Senatorial Blackmail?

From the editors of the OpinionJournal we learn that two Senators, Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) have sent a letter to ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson. Its message: Start toeing the Senators' line on climate change, or else. As is stated in the OpinionJournal commentary, [a] windfall profits tax is in the air, and we've seen what happens to other companies that dare to resist Congressional intimidation. The letter can be found in its' entirety here, courtesy of the editors of OpinionJournal. It's an eye opener, folks.

Basically what it boils down to is this. Rockefeller and Snowe believe that "global warming" is an indisputable fact, and they are calling on ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerman to discontinue funding organizations that don't hold that view - the "deniers" - as it is hurting the credilbility of the United States in its' foreign affairs. They also go on to state that the tactics ExxonMobil is promoting is similar to that used by "big tobacco".

After reading the letter myself, and getting over my feeling of astonishment, I realized something. Neither of the two Senators really knows what they are talking about, as they continuously use the phrase "climate change", when in reality they mean "global warming (which can be directly attributed to human activity)".

As those of you who have read my blog before, you'll know that I've posted on "global warming" and climate change before. Where climate change is definitely a fact of life here on Earth, "global warming" is an as yet proven theory, espoused mainly by extremist environmentalists, and the scientists who derive the majority of their funding from the extreme environmental organizations.

The climate of the Earth is a constantly changing force of nature. There is absolutely no doubt about that. Our climate is not, and never has been, static. It has always changed, and it always will, and man has no control, or direct influence, over that. So-called "global warming", however, is another thing altogether, has yet to be proven to anyone's satisfaction (including those scientists who advocate for it!), and thus, remains a theory (The easiest way to rebut the fallacy that "global warming" is a "fact", is to ask why your local weatherman can't accurately predict the weather more than a few days in advance. It's because they don't know enough - yet - and our climate is so unpredictable!). So much for "consensus" within the scientific community.

With the two Senators attempting to censor the activities of ExxonMobil in regard to who they can fund, and for what purpose, I think I like this paragraph the best. Every dogma has its day, and we've lived long enough to see more than one "consensus" blown apart within a few years of "everyone knowing" it was true. In recent decades environmentalists have been wrong about almost every other apocalyptic claim they've made: global famine, overpopulation, natural resource exhaustion, the evils of pesticides, global cooling, and so on. Perhaps it's useful to have a few folks outside the "consensus" asking questions before we commit several trillion dollars to any problem. [Emphasis mine]

The environmentalist extremists are wrong on this subject as well, in my opinion, and so are Senators Rockefeller and Snowe in their blatant attempt to blackmail ExxonMobil into doing something they don't feel is right, which is to stop debate.

H/T - specialrpt, posting in quicknews

Illegal immigrant sentenced to 5 years for fatal crash

This is why we need effective immigration reform, now.

An illegal immigrant with a history of drug arrests has been sentenced to five years and a month behind bars for the traffic death of a popular community college educator.

The prison term for Marcos Ramos Medina, 35, a twice-deported Mexican national who most recently lived in Portland, was the maximum under state guidelines for vehicular homicide. His criminal record in Portland included possession of cocaine and the sale of heroin for profit, and he also had a federal firearms conviction.

Imagine that. Deported twice before, yet this guy somehow manages to come back into our country, gets high on meth, kills a popular community college educator, and gets sentenced to five years and a month behind bars. And of course, Defense lawyer Jeff West said the verdict would be appealed.

Just another victim of poor economics who acted negligently and/or recklessly in pursuit of economic freedom, or a twice deported illegal engaging in criminal acts that cost a life?

And to think that there are some out there who want to give people like Medina amnesty?

Viaduct repair is ruled out

As reported here, [r]epairing Seattle's Alaskan Way Viaduct would cost $2.3 billion and extend the structure's life about 25 years -- maybe -- according to new estimates released Tuesday by the state.

And though some disagree, state officials say it just isn't worth it.

Sanity prevailing? One would hope so, but we are talking about the State, after all, so you'll forgive me when I say that this won't be the last word on this.

The repair cost estimate, the state maintains, is more than 80 percent of the estimated cost of building a new viaduct, though repairs would not have the same longevity. Cost inflation and risks account for more than 43 percent of the retrofit cost.

"Retrofitting" the 53-year-old viaduct "is possible," but the new study shows the work, while cheaper, might have one-fourth the longevity of a new structure, said the state's viaduct project manager, Ron Paananen. A replacement elevated structure or a tunnel would last 75 to 100 years.

"What this shows is we've appropriately screened (the repair option) out and are narrowing down the alternatives, and basically, we're down to a new elevated structure or a tunnel," Paananen said.

Also Tuesday, the state Department of Transportation released another report from an 11-member panel of engineers that concluded the "relatively narrow difference in costs between ... retrofit and rebuilding weighs heavily in favor of rebuilding."

The new studies continue escalating arguments about the viaduct, which carries about 100,000 vehicles a day on state Route 99 along downtown's west shore. The viaduct sustained minor damage during the 2001 Nisqually Quake, and state engineers maintain it could collapse in another major earthquake.

But retrofit advocates said Tuesday that they'll demand more answers about the latest conclusions. They questioned the earthquake standards that drive up part of the costs and argue that repairs won't require long shutdowns of the highway like a replacement would. They also said the new cost doesn't account for up to $3.4 billion in estimated annual losses to nearby businesses caused by a viaduct shutdown.

So, let me get this straight. Retrofitting the viaduct will cost 80% of the cost of replacing it with either a new viaduct or tunnel, but will only last - maybe - 25 years, while either of the replacement options will last between 75 to 100 years, and the retrofit advocates are concerned about the economic impact to businesses while construction is happening? What about 25 years later, if the viaduct is retrofitted? What then? Do we do it again, at a higher cost than replacing it now? And what if the retrofit doesn't last as long as projected? What then? What if a really big earthquake hits the city, collapsing the viaduct, making your retrofit moot? What then?

We need to replace the viaduct, sooner rather than later, both from the cost and business economic concerns, and for the safety of the people who use the viaduct.

And let me make one thing perfectly clear here. Contrary to what a recent reader thought I was saying when I posted this, I am adamantly opposed to either a retrofit of the existing viaduct or a rebuild of the viaduct, and fully support the tunnel option as the best course of action that we can take.

Sorry, David S., but you obviously haven't been paying attention to what I have said repeatedly here.

Jeane J. Kirkpatrick, 1926-2006

As reported here, America has lost a leading light and advocate for freedom, as the former UN Ambassador for the US under President Reagan, has passed away.

Rest in Peace, Jeane. Your voice will be sorely missed.

One last roll call for the survivors of Pearl Harbor attack

December 7th, 1941, a day that will live in infamy, as President Roosevelt characterized it, plunged the United States fully into WWII. On this day, 65 years later, the surviving members of the Pearl Harbor Survivors Association are making their final trip back to Pearl Harbor, to remember and honor their fallen comrades.

This, they say, will be their final farewell.

With their number quickly dwindling, survivors of Pearl Harbor will gather today one last time to honor those killed by the Japanese 65 years ago ...

The Association has met every five years since its' inception, and all of the members of the group are now in their 80's and 90's, and most don't expect to live to see the seventieth anniversary. That's the way life is, but I fear that as these brave men pass, the memory of that fateful day will also pass into the pages of history, and out of our consciousness.

That would be a shame, as remembering what happened on December 7th, 1941 reminds us all to be alert to the dangers in this world, and to always be ready to defend the nation, and stand for freedom over tyranny.

