. It's what the drinkers have long waited for. Destroy your liver, get another for another 40-50 years of boozing it up!
We live in a great world.

I'll be back

CC

NY Times Editor: Wiretaps OK After all

2006-10-23T17:38:00.000-05:00

OK, the NY Times guys finally decided that Bush is right about the wiretap stuff. Too bad they buried their "apology" down deep inside another piece that belied its real contents.
Sounds like when the politicians put an earmark on a major bill, hoping nobody will notice.
Hat Tip to Michelle Malkin for this info. Here are the actual words, or click he title bar to go to the NYT website. BTW, the website version will probably disappear soon. My guess is they won't even archive it. The words:

Since the job of public editor requires me to probe and question the published work and wisdom of Times journalists, there’s a special responsibility for me to acknowledge my own flawed assessments.

My July 2 column strongly supported The Times’s decision to publish its June 23 article on a once-secret banking-data surveillance program. After pondering for several months, I have decided I was off base. There were reasons to publish the controversial article, but they were slightly outweighed by two factors to which I gave too little emphasis. While it’s a close call now, as it was then, I don’t think the article should have been published.

Those two factors are really what bring me to this corrective commentary: the apparent legality of the program in the United States, and the absence of any evidence that anyone’s private data had actually been misused. I had mentioned both as being part of “the most substantial argument against running the story,” but that reference was relegated to the bottom of my column.

The source of the data, as my column noted, was the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, or Swift. That Belgium-based consortium said it had honored administrative subpoenas from the American government because it has a subsidiary in this country.

I haven’t found any evidence in the intervening months that the surveillance program was illegal under United States laws. Although data-protection authorities in Europe have complained that the formerly secret program violated their rules on privacy, there have been no Times reports of legal action being taken. Data-protection rules are often stricter in Europe than in America, and have been a frequent source of friction.

Also, there still haven’t been any abuses of private data linked to the program, which apparently has continued to function. That, plus the legality issue, has left me wondering what harm actually was avoided when The Times and two other newspapers disclosed the program. The lack of appropriate oversight — to catch any abuses in the absence of media attention — was a key reason I originally supported publication. I think, however, that I gave it too much weight.

In addition, I became embarrassed by the how-secret-is-it issue, although that isn’t a cause of my altered conclusion. My original support for the article rested heavily on the fact that so many people already knew about the program that serious terrorists also must have been aware of it. But critical, and clever, readers were quick to point to a contradiction: the Times article and headline had both emphasized that a “secret” program was being exposed. (If one sentence down in the article had acknowledged that a number of people were probably aware of the program, both the newsroom and I would have been better able to address that wave of criticism.)

What kept me from seeing these matters more clearly earlier in what admittedly was a close call? I fear I allowed the vicious criticism of The Times by the Bush administration to trigger my instinctive affinity for the underdog and enduring faith in a free press — two traits that I warned readers about in my first column.

The other troubling part is that statement about vicious criticism from the Bush administration. It wasn't the administration, it was us bloggers who viciously bit the ankles of the NY Times.

I'll be back

CC

Showing Off For Dad

2006-10-14T20:46:00.000-05:00

I don't write too much about sports here, but I'm a great fan of college football. Today there was an injury that was the direct result (in my opinion) of a son showing off for his father.
The Oklahoma Sooners were at home playing Iowa State. The game was well in hand late in the fourth quarter, with Oklahoma dominating. Adrian Peterson, Oklahoma's primary (NFL bound) running back races for the end zone on a 53 yard run. At the last second, as Peterson was crossing the two yard line to score, he showboats with a strange dive into the end zone. I've seen the replay at least ten times. The dive was showboating and not necessary.
Sure enough, Peterson hurts himself on the play. He has a broken collar bone and is most likely lost for the season.
What made this young man do this? His father had just gotten out of prison and was watching his son play college football for the first time.
Showboating for dad. Hurts the team a lot.
The commentators on TV are saying it may trigger Peterson's early exit from college football to make himself available for the NFL draft.
Selfishness.

I'll be back

CC

Straw Poll On GOP Candidates For President

2006-10-10T23:36:00.000-05:00

Germany vs Islam?

2006-09-29T17:45:00.000-05:00

So I'm sitting here watching a report on FOX News Channel about how Germans have given up their bad attitudes and reached out to the Muslim world. It's all a (non) story about the Nazis, etc, and how the Germans felt guilty about WW2 and all that stuff.
The story goes on to describe how the Germans now feel betrayed because of Islamic terrorism in Europe and around the world.
But hold everything!!!! The Nazis didn't abuse the Muslims during WW2. Really, they didn't!! As a matter of fact, Hitler saw the people living in Muslim areas of the Soviet Union as potential allies.
The Soviet dictator Josef Stalin knew this, and went so far as to transport a majority of the populations of Chechnya and Soviet Georgia to Siberia during the war, fearing a potential uprising by those Islamic populations.
How do I know this? Try reading this: "Russia At War, 1941-1945", a very comprehensive account of the Eastern front in WW2 from the Russian perspective.
I read the book, by Alexander Werth (a Russian born British correspondent in the Soviet Union during WW2), and all of what I said is in there.
That's one of the reasons the people in Chechnya are still committing terrorist acts vs Russia today.
But the idea that the Nazis abused Muslims is not supported by historical fact. If anything, Hitler was glad he had another potential ally against the Jews. He cultivated that as long as it was to his advantage, hence the response from Stalin.

I'll be back

CC

AP Photographer Has Strong Terrorist Ties

2006-09-19T05:38:00.000-05:00

In this piece from Michelle Malkin (click the title bar), there is ample evidence that AP photograper Bilal Hussein has stong ties to the terrorists in Iraq.
That being the case, and if it is as blatant as Michelle seems to have established, then AP should be indicted on conspiracy charges by the FEDS.
From Michelle's blog:

"We want the rule of law to prevail. He either needs to be charged or released. Indefinite detention is not acceptable," said Tom Curley, AP's president and chief executive officer. "We've come to the conclusion that this is unacceptable under Iraqi law, or Geneva Conventions, or any military procedure."

Mr Curley better watch his back, as this sure looks like collaberation with the enemy.

I'll be back

CC

Iran Leader Ali Khamenei On Pope's Remarks

2006-09-19T05:18:00.000-05:00

Click the title bar to read the ridiculous comments of the Ayatollah. Somehow the Jews are now running the Vatican, and the Pope is American, instead of German.
What a crock.

I'll be back

CC

Jihad?

2006-09-17T04:41:00.000-05:00

So the Pope has made the idiots mad. They are doing the usual, making threats and burning churches. And they call this a religion? I repeat again, it is nothing more than a cult of fanatics, mostly savages, who do not care about basic human rights.
I really hope the Pope stands his ground. It's time to put the animals in their cages.

I'll be back

CC

Michelle Malkin has more

Tammy Bruce chimes in

And from Gateway Pundit

LaShawn Barber says no apology

From Little Green Footballs

Right Truth says

From the Infidel Bloggers

Looks Like The Pope Got It Right

2006-09-16T09:51:00.000-05:00

When Pope Benedict XVI quoted an old text that described Islam as evil, he sure got it right. Now the Islamic Idiots are rioting in the streets. What else is new?
This is more of the same crap we saw when they rioted about the pictures of Mohammad.
As I have said before, it's not a religion, it is a fanatical cult. I'm hoping they really get out of control this time, so the Western (Civilized) part of the world can see the reality.
Click the title bar to read the short piece from My Way News.

I'll be back

CC

Here's Michelle Malkin on the controversy.

Tammy Bruce's thoughts are here.

So Who Writes The Rules Of Engagement?

2006-09-15T04:45:00.000-05:00

It has come to light that the Army passed up attacking a group of Taliban that had congregated for a funeral, because they were at a cemetary. Back in June, a Predator drone revealed the group, but no attack ensued.

"During the observation of the group over a significant period of time, it was determined that the group was located on the grounds of (the) cemetery and were likely conducting a funeral for Taliban insurgents killed in a coalition operation nearby earlier in the day," the statement said. "A decision was made not to strike this group of insurgents at that specific location and time."

It's stuff like this that gets me riled up to no end. Wars are not fought to be nice. They should be fought to win. It seems the lessons of Vietnam have been forgotten. If the enemy fighting you is using certain tactics that are effective, one should use those same tactics when feasible to even the playing field. Instead here is our reaction:

While not giving a reason for the decision, the military concluded the statement saying that while Taliban forces have killed innocent civilians during a funeral, coalition forces "hold themselves to a higher moral and ethical standard than their enemies."

Be nice to your enemy. After all, he only wants to kill you.

I'll be back

CC

I just ran across a piece on this at Debbie Schlussel's site: click

Don't want her to accuse me of plagiarism. It gets her all riled up.

Who Do You Want As The Republican Presidential Nominee?

2006-09-13T09:08:00.000-05:00

Scroll to the bottom of the page and vote!

I'll be back

CC

Lost Parts Of The ABC 9/11 Movie

2006-09-13T08:06:00.000-05:00

Click the title bar and go to the site of Traditional Values dot com to see what the Clinton's and other Dems demanded be removed from the ABC miniseries about 9/11.
I watched the film, and it still did a pretty good job of tearing Clinton a new one.
But the edited stuff is worth a look.
HT Michelle Malkin

I'll be back

CC

UPDATE:

Here is a piece from the WSJ online from the film's writer, CYRUS NOWRASTEH. Quite enlightening and a must read.

Tracking Chips For Safety

2006-09-08T19:41:00.000-05:00

I've said this type of thing before, but now I have a new idea. I said we should put tracking chips inside the bodies of any terrorist suspects if they are released, for whatever reason. That way we can track where they go and possibly catch their cohorts.
With the abduction of this American Major Jill Metzger,earlier this week and her subsequent release (fortunately) I have an idea.
BTW, thank goodness she is safe (albeit with a shaved head). But what about this idea? What about offering those who are in harm's way a way to be found, if abducted?
Here's my plan. All members of the armed forces, the press, and other types of potential targets for kidnapping (diplomats, etc) would have a tracking chip inserted under their skin prior to being deployed in the areas of danger. Each chip would have an individual identifier for the individual involved.
It works for my Labrador Retriever.
The chips would have to be transmitters, with a frequency unknown to all but those with the highest security clearances.
Or even better, the chips could be embedded with varying transmission frequencies, based on time or location. With today's technology, that's not a stretch.
With chips as described embedded in the bodies of our people, they would become beacons, guiding rescuers to their rescue, and to the deaths of their abductors.

I'll be back

CC

Reminder Of Why We Are Fighting

2006-09-08T14:51:00.000-05:00

Click the title bar and listen to the words. Remember, if we leave the Middle East, cutting and running the way the losers on the Left want, it's just a matter of time before the savages are at our doorstep again.

