Leave it to a Democrat to want to raise taxes for programs that benefit criminal gangs, which seems to be the unintended(?) effect of Los Angeles Councilwoman Janice Hahn's gang intervention program. It was supposed to go toward hiring convicted criminals as "gang specialists". Instead, the money was used to actually subsidize gang activities. The truth came out in 2009, along with federal indictments.
Even the New York Times took notice-
Federal agents announced criminal indictments for 24 high-ranking gang members, along with a prominent gang intervention specialist who associated with city politicians and routinely raised money from Hollywood’s elite.
The specialist, Alex Sanchez, director of Homies Unidos, a gang outreach organization in Los Angeles for more than a decade, was arrested and charged with a federal racketeering count for his alleged role in the assassination of a man in El Salvador in 2006.
Now Hahn is running for Congress, to replace the retiring Jane Harmon, and is opposed by Republican Craig Huey. In opposition to Hahn's campaign an independent political group has produced the following video.
The Daily Caller calls it the most offensive ad ever, but let's face it-sometimes the truth is offensive. And when a US Congresswoman funnels taxpayer funds to a criminal street gang, the truth is something that's hard to sugarcoat when that truth involves the use of said funds in the furtherance of the same criminal activities they were ostensibly meant to combat.
The Other McCain has the video and a different take on it, while providing an explanation from the video's director which makes use of the Congresswoman's own words, to wit-
Before you charge racism at the ad, consider her one line in the video: “It takes a different kind of person to speak the language.” By that she means, it takes black people to talk to black people. It takes gang members to talk to gang members. They have their own language, we should coddle them. They’re not responsible for their actions if they murder someone, rape someone. They’re a minority.
Spot on. Democrats take a passive aggressive stance towards the minority groups they keep down and under their thumb while yelling racism at everybody that opposes their lunacy. Same story different day. The only thing missing is the Klan robes. The Democrats haven't changed, they've just substituted the rope for a welfare check.
The video was funded by Turn Right USA which is an independent political action group not affiliated with Democrat Janice Hahn's Republican opponent Craig Huey. Here is their mission statement-
Turn Right USA is a Federal Non-connected, Expenditure Only Political Action Committee (SuperPAC) organized to execute Independent Expenditure campaigns by a group of American citizens who are:
unrepresented by the political class of this Country;
nauseated by the laughable stupidity of professional politicians;
outraged by their liberal benefactors like George Soros, and
angered that their opposition is too cowardly to fight back!
Turn Right USA’s mission is to expose and lampoon the typical politico’s microscopic brain through cutting-edge viral videos with guts and humor!
Unfortunately for Hahn's defenders, the fact that the gang receiving her taxpayer-funded largesse is black is not a reflection on the overall African-American community, who in fact are the community that suffers the most from the influence of these kinds of criminal gangs-and the Democratic Party and its members who support and enable them.
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Saturday, June 11, 2011
Right And Wrong In Yemen And Libya-The Arab Spring And The Coming Internationalist Downfall
There is good and there is bad, and sometimes, you have your in-between gray areas where you don't really know what to think. You just try to muddle through and hope things work out for the best. That's the situation right now in the Middle East, where let's face it, there's almost never any good news, so why start now?
The so-called Arab Spring is something I have been wary of from the start, just like I am of any alleged "pro-democracy" movements among the Arab/Muslim states. We have already seen the result of President Bush's insistence that the Palestinians be granted free elections. That turned into a fiasco which haunts us, and the Israelis, to this day. True enough, it resulted in the removal from power, in Gaza, of the corrupt Fatah organization, but it was replaced by the insanely and fanatically evil Hamas.
Proponents of the Arab Spring revolts throughout the Middle East, which started in Tunisia and spread first to Egypt, and then throughout the various countries of the Middle East with varying degrees of intensity, insist that it is a mostly secular movement. They might be right to a degree, but scratch the surface and it doesn't take long to smell the rancid, stinking odor of fanatical Islamic fascism, already taking strong root in Egypt, resulting in attacks on the minority Coptic Christians.
But so far, the most violent and dangerous disruptions have come about in Yemen, where the presidential palace was attacked and the President seriously injured. The place is in all but name a failed state, where a significant percentage of the people are either loyal to or terrorized by the local Al-Queda group, Al-Queda in Yemen. This is especially significant in that one of the most influential leaders of this group is a transplanted American who is deemed responsible for the Fort Hood Massacre.
It's also important to note that Obama, while expressing sympathy for the insurgents throughout the Arab world-after all, they only want the right to self-determination and freedom, supposedly-kept a generally hands off approach. He was criticized for this, and for his inconsistencies when it came to the status of our former ally, recently deposed President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt. He has also been taken to task for his lack of support for the anti-Assad factions in Syria, just like he was condemned, generally, for his lack of involvement with the anti-Qaddafi forces in Libya.
It was good that Obama was criticized, but it was all for the wrong reasons. In reality, Obama is in this up to his eyeballs. The State Department, various socialist factions within the EU and the UN, in conjunction with disparate leftist organs, including organized labor activist and progressive activist groups such as Code Pink, have engaged in a coordinated effort to inflame tensions in the region.
And when some people do point this out, they also err in casting aspersions related to the influence of Islamic radicals. The perpetrators here are not the radicals, but pro-democracy forces who are by no means republican in orientation, but of a progressive, socialist cast. These are the people Obama, the State Department, the EU and the UN, as well as international labor and progressive activists want to use to recast the Middle East, in a socialist, parliamentary democratic image. The problem is they fail to see the danger posed by the Islamic radicals in the event their schemes are initially successful. This is a blind spot of the ideological progressives, one that could induce them to lead the whole region over a cliff.
Why there haven't been demands for a Congressional investigation is beyond me, but on the other hand, conservatives wasted too much time and energy making political hay out of Obama's seeming lack of involvement, when the reality was quite the opposite of the perception he was purposely manifesting.
Obama has learned well the political lessons of the last few years. No matter what he does he will be attacked. And he would obviously be excoriated if he openly sought to throw the Middle East into the kind of turmoil that it is now experiencing. He would be criticized not just by the GOP, but worldwide. Few Democrats even would support him.
This might go a long ways towards explaining the recent involvement of NATO in the Libyan insurgency. The problem is, the US is expected as usual to contribute the lion's share of money and resources, and Obama is pressured daily by NATO elements to provide "boots on the ground".
For once, criticism of Obama is justified, and not misdirected. He has, in jumping on board the NATO bandwagon, defied established US protocol. Such actions should first go through Congress and gain congressional approval. Bush did this when he went to war in Afghanistan and then Iraq. He sought and received bi-partisan support. Obama, when it comes to the Libyan theater, acts like it is beneath him to even answer congressional queries concerning his actions.
Yemen, however, is an altogether different matter. Yemen has been our ally, at least officially, in the War on Terror. Our troops have been stationed there. We have an already vested interest in what happens there. Plus, we are at war, not just ideologically but in point of fact, with Al-Queda in Yemen.
Therefore, when people criticize Obama for his assault on the insurgent forces and Al-Queda in Yemen, they are off the mark and out of bounds. This is especially true of the charge that he is doing this without congressional approval. Of course we have congressional approval. We have had that approval, implicitly, ever since our troops were stationed there, ever since we had an agreement with the Yemeni government.
Sometimes it pays to step back and take a deep, long hard look at everything that's going on. Oftentimes if you just take the time and make the effort to peel back the layers, you might find things are not so simple as they might appear at first glance. And, sometimes they are even more simple.
There are some things that are just not appropriate venues for political grandstanding no matter how much or even how rightly you dislike the target of your attack. Obama should be investigated as to what his real role in the Arab Spring insurgencies. I might be wrong, but if I am right, he should be impeached and tried on that, among some other things.
But his attack on the insurgents in Yemen is not only justified, it is appropriate.
The so-called Arab Spring is something I have been wary of from the start, just like I am of any alleged "pro-democracy" movements among the Arab/Muslim states. We have already seen the result of President Bush's insistence that the Palestinians be granted free elections. That turned into a fiasco which haunts us, and the Israelis, to this day. True enough, it resulted in the removal from power, in Gaza, of the corrupt Fatah organization, but it was replaced by the insanely and fanatically evil Hamas.
Proponents of the Arab Spring revolts throughout the Middle East, which started in Tunisia and spread first to Egypt, and then throughout the various countries of the Middle East with varying degrees of intensity, insist that it is a mostly secular movement. They might be right to a degree, but scratch the surface and it doesn't take long to smell the rancid, stinking odor of fanatical Islamic fascism, already taking strong root in Egypt, resulting in attacks on the minority Coptic Christians.
But so far, the most violent and dangerous disruptions have come about in Yemen, where the presidential palace was attacked and the President seriously injured. The place is in all but name a failed state, where a significant percentage of the people are either loyal to or terrorized by the local Al-Queda group, Al-Queda in Yemen. This is especially significant in that one of the most influential leaders of this group is a transplanted American who is deemed responsible for the Fort Hood Massacre.
It's also important to note that Obama, while expressing sympathy for the insurgents throughout the Arab world-after all, they only want the right to self-determination and freedom, supposedly-kept a generally hands off approach. He was criticized for this, and for his inconsistencies when it came to the status of our former ally, recently deposed President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt. He has also been taken to task for his lack of support for the anti-Assad factions in Syria, just like he was condemned, generally, for his lack of involvement with the anti-Qaddafi forces in Libya.
It was good that Obama was criticized, but it was all for the wrong reasons. In reality, Obama is in this up to his eyeballs. The State Department, various socialist factions within the EU and the UN, in conjunction with disparate leftist organs, including organized labor activist and progressive activist groups such as Code Pink, have engaged in a coordinated effort to inflame tensions in the region.
And when some people do point this out, they also err in casting aspersions related to the influence of Islamic radicals. The perpetrators here are not the radicals, but pro-democracy forces who are by no means republican in orientation, but of a progressive, socialist cast. These are the people Obama, the State Department, the EU and the UN, as well as international labor and progressive activists want to use to recast the Middle East, in a socialist, parliamentary democratic image. The problem is they fail to see the danger posed by the Islamic radicals in the event their schemes are initially successful. This is a blind spot of the ideological progressives, one that could induce them to lead the whole region over a cliff.
Why there haven't been demands for a Congressional investigation is beyond me, but on the other hand, conservatives wasted too much time and energy making political hay out of Obama's seeming lack of involvement, when the reality was quite the opposite of the perception he was purposely manifesting.