Nearly 500 survivors from across the nation were expected to make the trip to Hawaii, bringing with them 1,300 family members, numerous wheelchairs and too many haunting memories.

Memories were vivid of the shocking, two-hour aerial raid that destroyed or heavily damaged 21 ships and 320 aircraft, that killed 2,390 people and wounded 1,178 others, that plunged the United States into World War II and that set in motion the events that led to atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

"I suspect not many people have thought about this, but we're witnessing history," said Daniel Martinez, chief historian at the USS Arizona Memorial. "We are seeing the passing of a generation."

The survivors say they have more than horrific memories to offer. "Remember Pearl Harbor" is just the first half of the association's motto; the rest is "Keep America alert."

Tom Brokaw called those who came of age during WWII "The Greatest Generation", which I agree with, and what Mr. Martinez said is also true. We are seeing the passing of this generation. I just hope we don't forget the lessons learned on that fateful day of infamy. As a veteran of the US Navy who was stationed on a ship home ported in Pearl Harbor, this day, and this story especially, is particularly poignant for me.

Remember Pearl Harbor!

Speaker Chopp fights viaduct tunnel plan

As reported here, [t]he most powerful lawmaker in Olympia, Speaker of the House Frank Chopp, D-Seattle, has again put his might behind an effort to sink any plans to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct with a waterfront tunnel.

"The tunnel is a luxury the taxpayers of Washington cannot afford," Chopp and 29 members of the House Democratic Caucus said in a recent letter to Gov. Chris Gregoire.

So, Frank, I suppose that we can afford the measly few who will be killed when this disaster-waiting-to-happen finally does collapse, either from another earthquake or from the supports just giving way due to the rain we get here washing them away? I also suppose that we who actually live in the area around the viaduct can afford the extra added traffic to the surface streets on a permanent basis that is equivalent to the amount of fans a Mariners and Seahawks game being played every day, would bring in? Let's not forget that the current Viaduct carries approximately 110,000 vehicles per day, ok?

So, Frank, what do you propose? That we simply stick our heads in the sand and hope this problem goes away on its' own? Well, I have news for you, Frank. This problem will go away on its' own, if we don't do something about it now, when the next earthquake happens, and I have some advice for you Frank. You better not be on it when that happens, or you'll end up in the "measly few" category.

The question that just won't die, Part II

Charles Rangel is at it again, speaking about something that he obviously doesn't have any real knowledge about, in calling for the reinstitution of a military draft, as we had during the Vietnam era. I posted about this previously, here. Mr. Rangel's remarks shows that he has not done any real research as to the true demographics of who does enlist in the military.

Mr. Rangel's remarks that only people who have no prospects for a "meaningful career" enlist is outrageously off the mark, and shows exactly what he and his fellow Dems really feel about our military - contempt - and the American Legion wants an apology.

Mr. Rangel tries to show that he has done some research into this by stating that, "[W]e also have done some research with the Department of Defense. And we have found that 26 percent of those killed in action are either African-American or Hispanics.", implying that only poor, uneducated folks are becoming casualties. What Mr. Rangel fails to mention is that only 26% of those killed in action are African-American or Hispanics, meaning that a whopping seventy four per cent of those killed in action are white and other ethnicities.

Mr. Rangel also conveniently ignores data that shows that those who enlist in our all-volunteer military are better educated and better off economically than their peers, instead of what he and Jessie Jackson continue to claim. As Tim Kane states in his article, "According to military data analyzed by the Heritage Foundation, U.S. troops come from wealthier neighborhoods than their civilian peers. In fact, the only underrepresented neighborhoods are those with the lowest incomes.".

Fortunately for our military, and hence our nation's security, there are adults in charge - even in the Democrat camp, amazingly enough - who say that a military draft is both unnecessary, and not even on the agenda. "We did not include that" in legislative plans for early next year, said Democratic Rep. Steny Hoyer (news, bio, voting record) of Maryland, who will be House majority leader when the new Congress convenes in January.

N.D. tribe barring church protesters

As reported here, [a] church group that protests at military funerals around the country will be barred from services for an American Indian soldier on a reservation, tribal officials say.

That "group" would be from the Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kan., Fred Phelps' bunch of nutjobs who have been going around the country, demonstrating at funeral services of those killed in the war on terror, claiming that the deaths are "God's punishment" for our "evil ways". These "people" are despicable in the extreme.

Tribal leaders passed a resolution Friday that prohibits the group from protesting on the reservation, said Marcus Wells Jr., chairman of the Three Affiliated Tribes.

"We will not tolerate any harassment that is intended to provoke ill feelings and violence," he said.

Kudo's to the Three Affiliated Tribes for making this stand.

Rest in Peace Young Eagle.

Ahmadinejad writes a letter to the American people

As reported here, the lunatic running the asylum called Iran has decided to reach out to the American people in an open letter. Although not as long or flowery as the 18 page ramble he sent to President Bush earlier this year, it is basically empty of anything substantive, merely calling on the US to disengage from Iraq, and stop "meddling" in the Middle East.

If you want to read the letter for yourself, you can find it here. But, if you would prefer not to read it, I'll give you a brief synopsis of what he wrote. In a nutshell, it pretty much boils down to Democrat talking points:

- Pull out of Iraq (the consequences to the Iraqi people of such an action are of no import, of course);
- Spend the money currently being spent in Iraq on the victims of Hurricane Katrina, and on the homeless (as if we aren't addressing those issues already);
- Stop meddling in the Middle East (we'll stop "meddling" in the Middle East when you stop trying to kill us through your surrogates Hamas and Hezbollah, and when you allow your people to have real representative government instead of the sham you and your predecessors have forced upon the Iranian people for nearly 40 years);
- Recognize a Palestinian State (never mind that we have been trying to get the Palestinians to embrace a state of their own, once they lay down their arms and recognize that Israel is not going away, no matter how much they want it to).

It's as if he has a direct line to Pelosi, Reid and Murtha (the latter of which would not surprise me one bit), and they dictated to him what to put in the letter.

A personal note

Regular visitors to this blog will have noticed that I've been absent the past two weeks, and that is due to some things that were going on in real life (and no, I'm not going into details). Suffice it to say that I'll be posting here again on at least a semi-regular basis, as time allows. Thanks for your patience, folks.

I hope everyone had a wonderful Thanksgiving, and if you live anywhere in the Pacific Northwest, that you are staying warm while we put up with this lovely little cold snap - which is very unusual for here! - and the snow and ice.

After the mid-terms - now what?

Democrats won a majority in both Houses this past Tuesday, and will take over majority leadership roles in January. To my Republican readers, I want to assure you that this is not the end of the world, although it was not the outcome we had hoped for. This is still a multi-party nation, and that was evidenced at the polls.

But now what? What will the Democrat Party do that will be better for our nation than what the Republican party was doing? Is there anything they can do that will actually be better? That remains to be seen, really, as I have yet to hear any Democrat put voice to anything remotely resembling a coherent plan, so I really have my doubts there. But, like I said, we’ll see in the coming months.

One thing I would like to see the Democrats not do is gloat. As Daniel Ortega, the recently re-elected President of Nicaragua said, "Don't let one criticism slip from your lips against those who didn't vote for us," he warned his supporters. "We have to be humble." That is wise advice indeed, and the Democrats would be wise to heed that. Why? It wasn’t the leadership of the Democrat Party that elected them, it was the voters of America that did, and that’s something they need to be mindful of.