I'll be back

CC

Dem Congressman In Bed With Terrorists?

2006-08-25T17:13:00.000-05:00

Illinois Congressman Danny Davis has taken funds from the known terror organization the "Tamil Tigers", according to the piece from the Chicago Tribune. Click the title bar to read the entire article.
While feigning ignorance of this violation of Federal law:

The five-term Democratic congressman said he was unaware that the Tigers paid for the trip and on his required congressional disclosure form he reported that the trip was paid for by a Hickory Hills, Ill.-based Tamil cultural organization, the Federation of Tamil Sangams of North America.

The congressman also admitted:

"I knew that they were associated with the Tamil Tigers, yes," he said.

Lucky for us the Dems are "strong on terror".

I'll be back

CC

Maybe We Are Wasting Our Time Trying To "Save Iraq"

2006-08-25T16:19:00.000-05:00

In this piece from My Way News, the savages in Iraq have shown they may not be ready for civilized living. Click the title bar to read how Iraqi looters have torn into a base that was turned over to Iraqi authorities by the British.
With such acts, how can we say the people over there are really ready for Democratic living? The only thing that seems to work in the Middle East is power and threats.

I'll be back

CC

Judge In Wiretap Case Has Conflict Of Interest Issues

2006-08-23T16:20:00.000-05:00

Click the title bar for this press release from Judicial Watch. The judge who ruled against the wiretap program last week has a big problem:

(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption and judicial abuse, announced today that Judge Anna Diggs Taylor, who last week ruled the government’s warrantless wiretapping program unconstitutional, serves as a Secretary and Trustee for a foundation that donated funds to the ACLU of Michigan, a plaintiff in the case (ACLU et. al v. National Security Agency). Judicial Watch discovered the potential conflict of interest after reviewing Judge Diggs Taylor’s financial disclosure statements.

Sounds like a clear case of conflict of interest. Perhaps the judge can be removed from the bench for failing to recuse herself from the case.

I'll be back

CC

Security Council Resolution In Lebanon

2006-08-16T18:32:00.000-05:00

I've been letting everybody else blog for a while, as I have been attending to a lot of personal business.
But this UN resolution to stop the destruction of Hizbollah has me pissed off. The idea that any UN force (short of the Americans and British) being able to make an impact in this confrontation is ludicrous.
Now the Lebanese army is balking at going into the areas in question, because they don't want to piss off their buddies, the terrorists.
Sounds a lot like Neville Chamberlain in 1938. He negotiated a treaty with Nazi Germany that was broken a year later, with the German invasion of Poland.
At the time, the know nothings were touting Chamberlain, and his statement that there would be "Peace In Our Time". The amount of time was slightly more than 12 months, if I remember my history.
So now Hizbollah has time to re-arm and regroup. It waits for Iran to send more supplies and weapons to replace those destroyed by the Israelis. Iran will be there. Count on it.
Maybe by the next conflict the terrorists will have some sort of WMD. My feeling is it would be some sort of "dirty bomb". Radiation filled containers, detonated by a large blast of explosives. The radioactive materials would be provided by Iran, as part of its "peaceful" nuclear program.
Click the title bar for the entire UN Resolution. Hat tip to Tammy Bruce. Read the ridiculous words of the UN, and wonder what Fantasyland they are living in.

I'll be back

CC

Wonderful Piece On Today's Wars, With The World War Two Perspective

2006-08-09T18:10:00.001-05:00

I was sent this via email. It is basically what my writing here has been about since I started this blog. Please click the title bar and read a comprehensive analysis (it contains a few small errors) of why we need to stay in the fight in Iraq, and against Islamo Fascism.

I'll be back

CC

Foreign Names Mispronounced On TV, Purposeful?

2006-07-16T15:15:00.000-05:00

I have been criticized by some for my attacks on the efforts of many to allow illegal immigration to continue. What usually occurs is an attack against me personally, for being "racist". Those who attack me thus are all supporters of the Latino infiltrators.
Now, over the years of my life (55) I have noticed one way that many people "get in their jab", so to speak, against those they dislike or disagree with. They mispronounce their names. On purpose.
It's an obvious tactic, at least to me, and it harkens to a "Junior High" mentality.
Having moved out here to Iowa a little less than two years ago, I have heard quite a few mispronunciations of Hispanic names and words. I have taken those situations in stride, as I don't feel the average Midwesterner to be racist against Hispanic people. Factually, I have helped those who don't know how to pronounce words with Hispanic roots. I do it to help, not ridicule. It's the teacher deep down inside me.
So what's my point? I've been stewing on this for a while. But today a Major League Baseball game triggered this diatribe.
Being from Los Angeles, I was a die hard LA Dodgers Baseball fan. I still check on the team's success, occasionally. I was clicking through my cable TV listings, and noticed the Dodgers were going to come on the local cable feed vs the St Louis Cardinals. The feed is from the Cardinals local TV broadcast, with the Cardinals team announcers. (St Louis Channel 11).
The game is pretty much gone, with the Cardinals leading 6-2. A Dodgers player with the last name of Seanez is batting. The announcers call him "Signs". No BS. They pronounced his name "Signs". Both announcers. Several times.
The correct pronunciation is "see-ah-nezz" as best I can put it. Did they do it on purpose? Do they dislike Hispanics? I don't think that's the case. But local Hispanics are probably not happy.
The more paramount example of this had occured a week ago, and then again on Friday night, on FOX News Channel. Sheppard Smith, who is one of the top announcers on FOX, was talking about the "American Terrorist" Jose Padilla.
Shep pronounced the name "pah-dill-ah". Dill, like dill pickle. The actual Hispanic pronunciation is: "pah-dee-ya", as best as I know.
This doesn't seem to be a FOX thing, because other announcers on the channel do pronounce the name correctly.
But it happened twice, with a split of days of at least five or six. During that time frame, somebody could have (should have) told Shep how to pronounce the name.
Is Shep's mispronunciation purposeful? I'm not sure. I do know that I don't stoop to that type of sophomoric BS. When I write something critical about somebody, it's based on what they've done or said. Not on how their name is spelled.

I'll be back

CC

Peace With Islam? Yeah, Right

2006-07-16T14:31:00.000-05:00

Click the title bar for the entire piece. From the Absurd Report, (it's in the links here on my site) this piece again points out the false facade of Islam. The idea that it is a "Religion of Peace" is, on the face of it, empirically seen to be a charade.

Islam, the self proclaimed “religion” of peace and love cannot stop killing its own people in the name of Islam and Allah. Islam is a religion that proclaims murder is wrong, and the killing of a fellow Muslim absolutely forbidden. Despite that, Muslims seem to have no problem killing a fellow Muslim if it is convenient or will lead to one sect having more power than another.

But we, as Americans (infidels) cannot stray from that false claim.

While American forces take great care not to violate any religious law by even entering a mosque, Muslims can blow up mosques and kill fellow Muslims who are praying to Allah and no one within the so-called “moderate Muslim” ranks utters a peep of condemnation.

Let an American soldier be accused of killing an Iraqi civilian and the howl of outrage and the blood-lust for revenge is heard from one Iraqi border to the other and reverberates throughout the Muslim world. But as Muslims commit mass murder within Islam, the Islamic leaders around the world turn a blind eye.

The "Religion of Peace" has never been peaceful.

The split within Islam began the day Mohammed died and it has grown more violent ever since. There is a good reason for this: Islam is a violent and warring belief. It is so violent that if unable to kill a perceived enemy, it turns on its own, ending lives in a hail of bullets or in a premeditated explosion from a suicide bomber. The killers are then instantly dubbed martyrs-for-Allah for killing fellow Muslims who did not follow Islam as their sect interprets Islam.

This "Religion of Tolerance" has never been tolerant.

For the most part, Christianity has been purged from the Middle East. While some countries have a small minority of Christians, they are persecuted and tormented and in many cases, they are not even allowed to be citizens of the country of their birth because they are not Muslim. In most Islamic countries, non-Muslims cannot own land and their children are not allowed to attend the better schools.

This "Religion of Peace" is not peaceful.

Now there has been a brutal attack in India with hundreds dead and injured. Some will say that this has nothing to do with the war America is involved in. Only the foolish believe this. Whether it is the attack on 9/11, London, Madrid, Russia, Bali, and now India, the common denominator in all these attacks is Islam. Attacks have been thwarted in Australia, Canada, England, France, and the United States.

Terrorism? Islam.

This is a war against the ideology of Islam. It is Islam that is behind nearly every terrorist attack in the world today. There is not a day that passes that someone, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, does not die at the hands of a follower of Islam. It is not possible to have peace with a “religion” that only believes in war.

I'll be back

CC

Democracy May Not Be The Cure All For Terrorism: McCarthy

2006-07-15T07:47:00.000-05:00

Click the title bar, and read a well thought out piece from The National Review Online. Andy McCarthy makes a strong case against President Bush's ideas that Democracy will save the Middle East from Radical Islam.

Democracy promotion as a goal of national policy is fine and admirable. On the other hand, selling democratization as a complete, self-contained response to terrorism is nothing beyond a more appealing manifestation of the regnant political correctness that induces us to call this enterprise the "war on terror" lest we offend anyone by mentioning who the enemy is. Wouldn't it be wonderful to believe that the problem wasn't a religious doctrine but rather the denial of a great aspiration — freedom — that we just happen to be in a noble position to provide?

But it's a fiction. The terrorists don't want to kill us because they have been deprived of freedom. They want to kill us because they believe their religion tells them that is what they are required to do. It is why they continue to try to kill us even when they live in very comfortable democratic circumstances. Freedom is not a cure for what ails them.

In addition, McCarthy could have pointed out that the Palestinians voted democratically to install a government that is MADE UP OF TERRORISTS!

I'll be back

CC

Crime Spree In D.C. Undeterred By Gun Laws

2006-07-12T16:19:00.000-05:00

Click the title bar for the Breitbart piece.

So with the most Draconian gun laws in the nation, Washington, DC has seen violent crimes on the rise in recent months. In at least one case, individuals were assaulted at KNIFE POINT.

...Alan Senitt, was attacked in the Georgetown area on Sunday, his throat was slit and police say the attackers attempted to rape his companion...

Others have been robbed at gunpoint. Looks like the bad guys have seen the ripe fruit on the trees in DC. With the average law-abiding individual unarmed, the attacks will continue.

An armed citizen is a safer citizen.

I'll be back

CC

Too Many Illegals? Mr Bush, It's Time To Be Like Ike

2006-07-12T06:46:00.001-05:00

Click the title bar for the piece from the Christian Science Monitor.