Obama has learned well the political lessons of the last few years. No matter what he does he will be attacked. And he would obviously be excoriated if he openly sought to throw the Middle East into the kind of turmoil that it is now experiencing. He would be criticized not just by the GOP, but worldwide. Few Democrats even would support him.
This might go a long ways towards explaining the recent involvement of NATO in the Libyan insurgency. The problem is, the US is expected as usual to contribute the lion's share of money and resources, and Obama is pressured daily by NATO elements to provide "boots on the ground".
For once, criticism of Obama is justified, and not misdirected. He has, in jumping on board the NATO bandwagon, defied established US protocol. Such actions should first go through Congress and gain congressional approval. Bush did this when he went to war in Afghanistan and then Iraq. He sought and received bi-partisan support. Obama, when it comes to the Libyan theater, acts like it is beneath him to even answer congressional queries concerning his actions.
Yemen, however, is an altogether different matter. Yemen has been our ally, at least officially, in the War on Terror. Our troops have been stationed there. We have an already vested interest in what happens there. Plus, we are at war, not just ideologically but in point of fact, with Al-Queda in Yemen.
Therefore, when people criticize Obama for his assault on the insurgent forces and Al-Queda in Yemen, they are off the mark and out of bounds. This is especially true of the charge that he is doing this without congressional approval. Of course we have congressional approval. We have had that approval, implicitly, ever since our troops were stationed there, ever since we had an agreement with the Yemeni government.
Sometimes it pays to step back and take a deep, long hard look at everything that's going on. Oftentimes if you just take the time and make the effort to peel back the layers, you might find things are not so simple as they might appear at first glance. And, sometimes they are even more simple.
There are some things that are just not appropriate venues for political grandstanding no matter how much or even how rightly you dislike the target of your attack. Obama should be investigated as to what his real role in the Arab Spring insurgencies. I might be wrong, but if I am right, he should be impeached and tried on that, among some other things.
But his attack on the insurgents in Yemen is not only justified, it is appropriate.
Friday, June 10, 2011
Celebration For Mentally Challenged Special Olympics Athletes Disrupted By Leftist Zombie Infestation
Ann Althouse, who lives in Wisconsin and has provided extensive coverage of the protests in Madison Wisconsin, has a video of a recent appearance by Governor Scott Walker. The governor was speaking in commemoration of the accomplishments of Special Olympics athletes. The minute he walked to the podium to speak, however, he was rudely interrupted by a group of pro-union protesters dressed as zombies.
I wonder if any of them considered how it would look to protest an event held in honor of mentally challenged athletes by appearing as a group of brain dead monsters.
In other words, as themselves.
Althouse is as usual mystified by the lack of tact and diplomacy on the part of these protesters. She regularly points out how they hurt their own cause in the eyes of the general public with their antics.
What she doesn't seem to get is, they don't care about the general public to begin with, in part because they think most people are basically on their side, but mainly they feel the courts will back them up, as in fact was most recently the case when a liberal activist judge declared that the recent law passed by the Republican legislature, and signed into law by Walker, could not be implemented due to the lack of input by the Democratic legislators-who had actually left the state in order to forestall a quorum for a vote they knew they would lose.
So they have held the state hostage and will continue to do so. No one or no group is safe from their disruption. Not even mentally challenged athletes who perform in the Special Olympics. These ersatz zombies purposely walked in between Walker and the attendees in order to block their view of Walker. It was supposed to be the athletes special day, a day to be honored for their contributions. Instead, their day was hijacked by a bunch of union thugs and leftists.
To tell you the truth though, it wouldn't be much of a surprise if these union jackass thugs and leftists actually do have a hunger for BRAAAAA-INS!! They do seem to be sorely lacking in that regard.
But the worse thing about the whole ordeal?
At the end of the day, they were still very much alive.
I wonder if any of them considered how it would look to protest an event held in honor of mentally challenged athletes by appearing as a group of brain dead monsters.
In other words, as themselves.
Althouse is as usual mystified by the lack of tact and diplomacy on the part of these protesters. She regularly points out how they hurt their own cause in the eyes of the general public with their antics.
What she doesn't seem to get is, they don't care about the general public to begin with, in part because they think most people are basically on their side, but mainly they feel the courts will back them up, as in fact was most recently the case when a liberal activist judge declared that the recent law passed by the Republican legislature, and signed into law by Walker, could not be implemented due to the lack of input by the Democratic legislators-who had actually left the state in order to forestall a quorum for a vote they knew they would lose.
So they have held the state hostage and will continue to do so. No one or no group is safe from their disruption. Not even mentally challenged athletes who perform in the Special Olympics. These ersatz zombies purposely walked in between Walker and the attendees in order to block their view of Walker. It was supposed to be the athletes special day, a day to be honored for their contributions. Instead, their day was hijacked by a bunch of union thugs and leftists.
To tell you the truth though, it wouldn't be much of a surprise if these union jackass thugs and leftists actually do have a hunger for BRAAAAA-INS!! They do seem to be sorely lacking in that regard.
But the worse thing about the whole ordeal?
At the end of the day, they were still very much alive.
Stand By Your Weiner Night
I would like to announce that I am now promoting a special night for all supporters of New York Democrat Congressman Anthony Weiner to show solidarity for the beleaguered Congressman. To all of you who insist on defending him, I have one thing to say to you-talk is cheap. Actions speak louder than words ever could.
With this is mind, Stand By Your Weiner Night is really a simple concept. On Saturday Night, Midnight, June 11-12 2011, all Twitter followers of Representative Anthony Weiner should tweet a dic-pic or, if a woman, a pussy-pic. It doesn't necessarily have to be a bare naked shot, it can just as easily be one taken of your self in your underwear, with an emphasis on the crotch, though preferably the outline of your sexual organs in a state of arousal would be appropriate for the occasion. If a man your the outline of your dick should be prominent. If a woman, the crotch of your panties should be suitably moist.
You should do this on Twitter at the stated time, using the hashtags #WeinerYes and #CollateralDamage.
I invite all of you to help me get the word out to all followers of @RepWeiner. Tweet the message early and often so we will get a big crowd standing in solidarity with the Weiner.
Let's not let our Weiner down.
With this is mind, Stand By Your Weiner Night is really a simple concept. On Saturday Night, Midnight, June 11-12 2011, all Twitter followers of Representative Anthony Weiner should tweet a dic-pic or, if a woman, a pussy-pic. It doesn't necessarily have to be a bare naked shot, it can just as easily be one taken of your self in your underwear, with an emphasis on the crotch, though preferably the outline of your sexual organs in a state of arousal would be appropriate for the occasion. If a man your the outline of your dick should be prominent. If a woman, the crotch of your panties should be suitably moist.
You should do this on Twitter at the stated time, using the hashtags #WeinerYes and #CollateralDamage.
I invite all of you to help me get the word out to all followers of @RepWeiner. Tweet the message early and often so we will get a big crowd standing in solidarity with the Weiner.
Let's not let our Weiner down.
Wednesday, June 08, 2011
GOP Strategist Ed Rollins Attacks Sarah Palin-On Behalf Of Michelle Bachmann
Michelle Bachmann might have made a fatal mistake in hiring long-time GOP strategist Ed Rollins as a campaign adviser for her fledgling presidential campaign. For his first day on the job, Rollins attacked potential Bachmann opponent Sarah Palin, calling her unqualified, and not a serious candidate. As you might imagine, this has Palin supporters in an uproar, and rightly so.
I wondered where I had heard of Rollins before, and then it occurred to me. I had a lot to say about him here, where he came across as more of an Obama supporter who was actually worried about Obama looking bad. Of course, come to find out, originally Rollins was a Democrat, so it makes sense that he would fit in with the establishment, RINO wing of the GOP.
But his salvo at Palin was beyond the pale, and potentially an embarrassment for Bachmann in yet another way-no longer ago than this last January Rollins said the exact same things about Bachmann.
Professor Jacobson, he of Legal Insurrection, seems to think that hiring Rollins was a rookie mistake on Michelle's part, though it definitely calls into question her decision making abilities. Many have wondered openly whether Michelle might actually be a stalking horse, for some other candidate, in an attempt to drain Tea Party votes from Palin in the event Sarah decides to run.
It makes sense to me. Bachmann tried to get an appointment to a committee chair following the 2010 mid-term elections but was turned down. Maybe this is a way of proving, to somebody like for example Speaker of the House John Boehner, or maybe even House Whip Eric Cantor, that she is capable of being a team player. Believe me, there is nothing the Party leadership would like better than to derail any hopes of a Palin campaign. But would Bachmann go that far? Doesn't she believe in the same things as Palin, more or less? Aren't they both Tea Party favorites?
I don't know, and I'm not making any accusations, just asking questions. But the hiring of Rollins should have set off alarm bells before he ever opened his mouth. The man has a checkered history at best. Legal Insurrection commenter Trochilus contributed some links to an old story that tells a sorry tale indeed.
Rollins was at the center of a big controversy in New Jersey during the election of Republican Christine Todd Whitman as Governor. He alleged that Whitman's funds went to suppress the black vote. He later admitted he made the whole thing up. It later turned out there was indeed an attempt to suppress the vote, but the Democrats were the guilty party. By the time the truth had come out, some months after the initial allegation, Whitman's administration had been seriously hampered by the charges and the resultant official investigation and bad publicity.
So I don't know, Rollins might just be a stupid man who hasn't caught on to the fact that the political strategies of the seventies and eighties, and even the nineties, no longer works in the modern internet age where people have far greater access to fact-checking resources and where past history and records are an open book, accessible in fact at the click of a mouse.
Or maybe his presence is more nefarious. Maybe he is actually trying to sew discord among the conservative factions of the GOP with the goal of derailing not only Palin, but ultimately Bachmann as well. In the meantime, if Palin stays out of the race, Bachmann can drain more votes from the rising star that is Herman Cain, and maybe also knock out Pawlenty in Iowa. Seen in that context, hiring someone like Rollins makes sense if Bachmann is culpable in such an attempt.
Otherwise hiring Rollins was really a stupid mistake on Bachmann's part, one she needs to rectify immediately. I never thought it was a good idea for her to run a national campaign this early in her congressional career. I am sure she would be a good president-though I sincerely doubt she would be a great one-but there's the matter of getting there. I just don't think she's ready for the rigors of an electoral campaign for national office, especially for the highest office in the land. It stands to reason it would be tempting for her to jump at the chance to have somebody with the reputation of an Ed Rollins.
Unfortunately, she seems to have focused solely on his selling points and elected to ignore the more inflammatory aspects of this man's history. In doing so, she might have done a lot of damage to her credibility with the very base of support she's trying to cement.