On that note, another thing I would like to see the Democrats do, in cooperation with the Republicans, is get back to doing the people’s business. To do that, the partisan bickering on both sides needs to stop. It is counter-productive at best, and shows a measure of condescension towards the American people at worst. We put you there – Republicans and Democrats – to do a job, and that is to represent US, not to advance your own little petty agenda’s. You’ve been voted in to do a job. Fail to do that job, and you can find yourself voted right back out. If you can’t concentrate on doing the people’s business in an honest, ethical way, you have no business being in office. Something else you need to be mindful of.

So far, the Democrats have been “playing nice”, but how long will that last? The ball is now in your court Democrats – now what?

General approves court martial for Watada

As briefly reported here, First Lt. Ehren Watada, who challenged the Bush administration's reasons for going to war in Iraq and then refused to deploy to that country, will face a military trial, the Army said Thursday.

The Fort Lewis commander, Lt. Gen. James Dubik, recommended a general court-martial of Watada. No date has been set for the trial.

Watada was charged with missing troop movement, conduct unbecoming an officer and contempt toward officials for comments he made about President Bush.

If convicted on all charges, Watada could serve six years of confinement and be dismissed from the service.

The 28-year-old officer from Honolulu has said he believes the war is illegal and was first charged after he refused to deploy to Iraq on June 22 with his Fort Lewis Stryker unit.

As I've posted on this individual before, what he believes, and what are facts are two different things, in that the war in Iraq is, in fact, legal, according to all of the UN Resolutions passed at the end of the Gulf War and later, regarding the activities of the regime of Saddam, who chose to violate each and every one of them in the mistaken belief that they wouldn't be enforced.

In making the statements that he did, Lt. Watada was also mistaken in the belief that the military regulations prohibiting such statements would not be enforced, and now he will face a general court martial to face the charges levied against him.

You took an oath, Watada, when you raised your right hand, an oath that you broke, disregarding the potential consequences of doing so, bringing the whirlwind upon yourself.

Race is on for the biggest prize -- the White House in 2008

The dust hasn't even settled yet on the mid-term elections, and people are already looking at 2008. This is an interesting article giving an early preview of who might be running for President in 2008.

United States Marine Corps - 231 Years and counting

November 10th is the 231st birthday of the United States Marine Corps.

As a veteran of the US Navy, I have sometimes given in to my impulses to occasionally needle my "cousins" in the Marines, but I have always done so in a fun way, never in a demeaning or denigrating way.

I want to state - again - for the record, that I have the utmost respect and admiration for the US Marine Corps, and for the men and women who have served, and are now serving, our country as members of one of our nations most elite fighting forces, who are "First to fight for right and freedom ...".

Happy Birthday, Marines!

Semper Fi!

[Edit - As originally posted, I had the date incorrect. My apologies to my "cousins" in the USMC.]

In Flanders Fields

On this Veteran's Day, Nov. 11th, 2006, I just want to bring you the poem "In Flanders Fields", written by Lt. Col. John McCrae, MD, Canadian Army, as presented on the web site of the Arlington National Cemetery, as a way to remember all those who have given their life in the service of their country.

In Flanders Fields
By: Lieutenant Colonel John McCrae, MD (1872-1918)
Canadian Army

IN FLANDERS FIELDS the poppies blow
Between the crosses row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.

Saddam sentenced to death by hanging

As reported here, Iraq's High Tribunal on Sunday found Saddam Hussein guilty of crimes against humanity and sentenced him to hang for the 1982 killing of 148 Shiites in the city of Dujail. The visibly shaken former leader shouted "God is great!"

Saddam's half brother and former intelligence chief Barzan Ibrahim, and Awad Hamed al-Bandar, head of the former Revolutionary Court, were sentenced to join Saddam on the gallows for the Dujail killings after an unsuccessful assassination attempt during a Saddam visit to the city 35 miles north of Baghdad.

So, what happens now? The death sentences automatically go to a nine-judge appeals panel which has unlimited time to review the case. If the verdicts and sentences are upheld, the executions must be carried out within 30 days.

Chief prosecutor Jaafar al-Moussawi told reporters that the Anfal trial now in progress for Saddam and others alleged role in gassing and killing Kurds would continue while the appeals process is underway. But if the appellate judges uphold the death sentence, the Anfal proceedings and other cases would be halted and Saddam hanged.

Al-Moussawi said Saddam would be hanged if the sentence were upheld, despite his demand that he be shot by a firing squad.

A court official told The Associated Press that the appeals process was likely to take three to four weeks once the formal paperwork was submitted.

I would e very surprised if this verdict was overturned in the appeals process, and I expect that Saddam will hang. Whether you believe in the death penalty or not, I think you'll agree that Saddam is a monster in human form, and deserves whatever justice the Iraqi courts mete out.

Get out and vote!

This coming Tuesday, Nov. 7th, is an important day. This is the day that you get to participate in the democratic process by voting, so get out there and do it. If you vote absentee, and haven't sent in your vote, do it.

Vote your conscience, even if that means "crossing party lines". I don't care if you call yourself a Democrat, Republican, Libertarian or "Other/Unaffiliated/Undecided", if a candidate on your ballot is speaking to those issues that are important to you, vote for him or her, even if they are in a different political party than you are.

Republicans! Do you want the House and Senate to remain in Republican hands? Then get out and cast your ballot. If you stay home, and the Republicans lose the majority in either House (or both), do not cry and bellyache about it! You won't have anything to say if you stay home.

Democrats! Tired of the policies of the current majority party? Want to see some changes? Then get out and vote! If you stay home, and the Republicans retain the majority in either House (or both), do not cry and bellyache about it! You won't have anything to say if you stay home.

Libertarians! Want your party to become a viable third choice to the Republican or Democrat parties? Then get out and vote! Show the American people that you're serious about having your voice heard, so your party isn't looked upon with condescending tolerance by the "big boys", as it is now.

The rest of you that fall in the category of "Other/Unaffiliated/Undecided"! Make up your mind, and get out and vote! Voting Green? Fine, as long as you get out and actually vote! Unaffiliated? Get affiliated with someone, and vote! Undecided? Quit straddling the fence, make a decision you can live with, and vote!

Anyone who sits at home this coming Tuesday (or fails to send in their absentee ballot on time), and defaults on their civic duty of participating in the American democratic process, automatically gives up their right to cry and bellyache about the results!

No one at the National level appeal to you? Then don't vote for any of them. But! There are still local issues that will have a direct impact on you, that you should vote for (or against, as the case may be). Don't let National candidates that you don't care for be the excuse for you not making the effort to get out and cast your ballot.

Oh, and one last thing. Don't let bad weather be your excuse to not get out and vote, whether it is at the polling place, or via the US Post Office. Bad weather is what they make coats and unbrella's for!

Get out and vote, people! You can be sure I am!

Cuba's Dissident Movement Grows Stronger as Castro Weakens

Information you won't see in the MSM regarding the democracy movements efforts in Cuba, via Stefania Lapenna of Town Hall.

If you want to know what real freedom fighters are all about, read the article.

A few simple rules on how to be a good Liberal

A good friend of mine from an on-line community posted the following list, and I thought I'd share it with all of you.

A few simple rules on how to be a good Liberal

1. You have to be against capital punishment, but support abortion on demand.

2. You have to believe that businesses create oppression and governments create prosperity.

3. You have to believe that guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens are more of a threat than U.S. nuclear weapons technology in the hands of Chinese and North Korean communists.