In the 1950's President Eisenhower managed to reduce the population of illegals in the border states with a massive roundup. Why not do the same today?

on June 17, 1954, what was called "Operation Wetback" began. Because political resistance was lower in California and Arizona, the roundup of aliens began there. Some 750 agents swept northward through agricultural areas with a goal of 1,000 apprehensions a day. By the end of July, over 50,000 aliens were caught in the two states. Another 488,000, fearing arrest, had fled the country.

Worked then. Will work now

I'll be back

CC

Judge Rules In Favor Of Christian College Group On Gay Rights Issue

2006-07-11T19:01:00.000-05:00

Click the title bar for the entire piece. A judge has ruled in favor of a Christian group on campus at Southern Illinois University, in its attempt to prevent homosexuals from joining the group. Gay Rights advocates have said the group's rules need to be changed, to allow membership in the group for homosexuals. The Christians have said that same gender sex violates their religious beliefs. It is also apparent that other groups on campus have not been so challenged:

The appeals court also questioned whether Southern Illinois was enforcing its rules fairly. Under several Supreme Court rulings, a key test of whether a public entity’s rules are constitutional is whether they are “viewpoint neutral.” In this case, the appeals court found that the policy met that requirement on “its face,” but it cited “strong evidence” that the Christian group was held to a higher standard than other groups. The court said that other religious groups limited membership to those of their faith, and that a women’s group admitted women only — in apparent violation of the policy — without losing their recognition.

Other courts have ruled the other way, in similar cases.
It's just a matter of time before the Supreme Court gets involved.

I'll be back

CC

Florida Governor Credits Reduced Crime There To Right To Carry Laws

2006-07-11T18:46:00.000-05:00

Click the title bar for the entire piece.

Jeb Bush has come out and said, point blank, that legal guns stop the bad guys.

"This report shows that staying tough on crime works," said Bush. "Law abiding citizens that have guns for protection actually probably are part of the reason we have a lower crime rate."

A law passed last year in Florida that allows a person to defend himself with deadly force (called the "shoot your neighbor law" by gun control nuts) is given the main credit:

"You send a real powerful signal when you know the citizen has a good potential of being armed and doesn't have to back off anymore," said John Birch, president of the Illinois-based Concealed Carry, Inc.

Good news for us gun toting NRA life members. HOO RAH!!

I'll be back

CC

Terrorist On "Dry Run" At Airport In Houston

2006-07-11T06:17:00.000-05:00

So this Middle Eastern guy is getting on an airplane in Houston, and is asked if he has a laptop computer. He says no, yet when his bag is X-Rayed, there is a laptop in his luggage. (Click the title bar for the entire piece.)
So they check him further:

A search of the man's baggage revealed a clock with a 9-volt battery taped to it and a copy of the Quran, the report said. A screener examined the man's shoes and determined that the "entire soles of both shoes were gutted out."

So what do the authorities do? Nothing. That's right, they allow the guy to get on board. Maybe we need another attack? The Houston police who were present at the time give this lame excuse:

"Our job is not to be the gatekeepers," police Capt. Dwayne Ready said. "That burden falls squarely on the airline and TSA to make that final decision.

But the TSA people disagree:

TSA spokeswoman Andrea McCauley said screeners have the authority to stop people from going beyond the checkpoint to the boarding areas, but they rely heavily on local police.

"It's just agencies talking with each other," Ready said, downplaying the disagreement.

It seems nobody wanted to take action:

a confidential TSA report obtained by the Houston Chronicle details a dispute between screeners and a police officer on duty at the airport.

So while Rome burned, Nero fiddled.

I know one thing, I'm not going through Houston's airport.

I'll be back

CC

Are You Against Gay Marriage?

2006-07-10T15:35:00.000-05:00

I received this email today. It's worth the time, I think. Click the title bar to participate in the protest.

This is an urgent call for you to join our formal protest to ABC News of a blatant attempt to distort what Americans believe about a key social issue of our time -- gay "marriage."
The new anchor of ABC's World News Tonight -- Charles Gibson -- didn't waste any time recently in showing his bias in favor of same-sex "marriage."

Gibson's bias was painfully obvious. Even as his own network's poll revealed overwhelming public opposition to same-sex marriage, Gibson reported: "Americans are fairly evenly split on this issue."

The ABC News poll found that Americans say: "Same-sex marriage should be illegal," by a 58 to 36-percent margin.

And Gibson calls that an even split!

Join our protest. Click here and demand that ABC News retract Gibson's lie and tell the truth about what America really thinks.

This is a case of liberal media bias crossing the line from "spin" to outright falsehood. It smacks of the totalitarian Big Lie technique -- repeat a lie often enough and people will start believing it.

Gibson DID JUST THAT.

During the same broadcast, an ABC reporter clearly stated that "forty-five of fifty states have passed either constitutional amendments or laws banning same-sex marriage."

Forty-five out of fifty is no "even split," but even that overwhelming statistic didn't stop Gibson.

He repeated the Big Lie twice more!

Interviewing his ABC colleague George Stephanopoulos, Gibson asked: "Why does the White House think this is a political winner for the President if indeed we're split?"

Gibson then repeated what even Stephanopoulos -- formerly Bill Clinton's White House spin-meister - had to admit was nothing but the Democratic party's spin on the issue. Gibson inquired, "why, if the votes are not there for this constitutional amendment, does the Senate spend three days on this issue when there are a lot of issues that perhaps they could do something about it?"

Such flagrant liberal media bias directly attacking the foundational institution of our civilization -- marriage -- must be challenged.

Click here to demand that ABC News correct the record and retract Gibson's Big Lie.

Eternal vigilance, Thomas Jefferson said, is the price of our liberties.

And Edmund Burke reminded us that "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

If we do nothing now to immediately confront ABC on this issue, the evil of gay "marriage" will be that much closer to eventual triumph.

We've made it easy for you to help. Click here to join our formal protest to ABC News.

And we all have friends, family members and colleagues who feel the same way we do about so-called "same-sex marriage" and the LIES the liberal media keep telling about the American people's support for it. I'm making sure every one of my contacts who agrees with me receives this e-mail so they can protest to ABC News, too, and I hope you will do the same. Please FORWARD this e-mail to at least four of your like-minded contacts NOW.

And then click here to immediately add your name to our protest to ABC News.

Urgently,

Doug Mills
Executive Director
MEDIA RESEARCH CENTER

P.S. In our full-time quest to fight bias and demand the truth from the increasingly liberal national media, your participation and support are key. So, if you have not done so already, forward this e-mail to at least four of your like-minded contacts and click here now to protest the liberal media's Big Lie on "same-sex marriage."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To contact the MRC with comments or questions, please write to info@FightMediaBias.org.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, please go to: https://www.fightmediabias.org/unsub.asp.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Media Research Center is a research and education organization operating under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. Contributions are tax-deductible for income tax purposes. Media Research Center, 325 S. Patrick Street, Alexandria, VA 22314

I'll be back

CC

Michael Goodwin: It's WW III

2006-07-09T18:50:00.000-05:00

A little bit late, but New York Daily News Columnist Michael Goodwin has figured out that we are in WW III.
Bill O'Reilly has been saying it since the Twin Towers fell. I have been saying it since the USS Cole was attacked.
Chipping away at the barriers that are blinders over the eyes of the MSM's and the public at large. That's what the job of us Pro-American bloggers is.
Click the title bar. There is an archive file on the left side of the site.

I'll be back

CC

Greg Gutfeld On An Inconvenient Al Gore

2006-07-09T06:50:00.000-05:00

From the Huffington Post, here's a hilarious review of Al Gore's global warming flick. Quite funny, really. (Click the title bar)

I'll be back

CC

PS Be sure to check out all of the Loons' comments afterwards

Latest Terrorist Threat Thwarted

2006-07-07T23:27:00.000-05:00

Click the title bar, and read what will become an interesting jabbing match between the Left and those who understand reality. Surely, the NY Times and other anti American news sources (BBC, AP, Reuters etc) will try to find out how they didn't know what sort of anti-terror tactics were used to facilitate this success.
We all know that if those tactics were known about by the MSM's it would have already been revealed.
And the chances of this success would have been greatly reduced.

I'll be back

CC

Another Voice For Action On Iran

2006-07-07T05:14:00.000-05:00

Mark Steyn has this superb piece in City Journal on the real threat posed by Iran and why it's time to act. If we wait for the Iranian people to overthrow the government, it may be too late.

The bad cop/worse cop routine the mullahs and their hothead President Ahmadinejad are playing in this period of alleged negotiation over Iran’s nuclear program is the best indication of how all negotiations with Iran will go once they’re ready to fly. This is the nuclear version of the NRA bumper sticker: “Guns Don’t Kill People. People Kill People.” Nukes don’t nuke nations. Nations nuke nations

Click the title bar for the entire piece, and then start to let your members of Congress know we can't wait any longer.

I'll be back

CC

Cindy Sheehan Wants To Live In Venezuela?

2006-07-05T18:04:00.000-05:00

Click the title bar. Watch her rant. Then help our country get rid of this idiot by putting together the funds necessary to send her (one way) to South America.
I will start an account for donations if enough people are interested.

UPDATE: Michelle Malkin agrees: here
UPDATE II: 300 Bucks for ticket:here

I'll be back

CC

Are Demonstrations Important?

2006-07-05T06:41:00.000-05:00

I have written about demonstrations by the Left, and how I feel they generally serve to further entrench those who already disagree with the demonstrators. Hence, I don't run out in the streets chanting and doing other foolish things, as I see those who do as infantile, at best. It reminds me of the little baby who throws a temper tantrum, when the authorities (parents) lay down the law. In today's society, the Left has trouble dealing with the rule of law, (except when activist Leftie judges interfere on their behalf) so they run around chanting and waving signs that contain personal attacks against whomever they feel has caused their latest personal angst.
George Bush, of course is a prime target for these morons.
Since I hold quite strongly to these feelings, I felt no desire to run out to New York and demonstrate in front of the NY Times building the other day. There was a small turnout for the event, and now the Left is ridiculing the low number of "moonbats" they saw out there on the sidewalk.
I even had a commenter write, regarding my recent post on Tammy Bruce's piece about what the NY Times might have printed back in the days of Paul Revere. Now what that had to do with the demonstration in front of the Times building, I'm not sure, since neither Tammy nor I advocated participation in the event. So basically the comments were a non-sequiter. In part, here's what was said:

"...look up the giant anti-New York Times protest in DC. You'll see some photos. Find the ones of Michelle Malkin and the other fifteen or twenty sign-carriers,..."

I didn't post the comment, as it contained personal attacks, which I do not regard as being worth the time of day.