I wondered where I had heard of Rollins before, and then it occurred to me. I had a lot to say about him here, where he came across as more of an Obama supporter who was actually worried about Obama looking bad. Of course, come to find out, originally Rollins was a Democrat, so it makes sense that he would fit in with the establishment, RINO wing of the GOP.
But his salvo at Palin was beyond the pale, and potentially an embarrassment for Bachmann in yet another way-no longer ago than this last January Rollins said the exact same things about Bachmann.
Professor Jacobson, he of Legal Insurrection, seems to think that hiring Rollins was a rookie mistake on Michelle's part, though it definitely calls into question her decision making abilities. Many have wondered openly whether Michelle might actually be a stalking horse, for some other candidate, in an attempt to drain Tea Party votes from Palin in the event Sarah decides to run.
It makes sense to me. Bachmann tried to get an appointment to a committee chair following the 2010 mid-term elections but was turned down. Maybe this is a way of proving, to somebody like for example Speaker of the House John Boehner, or maybe even House Whip Eric Cantor, that she is capable of being a team player. Believe me, there is nothing the Party leadership would like better than to derail any hopes of a Palin campaign. But would Bachmann go that far? Doesn't she believe in the same things as Palin, more or less? Aren't they both Tea Party favorites?
I don't know, and I'm not making any accusations, just asking questions. But the hiring of Rollins should have set off alarm bells before he ever opened his mouth. The man has a checkered history at best. Legal Insurrection commenter Trochilus contributed some links to an old story that tells a sorry tale indeed.
Rollins was at the center of a big controversy in New Jersey during the election of Republican Christine Todd Whitman as Governor. He alleged that Whitman's funds went to suppress the black vote. He later admitted he made the whole thing up. It later turned out there was indeed an attempt to suppress the vote, but the Democrats were the guilty party. By the time the truth had come out, some months after the initial allegation, Whitman's administration had been seriously hampered by the charges and the resultant official investigation and bad publicity.
So I don't know, Rollins might just be a stupid man who hasn't caught on to the fact that the political strategies of the seventies and eighties, and even the nineties, no longer works in the modern internet age where people have far greater access to fact-checking resources and where past history and records are an open book, accessible in fact at the click of a mouse.
Or maybe his presence is more nefarious. Maybe he is actually trying to sew discord among the conservative factions of the GOP with the goal of derailing not only Palin, but ultimately Bachmann as well. In the meantime, if Palin stays out of the race, Bachmann can drain more votes from the rising star that is Herman Cain, and maybe also knock out Pawlenty in Iowa. Seen in that context, hiring someone like Rollins makes sense if Bachmann is culpable in such an attempt.
Otherwise hiring Rollins was really a stupid mistake on Bachmann's part, one she needs to rectify immediately. I never thought it was a good idea for her to run a national campaign this early in her congressional career. I am sure she would be a good president-though I sincerely doubt she would be a great one-but there's the matter of getting there. I just don't think she's ready for the rigors of an electoral campaign for national office, especially for the highest office in the land. It stands to reason it would be tempting for her to jump at the chance to have somebody with the reputation of an Ed Rollins.
Unfortunately, she seems to have focused solely on his selling points and elected to ignore the more inflammatory aspects of this man's history. In doing so, she might have done a lot of damage to her credibility with the very base of support she's trying to cement.
Romney Must Be The Republican Nominee-Because Gallup Says So
HIP HIP HOORAY for The Romneylan. He comes in as the number one pick to win the Republican nomination for US President in 1968, ahead of Richard Nixon. Romney is favored by 45% of the general public, ahead of Nixon who garners 41% according to a poll conducted by the Gallup organization on March 1st, 1967.
Well by golly I guess that just settles that, huh?
Well by golly I guess that just settles that, huh?
Tuesday, June 07, 2011
The Triumph Of Civic Virtue
The below neoclassical statue by Frederick MacMonnies has been standing outside Borough Hall in Queens New York since 1942. Guess who recently started an initiative to have it taken down and sold on Ebay, saying it was sexist and out of touch with the current time and culture?
You might not be shocked to learn it was none other than New York Democrat Congressman Anthony "Dic-Pic" Wiener.
The semi-nude, muscular male figure is a symbolic representation of "Civic Virtue". The two women, lying prone at his feet, are supposed to represent the twin sirens of Vice and Corruption. This strong, masculine male figure has conquered these two shameless hussies. So of course, it was offensive to feminists, and therefore by proxy, to the Weiner. Look at the artwork in totality, and you be the judge.
I can understand how some would be put off by this. After all, in our modern age Civic Virtue would be represented by a multiracial person with a limp wrist and a vaguely non-sexual appearance, while the twin sirens would probably be distinctly white males in rich attire, carrying guns and Bibles.
That is to say, that might be the officially sanctioned artistic view, but in reality, Civic Virtue is on life support, hanging by a thread. He's been showing remarkable improvements over the last few years, but he has a ways to go and his improvement thus far is tentative.
As for Vice and Corruption, they were last seen skulking and slithering around the corridors and alleyways of Washington, still going strong-down for sure, but by no means out.
After all, for every man or woman who strives to live up to the ideals of Civic Virtue, there will always be an Anthony Weiner drawing on the hypocrisy and the promise of Vice and Corruption while hiding in plain sight.
H/T The Other McCain
You might not be shocked to learn it was none other than New York Democrat Congressman Anthony "Dic-Pic" Wiener.
The semi-nude, muscular male figure is a symbolic representation of "Civic Virtue". The two women, lying prone at his feet, are supposed to represent the twin sirens of Vice and Corruption. This strong, masculine male figure has conquered these two shameless hussies. So of course, it was offensive to feminists, and therefore by proxy, to the Weiner. Look at the artwork in totality, and you be the judge.
I can understand how some would be put off by this. After all, in our modern age Civic Virtue would be represented by a multiracial person with a limp wrist and a vaguely non-sexual appearance, while the twin sirens would probably be distinctly white males in rich attire, carrying guns and Bibles.
That is to say, that might be the officially sanctioned artistic view, but in reality, Civic Virtue is on life support, hanging by a thread. He's been showing remarkable improvements over the last few years, but he has a ways to go and his improvement thus far is tentative.
As for Vice and Corruption, they were last seen skulking and slithering around the corridors and alleyways of Washington, still going strong-down for sure, but by no means out.
After all, for every man or woman who strives to live up to the ideals of Civic Virtue, there will always be an Anthony Weiner drawing on the hypocrisy and the promise of Vice and Corruption while hiding in plain sight.
H/T The Other McCain
Monday, June 06, 2011
How Many Weiner Pics Did The Weiner Prick Send If The Weiner Prick Did Send Weiner Pics
Surprise, surprise, surprise! It is starting to look more and more likely that New York Democrat Congressman Anthony Weiner has sent quite a few intimate photos of himself, and not just to Gennette Nicole Cordova. It seems that he might have sent them out to other young ladies and, as fate would have itsome of them are coming forward.
We already know he's in tight on Twitter with a porn star named Ginger Lee. But that's just the beginning. He has also been a follower of a high school girl from Delaware who goes by @maggiehenning. It also bears mentioning however that in addition to being followed by @RepWeiner, Maggie Henning is also followed by none other than New York Democrat Senator Chuck Schumer. Odd, to say the least. But is it proof of anything shady?
No it is not, and in fairness I should relate that I have seen it explained by another of Weiner's mutual followers that if you want Weiner to follow you on Twitter, you just need to send him a tweet with the hashtag #WeinerYes.
By the same token, where there's smoke there very often is, in cases like this, a conflagration, and I find it very, very doubtful that the Weiner Dic-Pic with which we are so familiar is his first and only foray into the shady world of internet cyber-sex and porn, if you want to dignify Weiner's little Weiner pic with such an appellation. But let's face it-you wouldn't really call it "soft-porn". Then again, you wouldn't exactly call it "hard-porn" either-
But the question remains, how many of these things, or other similar kinds of things, has Weiner sent out there, and who did he send them to? And what can be, and should be, done about it, particularly if it turns out he has sent inappropriate communications to underage girls? Or for that matter, to anyone?
What is the true extent-and depth-of his connection to porn star Ginger Lee, who it turns out is suffering from the disease Lupus, which she talks about quite openly on her web-site.
Was this the reason for her initial interest in the Congressman? I ask this because it goes to Weiner's potential MO. If Ginger Lee reached out to Weiner for aid and assistance, urging him for example to support and champion research into a cure for Lupus, did this turn into a cyber friendship, and if so, from where then did it lead? Is this an example of a man elected to national office using his power and authority to manipulate and take advantage of a woman who might be vulnerable?
And if he would do that to a porn star-who, say what you will, would know how to attract attention and publicity-is it really that much of a stretch to think he might do it to somebody he might think is just one of those little people who don't really matter, who no one would believe?
Previously-
The Dic-Pic Seen Round The World
Jon Stewart Mad At The Weiner
We already know he's in tight on Twitter with a porn star named Ginger Lee. But that's just the beginning. He has also been a follower of a high school girl from Delaware who goes by @maggiehenning. It also bears mentioning however that in addition to being followed by @RepWeiner, Maggie Henning is also followed by none other than New York Democrat Senator Chuck Schumer. Odd, to say the least. But is it proof of anything shady?
No it is not, and in fairness I should relate that I have seen it explained by another of Weiner's mutual followers that if you want Weiner to follow you on Twitter, you just need to send him a tweet with the hashtag #WeinerYes.
By the same token, where there's smoke there very often is, in cases like this, a conflagration, and I find it very, very doubtful that the Weiner Dic-Pic with which we are so familiar is his first and only foray into the shady world of internet cyber-sex and porn, if you want to dignify Weiner's little Weiner pic with such an appellation. But let's face it-you wouldn't really call it "soft-porn". Then again, you wouldn't exactly call it "hard-porn" either-
But the question remains, how many of these things, or other similar kinds of things, has Weiner sent out there, and who did he send them to? And what can be, and should be, done about it, particularly if it turns out he has sent inappropriate communications to underage girls? Or for that matter, to anyone?
What is the true extent-and depth-of his connection to porn star Ginger Lee, who it turns out is suffering from the disease Lupus, which she talks about quite openly on her web-site.
Was this the reason for her initial interest in the Congressman? I ask this because it goes to Weiner's potential MO. If Ginger Lee reached out to Weiner for aid and assistance, urging him for example to support and champion research into a cure for Lupus, did this turn into a cyber friendship, and if so, from where then did it lead? Is this an example of a man elected to national office using his power and authority to manipulate and take advantage of a woman who might be vulnerable?