4. You have to believe that there was no art before federal funding.

5. You have to believe that global temperatures are less affected by cyclical changes in the earth's climate and more affected by soccer moms driving SUVs.

6. You have to believe that gender roles are artificial, but being homosexual is natural.

7. You have to believe that the AIDS virus is spread by a lack of federal funding.

8. You have to believe that the same teacher who can't teach 4th-graders how to read is somehow qualified to teach those same kids about sex.

9. You have to believe that hunters don't care about nature, but PETA activists do.

10. You have to believe that self-esteem is more important than actually doing something to earn it.

11. You have to believe that Mel Gibson spent $25 million of his own money to make "The Passion of the Christ" for financial gain only.

12. You have to believe the NRA is bad because it supports certain parts of the Constitution, while the ACLU is good because it supports certain parts of the Constitution.

13. You have to believe that taxes are too low, but ATM fees are too high.

14. You have to believe that Margaret Sanger and Gloria Steinem are more important to American history than Thomas Jefferson, Gen. Robert E. Lee, and Thomas Edison.

15. You have to believe that standardized tests are racist, but racial quotas and set-asides are not.

16. You have to believe that the only reason socialism hasn't worked anywhere it's been tried is because the right people haven't been in charge.

17. You have to believe that homosexual parades displaying drag queens and transvestites should be constitutionally protected, and manger scenes at Christmas should be illegal.

18. You have to believe that this message is a part of a vast, right-wing conspiracy.

GOD BLESS AMERICA oops, can't do that either.


H/T Conservative67

Blabbermouths in play

Still undecided about who you're going to vote for in November? Want some clear, honest advice? Then, read this piece by Michelle Malkin.

Bush rallies base to 'just say no'

As reported here, President Bush yesterday yelled himself hoarse in his first public political rally of the 2006 election campaign, whipping thousands of supporters into chants of "USA!" as he criticized Democrats for being weak on national security and anxious to increase taxes.

Swooping into a Republican stronghold that on Election Day will be an early harbinger of whether Republicans hold control of Congress, Mr. Bush led the crowd in a chant that gave new meaning to an old Reagan-era slogan.

"The Democrats in Washington follow a simple philosophy: Just say no," the president said. "When it comes to listening in on the terrorists, what's the Democratic answer? Just say no. When it comes to detaining terrorists, what's the Democrat answer?" Mr. Bush asked.

"Just say no!" the crowd shouted.

"So when the Democrats ask for your vote on Nov. 7, what are you going to say?"
"Just say no!" the audience replied.
With just nine days to go before the midterm elections, the White House has settled on a simple strategy: Turn out the base.

This is good, and I support the President's efforts. The base of the Republican Party does need to turn out, if we want to retain a majority in Congress.

Obama has one eye on White House

As reported here, Sen. Barack Obama acknowledged Sunday that he was considering a run for president in 2008, backing off previous statements that he would not do so.

In recent weeks, Obama's political stock has been rising as a potentially viable centrist candidate for president in 2008 after former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner announced earlier this month that he was bowing out of the race.

Frank Luntz, a Republican pollster who has done extensive focus-group research on all the Democrats and Republicans considering a White House race in 2008, said of Obama: "I saw how he lit up a crowd in Iowa with barely a B-plus speech -- and that's the worst I've seen him all year. Imagine how politically potent he is when he's on his game. He's got all the best qualities of John and Bobby Kennedy combined, and none of the worst."

Sen. Obama, who is relatively young at 45, is a rising star of the Democrat Party, and if he does decide to run, it could be problematic for Hillary. However, if he does decide to run, I don't think he'll get the nomination over Hillary, but you could see him paired with Hillary as the VP candidate, instead of at the head of the ticket.

I'll be keeping an eye on this.

Anti-abortion posters infuriate some students

As reported here, [a] small group of anti-abortion activists stood in the cold at the avowedly liberal University of Washington on Wednesday, bearing signs of dismembered, bloody fetuses. But despite the university's commitment to free speech, Show The Truth Washington had a hard time making its point.

Several dozen students supporting abortion rights encircled the sign-bearers, shouting pro-choice slogans into a bullhorn. Some tried to bar a photographer from access to the gruesome pictures.

The images were so gory and disturbing that campus officials had alerted students a week in advance. Because the university is a public institution, groups do not need formal permission to gather on its grounds, said Gus Kravas, who chairs the school's Use of Facilities Committee.

But students were incensed, nonetheless.

"I think it's absurd that they're here," said Grant Mandarino, 25, who is working on a graduate degree in comparative literature. "These people are not wanted. This is a pro-choice campus, and there isn't a place for them here."

So, Mr. Mandarino, you speak for everyone on campus? I think not. As for your statement that there isn't a place for them on campus, could you kindly show me in the US Constitution where it says that free speech is allowed everywhere except where you don't want to see or hear a view that is different from your own? I'm waiting ... oh, wait! You can't show me where that particular clause in the Constitution is, because there isn't one!

Let me remind you of something there, Sunshine. Free speech is guaranteed to every American citizen by the US Constitution, whether you agree with someone's point of view or not.

I don't happen to agree with your point of view regarding abortion (and possibly a whole range of other things as well). I also don't agree with the point of view espoused by that nutjob Fred Phelps, either. But you know what? Just because I don't happen to agree with either of the cited points of view does NOT give me the right to tell you, or Phelps, that you can't express those points of view.

Just as you, and your liberal PC adhering cohorts have no right to tell anyone, whether it's the "Show The Truth Washington" group, or me, what we can or cannot say, just because you disagree with what they, or I, are saying.

Let me say this one more time. Free speech is guaranteed to every American citizen by the US Constitution, whether you agree with someone's point of view or not.

Deal with it!

State high court stands by gay marriage ban; Justices' decision is the final word in the case

As reported here, [t]he [Washington] state Supreme Court will stand by its endorsement of Washington's gay marriage ban, justices said Wednesday.

Gay and lesbian couples had asked the justices to reconsider their 5-4 ruling upholding the Defense of Marriage Act, a 1998 law limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples.

The court's denial, signed by Chief Justice Gerry Alexander, is the final word in the case. Further appeal is not possible because no federal legal issues were raised.

The high court rarely reconsiders its rulings. Few observers expected it to revisit a ruling that took nearly 18 months to craft.

"Having taken as long as they took to make up their minds, I thought it was unlikely that they would change them," said Assistant Attorney General Bill Collins, who defended the gay-marriage ban in court.

Gay marriage supporters said the ruling was particularly disheartening because it came on the same day New Jersey's Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples are entitled to benefits heterosexual couples have.

Over 40 states have some sort of variation of our law on their books, with 20 states having amended their state constitutions, specifically defining marriage as being between a man and a woman, with the rational being to promote stable families. I'm glad that we can count Washington State among that group.

Listen. If you are a gay or lesbian that wants to see changes made to the laws, your best recourse for doing so is by going through your state legislature, and stop trying to get the courts to legislate from the bench, ok? Depending on where you live, you can either simply lobby your legislative representatives to ask them to either change current laws, or write new laws, or try to get an initiative or referendum on the ballot, and let the voters decide. That's how the process works.

We are biased, admit the stars of BBC News

What bias? Oh, that bias!

Just as the BBC is full of liberals, so too is the majority of US newspapers and network news, which they steadfastly deny. Read the article. It's an eye opener.