In addition, there was a link put in the comment, "http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com"
just like that, unclickable. It can be cut and pasted into your browser, if you want to read a bunch of Leftie propaganda. Bush lied, blah blah, Conservatives have no brains, blah blah, etc. The title of the piece is "Light holiday fare", in case you need to hunt for it at the site.
This piece is so full of holes one could drive a semi-tractor trailer through it. It contains numerous links that do not link to what is implied by their context in the piece.
And best of all, the author begins with this preamble:

For the past 10 years, I was a litigator in NYC specializing in First Amendment challenges, civil rights cases, and corporate and securities fraud matters. I am the author of the New York Times Best-Selling book, How Would A Patriot Act?, a critique of the Bush administration's use of executive power, released May, 2006.

I checked the NY Times bestseller list for non-fiction. I'm assuming the author thinks he is writing non-fiction....maybe that's why I couldn't find it. Heh-Heh-Heh.

Here is the list, from the Times:

1 GODLESS, by Ann Coulter. (Crown Forum, $27.95.) The columnist argues that liberalism is a religion with sacraments, a creation myth and a clergy. 2 3
2 WISDOM OF OUR FATHERS, by Tim Russert. (Random House, $22.95.) The host of "Meet the Press'' presents readers' letters about their fathers in responseto his book "Big Russ and Me.'' 1 5
3 MARLEY & ME, by John Grogan. (Morrow, $21.95.) A newspaper columnist and his wife learn some life lessons from their neurotic dog. 3 36
4 DISPATCHES FROM THE EDGE, by Anderson Cooper. (HarperCollins, $24.95.) The CNN correspondent describes a year of covering the tsunami in Sri Lanka, the war in Iraq and Hurricane Katrina. 4 5
5 THE ONE PERCENT DOCTRINE, by Ron Suskind. (Simon & Schuster, $27.) An investigation of the Bush administration's strategic thinking and of the role of ideology and personality in the decision to go to war. 1
6 THE WORLD IS FLAT, by Thomas L. Friedman. (Farrar, Straus & Giroux, $27.50; updated and expanded edition, $30.) A columnist for The New York Times analyzes 21st-century economics and foreign policy. 5 64
7 MAYFLOWER, by Nathaniel Philbrick. (Viking, $29.95.) How America began, from the author of "In the Heart of the Sea." 6 7
8 MYTHS, LIES, AND DOWNRIGHT STUPIDITY, by John Stossel. (Hyperion, $24.95.) The "20/20" anchor questions conventional wisdom. 7 7
9 FREAKONOMICS, by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner. (Morrow, $25.95.) A maverick scholar applies economic thinking to everything from sumo wrestlers who cheat to legalized abortion and the falling crime rate. First Chapter 9 63
10 MY LIFE IN & OUT OF THE ROUGH, by John Daly with Glen Waggoner. (HarperCollins, $25.95.) A memoir by the bad-boy golf champion. 8 7
11 ARMED MADHOUSE, by Greg Palast. (Dutton, $25.95.) A collection of articles about the war on terror, the 2008 election and other topics by an investigative reporter. 2
12 HEAT, by Bill Buford (Knopf, $25.95.) An editor changes his life by apprenticing in a restaurant kitchen. 13 2
13 A HECKUVA JOB, by Calvin Trillin. (Random House, $12.95.) The humorist, essayist and novelist takes on the Bush administration in verse. 1
14 BLINK, by Malcolm Gladwell. (Little, Brown, $25.95.) The author of "The Tipping Point" explores the importance of hunch and instinct to the workings of the mind. First Chapter 15 70
15 THE OMNIVORE'S DILEMMA, by Michael Pollan. (Penguin Press, $26.95.) Tracking dinner from the soil to the plate, a journalist juggles appetite and conscience. 7
16 * DON'T MAKE A BLACK WOMAN TAKE OFF HER EARRINGS, by Tyler Perry (Riverhead, $23.95.) The man behind "Diary of a Mad Black Woman" muses on life. 10

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also Selling
17 MOCKINGBIRD, by Charles J. Shields (Holt)
18 AMERICA: THE LAST BEST HOPE, VOL. I, by William J. Bennett (Nelson Current/Thomas Nelson)

19 BEYOND BAND OF BROTHERS, by Dick Winters with Cole C. Kingseed (Berkley)
20 STUMBLING ON HAPPINESS, by Daniel Gilbert (Knopf)
21 THE NASTY BITS, by Anthony Bourdain (Bloomsbury)
22 POSSIBLE SIDE EFFECTS, by Augusten Burroughs (St. Martin’s)
23 HOSTILE TAKEOVER, by David Sirota (Crown)

24 GUESTS OF THE AYATOLLAH, by Mark Bowden (Atlantic) First Chapter
25 MANHUNT, by James L. Swanson (Morrow)
26 CLEMENTE, by David Maraniss (Simon & Schuster) First Chapter
27 THE BIG BAM, by Leigh Montville (Doubleday) First Chapter
28 WE ARE THEIR HEAVEN, by Allison DuBois (Fireside/Simon & Schuster)
29 GOOD TO GREAT, by Jim Collins (HarperBusiness)
30 THE MIGHTY AND THE ALMIGHTY, by Madeleine Albright with Bill Woodward (HarperCollins)
31 I HAD THE RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT . . . , by Ron White (Dutton)
32 MY LIFE IN FRANCE, by Julia Child with Alex Prud'homme (Knopf) First Chapter
33 UNCOMMON CARRIERS, by John McPhee (Farrar, Straus and Giroux) First Chapter
34 THE PURSUIT OF HAPPYNESS, by Chris Gardner (Amistad)
35 FUN HOME, by Alison Bechdel (Houghton Mifflin)

So the author starts off with a lie. Not a good way to get the audience on one's side, unless that audience is already your friend and won't take the time to check on one's statements.
He even goes so far as to include comments from his readers as part of his piece, as if those comments were part of the original writing. Lame, to say the least.
Ridiculing the Right for not acting like a bunch of loons running around with signs in the streets is typical of those who don't understand what is considered to be adult behavior.

I'll be back

CC

Tammy Bruce With More On NY Times Treason

2006-07-04T16:07:00.000-05:00

Click the title bar and see the latest from Tammy with links to a couple of sites.
The graphic of the NY Times back during the American Revolution is priceless.

I'll be back

CC

Why The 4th Of July Matters

2006-07-04T07:55:00.000-05:00

July 4

ht: Michelle Malkin

I'll be back

CC

MIT Scientist On Al Gore And Global Warming

2006-07-03T18:47:00.000-05:00

Click the title bar and read this piece from Ankle Biting Pundits. Another scientist steps in against Al Gore.

I'll be back

CC

Boycott The Times

2006-07-02T15:00:00.000-05:00

I have been reading a lot of stuff and advocating that we prosecute the NY & LA Times and those who leaked information to them.
Another way to hurt them is to boycott the papers and those who would advertise on their pages.
Scott at Somerschool has links on his site to make it easy:Click hereto get all the info you need to communicate with those advertisers.

I'll be back

CC

Gerard Vanderleun On NY Times

2006-07-02T14:08:00.000-05:00

From Tammy Bruce's blog, click here comes this piece on American Digest.
It takes care of the newspaper's leadership, and their haughty demeanor.

I'll be back

CC

Ollie North Weighs In On Avaricious Leakers

2006-06-30T06:39:00.000-05:00

In this scathing piece, Oliver North compares those who recently leaked information to the NY Times to some of our worst spy criminals. He compares the actions of John Walker, Aldrich Ames and Robert Hanssen in a not so friendly light.

What's the difference between what Walker, Ames and Hanssen did -- and those who decided to "out" NSA and CIA efforts to track terrorist communications and financial data? Materially, there is no distinction. As in the earlier espionage cases, current and former U.S. government employees -- according to the NYT, "nearly 20" of them -- broke their oaths not to disclose classified information. Like Walker, Ames and Hanssen, "reporters," editors and publishers have hope that their exposes will result in substantial financial gain. Brutal adversaries with a proven penchant for killing innocent Americans have gained invaluable knowledge about our intelligence sources and methods

Click the title bar and be angry

I'll be back

CC

More to follow if necessary

GOP Spending Out Of Control? What About Dem Jim Moran of Virginia?

2006-06-28T19:45:00.000-05:00

Click the link and see the real stripes on the Zebra. Or the real tail on the donkey (jackass).
My guess is this isn't just one Dem with this attitude. He just made the mistake of saying so.

I'll be back

CC

AP Story Supports Gore's Global Warming Flick, BUT.....

2006-06-28T08:55:00.000-05:00

Click the title bar to read an entirely biased piece on the Al Gore movie "An Inconvenient Truth".
Then click herefor a very effective rebuttal of that AP piece.

I'll be back

CC

Updates will be added if they become pertinent

Seixon weighs in here

Utah Election Today Highlights Illegals, And GOP Myopia

2006-06-27T07:04:00.000-05:00

There is a congressional election today in Utah, where the Incumbent Republican has taken the wrong side on the Illegal Immigration issue. Click the title bar to see the particulars. If this election goes the way of several similar referendums on the issue, the incumbent, Chris Cannon will lose in the GOP primary today.
From the piece: (stating what I have said numerous times)

Other than spending I don’t think I’ve ever seen an issue in which the GOP leadership is more detached from its base than illegal immigration. The GOP base (and many Americans) is adamant that any immigration reform secure the borders first. There is also overwhelming opposition to anything that smells like amnesty.

I hope Mr Cannon loses, as the GOP needs this sort of wake up call.

I'll be back

CC

Patterico (And Others) On LA (&NY) Times

2006-06-26T19:15:00.000-05:00

This piece says it all, from the Loa Angeles perspective on why the LA Times and the NY Times decided it was OK to reveal the Feds program to track money in the banking system to catch those who are aiding terrorism. Click the title bar.
I left this comment on the site:

It’s pretty obvious to me why the Times, both NY and LA do the things they do to hurt the country.
Both papers are run by people who hate conservatives, hate the GOP, by and large, and hate George Bush in particular.
Since the American public elected Mr Bush to a second term, the only way the papers and other MSM’s can get revenge on the “stupid voters” is to put their lives in jeopardy.

It seems clear to me. Anybody disagree?

In a follow up, Pat Hynes wants to prosecute the papers:click

The Conservative Voice chimes in with an indictment:here

Congress' lame response here

I'll be back

CC

WMD's In Iraq Were Old? So What???

2006-06-24T04:42:00.000-05:00

In this piece from Tammy Bruce, she makes a great argument that the discovery of WMD's in Iraq (even though older stockpiles) is indeed a validation of the originally announced reason we went into the country with our military.
Sorry MSNBC, you can't have it both ways. From Tammy:

So let me see if I understand this correctly--Sarin and Mustard Gas only count as WMD if they were made post-1991? They're still lethal gases, still kill, and can kill thousands, but they don't count because...? So in one breath the MSNBC Pentagon "official" (perhaps the janitor?) says these aren't the WMD we were looking for but then in the next breath says they're lethal. Last time I checked, that's exactly what we were looking for--WMD that could kill hundred and thousands of people in one shot. I thought we were also looking for weapons the circus clowns at the UN IAEA said didn't exist anymore, and that Saddam said he completely destroyed--which these 500+ weapons prove did exist and about which Saddam lied.