And if he would do that to a porn star-who, say what you will, would know how to attract attention and publicity-is it really that much of a stretch to think he might do it to somebody he might think is just one of those little people who don't really matter, who no one would believe?
Previously-
The Dic-Pic Seen Round The World
Jon Stewart Mad At The Weiner
Jon Stewart Mad At The Weiner
By now you would have to have been spending the last ten days on some deserted island or some similarly secluded spot to not know the story about New York Democrat Congressman Anthony Weiner and The Dic-Pic Seen Round The World.
Comedy Central's Jon Stewart certainly knows about it, and evidently he doesn't think its a laughing matter. How mad is he? He is so mad he has told him flat out "if you did this you gotta go".
No big deal there. People might interpret this as some kind of indication of Stewart's sense of morality and ethics, but I wouldn't go that far. Of course Jon Stewart is mad at the Weiner. Why wouldn't he be? The question is why is he really mad at him.
I say Stewart's just mad because Wiener makes all liberal dicks look like the little pricks they all really are.
Comedy Central's Jon Stewart certainly knows about it, and evidently he doesn't think its a laughing matter. How mad is he? He is so mad he has told him flat out "if you did this you gotta go".
No big deal there. People might interpret this as some kind of indication of Stewart's sense of morality and ethics, but I wouldn't go that far. Of course Jon Stewart is mad at the Weiner. Why wouldn't he be? The question is why is he really mad at him.
I say Stewart's just mad because Wiener makes all liberal dicks look like the little pricks they all really are.
Sunday, June 05, 2011
Obama Loses Key Ally In War On Terror
Now that Al-Queda is rampaging through Yemen, I guess we'll get to see now just what are the real implications of the "Arab Spring".
The country's president, Saleh, was wounded seriously in an attack on the presidential palace and had to be flown out of the country for medical treatment. Although he did not officially abdicate his position, leaving the country in the hands of Vice President Hadi, many observers doubt that the president will ever return.
Now we have a situation where Yemen is swiftly spiraling out of control and on the verge of becoming a failed state and terrorist haven. In the meantime, across the Red Sea, we have Somalia, also a failed state and a terrorist haven, and which is infested with pirates which regularly threaten international shipping.
Time to bring out the nukes.
Oh wait, that's right, Obama's president.
Time to wring our hands.
The country's president, Saleh, was wounded seriously in an attack on the presidential palace and had to be flown out of the country for medical treatment. Although he did not officially abdicate his position, leaving the country in the hands of Vice President Hadi, many observers doubt that the president will ever return.
Now we have a situation where Yemen is swiftly spiraling out of control and on the verge of becoming a failed state and terrorist haven. In the meantime, across the Red Sea, we have Somalia, also a failed state and a terrorist haven, and which is infested with pirates which regularly threaten international shipping.
Time to bring out the nukes.
Oh wait, that's right, Obama's president.
Time to wring our hands.
Saturday, June 04, 2011
How Could Anyone Possibly Think Progressives Are Antisemitic?
Progressives in San Francisco only want what is best for young infant boys, and to that end have initiated a ballot measure which would ban the ancient Jewish practice of circumcision. In order to build support for the measure, someone has produced a comic book starring the blond, blue-eyed, unabashedly Aryan looking super-hero known as "Foreskin Man".
As for the villain of the comic book, take a look and see if he might seem somewhat familiar.
This is blood libel of a most profoundly incredible nature. Amazingly, I have no doubt that many of the people involved in this political initiative, as well as the comic book, are probably secular Jews, in this case of a particularly self-loathing variety. I just can't conceive of any group having the temerity to produce something like this for mass consumption-in pursuit of political aims, at that-without their input.
For what its worth, the foreskin has outlasted its usefulness from the days before mankind started wearing clothing, when it probably served a protective function. The only reason evolution has not eradicated it is probably because it still serves a protective function of some kind in the womb.
Otherwise, not only is it useless, it is actually detrimental. Like wall to wall carpet, which at least serves some useful purpose, it serves now only as a repository and incubator of germs, bacteria, and viruses. It is not unheard of for a foreskin to contribute to penile cancer, necessitating the removal of more than merely the foreskin. It can also increase the contraction and frequency of other diseases.
If anything, there should be a law requiring circumcision, not banning it. Of course, the main reason given for banning the procedure is the lack of input of the child, who has no say in the removal of something which, because it contains nerve-endings like any other part of the body, can contribute to the enhancement of sexual pleasure. Like everything else the left pushes, they use such bullshit scare tactics while insisting the procedure should be put off until the child has a say.
Yeah, let's imagine a potential father-son talk-
Dad-Son, your mother and I would like to have the foreskin of your penis cut off.
Son-Huh? Why?
Dad-Well, its what God wants. Plus there's good health reasons to have it done.
Son-Will it hurt?
Dad-Well, yes, for a few days it will be awful sore. But it won't last more than a few days.
Remember this is an eight or nine year old boy we're talking about here. And in the case he does give his consent, you can bet your bottom dollar the very same leftists who are saying now to "wait until the child has a say" is going to be raising the roof about parents "coercing" their sons to do something they don't really want to do.
There probably aren't many Muslims living in San Francisco. If there were this ballot initiative would have never seen the light of day. And if a sizable number of them moved there today, the cowardly leftist pukes would be falling all over themselves to have this insane initiative taken off the ballot on the grounds of religious insensitivity.
H/T AceofSpadesHQ
As for the villain of the comic book, take a look and see if he might seem somewhat familiar.
This is blood libel of a most profoundly incredible nature. Amazingly, I have no doubt that many of the people involved in this political initiative, as well as the comic book, are probably secular Jews, in this case of a particularly self-loathing variety. I just can't conceive of any group having the temerity to produce something like this for mass consumption-in pursuit of political aims, at that-without their input.
For what its worth, the foreskin has outlasted its usefulness from the days before mankind started wearing clothing, when it probably served a protective function. The only reason evolution has not eradicated it is probably because it still serves a protective function of some kind in the womb.
Otherwise, not only is it useless, it is actually detrimental. Like wall to wall carpet, which at least serves some useful purpose, it serves now only as a repository and incubator of germs, bacteria, and viruses. It is not unheard of for a foreskin to contribute to penile cancer, necessitating the removal of more than merely the foreskin. It can also increase the contraction and frequency of other diseases.
If anything, there should be a law requiring circumcision, not banning it. Of course, the main reason given for banning the procedure is the lack of input of the child, who has no say in the removal of something which, because it contains nerve-endings like any other part of the body, can contribute to the enhancement of sexual pleasure. Like everything else the left pushes, they use such bullshit scare tactics while insisting the procedure should be put off until the child has a say.
Yeah, let's imagine a potential father-son talk-
Dad-Son, your mother and I would like to have the foreskin of your penis cut off.
Son-Huh? Why?
Dad-Well, its what God wants. Plus there's good health reasons to have it done.
Son-Will it hurt?
Dad-Well, yes, for a few days it will be awful sore. But it won't last more than a few days.
Remember this is an eight or nine year old boy we're talking about here. And in the case he does give his consent, you can bet your bottom dollar the very same leftists who are saying now to "wait until the child has a say" is going to be raising the roof about parents "coercing" their sons to do something they don't really want to do.
There probably aren't many Muslims living in San Francisco. If there were this ballot initiative would have never seen the light of day. And if a sizable number of them moved there today, the cowardly leftist pukes would be falling all over themselves to have this insane initiative taken off the ballot on the grounds of religious insensitivity.
H/T AceofSpadesHQ
Christine O'Donnell Cleared Of Ethics Charges
She was accused of violating election laws that restrict coordination between candidates and outside political organizations, the group in this particular case being the Tea Party Express. She was cleared by the Federal Elections Commission, which decided that the suit brought against O'Donnell was frivolous.
But the damage has already been done. O'Donnell was targeted from the beginning of her campaign for the US Senate from Delaware by those who went out of her way to make sure she would not, could not be elected. Since that time they have gone out of their way to make sure there is not a repeat performance.
Shame on those Democrats, you say? Well actually, in this case, the true culprits were not the Democrats but the Delaware State GOP. They were the ones who opposed her in the 2010 GOP primary, which she went on to win against Mike Castle. They were the ones who refused to support her in the general election against the ultimately victorious Democrat candidate. And, finally, they are the ones who brought this suit.
Like I keep saying, the Republican Party establishment is the worst enemy of Republican voters, and the best friend the Democratic Party could ever hope to have. They don't care so much about beating Democrats as they care about holding on to their piece of the pie, their own specially carved out territories. And candidates like Christine O'Donnell, Sarah Palin, Nikki Haley, and Jim DeMint, to name just a few, are the true natural enemies of the Republican Party establishment.
If Barak Obama goes on to win his bid for re-election in 2012-not at all impossible-you will have them to thank for it.
Facebook Trashing Conservative Groups
That's what many conservative Facebook group administrators are afraid is going to happen once Facebook implements its new upgrade, which will archive all old groups but eliminate the lists of members. This would cause the administrators to start rebuilding their groups from scratch, even in those cases where some groups might have tens of thousands of members. In order to prevent this from happening, Facebook groups will have to ask for a new, special software key which will enable users to upgrade their page.
It may sound akin to a wild-eyed conspiracy theory, but it has been pointed out that of all political donations that went to political campaigns from Facebook employees, 98% went to Democrats. And it is well-known that Mark Zuckerberg himself is a supporter of Barak Obama, with whom he recently appeared at a forum discussing the economy. Zuckerburg was noted here for his support of the President's economic policies, including Obama's express desire to raise taxes on "the rich".
When you add all of these factors together, Facebook Groups administrators have a right to be concerned that their groups might be purposely targeted for-well, let's just call it what it is-elimination.
This is especially true when you consider that some liberal groups have seemed to experience no undue difficulties with the upgrade-
The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence got the upgrade for its 1,000-member group. “We changed over very smoothly,” said David Churchill, the network-manager at the D.C.-based gun-control group. “We just basically clicked the upgrade button, checked it over, and we have a tremendous increase in participation,” he said.
This could be a way to simply eliminate groups that don't meet Facebook standards by targeting specific instances of what the company decides is "intolerance", or "hate speech".
You know, like for example making such racist statements as "I oppose Barak Obama because of his liberal, progressive policies."