H/T: Reality Hammer

China sides with U.S. against North Korea

As reported here, [a]n exasperated China took a newly tough approach to communist ally North Korea on Friday, siding with the United States in saying the North must back away from nuclear confrontation, and moving to cut Pyongyang's vital supply of hard currency.

Chinese banks have stopped financial transfers to North Korea under government orders, bank employees said Friday. And at an appearance with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, China's foreign minister nudged the North to resume negotiations over its nuclear program and assured Washington that China would carry out United Nations sanctions on Pyongyang.

China losing patience with N. Korea and finally siding with the US is a start; cutting off money transfers with N. Korea will definitely hurt them, and may impel Kim to agree to return to the six nation talks, but what I think may really hurt is the cutting off of luxury goods, which go exclusively to the elites in the North, who won't like that at all, and I'm sure they will put pressure on Kim that will actually accomplish something.

Bush signs law on terror suspects

As reported here, [s]ome of the most notorious names in the war on terror are headed toward prosecution after President Bush signed a law Tuesday authorizing military trials of terrorism suspects.

The legislation also eliminates some of the rights defendants are usually guaranteed under U.S. law, and it authorizes continued harsh interrogations of terror suspects.

"With the bill I'm about to sign, the men our intelligence officials believe orchestrated the murder of nearly 3,000 innocent people will face justice," Bush said in a White House ceremony.

This is a good thing in the fight against Islamofascist terrorists, yet there are some - most notably the ACLU, and Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis) - who would have us give more rights to those who perpetrate acts of terror, over the victims of their acts of terror.

Civil libertarians and leading Democrats decried the law as a violation of American values. The American Civil Liberties Union said it was "one of the worst civil liberties measures ever enacted in American history." Democratic Sen. Russ Feingold of Wisconsin said, "We will look back on this day as a stain on our nation's history."

What about the civil rights of those who died in New York City, at the Pentagon, and in a lonely field in Shanksville, PA? What about the civil rights of those who died on the USS Cole? What about the civil rights of those who died in the bombings of our two embassies in Africa? What about the civil rights of those who died in the Khobar Towers in Saudia Arabia? Don't their civil rights count? Oh, wait - they're dead, so they don't have any civil rights any more. Silly me.

As for this being "a stain on our nation's history.", this law goes hand in hand with the Patriot Act in giving us tools to bring those who commit acts of terror to justice, whether that justice is through military tribunes (which FDR also used during WWII, I'd like to point out), or the death of other terrorists from the information obtained from those terrorists already held. This law is far from being a stain. Rather, it is a welcome bright spot in this war we must win at all costs!

I'd like to ask the ACLU, and most Democrats one question, and that is - what part of they want to kill us all don't you understand?

Democrat Staffer Linked to National Security Leaks

As briefly reported here, Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Rep. Peter Hoekstra, announced last week that the committee has suspended a Democrat staffer for leaking classified information documents. The leaks involved an NIE (National Intelligence Estimate) report that was given to the New York Times.

On Sunday Fox News’ Weekend Live, Rep. Hoekstra told Bret Baier that there is “sufficient evidence to suspend the person’s access to classified documents. We can’t politicize this. We’re still a nation at risk.”

The staffer, Larry Hanauer, is employed by Rep Jane Harman (D-CA). Harman is also a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

It really doesn't matter to me what political party affiliation Mr. Hanauer claims. What does matter to me is that he is alleged to have leaked classified information, specifically cherry picked portions of the NIE, to a newspaper, which in this case just happens to be the New York Times.

What Mr. Hanauer allegedly did is a crime. The fact that he now no longer has access to classified information is good. However, an investigation - if there isn't one already - needs to be made into this incident, and all of the relevant facts must be made known to the American public. If the allegations prove to be true, then Mr. Hanauer needs to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, and sent to prison. I would say the same thing if it was a Republican staffer.

The New York Post is equally outraged at this as I am, and gives a few more details here.

Election 2006: McGavick returns to politics after Safeco save

Nice write up on Republican Senatorial candidate Mike McGavik here.

New urgency on viaduct repairs

As reported here, [a] chunk of Seattle's Alaskan Way Viaduct is sinking -- again.

One section has settled deeper into the waterfront fill it sits on, the state said Wednesday, perhaps adding more pressure to begin much-debated repairs on the 53-year-old structure.

Vertical supports between Columbia Street and Yesler Way sank another quarter-inch into the ground since March, according to measurements taken during a semi-annual inspection last weekend, state officials said.

The structure, built in the 1950s, remains safe to drive on with current restrictions on trucks and buses, but will need repairs if the same supports sink another 1.25 inches.

"It continues to reinforce our assessment that this structure is at risk and that we need to really move ahead with (a) replacement," said state project manager Ron Paananen.

State officials think the settling was at least partly caused by the Nisqually Quake in February 2001. [This is misleading, in that State officials know that the settling was caused by the Nisqually earthquake. Apparently, Larry Lange hasn't been reading his own articles!]

Seattle city officials agree the structure needs to go and think a waterfront tunnel should replace it, but many others disagree. Gov. Chris Gregoire is expected to decide next month which option should be pursued.

The latest news prompted Mayor Greg Nickels to repeat that "time is running out on this deteriorating structure. ... The latest settling highlights the need to get moving on replacing the Alaskan Way Viaduct with the preferred option of the city -- a cut-and-cover tunnel."

This is one issue where I am in agreement with Mayor Nichols. The Alaskan Way Viaduct is a disaster waiting to happen, and we need to do something about it now. Not tomorrow, not next week, not next month - NOW! We've had enough studies on this; we know it is going to fail, whether that failure is caused by another earthquake, or just heavy rains which we get here from time to time, does not matter. IT IS GOING TO FAIL. PERIOD!

I just hope that we do something about this before an untold number of the approximately 110,000 vehicles with people in them, have to suffer the consequences of our inaction, if it fails before we "get around to it."

Christine, you need to move up your timetable for making a decision.

U.N. imposes trade embargo on N. Korea

As reported here, [t]he U.N. Security Council voted unanimously yesterday to impose punishing sanctions on North Korea for reportedly carrying out a nuclear test, declaring that the test posed "a clear threat to international peace and security."

Of course, North Korea immediately rejected the resolution, and its U.N. ambassador walked out of the council chamber after accusing its members of a "gangsterlike" action that neglects the nuclear threat posed by the United States.

"The Democratic People's Republic of Korea is ready for talks, dialogue and confrontation," Ambassador Pak Gil-yon said, using the conventional long form of his country's name.

"If the United States increases pressure upon the Democratic People's Republic of Korea persistently, the DPRK will continue to take physical countermeasures, considering it as a declaration of war."

Walking out sure shows that you're willing for talks, doesn't it? Refusing to return to the six nation talks also sure shows that you're ready for dialogue, doesn't it?

As for declaring war against the US if the US continues to apply pressure goes ... well, that would be downright silly, considering that the US is the sole remaining super power, and with what forces we have in South Korea, Japan, and Okinawa, it wouldn't take much to overwhelm your little country's armed forces.

Am I advocating for war against North Korea? No, I am not. All I'm trying to point out is that if you are a 98 pound weakling, you don't go up to the biggest guy on the block and scuff his shoes, and not expect to suffer the consequences.

Meanwhile, in this related article, people in South Korea are fed up with their governments policy toward the North, as 78 percent of respondents thought South Korea should revise its policy, and 65 percent said South Korea should develop nuclear weapons to protect itself, from a poll taken recently by a JoongAng newspaper.