So Bush lied? Or Saddam lied? Call it a stretch, but my money is with Mr Hussein being the prevaricator.

I'll be back

CC

Another Clue China Is Readying For War

2006-06-24T04:35:00.000-05:00

So now China wants to build an oil reserve similar to that of the US. No matter what our government says, the main reason we have the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is in case of a major war. The potential disruption of oil to our military could be catastrophic in such a case, so the SPR exists to ensure combat readiness for our forces.
Now China wants to build the same thing. Another brick in the wall. (Click the title bar)

I'll be back

CC

China Gets A Free Look At Our Military

2006-06-24T04:12:00.001-05:00

In what I can only classify as stupid, our government has allowed members of the Communist Chinese military to observe maneuvers by our Navy and Air Forces. As I've posted before, it's quite likely that we will be fighting these bastards over Taiwan.
What were they thinking? (Click the title bar link)

I'll be back

CC

World War 2 Art Work Resurrected

2006-06-24T04:12:00.000-05:00

Check out this piece on Michelle Malkin's site. With a little photoshop work, many of the World War 2 posters warning about too much talk aiding the enemy have been updated to today's situation with the LA Times and the NY Times.

I'll be back

CC

Must I Repeat Myself?

2006-06-20T15:01:00.000-05:00

I received another anonymous comment today. I will not publish it, not so much because the person didn't make some valid points, but again there were personal attacks that are unwarranted, and unacceptable.
Please don't waste my time and yours to comment anonymously, as those comments will not be posted.

I'll be back

CC

Illegal Workers Necessary?

2006-06-17T10:08:00.000-05:00

Click the title bar and read the argument against those who say the illegals are needed to do the jobs "most American's won't do".
Here are a couple of main parts:

...even in areas with few immigrants, grass is cut, groceries are bagged and hotel sheets are changed. Indeed, a large majority of low-skilled workers are native to the United States. A look at the 2000 census is instructive: among males age 25 to 64 years employed that year, of those with less than a high school diploma, 64 percent were born in the United States and 36 percent were foreign born.

The author, BARRY R. CHISWICK makes the case that employers would out of necessity have to pay slightly higher wages for such work, but that is already happening in many areas of the country.
He establishes that it is workable, and would not create the disaster that many have predicted. He closes this way:

The point is that with a decline in low-skilled foreign workers, life would go on. The genius of the American people is their ingenuity, and the genius of the American economy is its flexibility. And throughout our nation's history, this flexibility, the finding of alternative ways of doing things, has been a prime engine of economic growth and change.

Makes sense to me

I'll be back

CC

Who's Not Hiring Illegals

2006-06-17T09:52:00.000-05:00

Click the title bar and see what businesses in your state are not hiring illegal workers. The website it takes you to has a list, by state of all the businesses that are signed up for the Federal Basic Pilot verification program.
If you are a business owner, and want to sign up, go here.

Tell your friends who own businesses about this.

I'll be back

CC

For Al Gore The Real Truth Is Inconvenient

2006-06-16T20:01:00.000-05:00

The motion picture "An Inconvenient Truth" has made a lot of claims about global warming, and basically blames humans for the problem, from what I hear. I haven't seen the film, but will see it in the near future. After I see it, I will append this piece as necessary.
But for now, I will go with what the buzz is: excess CO2 in the atmosphere is the reason our planet is warming up, and the increase in CO2 is mostly man made.
I ran across a piece from Canada Free Press dot Com. Hat Tip: Tammy Bruce:Tammy It largely rebuts the main assertions in the film and paints Al Gore, who appears in the film as the main finger pointer, as "an embarrassment".

Carter does not pull his punches about Gore's activism, "The man is an embarrassment to US science and its many fine practitioners, a lot of whom know (but feel unable to state publicly) that his propaganda crusade is mostly based on junk science."

I have written to Roger Ebert (Ebert & Roper At The Movies) regarding his claims in his review of the film: Ebert

Ebert starts his review with a series of faulty statements, based on his own lack of knowledge about Global Warming, and its causes and history:

(I)...want to write this review so every reader will begin it and finish it. I am a liberal, but I do not intend this as a review reflecting any kind of politics. It reflects the truth as I understand it, and it represents, I believe, agreement among the world's experts.

Global warming is real.

It is caused by human activity.

Mankind and its governments must begin immediate action to halt and reverse it.

I wrote to Mr Ebert on his webpage, telling him about the historic significance of Global Warming:

Hey Roger,

I saw what you said about the Global Warming issue. You have a fundamental lack of knowledge about this phenomenon. Global warming IS NOT created by man. It is increased to some degree by human activities, but overall it happens in a cyclical manner, over and over perpetually.
Ask any paleontologist, or weather expert. The world has gone through cooling and then warming cycles for as long as the planet has existed.
Granted, some of the warming has been increased by industrial pollution, but it would happen anyway, given time.
A good example of this is what was observed by Father Junipero Serra in what is now Southern California, back when the Spanish missions were being built. He wrote of a "haze above the valley" that kept the heat concentrated in the San Fernando Valley, just as it does today.
That's right, there was smog and a layer of brown air over the SFV back then, long before automobiles and factories were present. This type of atmospheric condition is caused by normal processes of photosynthesis, that create ozone as a by-product.
Look it up. Then maybe talk to Al about his movie, and its faulty basic premise.

Regards

Craig C
Ames, Iowa

Of course there was no reply. To give Mr Ebert a little credit though, he has posted this on his website:
Ebert
I'm going to put the entire piece about the scientists who disagree with the Global Warming hypothesis of Mr Gore's film here, just in case it becomes a dead link. Read it, and check out the part down towards the bottom, about the temperature of the planet about 450 million years ago, when the CO2 level was TEN TIMES the level it is today. MAJOR ICE AGE???? Here's the piece:

"The Inconvenient Truth" is indeed inconvenient to alarmists
By Tom Harris
Monday, June 12, 2006
"Scientists have an independent obligation to respect and present the truth as they see it," Al Gore sensibly asserts in his film "An Inconvenient Truth", showing at Cumberland 4 Cinemas in Toronto since Jun 2. With that outlook in mind, what do world climate experts actually think about the science of his movie?
Professor Bob Carter of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, in Australia gives what, for many Canadians, is a surprising assessment: "Gore's circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention."
But surely Carter is merely part of what most people regard as a tiny cadre of "climate change skeptics" who disagree with the "vast majority of scientists" Gore cites?
No; Carter is one of hundreds of highly qualified non-governmental, non-industry, non-lobby group climate experts who contest the hypothesis that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are causing significant global climate change. "Climate experts" is the operative term here. Why? Because what Gore's "majority of scientists" think is immaterial when only a very small fraction of them actually work in the climate field.
Even among that fraction, many focus their studies on the impacts of climate change; biologists, for example, who study everything from insects to polar bears to poison ivy. "While many are highly skilled researchers, they generally do not have special knowledge about the causes of global climate change," explains former University of Winnipeg climatology professor Dr. Tim Ball. "They usually can tell us only about the effects of changes in the local environment where they conduct their studies."
This is highly valuable knowledge, but doesn't make them climate change cause experts, only climate impact experts.
So we have a smaller fraction.
But it becomes smaller still. Among experts who actually examine the causes of change on a global scale, many concentrate their research on designing and enhancing computer models of hypothetical futures. "These models have been consistently wrong in all their scenarios," asserts Ball. "Since modelers concede computer outputs are not "predictions" but are in fact merely scenarios, they are negligent in letting policy-makers and the public think they are actually making forecasts."
We should listen most to scientists who use real data to try to understand what nature is actually telling us about the causes and extent of global climate change. In this relatively small community, there is no consensus, despite what Gore and others would suggest.
Here is a small sample of the side of the debate we almost never hear:
Appearing before the Commons Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development last year, Carleton University paleoclimatologist Professor Tim Patterson testified, "There is no meaningful correlation between CO2 levels and Earth's temperature over this [geologic] time frame. In fact, when CO2 levels were over ten times higher than they are now, about 450 million years ago, the planet was in the depths of the absolute coldest period in the last half billion years." Patterson asked the committee, "On the basis of this evidence, how could anyone still believe that the recent relatively small increase in CO2 levels would be the major cause of the past century's modest warming?"
Patterson concluded his testimony by explaining what his research and "hundreds of other studies" reveal: on all time scales, there is very good correlation between Earth's temperature and natural celestial phenomena such changes in the brightness of the Sun.
Dr. Boris Winterhalter, former marine researcher at the Geological Survey of Finland and professor in marine geology, University of Helsinki, takes apart Gore's dramatic display of Antarctic glaciers collapsing into the sea. "The breaking glacier wall is a normally occurring phenomenon which is due to the normal advance of a glacier," says Winterhalter. "In Antarctica the temperature is low enough to prohibit melting of the ice front, so if the ice is grounded, it has to break off in beautiful ice cascades. If the water is deep enough icebergs will form."
Dr. Wibjörn Karlén, emeritus professor, Dept. of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, Sweden, admits, "Some small areas in the Antarctic Peninsula have broken up recently, just like it has done back in time. The temperature in this part of Antarctica has increased recently, probably because of a small change in the position of the low pressure systems."
But Karlén clarifies that the 'mass balance' of Antarctica is positive - more snow is accumulating than melting off. As a result, Ball explains, there is an increase in the 'calving' of icebergs as the ice dome of Antarctica is growing and flowing to the oceans. When Greenland and Antarctica are assessed together, "their mass balance is considered to possibly increase the sea level by 0.03 mm/year - not much of an effect," Karlén concludes.
The Antarctica has survived warm and cold events over millions of years. A meltdown is simply not a realistic scenario in the foreseeable future.
Gore tells us in the film, "Starting in 1970, there was a precipitous drop-off in the amount and extent and thickness of the Arctic ice cap." This is misleading, according to Ball: "The survey that Gore cites was a single transect across one part of the Arctic basin in the month of October during the 1960s when we were in the middle of the cooling period. The 1990 runs were done in the warmer month of September, using a wholly different technology."
Karlén explains that a paper published in 2003 by University of Alaska professor Igor Polyakov shows that, the region of the Arctic where rising temperature is supposedly endangering polar bears showed fluctuations since 1940 but no overall temperature rise. "For several published records it is a decrease for the last 50 years," says Karlén
Dr. Dick Morgan, former advisor to the World Meteorological Organization and climatology researcher at University of Exeter, U.K. gives the details, "There has been some decrease in ice thickness in the Canadian Arctic over the past 30 years but no melt down. The Canadian Ice Service records show that from 1971-1981 there was average, to above average, ice thickness. From 1981-1982 there was a sharp decrease of 15% but there was a quick recovery to average, to slightly above average, values from 1983-1995. A sharp drop of 30% occurred again 1996-1998 and since then there has been a steady increase to reach near normal conditions since 2001."
Concerning Gore's beliefs about worldwide warming, Morgan points out that, in addition to the cooling in the NW Atlantic, massive areas of cooling are found in the North and South Pacific Ocean; the whole of the Amazon Valley; the north coast of South America and the Caribbean; the eastern Mediterranean, Black Sea, Caucasus and Red Sea; New Zealand and even the Ganges Valley in India. Morgan explains, "Had the IPCC used the standard parameter for climate change (the 30 year average) and used an equal area projection, instead of the Mercator (which doubled the area of warming in Alaska, Siberia and the Antarctic Ocean) warming and cooling would have been almost in balance."
Gore's point that 200 cities and towns in the American West set all time high temperature records is also misleading according to Dr. Roy Spencer, Principal Research Scientist at The University of Alabama in Huntsville. "It is not unusual for some locations, out of the thousands of cities and towns in the U.S., to set all-time records," he says. "The actual data shows that overall, recent temperatures in the U.S. were not unusual."
Carter does not pull his punches about Gore's activism, "The man is an embarrassment to US science and its many fine practitioners, a lot of whom know (but feel unable to state publicly) that his propaganda crusade is mostly based on junk science."
In April sixty of the world's leading experts in the field asked Prime Minister Harper to order a thorough public review of the science of climate change, something that has never happened in Canada. Considering what's at stake - either the end of civilization, if you believe Gore, or a waste of billions of dollars, if you believe his opponents - it seems like a reasonable request.
Tom Harris is mechanical engineer and Ottawa Director of High Park Group, a public affairs and public policy company. He can be reached at letters@canadafreepress.com