It may sound akin to a wild-eyed conspiracy theory, but it has been pointed out that of all political donations that went to political campaigns from Facebook employees, 98% went to Democrats. And it is well-known that Mark Zuckerberg himself is a supporter of Barak Obama, with whom he recently appeared at a forum discussing the economy. Zuckerburg was noted here for his support of the President's economic policies, including Obama's express desire to raise taxes on "the rich".
When you add all of these factors together, Facebook Groups administrators have a right to be concerned that their groups might be purposely targeted for-well, let's just call it what it is-elimination.
This is especially true when you consider that some liberal groups have seemed to experience no undue difficulties with the upgrade-
The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence got the upgrade for its 1,000-member group. “We changed over very smoothly,” said David Churchill, the network-manager at the D.C.-based gun-control group. “We just basically clicked the upgrade button, checked it over, and we have a tremendous increase in participation,” he said.
This could be a way to simply eliminate groups that don't meet Facebook standards by targeting specific instances of what the company decides is "intolerance", or "hate speech".
You know, like for example making such racist statements as "I oppose Barak Obama because of his liberal, progressive policies."
Joe Biden Not Worth Killing According To Bin Laden
For once me and the late Al-Queda chief are in total agreement. Some people are saying this was because in Bin Laden's opinion at the time he wrote this in his diary, the office of the Vice President was just not important enough to worry about. Therefore, his advice to Al-Queda operatives was that they should leave Joe Biden alone and concentrate on killing Obama, or other high ranking officials such as the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Maybe, but I for one have an idea he didn't have such a cavalier opinion about killing Dick Cheney. Let's face it, our Vice President is a clown, and everybody knows it.
The only thing I can't figure out is why he would want to kill Obama, who is over time going to do more to destroy the US than Bin Laden could ever hope to accomplish in his wildest dreams.
H/T LibertasLogos
Fair Warning To The GOP-I Will Not Vote For The Romneylan
To the Republican Party-
Many of you among the party elite are promoting Mitt Romney for President. I see it all the time, people like Charles Krauthammer on Fox News being just the first and most obvious example I can think of off the top of my head.
Why are you doing this? Not only will this clown lose, he will drag the down ticket Republican races down with him.
First he defends his foray into socialized medicine, which as Governor of Massachusetts he implemented via RomneyCare, on the grounds of federalism, swearing he would never support that on a national level. But he just didn't defend government controlled medical care at the state level, he went that extra mile and defended the mandate policy wherein everyone is forced to purchase health insurance. That, or face fines and possibly even a jail sentence. Well, I'm sorry but there's not enough free riders in the universe to justify that on constitutional grounds.
But even that is almost negligible in comparison to his recent statement in support of a government policy to control what he insists is man's contribution to global warming.
This guy just wants to lower taxes. Fine, but what good is that if he is going to maintain the current regulatory regimes that are the real villains choking the life out of the American economy? In fact, in this case he might even make things worse than they already are.
But let's face it, the Republican Party establishment wants somebody that isn't going to rock the boat too much. They want a conservative, but they want a big government conservative, who will lower everybody's taxes but at the same time maintain the status quo that allows the big corporations to maintain their hold on the economy. After all, its regulations, more even than taxes, that kills competition in the market. They are crony capitalists who only pay lip service to the concept of free markets when it helps them advance their cause.
And I for one am not going for it.
But give the Romneylan credit for one thing-if he runs like a RINO in the GOP primaries, you know he's not going to turn around and govern any differently if he were to win.
Many of you among the party elite are promoting Mitt Romney for President. I see it all the time, people like Charles Krauthammer on Fox News being just the first and most obvious example I can think of off the top of my head.
Why are you doing this? Not only will this clown lose, he will drag the down ticket Republican races down with him.
First he defends his foray into socialized medicine, which as Governor of Massachusetts he implemented via RomneyCare, on the grounds of federalism, swearing he would never support that on a national level. But he just didn't defend government controlled medical care at the state level, he went that extra mile and defended the mandate policy wherein everyone is forced to purchase health insurance. That, or face fines and possibly even a jail sentence. Well, I'm sorry but there's not enough free riders in the universe to justify that on constitutional grounds.
But even that is almost negligible in comparison to his recent statement in support of a government policy to control what he insists is man's contribution to global warming.
This guy just wants to lower taxes. Fine, but what good is that if he is going to maintain the current regulatory regimes that are the real villains choking the life out of the American economy? In fact, in this case he might even make things worse than they already are.
But let's face it, the Republican Party establishment wants somebody that isn't going to rock the boat too much. They want a conservative, but they want a big government conservative, who will lower everybody's taxes but at the same time maintain the status quo that allows the big corporations to maintain their hold on the economy. After all, its regulations, more even than taxes, that kills competition in the market. They are crony capitalists who only pay lip service to the concept of free markets when it helps them advance their cause.
And I for one am not going for it.
But give the Romneylan credit for one thing-if he runs like a RINO in the GOP primaries, you know he's not going to turn around and govern any differently if he were to win.
Friday, June 03, 2011
RIP Kevorkian
A lot of people didn't like Dr. Jack Kevorkian, and I can certainly understand that. He isn't exactly the first person who would be on my party list. The very mention of his name, after all, invokes the aura of death, almost as though he were the Grim Reaper incarnate.
But a lot of objections to him were political as well as religious. He felt he had a mission in life, to ease the transition to death in the case of those who simply no longer wanted to live. Although he concentrated his practice on those who were suffering through debilitating illnesses, he himself felt neither the federal government nor states should intervene whenever anyone wanted to end their lives, whether or not they suffered from an illness from which they stood no realistic chance of finding a cure or any kind of substantial relief from the agony it caused. To him, the state just did not have the right to make that call. In the case of states that allowed euthanasia, or physician assisted suicide, he generally complained their laws were too restrictive.
When he was finally prosecuted successfully by the state of Michigan, he had performed in close to one hundred assisted suicides by his own admission.
The state was right to prosecute him. The law is the law. Nor do I necessarily think euthanasia is a good practice or that it should be sanctioned by the state or codified into law. I don't, in fact, because it could be, and doubtless would be abused.
Still, I'm in awe of the man, and always was. He never backed down, right or wrong, even when it would have been to his advantage. He protested against what he considered an unjust law by breaking it. It was his own private foray into civil disobedience.
No matter what one might think of the man and his actions, he did help people die in peace and relative comfort. He saved them years of agony. Many people who live on for years in states of severe illness and incapacitation have nothing but misery to look forward to and their families have years of exorbitant medical expenses that can drain their finances and ruin the futures of their children and grandchildren.
He helped many people avoid these sufferings. He helped them to rest in peace. May he do likewise.
Zombie Jesus
He rose from the dead. He wants you to eat his flesh and drink his blood. And all he wants in return is for you to turn your life over to him completely. He wants your heart. He wants you mind. He wants your soul. He wants your-
BRAAAAAAIIIINSSSS
BRAAAAAAIIIINSSSS
Thursday, June 02, 2011
Questionable Timing In Soutthworth Murder Arrest
As I posted earlier here, Lexington Police have arrested Donald Southworth for murder, presumably for the murder of his late wife Umi Southworth, who was beaten to death June 16th of last year in a case that led to widespread criticism of police misconduct and the initiation of procedural changes. The police waited five hours after finding Southworth, battered in the bushes of her Meadowthorpe Lane property, before they called an ambulance because they didn't realize she was still alive. She died some hours later at the hospital.
It just so happens that husband Donald had earlier yesterday filed paperwork to make himself the executor of the late Umi's estate, in preparation for filing a wrongful death lawsuit on behalf of himself and the couple's daughter Almira Fawn.
Southworth's lawyer questions the timing of the arrest, which occurred late last night. As do I.
There's nothing worse, and more dangerous, than official incompetence married to corruption, and it looks like that might well be what we are seeing here. It almost beggars belief, but as of now it looks like the Lexington Police Department is trying to cover themselves by engaging in malicious prosecution based on circumstantial evidence. If Southworth was guilty of the crime, I find it difficult to understand why the police would not have long ago arrested him. It should not have been that hard to gather the necessary evidence for such a brutal, bloody crime.
Two things for sure-
1. I'm glad I don't live in Lexington Kentucky.
2. If I did I wouldn't be writing this post.
UPDATE-The story just gets more bizarre. According to the LPD, Southworth murdered his late wife Umi Southworth by hitting her over the head with a piece of wood. Okay, so in so many words, not only do they not have a murder weapon, they don't even know what the hell the murder weapon was. All they "know" is that it was some kind of wooden object. I don't know, maybe they found splinters in Umi Southworth's head, or the nature and extent of her head injuries was somehow suggestive of wood as opposed to metal. Some enterprising investigative reporter should ask them if they have the object in question locked away in their evidence, or if they at least have some kind of general idea what it was. It's always possible they are keeping it secret for some reason but I seriously doubt that. They need to accede to some level of transparency here. Otherwise if this ever does go to trial, its going to be like a three ring circus-the part where the clowns pile out of the tiny little car.
UPDATE II-I covered the Southworth murder not long after it happened in June of last year. Owing to these latest developments, it might be worth your time to read A Murder On Meadowthorpe, in which I detailed the reasons why in my opinion it was unlikely-certainly not impossible, but unlikely-that Donald Southworth was the killer of his wife.
It just so happens that husband Donald had earlier yesterday filed paperwork to make himself the executor of the late Umi's estate, in preparation for filing a wrongful death lawsuit on behalf of himself and the couple's daughter Almira Fawn.
Southworth's lawyer questions the timing of the arrest, which occurred late last night. As do I.
There's nothing worse, and more dangerous, than official incompetence married to corruption, and it looks like that might well be what we are seeing here. It almost beggars belief, but as of now it looks like the Lexington Police Department is trying to cover themselves by engaging in malicious prosecution based on circumstantial evidence. If Southworth was guilty of the crime, I find it difficult to understand why the police would not have long ago arrested him. It should not have been that hard to gather the necessary evidence for such a brutal, bloody crime.
Two things for sure-
1. I'm glad I don't live in Lexington Kentucky.
2. If I did I wouldn't be writing this post.
UPDATE-The story just gets more bizarre. According to the LPD, Southworth murdered his late wife Umi Southworth by hitting her over the head with a piece of wood. Okay, so in so many words, not only do they not have a murder weapon, they don't even know what the hell the murder weapon was. All they "know" is that it was some kind of wooden object. I don't know, maybe they found splinters in Umi Southworth's head, or the nature and extent of her head injuries was somehow suggestive of wood as opposed to metal. Some enterprising investigative reporter should ask them if they have the object in question locked away in their evidence, or if they at least have some kind of general idea what it was. It's always possible they are keeping it secret for some reason but I seriously doubt that. They need to accede to some level of transparency here. Otherwise if this ever does go to trial, its going to be like a three ring circus-the part where the clowns pile out of the tiny little car.