North Korea needs to get back to the six nation talks, and shut down their nuclear program to forestall the UN sanctions from going into effect, so the people of North Korea don't suffer even more hardships than they do now at the hands of their own government.

Sadly, I don't see that happening anytime soon.

Students in Texas taught to fight gunman

As reported here, in the wake of school shootings from Colombine to the recent Amish incident [y]oungsters in a suburban Fort Worth school district are being taught not to sit there like good boys and girls with their hands folded if a gunman invades the classroom, but to rush him and hit him with everything they got -- books, pencils, legs and arms.

"Getting under desks and praying for rescue from professionals is not a recipe for success," said Robin Browne, a major in the British army reserve and an instructor for Response Options, the company providing the training to the Burleson schools.

That kind of fight-back advice is all but unheard of among schools, and some fear it will get children killed.

Well, it seems that getting under desks, and praying for rescue by professionals gets children killed. These "concerns" are being voiced by the same people who have advocated that women and girls scream, kick and scratch in attempted rape or child abduction situations, and yet, they want kids in school confronted by someone with a gun to just sit there passively? That makes absolutely no sense!

If I had a child in school, and someone came in with a gun, I certainly wouldn't want my child to just sit there passively, hoping that the gunman wouldn't decide that my child was a target!

I for one think that this is an entirely appropriate program, and should be expanded to every school in the country. Why?

It stands to reason that if someone who was planning to go to a school with a gun just might think twice about that if they knew that they would be confronted by those in the school, and that they may be the one who gets injured, and not their intended targets.

Road taxes could drive voters over the edge

As reported here, as we get closer to November, some politicians are beginning to worry that local voters will be 'fatigued' with all of the road tax proposals on this years ballot, with two other massive tax proposals coming in 2007. These are some of the things we face:

Traffic jams, crumbling streets, bridges so vulnerable they must be closed to cars during fairly routine windstorms, along with trying to find the resources to replace both the SR-99 Alaskan Way Viaduct and the Evergreen Point Floating Bridge, both of which are critical transportation conduits for the Metropolitan Seattle area.

Seattle got into this mess, politicians acknowledge, because those in charge gave the region's transportation network short shrift for decades.

Over those decades, it has been more about process and paralysis through over analysis, rather than actually doing anything about our road infrastructure, coupled with imprudent spending. Add to that the dot com bust of the late 1990's and the events of 9/11 with the resultant recession, resulting in jobs losses and reduced tax revenue, forcing cuts to most spending programs except entitlements, and you wind up with the mess we have today.

Now officials have a plan for breaking the logjam. More precisely, they have at least four proposals -- each with its own price tag, each headed to a ballot soon.

The projects could cost a typical Seattle household nearly $450 annually in coming years, plus any tolls, localized property tax surcharges, business taxes and developer fees official[s] tack on.

It's got some asking whether voters are being pushed too far. Some political insiders worry government is asking for too much, too late -- and all at once.

Let's see now ... a $1.6 billion dollar tax proposal from the Mayor of Seattle, and a sales tax increase proposal to "improve" transit from King County Executive Ron Sims for this years ballot at the tune of about $570 million dollars, and then two more massive regional tax proposals for 2007 costing close to an additional $17 billion dollars more, and "some" are asking if this is too much, too late, at all at once? You THINK?

Oh, and then there are others who think that the voters in both the city of Seattle and in the region will just give a blanket ok to all of these tax proposals without batting an eye, which smacks of arrogance to me.

Yes, our roads are a mess and do need to be fixed. The Viaduct is a disaster waiting to happen, as is the Evergreen Point Floating Bridge. Transit does need to be improved (I should know, since I take the bus to commute to work and back right now). All of these issues will take massive amounts of money to fix, but these issues should, and could, have been addressed in the previous decades, but weren't because of a lack of political back bone and vision.

Everything here is more about the process, rather than actually doing anything, so now we are faced with massive tax proposals in this years, and next years, elections.

To the tune of about $20 billion dollars.

Too much, too late, and all at once pretty much sums it up I think. I think it's time the voters in both the region and the city of Seattle take a very long, very hard look at our politicians, and make some needed changes to bring in some people who will actually get things done, and not just study something to death.

THE OUTING

In this excellent op-ed piece by David Reinhard, regarding The List, he excoriates those who have released The List. Don't know what The List is?

The List is a roster of gay Republican congressional staffers that has circulated around Washington, D.C., since former Rep. Mark Foley's exit. It includes chiefs of staff, press secretaries and communications directors who work for GOP lawmakers such as Bill Frist, George Allen, Mitch McConnell, Rick Santorum and Henry Hyde. List recipients include the social-conservative arm of the vast right-wing conspiracy: the Christian Coalition, the Southern Baptist Convention, Focus on the Family and so on.

The release of The List at this time, a mere few weeks before the mid-term elections, is intended solely to influence the elections, but it is being met with yawns instead of the intended gasps.

This is just another demonstration of the ideological bancruptcy of the extreme left.

H/T: Hollie-is-Right

Democrats Have Foleys Too

In this well written piece, R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. points out the hypocrisy of the Democrat's in the Foley situation, and asks why the Republicans haven't pointed this out yet.

I'm kind of wondering the same thing.

Inhofe correct on warming

In this excellent piece by David Deming, a geophysicist, an adjunct scholar with the National Center for Policy Analysis and associate professor of arts and sciences at the University of Oklahoma, he states, Sen. James Inhofe, Oklahoma Republican, has been taking a lot of heat lately for his skeptical stance on global warming. He's been called a "social dinosaur" for his failure to accept the politically correct view. Yet Mr. Inhofe is absolutely correct to be skeptical.

In case you missed it, what Mr. Deming is referring to is a speech given by Sen. Inhofe, which I posted about here, which includes a link to Sen. Inhofe's speech.

Both what Sen. Inhofe said, and what Mr. Deming added, need to be heard, to counter the environmental extremists and their enablers in the MSM.

Downtown tractor rally tries to cultivate support for property rights

As reported here, [I]t was a clash of two worlds that rarely meet -- tractors, flatbed trucks and other farm machinery rolled slowly down the streets of downtown Seattle on Thursday afternoon, stopping traffic and causing pedestrians to turn their heads and stare.

Their invasion said one thing to the city slickers of Seattle: There's a whole lot more to Washington state than the urban Puget Sound area.

The farmers driving the vehicles were the foot soldiers in the battle over Initiative 933, a controversial property rights proposal on November's general election ballot.

Backed by the Washington State Farm Bureau, I-933 would require the government to compensate landowners when property restrictions damage the value of their land, or to modify the restrictions.

"We think this is a common-sense proposal," said farm bureau President Steve Appel, who watched the demonstration from the sidewalk. "It's not that extreme."

Mr. Appel is correct - it is not extreme to expect fairness from local governments, where it comes to what they allow on private property, although those who oppose I-933 would have you believe otherwise.

Television ads produced by the No on 933 coalition have focused on farmers who don't support the measure, but Appel shrugs the ads off with an appeal to logic: "Would the farm bureau sponsor something that's bad for farmers?"

Unfortunately, logic doesn't apply to those who oppose this initiative, who are trying to use fear in their ads against I-933.

The concern supporters of the initiative have with the way land-use regulations work now is that they sometimes prohibit use of certain parts of their land, which can lower the value of the property.

In addition to creating "pay or waive" method for claims filed about regulations, the initiative would bar the creation of new regulations that would prohibit uses of property that are legal now.

"Do you want the government to control everything or do you want to control something yourself?" asked David Card, a Kitsap County resident who came with his wife to Seattle to lend their support to the initiative. "You're never going to get to control it all."