I included the credits of the piece, to avoid plagiarism charges, I'm not like Ward Churchill.

I'll be back

CC

Minister Says Haditha Iraqis Not Angry?

2006-06-09T17:55:00.000-05:00

In the highlighted piece, Rev. Christopher Price of suburban Atlanta, who was embedded with the Marines in Haditha has said he saw no angst from the Marines or the Iraqi civilians in the town after the incident.

``I knew he had been killed and there had been a response. I got the impression insurgents were killed and also some civilians got killed,'' the Rev. Christopher Price of suburban Atlanta recalled Friday of his conversations with Marines in Haditha in January.

``As it was presented, it seemed a normal part of what happened. It seemed a sort of regrettable but also fairly typical incident. I saw nothing that betrayed any difficulty between the Marines and the people of Haditha.''

If true, why are there suddenly charges against the Marines months after the alleged atrocity?
Reverend Ben Mathes was there as well. He said this:

``If this thing had been as horrible as it's been made out to be, the people of Haditha would have been up in arms when we were there,'' said Mathes, who said he first learned of the accusations when they recently became public.

And this from the piece:

The ministers said they saw good relations and no bitterness between the Marines, whose morale seemed high, and the friendly Iraqis.

``Nobody disparaged the Iraqis while we were there,'' Price said. ``They were proud stores were beginning to open, the town was coming back to life.''

While out on patrol with Marines, the ministers were invited to share tea and bread in many Iraqi homes.

``So many kept saying, 'I want to be part of doing something good in this country,' and when you walk the streets and you see how these folks would greet them and talk to them and the kids would come out and wanna play with them and stuff ... they just become part of the community,'' Mathes said.

``They weren't in the least bit jaded,'' Price said of the soldiers. ``I like the fact that Americans are that generous.''

So the Marines weren't going crazy and killing everybody in sight? Sounds more real than the current charges against them.

I'll be back

CC

Huffington Contributor Ridicules Marriage Ammendment

2006-06-07T07:59:00.000-05:00

Bob Cesca has a piece on the Huffington Blog site about the sanctity of marriage constitutional ammendment being proposed by President Bush. I wrote a response on the website:

You wrote: "But what happens if a same-sex couple is joined in a legally sanctioned civil union? Can they tell people they're married? Sure they can. So why push this pathetic amendment if same-sex couples can still freely define their relationship as being married? The whole notion of a marriage definition amendment is semantically, constitutionally, and morally weak. Historians, sociologists, and civil libertarians of the future are going to have a blast laughing at this one. They'll shake their heads with the same disdain we feel when considering that women couldn't vote in America until 1920.
The first reason is because right now marriage is a states rights issue. With the fact that all states are supposed to honor the laws of the other states, it would take only one state to pass a gay marriage law and the dam would be burst. And the idea that it's constitutionally weak is the reason we need an ammendment. The founding fathers would not have sanctioned gay marriage. Bet on it. And those in the future who will be laughing is those who find the gay life style abhorrent and atrocious.

http://blogresponder.blogspot.com

They haven't posted it yet. We'll see if they have the balls

I'll be back

CC

Ben Stein On Iraq, And Bad Decisions

2006-06-03T16:50:00.000-05:00

Check out this piece by Ben Stein. It outlines what I have posted here numerous times.

I'll be back

CC

Senate Sellout Bill May Be Dead

2006-06-03T16:45:00.000-05:00

If you click the title bar, you will see that there is a ray of hope on the US Senate's Illegal Immigration Sellout Bill. Apparently it's not constitutional for the Senate to enact tax law. Only the House of Representatives can do that. From the piece:

A key feature of the Senate bill is that it would make illegals pay back taxes before applying for citizenship, a requirement that supporters say will raise billions of dollars in the next decade.
There's just one problem: The U.S. Constitution specifically prohibits revenue-raising legislation from originating in the Senate.
"All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives," according to the "origination clause" in Article I, Section 7.

Dead in the water? Hopefully.

I'll be back

CC

FBI Under Clinton Failed Often

2006-05-24T21:10:00.000-05:00

Click the title piece and view what's there. The FBI was derelict in its duty numerous times during the Clinton administration, because the leader of the FBI was a Clinton guy. That's my take on it. Here's the timiline:

The report said the FBI had substantial evidence that Leung actually was a Chinese spy, but waited until May 2001 to begin investigating the matter and whether she had a source within the Los Angeles office. Fine faulted the senior bureau official in charge of the counterintelligence division for the delay.

Neil Gallagher headed the FBI's counterintelligence operations at the time. He retired in November 2001.

``It is particularly puzzling that the assistant director did not suspect Smith because the assistant director was overseeing the Robert Hanssen espionage investigation at the time,'' he said.

Even then, a preliminary report concluded that ``an espionage relationship between an FBI employee and Leung is unlikely,'' Fine said.

Finally, a special task force was created in 2002 after FBI Director Robert Mueller, on the job for only a few months, expressed concern about the pace and scope of the investigation. Mueller asked for the inspector general's review.

So Bush gets the new guy in at the FBI and things get fixed. Or at least recognized as a problem. Hey Bill, what would Monica say?

I'll be back

CC

Hastert Criticizes Bush For Raid On Congressman

2006-05-24T19:24:00.000-05:00

In what I see as just a bunch of bellowing, in the wake of Bush's low public poll ratings, Dennis Hastert has claimed that the FBI's search and seizure of congressional documents in Rep. William Jefferson’s (D-La.) congressional office is unconstitutional. Jefferson is under investigation by the FBI for taking bribes. The FBI even got Jefferson to take a suitcase full of money ($100,000) from an FBI agent in a theoretical kickback scheme. Hastert is concerned that the separation of powers doctrine of the Comstitution has been violated with the searching of Jefferson's offices.
My response is this. What if it were an investigation of a murder? Or of an organized slavery/prostitution situation?
In each of those instances, time would be of the essence. Would Mr Hastert assert that an imminent threat is not enough to warrant a search?
And if the search would be OK under those circumstances, why not in the current?
Mr Hastert's assertions are tantamount to claiming "diplomatic immunity", which I find to be particularly offensive.

I'll be back

CC

Senate Votes To Allow Social Security For Illegals

2006-05-24T18:52:00.000-05:00

On May 18, the Senate voted down an ammendment to S2611 that would have denied Social Security credits to illegals for the money they may or may not have put into the system. The list of Senators who love the illegals: (Yeas means to vote down the ammendment) Sorry I was late with this. The vote was to table (kill) the ammendment, thus yea meaning against.

YEAs ---50
Akaka (D-HI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brownback (R-KS)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carper (D-DE)
Chafee (R-RI)
Clinton (D-NY)
DeWine (R-OH)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Graham (R-SC)
Hagel (R-NE)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Obama (D-IL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Specter (R-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Stevens (R-AK)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Wyden (D-OR)

Again, it's time to reevaluate those who you may have voted for in the past. Check the list, and vote what you think is right, in the next election.

I'll be back

CC

Senate Votes To Consider Amnesty Bill As Is

2006-05-24T18:25:00.000-05:00

The US Senate today voted for "cloture" of debate on the Senate sell-out bill, S2611. This means that a final vote can be taken on the HUGE AMNESTY BILL can be taken any time now. The following US Senators voted for this procedure:

Akaka (D-HI)
Alexander (R-TN)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brownback (R-KS)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carper (D-DE)
Chafee (R-RI)
Clinton (D-NY)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Dayton (D-MN)
DeWine (R-OH)
Dodd (D-CT)
Domenici (R-NM)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Frist (R-TN)
Graham (R-SC)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Obama (D-IL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Stevens (R-AK)
Thomas (R-WY)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)
Wyden (D-OR)

When elections for these individuals come up, please do what you think is right. If you are against amnesty, then vote the miscreants out of office. If you want amnesty, go to your psychiatrist and find out why.

I'll be back

CC

Louisiana Church Shootings

2006-05-21T18:23:00.000-05:00

With the latest news of multiple murder at a Louisiana church, one can only wonder if the individual who had his firearm was disarmed by the police during the illegal disarmament tactics that were exercised by the authorities in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.
Most law abiding gun owners in the New Orleans area had their legal firearms confiscated by the authorities in the wake of the devastation of the hurricane.
The excuse of the cops was "to secure law and order".
We saw how well that worked out. Roving bands of bandits and some of the police themselves proceeded to terrorize and rob the citizens of New Orleans and outlying areas, until the National Guard got involved.
Now, with most of the illegally confiscated weapons still not in the hands of their rightful owners, we see this news. A crazed gunman shoots up a church, kidnaps and then murders his ex-wife (estranged ?) and apparently just captured.
How many of the churchgoers might have been legally armed and packing if not for the actions of the "authorities" during the Katrina crisis?

And these morons have just re-elected Ray Nagin...

I'll be back

CC

NY Post On The Religous Badges

2006-05-21T17:43:00.000-05:00

From Allah Pundit, click the title and read. It's the same story from just yesterday, May 20 2006.

Maybe the Post knows something?