UPDATE II-I covered the Southworth murder not long after it happened in June of last year. Owing to these latest developments, it might be worth your time to read A Murder On Meadowthorpe, in which I detailed the reasons why in my opinion it was unlikely-certainly not impossible, but unlikely-that Donald Southworth was the killer of his wife.
Trump Might Run For President As Independent If Republicans Nominate A "Stiff"
He made it pretty plain that he thinks the GOP is flirting with disaster, and blames first of all the Ryan Plan, pointing out the recent loss in the special election for the House seat of New York-26. That race saw a Democrat win a seat that has been a safe Republican seat for decades. The Republicans, according to Trump, have a death wish.
He further warned that if the GOP nominates a "stiff" he might run as an Independent. His meaning is clear enough. He plainly means Pawlenty or Romney, two of the biggest stiffs on the political landscape. Obviously New York Democrat Anthony Weiner doesn't count (sorry, couldn't resist).
At the same time, Trump seems to be impressed with Sarah Palin, who he says he likes, calling her a friend, and a patriot who loves America. It is starting to look as though the recent Pizza Summit between Palin and Trump in New York might have been a potential lead to a Palin endorsement by Trump. Trump stopped short of that last night on On The Record with Greta Van Sustern, but then again, he claims not to know whether Palin is running, saying he's pretty sure she hasn't yet decided.
It looks like Trump, if he does run, might well be the first person to openly run as a spoiler. Most people think that would hurt the GOP more than the Democrats, but I have to wonder about that. Most of Trumps votes would come from Independents, and maybe some moderate Democrats who are unsatisfied (if not outright disgusted) with how Obama has governed (for lack of a better word) thus far.
I just can't see conservative Republicans voting for Trump in any significant numbers should he mount an independent bid, even if the GOP does nominate a "stiff", or another RINO. What moderate Republicans might vote for him would probably be more than offset by Democrats, and by Independents who might ordinarily tend to vote Democrat if they are unsatisfied with the GOP nominee, or who already lean towards the Democrats regardless.
Ironically, since Palin has low approval ratings among Independents, a third-party Trump candidacy might actually help her if she received the nomination, unless she manages to improve her numbers.
He further warned that if the GOP nominates a "stiff" he might run as an Independent. His meaning is clear enough. He plainly means Pawlenty or Romney, two of the biggest stiffs on the political landscape. Obviously New York Democrat Anthony Weiner doesn't count (sorry, couldn't resist).
At the same time, Trump seems to be impressed with Sarah Palin, who he says he likes, calling her a friend, and a patriot who loves America. It is starting to look as though the recent Pizza Summit between Palin and Trump in New York might have been a potential lead to a Palin endorsement by Trump. Trump stopped short of that last night on On The Record with Greta Van Sustern, but then again, he claims not to know whether Palin is running, saying he's pretty sure she hasn't yet decided.
It looks like Trump, if he does run, might well be the first person to openly run as a spoiler. Most people think that would hurt the GOP more than the Democrats, but I have to wonder about that. Most of Trumps votes would come from Independents, and maybe some moderate Democrats who are unsatisfied (if not outright disgusted) with how Obama has governed (for lack of a better word) thus far.
I just can't see conservative Republicans voting for Trump in any significant numbers should he mount an independent bid, even if the GOP does nominate a "stiff", or another RINO. What moderate Republicans might vote for him would probably be more than offset by Democrats, and by Independents who might ordinarily tend to vote Democrat if they are unsatisfied with the GOP nominee, or who already lean towards the Democrats regardless.
Ironically, since Palin has low approval ratings among Independents, a third-party Trump candidacy might actually help her if she received the nomination, unless she manages to improve her numbers.
The WHO Wants To Tax And Regulate Your Cell Phone Use
Otherwise, you might use it too much. Then you might end up with cancer. Cos, you see, there's just no available evidence to conclude that using cell phones will NOT give you cancer. Therefore, because there's an alleged link, we need more study. And that means money, and that means you need to fork over some more money to some bureaucrats so they can pretend to do something about it and stuff.
Wednesday, June 01, 2011
Umi Southworth Murder Possibly Solved-Police To Soon Announce Arrest
UPDATE-To all the people who might read this post over the next few days and weeks, I strongly suggest you read the following update post-Questionable Timing In The Southworth Murder Arrest
I don't know any names of details yet, but Lexington Police have just announced they have made an arrest in the murder of Umi Southworth, the mother of teen singer Almira Fawn, and will be holding a press conference in roughly thirty minutes, or about twelve midnight. Southworth was murdered the 16th of June of last year. She was beaten to death and died of blunt force trauma to the head. Some might recall that I covered the case not too long after it happened last year.
My goal in covering the story was to guard against the rush to judgement against Umi's husband by many in the Lexington press. I conjectured it might have been the work of of the underworld denizens or similarly unsavory characters known to frequent the music business in which Almira and Uni were both steeped in.
I never mentioned it, but Umi was an Indonesian immigrant, though I never heard whether she was a religious Muslim, though I doubt it. There is a sizable Islamic community in the Lexington area, and some mosques, so I have also wondered about the potential there.
I guess I'll find out soon. Whatever happened, I just hope the family, especially Almira and her younger sister, can find closure and even maybe some degree of comfort in the apprehension of their mother's killer, assuming they have indeed got the guilty party-or parties.
UPDATE: Looks like I was wrong, they arrested the father. But they are playing games about the whole thing. First the Lexington Police Department announced there would be a midnight press conference pertaining to the arrest in the Umi Southworth murder. Then around twelve thirty AM they said the case was under seal and they couldn't release any information at that time. They did confirm that Donald Southworth had been arrested for murder, but they couldn't say whose murder he had been arrested in connection with. All very strange. Of course he was arrested for the murder of Umi (they had already announced the arrest was in connection with her case) so its a lot of bureaucratic and legal "i" dotting and "t" crossing going on, I guess.
I don't know any names of details yet, but Lexington Police have just announced they have made an arrest in the murder of Umi Southworth, the mother of teen singer Almira Fawn, and will be holding a press conference in roughly thirty minutes, or about twelve midnight. Southworth was murdered the 16th of June of last year. She was beaten to death and died of blunt force trauma to the head. Some might recall that I covered the case not too long after it happened last year.
My goal in covering the story was to guard against the rush to judgement against Umi's husband by many in the Lexington press. I conjectured it might have been the work of of the underworld denizens or similarly unsavory characters known to frequent the music business in which Almira and Uni were both steeped in.
I never mentioned it, but Umi was an Indonesian immigrant, though I never heard whether she was a religious Muslim, though I doubt it. There is a sizable Islamic community in the Lexington area, and some mosques, so I have also wondered about the potential there.
I guess I'll find out soon. Whatever happened, I just hope the family, especially Almira and her younger sister, can find closure and even maybe some degree of comfort in the apprehension of their mother's killer, assuming they have indeed got the guilty party-or parties.
UPDATE: Looks like I was wrong, they arrested the father. But they are playing games about the whole thing. First the Lexington Police Department announced there would be a midnight press conference pertaining to the arrest in the Umi Southworth murder. Then around twelve thirty AM they said the case was under seal and they couldn't release any information at that time. They did confirm that Donald Southworth had been arrested for murder, but they couldn't say whose murder he had been arrested in connection with. All very strange. Of course he was arrested for the murder of Umi (they had already announced the arrest was in connection with her case) so its a lot of bureaucratic and legal "i" dotting and "t" crossing going on, I guess.
The First Transgender High School Prom Queen
It happened at McFatter Technical High School in Miami, where 17 year-old Andrew-or, as "she" prefers to call "herself", Andii-beat out fourteen others at the school where she had been bullied and tormented for years. At the advice of her counselor, she ignored the demands that she not be allowed to run. It seems as though nobody was as surprised as she was when she was named Prom Queen.
Andrew/Andii gets all the support she needs at home, including from her father, who admits that many of his co-workers have questioned his devotion to his son, saying things like "Oh,you didn't beat him up?"
Far from beating him up, Andrew's father, who works for a private garbage collection company in Fort Lauderdale, brought Andrew a gown, shoes, and make-up for the big night, and says he views Andrew as a straight female, as does his wife and Andrew's mother.
“I’ve always loved him unconditionally,” said Oscar Viveros, who still uses male pronouns when talking about Andrew. “I’ve told my other kids, they have to support him. He thinks he’s a girl in a man’s body. In school, he hears this and that, but I’ve made sure in our house he’s free to act and do whatever makes him comfortable.”
"He doesn’t consider himself gay. He likes men. I understand that. He’s just in the wrong body,’’ said Viveros, who recalls a young Andrew wanting to try on Cinderella’s dress at Disney World.
“I’d tell him, ‘You’re a boy,’’’ Viveros said. “He’d try it on anyway. He was happy.”
Below is Andrew alongside the night's "Prom King", who is also, no surprise here, gay.
Andrew/Andii gets all the support she needs at home, including from her father, who admits that many of his co-workers have questioned his devotion to his son, saying things like "Oh,you didn't beat him up?"
Far from beating him up, Andrew's father, who works for a private garbage collection company in Fort Lauderdale, brought Andrew a gown, shoes, and make-up for the big night, and says he views Andrew as a straight female, as does his wife and Andrew's mother.
“I’ve always loved him unconditionally,” said Oscar Viveros, who still uses male pronouns when talking about Andrew. “I’ve told my other kids, they have to support him. He thinks he’s a girl in a man’s body. In school, he hears this and that, but I’ve made sure in our house he’s free to act and do whatever makes him comfortable.”
"He doesn’t consider himself gay. He likes men. I understand that. He’s just in the wrong body,’’ said Viveros, who recalls a young Andrew wanting to try on Cinderella’s dress at Disney World.
“I’d tell him, ‘You’re a boy,’’’ Viveros said. “He’d try it on anyway. He was happy.”
Below is Andrew alongside the night's "Prom King", who is also, no surprise here, gay.
More Joyous Tidings From The Religion Of Peace
A teenage Muslim girl, pictured below, was stoned to death by other Muslim teenagers, her battered body dumped in a forest in the Ukraine. Her crime? She entered a beauty contest, which her attackers insisted was "against Shariah".
But hey-I'm not prejudiced. I think Islam should be treated just the same as any other disease.
But hey-I'm not prejudiced. I think Islam should be treated just the same as any other disease.