As I've repeatedly said, I strongly believe that property owners know better what they can and shouldn't do with their own property than any government entity ever will, and it should be left up to the property owners what is done with their own property.

It's the fair thing to do.

FBI Says Foley Internet Texts Heavily Altered

As reported here, the text of the e-mail's sent to the FBI by C.R.E.W., a George Soros funded outfit, were heavily redacted (edited and/or entirely rewritten), and the want C.R.E.W. to provide them with the originals, which C.R.E.W. is refusing to do (I think a court order would rectify that rather quickly).

This episode with former Congressman Foley is looking more and more like an "October Surprise" staged by Democrats, in an effort to influence the up coming mid-term elections.

Michelle Malkin has more on this here.

John Hinderaker at Power Line asks some pertinent questions here.

Michael Barone adds his voice here.

Macranger is doing a whole series on this topic, starting here.

Gateway Pundit also has a whole series, with tons of other links, here.

David Limbaugh weighs in here on the Dems hypocrisy.

The questions being asked the most are: Who knew what, and when did they know it, and if they knew about this for over a year (or longer), why did they sit on it until now?

What Foley is alleged to have done is despicable, but what others have done - releasing this information now - is at best highly suspect, and at worst another example of the Democrat creed of "Lie, Cheat, Steal" - do anything it takes to "win" an election.

“Hot & Cold Media Spin: A Challenge To Journalists Who Cover Global Warming”

Senator James Inhofe, Chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee recently gave a speech about the media hype and spin on "global warming", which is eye opening for those who may be confused about this subject. Although somewhat long, it's definitely a must read.

H/T - Reality Hammer

'United 93' used to support war

In a sneeringly cynical "article" by an unnamed AP reporter, about the Progress for America group running ads and sending e-mails out to supporters, the "reporter" says, A conservative group is blending ads, e-mails and the feature film "United 93" in an innovative campaign to convince voters that the war in Iraq is a crucial component in the struggle against terrorism.

You can sense the sarcasm just dripping from that last part. My question to the editorializing "reporter" is, what's wrong with that, since the on-going war in Iraq is a crucial component of the larger war on terror?

Progress for America began airing a new ad in the political battlegrounds of Missouri and Ohio and on national cable featuring David Beamer, whose son Todd was killed when United Flight 93 crashed on Sept. 11, 2001, in a field in southwestern Pennsylvania.

At the same time, the group is sending hundreds of thousands of e-mails across the country with an offer from Beamer to give away free copies of "United 93," the feature film about the passengers who joined Todd Beamer in thwarting the hijackers' plans to reach their Washington targets.

Though required to work independently from candidates and political parties, the Progress for America message dovetails with Republican efforts to link the war in Iraq with the war on terror.

And the problem with that is ...?

6 nations to mull Iran sanctions

As reported here, Six world powers agreed Friday to pursue possible U.N. sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program, but left crucial questions about the scope and timing of any measures unresolved.

Top diplomats from the United States, Britain, France, Germany, China and Russia said in a joint statement after talks in London that they were "deeply disappointed" by Tehran's refusal to suspend uranium enrichment, a key step toward making nuclear weapons.

Reading the diplomats' joint statement, British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett said Iran had two choices when the United Nations demanded it halt enrichment activities.
"We regret that Iran has not yet taken the positive one."

Beckett said the six powers "will now consult on measures under Article 41 of Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter." Article 41 authorizes the Security Council to impose non-military sanctions such as completely or partially severing diplomatic and economic relations, transportation and communications links.

The fact that Iran has refused to comply with the UN demands to stop their nuclear enrichment program is no surprise, as they have repeatedly stated that they wouldn't. Although the envoys from the six nations (United States, Britain, France, Germany, China and Russia) have finally come to that realization, and have threatened to pursue sanctions against Iran, thereby putting more pressure on Iran, sanctions alone won't do much good unless the rest of the member nations also sign off on those sanctions.

I don't see that as being very likely, as there are a lot of nations that do business with Iran, and by abiding by any economic sanctions placed on Iran would hurt their own economies. Greed will over rule good sense, as it did in the Oil-For-Food sanctions against Saddam's Iraq regime, allowing Iran to continue to thumb their nose at the rest of the world.

Gunman storms school, kills girls

Earlier today, an armed gunman stormed a one room Amish school, killing three girls and leaving eight others in critical condition, before killing himself.

No real motive is known at this time, other than he may have had some kind of general grudge against girls, nor is it known why he chose this particular school in rural Pennsylvania, other than it was close to his home.

My heart goes out to the Amish people, and to the family of the man who committed this heinous act.

UPDATE: Gunman at Amish school may have planned to molest girls. Police investigating this terrible incident now believe they may know why Roberts did what he did.

The death toll has also risen to five: Naomi Rose Ebersole, 7; Anna Mae Stoltzfus, 12; Marian Fisher, 13; Mary Liz Miller, 8; and her sister Lena Miller, 7.

Other victims range in age from 6 to 13, with three girls still in critical condition, and two in serious condition.

A Warning to Islamofascist Terrorists

Somehow I missed this, as this article was put out on August 31st of this year, but it is still timely, and well worth the read.

I wholeheartedly agree with Mssr. Jacques Dhervillez, and wish to add my two cents.

To the Islamofascists, I say - be afraid. Be very afraid. Those who choose to poke a sleeping tiger with a sharp stick, and pull its' tail, soon find themselves looking at the inside of it's powerful jaws. Keep provoking us with your atrocities, and you will soon reap the whirlwind, as we in the West fully unleash the dogs of war to hunt you down, until each and every one of you, and your relatives are dead. If that is your wish, at some point in the very near future, we will oblige you your wish in ways that you will find completely incomprehensible, as you take your last breath.

We are coming for you.

H/T: The Freedom Fighter, via specialrpt posting in quicknews

The week's revelations

Thomas Sowell looks back at the just concluded week.

It's a mad, mad world

Chuck Colson nails it.

Top Democrats urge Bush to change his Iraq policy

As reported here, Top Democrats, citing a leaked National Intelligence Estimate that said the 42-month military occupation in Iraq has stoked Islamic terrorism, urged President Bush on Monday to change U.S. policy there.

Of course, they conveniently leave out the fact that the NIE also states that abandoning Iraq by withdrawing our troops now would be an unmitigated disaster, not only for Iraq, but for the overall war on terror. Cherry picking at its' finest, eh?

The New York Times reported Sunday that the National Intelligence Estimate prepared by the nation's 16 intelligence agencies last April concluded that U.S. operations in Iraq were aggravating the threat of terrorism.

Oh, please. As if anyone at the NY Times is an expert on how to fight terrorism. OBL declared war on the US, and whether we are in Iraq or not, or in Afghanistan or not, matters little to him. Let's say your child is experiencing problems with a bully at school. Do you think that by ignoring the problem, the bullying will stop? That would be a 'No, it won't.' situation. Ignoring the problem will only allow it to escalate. So too, ignoring the terrorists only escalates their abilities to commit further acts of terrorism, and fighting the terrorists in Iraq (while it is a tragedy that the Iraqi people must endure this) is far better than having to fight them in, say, the offices of the New York Times.

The report, the first governmentwide assessment of global terrorism since the Iraq war began in 2003, concluded that U.S. military operations were handing Islamic extremists a propaganda bonanza, helping recruit a new generation of terrorists and boosting the overall threat of terrorist attacks.