Updates as necessary

I'll be back

CC

More Updates On The Religious Badges In Iran Via Allah Pundit

2006-05-21T16:19:00.000-05:00

Click the title and check out the latest on the Jews/Christians badges stuff in Iran

More later, as necessary.

I'll be back

CC

A Note To Commenters

2006-05-21T15:37:00.000-05:00

I have received a few comments recently that attack me personally, or are simply specious. Since those comments have been made anonymously, I will not bother to give the comments the light of day. If you wish to comment, (and have your comment posted on my site) you must reveal your identity. Either your own blog site, or your email address must be available for rebuttal. Sneak attacks are made only by cowards and terrorists.

I'll be back

CC

Congress Wants High Oil/Natural Gas Prices

2006-05-19T15:48:00.000-05:00

The House of Representatives in Washington, DC has again prevented oil and natural gas exploration off shore around the country. Read the piece. Those who defended their votes seem to think that the tourism values available in their coastal states supercede the need for the country as a whole to have lower energy costs. Kind of ironic, though. Those same states seem to have the highest retail prices for gasoline and natural gas. California and Texas both have very high prices at the pump. I've traveled there..lived in California until recently. It's true.
To all of you who are reading this from those and other states affected by this most recent vote, consider who you will vote for (and against) in the next election.

I'll be back

CC

PS I just emailed one of the California reps about her statements against offshore drilling.
Her name is Lois Capps, from the Santa Barbara area of California. Her offices:

Contact Lois

Washington, D.C.
1707 Longworth House Office Building
Washington D.C. 20515
Phone: (202) 225-3601
Fax: (202) 225-5632

Santa Barbara
1216 State Street, Suite 403
Santa Barbara, CA 93101
Phone: (805) 730-1710
Fax: (805) 730-9153

San Luis Obispo
1411 Marsh Street, Suite 205
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Phone: (805) 546-8348
Fax: (805) 546-8368

Oxnard
141 South A Street, Suite 204
Oxnard, CA 93030
Phone: (805) 385-3440
Fax: (805) 385-3399

Here's what I said. It took a little effort, but I got through.

Kind of hard to dig through your defences, but this is the best for now.
I used to live in California, up until the end of 2004. 50+ years in the Los Angeles area. The final time 1978-2004 in Panorama City, SFV. I read your statement on offshore drilling, and had to respond. Here is what I read from Drudge:
"Drilling for natural gas means drilling for oil," argued Rep. Lois Capps, D-Calif., citing industry pronouncements that where there is gas, often oil is found and probably would be developed. "Drilling three miles off our coast will not lower gas prices today or anytime in the near future."
Now if you didn't say it, that's OK. But if you did, it shows all you care about is pandering to your constituency.
Our country is in an energy crisis. All means of obtaining new sources of oil and natural gas are essential to our well being and to the future of our country as the leader of the world.
My grandfather lives in Santa Barbara. I've seen the oil platforms out there in the water, and see no reason to not continue exploration and drilling offshore in that area. The myopic view that it will "hurt tourism" is the height of selfishness. The beaches suck anyway, and the water is too cold.
Sure, it takes years to develop new oil and natural gas resources. That's just the way it goes. But the longer we wait, the more expensive it will be once it finally does happen. And believe me, it will eventually happen.
I see your title. "Honorable". Maybe it's time to live up to it.

Each little step to eliminate the elitism in Congress. Step by Step.

Nevada Senator Reid Courting Hispanic Vote

2006-05-19T15:39:00.000-05:00

Senator Harry Reid claims that making English the official language of our country, (which was supported by Washington, Madison, Adams, etc) is now suddenly racist. Note that the senator is from Nevada, which has a fairly large Hispanic population.
Could it be he is courting those voters? Nah....
Here is the text of an email I just sent to this person of integrity.

I read about your claim that making a law to make English the official language of our country is racist. Pander, pander, pander. It is a racist statement to call things that are clearly NOT RACIST, racist. You are just trying to get reelected. Being in Nevada, I guess it will work. But your statement is transparent on the face of it, and tiresome, at best.
http://blogresponder.blogspot.com

Hopefully the voters will get rid of this opportunistic SOB.

I'll be back

CC

I have received a comment that attempts to defend the use of "racist" as an attack, when it is false. Since the wording was done as a personal attack and anonymously, I have rejected it. I invite the commenter to comment without protecting him/her self by commenting anonymously.

5/21/2006

Iran Like Nazi Germany? Read This

2006-05-19T15:05:00.000-05:00

Here's a perfect example of why the US needs to intervene in Iran immediately. There is a new law proposed in Iran that would require the wearing of badges describing an individual's faith. Jews and Christians would be singled out under this new law to wear identification on their clothing letting others know their religious beliefs.
The next step, arrest and.....????

From the piece quoted:

Iranian expatriates living in Canada yesterday confirmed reports that the Iranian parliament, called the Islamic Majlis, passed a law this week setting a dress code for all Iranians, requiring them to wear almost identical "standard Islamic garments."

The law, which must still be approved by Iran's "Supreme Guide" Ali Khamenehi before being put into effect, also establishes special insignia to be worn by non-Muslims.

Iran's roughly 25,000 Jews would have to sew a yellow strip of cloth on the front of their clothes, while Christians would wear red badges and Zoroastrians would be forced to wear blue cloth.

"There's no reason to believe they won't pass this," said Rabbi Hier. "It will certainly pass unless there's some sort of international outcry over this."

Bernie Farber, the chief executive of the Canadian Jewish Congress, said he was "stunned" by the measure. "We thought this had gone the way of the dodo bird, but clearly in Iran everything old and bad is new again," he said. "It's state-sponsored religious discrimination."

Ali Behroozian, an Iranian exile living in Toronto, said the law could come into force as early as next year.

And this last:

It would make religious minorities immediately identifiable and allow Muslims to avoid contact with non-Muslims.

That's the least of its ramifications, as is readily discernable to those who have listened to the diatribes of Iran's leader over the last several months/years.

I'll be back

CC

It has come to my attention that Canada.com has removed the piece on this issue. I will put up a link to another source to verify the statements I made before. Thank goodness I put enough blockquotes in my original post to show the gist of the piece.

5/21/2006

Allah Pundit has an update:here,and here is another

Heritage Foundation Weighs In On Immigration

2006-05-17T16:49:00.000-05:00

In a chilling report, The Heritage Foundation outlines the potential (and likely) outcome of the passing of the new immigration bill now before the Senate. The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act (CIRA, S.2611), will result in a massive increase in all forms of immigration (both legal and not) over the next 20 years.
From the report:

Much attention has been given to the fact that the bill grants amnesty to some 10 million illegal immigrants. Little or no attention has been given to the fact that the bill would quintuple the rate of legal immigration into the United States, raising, over time, the inflow of legal immigrants from around one million per year to over five million per year. The impact of this increase in legal immigration dwarfs the magnitude of the amnesty provisions.

And on the "Temporary Guest Worker" part of the bill:

CIRA creates an entirely new “temporary guest worker” (H-2C) program. There is nothing temporary about this program; nearly all “guest workers” would have the right to become permanent residents and then citizens.

And further down in the piece:

The “guest worker” program, then, is an open door program, based on the demands of U.S. business, that would allow an almost unlimited number of workers and dependents to enter the U.S. from anywhere in world and become citizens. It is essentially an “open border” provision.

The adoption of this bill will make the illegal immigration problem seem small:

Legal Flow Compared to Illegal Immigration

All of the immigration discussed to this point would be legal immigration. If illegal immigration continued after enactment of S.2611, the inflow of immigrants would be even greater. Although illegal immigration is considered a major problem, the proposed legal immigration under CIRA would dwarf it numerically. The net inflow of illegal immigrants into the U.S. population is around 700,000 per year.[16] Legal immigration under CIRA would exceed five million per year, seven times the rate of the current illegal immigration flow. Annual legal and illegal immigration together now equals about 1.7 million; future legal immigration alone under CIRA would be three times this amount.

So it's now or never folks. Call your Senator. Scream at him or her over the phone if necessary. This is our worst nightmare.

I'll be back

CC

Latest Sellout Vote By GOP Senators

2006-05-16T22:45:00.000-05:00

Click the title, and read the names of the Republican Senators who voted against a bill to require securing of the border prior to any "guest worker" program.
Thanx to Michelle Malkin for the story.

If you know people in the states of these sellout Senators, please give them the names of their ungrateful (for electing them in the first place) representatives.

I'll include the names here, just in case you don't care to read the entire piece:

The GOP Senators who oppose Enforcement First and sided with the open-borders Dems:

Bennett (UT)
Brownback (R-KS),
Chafee (RI),
Coleman (MN),
Collins (ME),
Craig (ID),
DeWine (OH),
Graham (SC),
Hagel (NE),
Lugar (IN),
Martinez (FL),
Murkowski (AK),
Shelby (AL),
Snow (ME),
Specter (PA),
Stevens (AK),
Voinovich (OH),
Warner (VA)

I'll be back

CC

Nebraska Votes Against Football Coach Who Favors Illegals

2006-05-15T18:47:00.000-05:00

Tom Osborne ran for the office of Governor of Nebraska, and with his advocating of in-state tuition for illegals, he was defeated.

From Numbers USA:

Congressman Tom Osborne lost his primary attempt to run for governor. As a long-time hero football coach of the Nebraska Cornhuskers, with huge margins of victory in the past and with an endorsement by Sen. McCain just before the primary, Osborne had looked like a sure thing.

But he lost. And even he said that one of the main reasons for his loss was his support for in-state tuition for illegal aliens. His opponent stood firm against providing incentives for illegal aliens.

Osborne was a lackluster Member of Congress on our issues, with a B-minus. He wasn't that bad. But Nebraska voters made it clear that they prefer somebody a little more excited about protecting them from out-of-control immigration.

Just another message to our Congress members. Wise up. Stop the illegals. No amnesty.

Or find a new line of work.

I'll be back

CC

Tree Huggers Waffling On Illegals Issue

2006-05-15T07:41:00.000-05:00

This piece in The Christian Science Monitor on May 12 notes that Environmental Groups are having a hard time rationalizing their support for the illegals in the border issue.

"We've got to talk about these issues - population, birth rates, immigration," says Paul Watson, founder of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, which confronts whalers, seal hunters, and those who poach wildlife in the Galapagos Islands. "Immigration is one of the leading contributors to population growth. All we're saying is, those numbers should be reduced to achieve population stabilization."

What an unholy alliance! Us real conservatives, and others who really care about our kids' (and the nation's) future may actually have some allies in the Green movement.
While some in the environmental groups are against border enforcement for "humanitarian" reasons, the numbers are there, staring them in the face.