Monday, May 30, 2011
The Dic-Pic Seen Round The World
Here is the penis pic sent out over Twitter by New York Democrat Congressman Anthony Weiner by way of a link to his yFrog account.
And here is the college student, Gennette Nicole Cordova, to whom he sent it.
Weiner is of course in denial, as is the young lady, one of a very few people who followed Weiner, and whom Weiner simultaneously followed on Twitter-along with a high school girl from Delaware and a porn star.
So what's going on here? I think Weiner sent the pic by way of DM (direct message) onTwitter, which is a private communication tool on the site. When she received it, it looks to me like she copied and pasted the DM onto a public tweet, and tweeted it off to her own specific followers, which would include Weiner, even going to the trouble of typing @RepWeiner on the tweet.
This is significant as, unless things have recently changed, the only way the @ appears next to your name on your Twitter timeline-or homepage-is if someone sends you a public tweet, or if they reply to one of your own public tweets.
Unfortunately, there was at least one person, probably the only person who followed both Weiner and the young woman in question. From the moment he saw the tweet, the fun and games began.
Gennelle furiously scrubbed not only her Twitter account, but all her other social networking accounts as well, including her FaceBook page. Even her by-line has been removed from The Horizon, the community college student newspaper she has worked for. Under the scenario I outlined, this could have been to prevent others from looking at her subsequent tweets as well as those of her mutual followers who would likewise have received the tweet with the link to the offending pic. Do note that as of this writing, none of Weiner's followers have stepped forward to comment as to whether they, too, received the dic-pic. Which is odd, considering that if it had been sent publicly by Weiner, tens of thousands of his followers would have received it as well as her. This makes it more likely that the recipients are limited to only her followers, probably a few hundred at most.
Weiner, in the meantime, has likewise scrubbed not only this but all his other pics from his yFrog account, while steadfastly claiming he is the victim of a hacker. Even if it were possible to hack into a Twitter account while the person who owns the account is actually on it (which I am told it is not) I would like to point out to those eager to cast aspersions on USAPatriot76 and even on Andrew Breitbart and other so-called #TCOT Bloggers that Weiner's Twitter account would be as likely, if not more likely, to be hacked by a fellow progressive or liberal Democrat as by a conservative.
Consider-
1. Weiner has been laying the groundwork to run for New York City Mayor for more than ten years now. Running for the NY Mayor's office will make you some bitter, determined enemies, mostly among your own party if you are a New York City Democrat.
2. The naturally combative Weiner was a supporter of Hillary Clinton during the 2008 primaries, and at one time got into such a heated argument with Obama supporter Ben Afleck that people in the vicinity considered stepping in between the two of them before it turned physical.
3. Weiner, a Jew and unabashed supporter of Israel, was so determined to prevent the Palestinian delegation from appearing at the UN, he made the statement that they should "take their little Palestinian terrorist bags back to where they came from". That is a pretty intense, provocative statement, especially coming from a liberal Democrat.
The point being that Weiner has probably as many determined enemies among the left as he does the right, so liberals should think carefully before they start casting aspersions and making accusations.
But of course, its all bullshit. Nobody hacked Weiner's account. It looks to me like he made the mistake of getting just a little too friendly with somebody that was lacking the maturity to keep their private communications private. He has only one person to blame for that, and his name is Anthony Weiner.
As for Ginger Lee, the porn star that Weiner is following, her loyalty is perhaps more touching. She considers receiving tweets from Weiner akin to receiving them from the Buddha. And the high school girl from Delaware? She also locked up her Twitter account, but since the initial shock wore off, she's back on. She insists that she didn't do anything wrong.
And here is the college student, Gennette Nicole Cordova, to whom he sent it.
Weiner is of course in denial, as is the young lady, one of a very few people who followed Weiner, and whom Weiner simultaneously followed on Twitter-along with a high school girl from Delaware and a porn star.
So what's going on here? I think Weiner sent the pic by way of DM (direct message) onTwitter, which is a private communication tool on the site. When she received it, it looks to me like she copied and pasted the DM onto a public tweet, and tweeted it off to her own specific followers, which would include Weiner, even going to the trouble of typing @RepWeiner on the tweet.
This is significant as, unless things have recently changed, the only way the @ appears next to your name on your Twitter timeline-or homepage-is if someone sends you a public tweet, or if they reply to one of your own public tweets.
Unfortunately, there was at least one person, probably the only person who followed both Weiner and the young woman in question. From the moment he saw the tweet, the fun and games began.
Gennelle furiously scrubbed not only her Twitter account, but all her other social networking accounts as well, including her FaceBook page. Even her by-line has been removed from The Horizon, the community college student newspaper she has worked for. Under the scenario I outlined, this could have been to prevent others from looking at her subsequent tweets as well as those of her mutual followers who would likewise have received the tweet with the link to the offending pic. Do note that as of this writing, none of Weiner's followers have stepped forward to comment as to whether they, too, received the dic-pic. Which is odd, considering that if it had been sent publicly by Weiner, tens of thousands of his followers would have received it as well as her. This makes it more likely that the recipients are limited to only her followers, probably a few hundred at most.
Weiner, in the meantime, has likewise scrubbed not only this but all his other pics from his yFrog account, while steadfastly claiming he is the victim of a hacker. Even if it were possible to hack into a Twitter account while the person who owns the account is actually on it (which I am told it is not) I would like to point out to those eager to cast aspersions on USAPatriot76 and even on Andrew Breitbart and other so-called #TCOT Bloggers that Weiner's Twitter account would be as likely, if not more likely, to be hacked by a fellow progressive or liberal Democrat as by a conservative.
Consider-
1. Weiner has been laying the groundwork to run for New York City Mayor for more than ten years now. Running for the NY Mayor's office will make you some bitter, determined enemies, mostly among your own party if you are a New York City Democrat.
2. The naturally combative Weiner was a supporter of Hillary Clinton during the 2008 primaries, and at one time got into such a heated argument with Obama supporter Ben Afleck that people in the vicinity considered stepping in between the two of them before it turned physical.
3. Weiner, a Jew and unabashed supporter of Israel, was so determined to prevent the Palestinian delegation from appearing at the UN, he made the statement that they should "take their little Palestinian terrorist bags back to where they came from". That is a pretty intense, provocative statement, especially coming from a liberal Democrat.
The point being that Weiner has probably as many determined enemies among the left as he does the right, so liberals should think carefully before they start casting aspersions and making accusations.
But of course, its all bullshit. Nobody hacked Weiner's account. It looks to me like he made the mistake of getting just a little too friendly with somebody that was lacking the maturity to keep their private communications private. He has only one person to blame for that, and his name is Anthony Weiner.
As for Ginger Lee, the porn star that Weiner is following, her loyalty is perhaps more touching. She considers receiving tweets from Weiner akin to receiving them from the Buddha. And the high school girl from Delaware? She also locked up her Twitter account, but since the initial shock wore off, she's back on. She insists that she didn't do anything wrong.
Saturday, May 28, 2011
Finally, At Long, Long Last-A Much Needed Federal Government Program To Deal With The Insidious Problem Of Childhood Fidgeting
And so far, according to Sundries Shack, this early learning initiative its only going to cost a mere 500 million dollars.
And really, what else can you do. If you are Kathleen Sibelius, Secretary of Health And Human Services, you know you have to tackle the problem at its source-those formative years starting from birth, which culminate in the manifestation of five year old children who fidget in kindergarten classes. Sometimes these unruly tykes just can't seem to sit still.
But thanks to the wisdom and munificence of the federal government, and by way of your tax dollars, there is hope. Your child can be reprogrammed.
Sundries Shack addresses the real problem here-
The telling word in the story is “problems”. To Sibelius and her fellow progressives, it’s a problem if 5-year-old children act like 5-year-old children. And in classic progressive fashion, her answer is not to alter our educational system to account for this but to “solve” the “problem” with an expansive and expensive government program to reprogram small children so they all act the way Kathleen Sibelius believes they should
I think I agree with Sundries proposed solution to the problem. Somebody needs a spanking.
We know this is folly, which is why we must pry their greedy and delusional hands from the levers of government power every chance we get. If we can’t manage it, we’re going to get more of these lunatic experiments and both we and our children will suffer.
Indeed, until discipline is restored in our school systems, they will continue to spiral out of control, until they are dominated by intellectually lazy and emotionally shiftless bullies who will continue to discredit our institutions of education at all grade levels. Our schools are already plagued with far too many of these immature and incoherent denizens of chaos who have turned our education system into a crumbling failure. By the way-I'm not talking about the students.
Our school system has degenerated to such an extent that, in some of the more extreme cases, by the time a student graduates, if he or she is lucky said student might have picked up some good coping and survival skills along the way to balance out the PTSD. Some of the more determined students might even learn to write their names.
But take heart. According to Kathleen Sibelius, its not really the fault of the school system. It's societies fault, for not taking charge of your fidgeting while you were in your formative years. But this 500 million dollar program should enable us to find ways to address this issue. Then again-
Here’s one last thing to ponder. How much of this $500 million will go toward actually educating children and how much will go into salaries for brand-new school administrators, high-dollar outside consultants, and more cash into the coffers of teachers’ unions?
A good question, but it doesn't really stop there. The real question should be, how long before the five hundred million dollars is increased to five billion dollars, and beyond?
If you ever wondered why there has been such an increase in known psycopaths and sociopaths over the course of the last four decades, you need look no further than America's school system. And its high time we actually did something about it.
This is not the time for fidgeting.
And really, what else can you do. If you are Kathleen Sibelius, Secretary of Health And Human Services, you know you have to tackle the problem at its source-those formative years starting from birth, which culminate in the manifestation of five year old children who fidget in kindergarten classes. Sometimes these unruly tykes just can't seem to sit still.
But thanks to the wisdom and munificence of the federal government, and by way of your tax dollars, there is hope. Your child can be reprogrammed.
Sundries Shack addresses the real problem here-
The telling word in the story is “problems”. To Sibelius and her fellow progressives, it’s a problem if 5-year-old children act like 5-year-old children. And in classic progressive fashion, her answer is not to alter our educational system to account for this but to “solve” the “problem” with an expansive and expensive government program to reprogram small children so they all act the way Kathleen Sibelius believes they should
I think I agree with Sundries proposed solution to the problem. Somebody needs a spanking.
We know this is folly, which is why we must pry their greedy and delusional hands from the levers of government power every chance we get. If we can’t manage it, we’re going to get more of these lunatic experiments and both we and our children will suffer.