I say that the erroneous reporting, and flat out lies by the MSM is what is handing the Islamofascists a "propaganda bonanza", not our military operations in Iraq. What our military in Iraq is doing, is sending hundreds of Islamofascist terrorists to speak to Allah.

Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., the Senate Democratic leader, said the NIE showed that the war in Iraq was "doing more harm than good" in the U.S. campaign against terrorism. "After all this sacrifice, the intelligence community reports that this war has made us less safe."

Reid added in a later statement that the White House had "lost all credibility on matters of national security" because the U.S. intelligence community had "confirmed that America is losing the war on terror because of Bush failures in Iraq."

How is the war in Iraq "doing more harm than good"? How has this war made us less safe? Those questions are unanswerable by Sen. Reid, et al., as they are only talking points of those suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome, who have cherry picked portions of the declassified parts of the latest NIE, to suit their political agenda.

Sen. Robert Dorgan, D-N.D., said U.S. operations in Iraq had contributed to "a substantial increase in terrorism."

Sen. Dorgan is delusional. Terrorist activity has increased because they want to try to kill more Americans and are finding Iraq and Afghanistan a more convenient place to try to do that, rather than North Dakota or Nevada.

Sen. Clinton, D-N.Y. also chimed in, urging the President to fully declassify the rest of the NIE, and release it to the public, which is mere foolish demagoguery on her part, in that, those portions that the Dems are conveniently disregarding would be more available to the public who would see the Dems efforts for what they are - simple minded Bush bashing. It is also foolish on her part to open her mouth to criticize President Bush's efforts in the war on terror after what her husband failed to do during their eight years in the White House.

People who live in glass houses should not throw stones. The Dems attempts to make themselves appear "tough on terrorism" are belied by their dismal past record in that regard.

Blair, Musharraf dismiss terrorism report

As reported here, PM Tony Blair and Pakistani President Musharraf dismiss a report from the BBC that states, falsely according to the British Ministry of Defense, that Pakistan's Directorate of Inter Services Intelligence is aiding terrorists, rather than fighting terrorists.

Just as we here in the US have various elements in the MSM - CNN, the New York Times, Washington Post, et. al. - working overtime to undermine our efforts to combat terrorism both here and abroad, so too the UK has it's own elements in the MSM, most notably the BBC - which used to be a bastion of truth - doing whatever it takes to undermine their efforts to combat terrorism.

Publishing, and misrepresenting, leaked government documents is not only despicable, it's also treasonous in my opinion. When are our governments going to take steps to plug the leaks, and go after the leakers, and when are the news editors going to stop committing treason?

Mayor has plan to clear the air

As reported here, Saying Seattle must lead the world in battling the globe-warming gases that spew from our cars and furnaces and power plants, Mayor Greg Nickels today will unveil the most comprehensive plan to date to reduce Seattleites' impact on the climate.

The plan amounts to a call for everyone who lives here -- along with the city's businesses -- to change how they get around and how they heat and light their homes and offices. It could mean charging tolls for using certain roads, additional taxes on parking and other measures to encourage people to get out of their cars and use mass transit.

The 34-page list of actions Nickels is proposing range from the very specific -- spending $530,000 over the next two years to save natural gas in city buildings, for instance -- to aspirations whose outcome the city can't control, such as persuading the Legislature to follow California's lead and cap so-called "greenhouse gases."

The basic message: Seattle can do this. And so can the world.

"We can make a difference," Nickels said.

Boy, oh boy. Talk about your delusions of grandeur! While clean air is something desirable, most of the provisions put forth by the Mayor would cost tax payers more money through taxes, and clamp down on the business community through onerous regulations resulting in lost jobs, which in turn would lower tax revenue, which in turn would increase state cut backs in "essential services".

The Mayor goes on to talk about "the struggle with climate change", when in fact he meant "global warming" (a pet theme of his). As I've said before, and I'll say it again, climate change has always occurred, and will continue to do so, whether we take any steps "to halt global warming", or not.

Our Mayor is getting more delusional by the week!

Study puts I-933's cost in billions

As reported here, If voters pass the land-use measure Initiative 933 in November, it will cost taxpayers almost $8 billion during the next five years, a University of Washington study released Tuesday contends.

"The future of land use will change forever if the initiative passes," said Keith Dearborn, an environmental law and land-use lawyer who provided legal analysis for the study, which was conducted by a group of researchers at the UW's Northwest Center of Livable Communities.

But proponents of I-933 blasted as off-base the conclusions of the UW study, as well as the findings of a state report released last week that made similar dire predictions if the measure passes. Those in favor of the measure also said the UW study was biased because it was partially paid for by groups with ties to the opposition camp.

Initiative 933 had it's genesis in the Kelo decision by the Supreme Court, and by the Critical Areas Ordinance passed by King County, both actions limiting what a private property owner can do with their property. Simply put, I-933 is about fairness, as it seeks - if passed - to force local governments to compensate land owners for putting restrictions on the use of their property, or waive those restrictions.

If local governments don't want to pay compensation to private property owners for restrictions placed on the use of said private property, then they shouldn't pass laws and ordinances restricting the use of the land by the property owner, right?

Unfortunately, the simple logic in that is lost on those who only listen to the extremist conservationists, who would rather see us all living in Soviet-era style concrete block house apartments, instead of being able to use and enjoy our privately owned property.

Union case goes to high court

As reported here, The Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to decide whether public employee unions must get special permission before spending some workers' dues on political causes.

Justices accepted an appeal from the state of Washington that involves fees paid to the Washington Education Association by teachers who decline to join the union.

Those workers still can be charged dues by the union to help pay for labor negotiations that affect them. But they can't be forced to pay for the union's political activism, under a string of Supreme Court rulings that reach back nearly 30 years.

At issue is whether the union needs teachers to say "yes" before the fees can be used for political causes or whether teachers must specifically object to having a portion of their fees spent for that purpose.

The court will hear arguments in the case, as well as a related lawsuit by five teachers to recover their fees, early next year.

State voters in 1992 adopted a campaign finance law that requires unions to get the consent of each worker before spending fees on political activity. The law also required the unions to refund the fee to teachers who did not agree with the political activity the union was proposing.

The Washington Supreme Court overturned the requirement that union officials get worker consent, saying the union's annual offer to reduce fees for any non-member who registers an objection to the political spending is sufficient.

The state court said that forcing the union to seek permission from each worker violated the union's free speech rights.

The three dissenters on the state Supreme Court, however, said the ruling "turned the First Amendment on its head," by valuing the rights of the union above those of individuals.

I'm happy that the USSC is going to hear this appeal of the WSSC, in effect, legislating from the bench in this case. The teachers union, the WEA, is about as liberal a union as there is, while not all teachers are. The current majority of the justices on the WSSC are also very liberal, and in declaring the 1992 state campaign finance law "unconstitutional" were showing their support for unions, rather than the people of the state of Washington as is their mandate (with the exception, of course, of the 3 dissenters).

In my opinion, unions should be prohibited from any political activity whatsoever, even if their entire membership ascribes to the political activity that the union wants to engage in. The primary role - which should be the only role of any union - is to represent their membership in the negotiation of wages and benefits with an employer. (Oh, and case you're wondering, yes I have been a union member - of three different unions - but I am not currently a union member.)

There are plenty of other outlets that allow people to be involved in the political activism of their choice. It's ludicrous that members of a union be forced to pay for political activities that they do not ascribe too, and the hope here is that the USSC will see it that way too.