...the US population is far from stabilized, and immigrants (legal and illegal) are one of the main reasons. There are about 11 million illegal immigrants in the US today, 57 percent from Mexico, and another 24 percent from other Latin American countries, according to the Pew Hispanic Center. Of the US foreign-born population, nearly 30 percent is illegal, according to Pew.

There are more numbers of note:

The US Census Bureau this week reported that Hispanics - the largest minority at 42.7 million - are the nation's fastest-growing group. They are 14.3 percent of the overall population, but between July 2004 and July 2005, they accounted for 49 percent of US population growth. Of the increase of 1.3 million Hispanics, the Census Bureau reported, 800,000 was because of natural increase (births minus deaths), and 500,000 was due to immigration.

And this on the Hispanic birth rate in the US:

Steven Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, finds that once women emigrate to the US, most tend to have more children than they would have in their home countries. "Among Mexican immigrants in the United States fertility averages 3.5 children per woman compared to 2.4 children per woman in Mexico," he wrote in a study last October. And the same is true among Chinese immigrants. Fertility is 2.3 in the US compared with 1.7 in China. However, typically these high fertility rates decline in the successive generations as immigrants assimilate into America.

And the impact of all of this:

Harvard University ecologist Edward Wilson figures that the "ecological footprint" - which he defined in a Scientific American article in 2002 as "the average amount of productive land and shallow sea appropriated by each person in bits and pieces from around the world for food, water, housing, energy, transportation, commerce, and waste absorption" - is about 5 acres per person worldwide. In the US, each individual's ecological footprint is about 24 acres, according to Dr. Wilson.

Maybe some of the Leftie Loons are seeing the light....

I'll be back

CC

Boston College Instructor Quits Over Rice Speech

2006-05-15T07:12:00.000-05:00

So this Leftie "adjunct professor" at Boston College is leaving because of the usual "Bush Lied" crap. (Click the link). Now he says Condoleezza Rice lied about the WMD's and the reason we went into Iraq. Since that ridiculous reasoning has long ago been put to rest by those who have a brain, I wish to point out the scary part of this man's open letter to the University Administration.

I would like to apologize to my students and prospective students. I would also urge them to investigate the words and actions of Rice, and to exercise their own First Amendment rights at her speech

It's quite clear that the man wants the radicals on campus to rise up during the speech at the BC graduation commencement and disturb the proceedings with rants and demagoguery. Maybe they should throw blood too.
My guess is he's had trouble getting tenure, and figures he might as well go out with a blast. Hopefully he won't strap on a bomb.

I'll be back

CC

Newmax Says Republican Majority At Risk

2006-05-11T07:06:00.000-05:00

Here is another piece I received Sunday via email from Newsmax. It says basically the same thing as my last post, quoting another poll.

Charlie Cook Sees GOP Problems in '06 Elections

Signs are pointing to a bumpy ride for Republicans in this year's midterm elections - and voter turnout could turn out to be a major problem.

That's the word from pundit Charlie Cook, writer of the "Off to the Races" column for the Washington, D.C.-based National Journal Group.

Cook points to a new Cook Political Report/RT Strategies national survey of more than 1,000 adults, which found that 60 percent of Democrats said they were "most likely" to vote in November, compared to only 51 percent of Republicans.

That amounts to a sharp departure from the last two elections, when Republicans turned out in higher numbers.

"History tells us that when one party is either complacent or disillusioned, and the other party is highly motivated, agitated or angry, the results can be devastating to the former while providing boundless opportunities for the latter," Cook writes.

RT Strategies also found that 49 percent of registered voters said they would like to see the Democrats in control of Congress after the elections, compared to 37 percent who favored Republicans.

And when asked if they planned to vote for the Democratic candidate for Congress or the Republican, 50 percent of "most likely" voters said Democrat and 32 percent said Republican.

The GOP faces not only serious misgivings among voters about the war in Iraq, but also "a combination of Social Security, mounting budget deficits, Hurricane Katrina, Harriet Miers, port security, immigration, gasoline prices and various scandals," according to Cook.

President Bush is perceived as strong in the war on terrorism, but only 7 percent of respondents selected terrorism as the one issue that will matter most in deciding how to vote for the U.S. House in November.

The poll also showed that only 25 percent of registered voters would definitely vote to re-elect their member of Congress, while 36 percent said they would consider voting for another candidate and 21 percent they would definitely vote for someone else - an ominous finding for the incumbent party.

Tell your congress person and senator what you want for him/her to get your vote.
It's time that we all be heard from directly.

I'll be back

CC

Numbers USA Writer Points Out Necessary Republican Strategy On Illegals Issue

2006-05-11T06:51:00.000-05:00

From the Numbers USA website, here is the text of an opinion piece by Thomas Sowell. It is along the same lines as what I have been saying. He backs up his ideas with poll numbers.

REPUBLICANS AND IMMIGRATION
The Conservative Voice : May 9 , 2006 -- by Thomas Sowell

"Separate border control legislation would force the Democrats to stand up and be counted on this issue, without the political cover of a package deal. Some of the more weak-kneed Republicans also want this political cover but taking away the package deal would do far more damage to the Democrats. Legislation dealing solely -- and seriously -- with border control might be difficult for some Congressional Republicans to vote for but it would be a political nightmare for the Democrats in Congress. And a bill takes just 51 votes to pass in the Senate..." Maybe some recent polls will put some backbone into Senate Republicans. But don't bet the rent money on it.

The percentages vary a little from poll to poll, as is usually the case, but these polls agree on one thing -- the public's top priority on the immigration issues is controlling the borders. They prefer the tougher bill passed by the House of Representatives to the weaker approach of the Senate.

The House of Representatives bill has been depicted in much of the media as harsh or draconian, as if it is a terrible thing to make illegal entry into this country a crime. The House bill is what is supposed to have sparked massive protest demonstrations around the country by illegal aliens and their supporters.

Those demonstrations may have impressed the media and intimidated politicians but they didn't change many minds among the American people. A majority of Republicans, Democrats, and independents all favor the tougher House bill. The percentages differed among these groups but they were all majorities.

What is really striking is that 53 percent of Hispanics supported the House bill. The loudmouths at the demonstrations did not speak for all Hispanics.

On this issue, as on some others, the Democrats in Congress are more united than the Republicans, even though the Republicans have a majority in both Houses. But a united minority can often defeat a divided majority.

As things stand at the moment on the immigration issue, the Democrats clearly have the upper hand politically as this year's elections approach.

The Democrats can solidify their base behind amnesty. But the Republicans' base -- 81 percent of whom are behind the tougher House bill -- are undermined, if not demoralized, by the vacillation of the Senate Republicans and the Bush administration on strong border control, apparently out of fear of alienating Hispanic voters.

In view of the latest polls, it is not clear how many Hispanic voters are going to be alienated. The greater danger is that the Congressional Republicans will alienate their own supporters.

The irony in all this is that the Republicans could turn the tables on the Democrats and put them on the defensive, instead of being on the defensive themselves.

There is no reason other than politics why amnesty and border control have to be in the same bill. It will take time to see how various new border control methods work out in practice and there is no reason to rush ahead to deal with the people already illegally in this country before the facts are in on how well the borders have been secured.

Separate border control legislation would force the Democrats to stand up and be counted on this issue, without the political cover of a package deal. Some of the more weak-kneed Republicans also want this political cover but taking away the package deal would do far more damage to the Democrats.

Legislation dealing solely -- and seriously -- with border control might be difficult for some Congressional Republicans to vote for but it would be a political nightmare for the Democrats in Congress. And a bill takes just 51 votes to pass in the Senate.

Unfortunately, President Bush has pushed the package deal and used the straw man argument that we cannot find and deport millions of people, even though virtually no one has said that we could.

The real question is whether sweeping the illegal alien problem under the rug by calling them legal will bring in still more millions of illegals, as a previous amnesty has already done. Nor will calling amnesty by some other name do anything more than undermine the confidence of the American people in general and the Republican base in particular.

Sometimes caution is the most dangerous policy. General MacArthur once defined defensive warfare in one word: "Defeat."

Frankly, the Republicans deserve to lose this fall's election, after their wild spending and pandering to economic ignorance on gas prices. But a Republican defeat would only bring in the Democrats -- and the country does not deserve anything that disastrous. The Democrats' petty obstruction and irresponsible demagoguery in wartime disqualifies them for national leadership when a nuclear Iran and nuclear terrorists loom on the horizon.

I'll be back

CC

Zogby Poll: Stop The Illegals

2006-05-06T09:05:00.000-05:00

The latest Zogby poll came out a few days ago. Click the link and read the results. Or go here for the results in a PDF file.

Here'e page one of the report:

WASHINGTON (May 3, 2006) – A new Zogby poll of likely voters, using neutral language (see wording
on following pages), finds that Americans prefer the House of Representatives’ enforcement-only bill by
2-1 over Senate proposals to legalize illegal immigrants and greatly increase legal immigration. The poll
was conducted for the Center for Immigration Studies.
• On immigration generally, Americans want less, not more, immigration. Only 26 percent said
immigrants were assimilating fine and that immigration should continue at current levels, compared
to 67 percent who said immigration should be reduced so we can assimilate those already here.
• While the Senate is considering various bills that would increase legal immigration from 1 million
to 2 million a year, 2 percent of Americans believe current immigration is too low. This was true for
virtually every grouping in the survey by ethnicity, income, age, religion, region, party, or ideology.
• When offered by itself, there is strong support for the House bill: 69 percent said it was a good or
very good idea when told it tries to make illegals go home by fortifying the border, forcing employer
verification, and encouraging greater cooperation with local law enforcement while not increasing
legal immigration; 27 percent said it was a bad or very bad idea.
• Support for the House approach was widespread, with 81 percent of Republicans, 72 percent of
independents, 57 percent of Democrats, and 53 percent of Hispanics saying it was good or very good
idea.
• When offered by itself, there is also some support for the Senate approach, thought not as much
as for the House bill: 42 percent said the Senate approach was a good or very good idea when told
it would allow illegal immigrants to apply for legal status provided they met certain criteria, and it
would significantly increase legal immigration and increase enforcement of immigration laws; 50
percent said it was a bad or very bad idea.
• There were few groups in which a majority supported the Senate plan, even when presented by itself,
exceptions included Hispanics 62 percent of whom said it was a good or very good idea and the most
liberal voters (progressives) 54 percent of whom approved of it.

I'll be back

CC

Arizona Sheriffs To Start Posse Patrols For Illegals: You Can Vote On It!!

2006-05-03T18:19:00.000-05:00

Click the link and vote on the website of Channel 5 TV in Phoenix. So far it's 97% in favor of the patrols.

I'll be back

CC

Cost Of Illegals In California: LA Times

2006-04-30T16:32:00.000-05:00

From the Muscle Head Revolution Site, click the link and read the numbers quoted from Los Angeles Times research on the cost of illegals to the Southern California area.

I'll be back

CC