Indeed, until discipline is restored in our school systems, they will continue to spiral out of control, until they are dominated by intellectually lazy and emotionally shiftless bullies who will continue to discredit our institutions of education at all grade levels. Our schools are already plagued with far too many of these immature and incoherent denizens of chaos who have turned our education system into a crumbling failure. By the way-I'm not talking about the students.
Our school system has degenerated to such an extent that, in some of the more extreme cases, by the time a student graduates, if he or she is lucky said student might have picked up some good coping and survival skills along the way to balance out the PTSD. Some of the more determined students might even learn to write their names.
But take heart. According to Kathleen Sibelius, its not really the fault of the school system. It's societies fault, for not taking charge of your fidgeting while you were in your formative years. But this 500 million dollar program should enable us to find ways to address this issue. Then again-
Here’s one last thing to ponder. How much of this $500 million will go toward actually educating children and how much will go into salaries for brand-new school administrators, high-dollar outside consultants, and more cash into the coffers of teachers’ unions?
A good question, but it doesn't really stop there. The real question should be, how long before the five hundred million dollars is increased to five billion dollars, and beyond?
If you ever wondered why there has been such an increase in known psycopaths and sociopaths over the course of the last four decades, you need look no further than America's school system. And its high time we actually did something about it.
This is not the time for fidgeting.
Friday, May 27, 2011
Objective Media, Or Media Objective?
Tigerhawk makes an apt comparison of the media treatment of Sarah Palin to former Senator and VP/Presidential candidate John Edwards, now facing federal prosecution for misuse of campaign funds.
Edwards got a complete pass from the media for years, which avoided reporting the details of his illicit affair for as long as they could, which was until the National Enquirer released the news. Even then, the liberal Democrat base screeched that it was a personal matter, until the news surfaced that Edwards was paying his mistress hush money with campaign funds funneled through an adviser, a man who falsely claimed to be the father of the illegitimate child fathered by Edwards in order to protect the then presidential candidate.
The story eventually made its way into the mainstream press, which pursued it mainly for the human interest of Edwards wife Elizabeth going through this humiliation while simultaneously battling the breast cancer that eventually killed her.
Yet, even at this, the press was remarkably restrained and incredibly objective in reporting these details, and certainly did not dwell on them for an inordinate amount of time.
And this brings us to Tigerhawk's comparison to the Palin coverage.
I have long thought that the media's disparate treatment of John Edwards and Sarah Palin was the most powerful evidence of structural bias toward the left. Edwards was having an affair and the media turned a blind eye. Palin was pregnant by her husband, and the media accused her of faking it and swarmed Alaska with investigators. Edwards had no useful experience -- he was a trial lawyer, which is training for essentially nothing important, and a one-term Senator -- and nobody in the press questioned his qualifications. However one might weigh Palin's resume, she was no less experienced than Edwards (that would be difficult) and the press hammered her constantly for it. Edwards was vain as can be and the press did not even suggest that he was a narcissist (which he obviously is). Palin bought some better looking clothes for campaigning and the whole press pool jumped on it. Edwards could not make a speech without reminding us he was the son of a "mill worker" who had gotten rich and the media ate it up as evidence of humble beginnings. The Palins actually built a successful small business and the media mocked it as a stunt. One could go on.
The disparate treatment of Edwards and Palin is a warning to all Republicans, or at least Republican women -- the non-Fox mainstream media will pretty much do anything it can to destroy you.
Truer words were never spoken. In fact, its so obvious the media doesn't really even try to deny it anymore. Its almost as if they feel if you aren't with them, they don't give a damn what you think. That's the sign of a media that's brought and paid for. And that begs the question, who's writing the checks.
Edwards got a complete pass from the media for years, which avoided reporting the details of his illicit affair for as long as they could, which was until the National Enquirer released the news. Even then, the liberal Democrat base screeched that it was a personal matter, until the news surfaced that Edwards was paying his mistress hush money with campaign funds funneled through an adviser, a man who falsely claimed to be the father of the illegitimate child fathered by Edwards in order to protect the then presidential candidate.
The story eventually made its way into the mainstream press, which pursued it mainly for the human interest of Edwards wife Elizabeth going through this humiliation while simultaneously battling the breast cancer that eventually killed her.
Yet, even at this, the press was remarkably restrained and incredibly objective in reporting these details, and certainly did not dwell on them for an inordinate amount of time.
And this brings us to Tigerhawk's comparison to the Palin coverage.
I have long thought that the media's disparate treatment of John Edwards and Sarah Palin was the most powerful evidence of structural bias toward the left. Edwards was having an affair and the media turned a blind eye. Palin was pregnant by her husband, and the media accused her of faking it and swarmed Alaska with investigators. Edwards had no useful experience -- he was a trial lawyer, which is training for essentially nothing important, and a one-term Senator -- and nobody in the press questioned his qualifications. However one might weigh Palin's resume, she was no less experienced than Edwards (that would be difficult) and the press hammered her constantly for it. Edwards was vain as can be and the press did not even suggest that he was a narcissist (which he obviously is). Palin bought some better looking clothes for campaigning and the whole press pool jumped on it. Edwards could not make a speech without reminding us he was the son of a "mill worker" who had gotten rich and the media ate it up as evidence of humble beginnings. The Palins actually built a successful small business and the media mocked it as a stunt. One could go on.
The disparate treatment of Edwards and Palin is a warning to all Republicans, or at least Republican women -- the non-Fox mainstream media will pretty much do anything it can to destroy you.
Truer words were never spoken. In fact, its so obvious the media doesn't really even try to deny it anymore. Its almost as if they feel if you aren't with them, they don't give a damn what you think. That's the sign of a media that's brought and paid for. And that begs the question, who's writing the checks.
China, India, And Pakistan-The Possible Road To A Nuclear Rumble
Watch this leftist loon reading the news of China's defense of Pakistan and promises of support in the wake of the Bin Laden killing. Even though he's British, he hopes this will all somehow lead to the destruction of Britain, and the US, by way of nuclear attack. He's in love with somebody according to his YouTube homepage, but evidently is having a hard time convincing the girl in question he's the right man for the job. I'm reasonably certain this guy has never been laid, which would explain a lot. But in the meantime, as far as he's concerned, the US and Britain are responsible for all the world's ills.
Ironically, this is the kind of person who is most responsible for the downward spiral of both Britain and the US, but he and his ilk insist on projecting their suicidal impulses onto the rest of us in expiation of their obvious self-loathing. In this case, an unhinged man displays his lunatic evil for all the world to see.
He is referring of course to the recent announcement by China than any further encroachment on Pakistani soil, by the US or by anyone, would be interpreted as an assault on China itself.
In the meantime, China has been steadily strengthening its relationship with Pakistan, in terms of trade, mutual defense and international cooperation, including against India, as explained in the post from the Times of India, linked above-
In its zeal to protect Pakistani rulers, China even indicated it would not pressurize Pakistan to hand over the perpetuators of the Mumbai terrorist attack to India.
The most ominous sign therefore may not be how this applies to Sino-American relations, but to Chinese relations with bordering India, with whom both China and ally Pakistan have had a long and tumultuous relationship which has numerous times led to open warfare.
Now China has extra cause for concern, in that by any objective measurement the economy of India has substantially outgrown the economy of China.
As if it were not bad enough that they are therefore trade rivals, there is also the old border and territorial disputes, which also involves Pakistan to some degree, and which are significant, as they involve more than just a little bit of territory.
Then there is the recent acquisition by China of Gwadar, a Pakistani port on the Indian Ocean. The following paragraph sums it up-
Pakistan's Defence Minister Ahmad Mukhtar has said China is to take over operation of the strategically positioned port of Gwadar. The announcement has yet to be confirmed by Beijing, but if true it will see yet another addition to China's 'String of Pearls', a group of Indian Ocean ports that China has been developing, ostensibly for commercial use, but which could also have military purposes. CFW believes that a Chinese naval presence in Gwadar would greatly enhance Beijing's ability to project power into the Persian Gulf for the first time in the modern era, and would allow it to guard the western part of its crucial energy supply chain.
Note that this has strategic and military as well as commercial trade implications.
Bear in mind that these three countries together comprise almost one third of the population of the world, they are all three nuclear powers, and one is a sworn enemy of the other two, who are now seemingly joined at the hip in mutual cooperation on trade and defense issues.
Yet, the gravity of the situation seems to have escaped the attention of our government, for the most part. But it is an unfortunate truth that the US position has become so weakened over the years that the Chinese leadership knows they can do this with impunity, while publicly threatening our elected leaders with what can only be interpreted as a swift and strong response should we ever again deign to violate the sovereignty, as they see it, of Pakistani territory.
That means we are no longer evidently allowed to operate predator drones in the northwest territories without the express permission of the Pakistani authorities we have also supported financially, lest any forget, to the tune of billions of dollars yearly.
But more importantly, perhaps, is the implications pertaining to the long-running border disputes between the three nations. India will feel like its in a bind and must now negotiate from a weakened position.
Or at least that's what China hopes. It might not work out that way. I hope it doesn't. I hope the Indians stand firm and doesn't cave in to any demands or provocations, from either the Chinese, the Pakistanis, or both.
But I am certain the Chinese are right about one thing, at least-the Obama Administration will be less than useless to India, regardless of what happens.
In a sense, the man in the video is right about America and Britain's responsibility for all that's wrong with the world. Just not in the way he thinks he is.
Ironically, this is the kind of person who is most responsible for the downward spiral of both Britain and the US, but he and his ilk insist on projecting their suicidal impulses onto the rest of us in expiation of their obvious self-loathing. In this case, an unhinged man displays his lunatic evil for all the world to see.
He is referring of course to the recent announcement by China than any further encroachment on Pakistani soil, by the US or by anyone, would be interpreted as an assault on China itself.
In the meantime, China has been steadily strengthening its relationship with Pakistan, in terms of trade, mutual defense and international cooperation, including against India, as explained in the post from the Times of India, linked above-
In its zeal to protect Pakistani rulers, China even indicated it would not pressurize Pakistan to hand over the perpetuators of the Mumbai terrorist attack to India.
The most ominous sign therefore may not be how this applies to Sino-American relations, but to Chinese relations with bordering India, with whom both China and ally Pakistan have had a long and tumultuous relationship which has numerous times led to open warfare.
Now China has extra cause for concern, in that by any objective measurement the economy of India has substantially outgrown the economy of China.
As if it were not bad enough that they are therefore trade rivals, there is also the old border and territorial disputes, which also involves Pakistan to some degree, and which are significant, as they involve more than just a little bit of territory.
Then there is the recent acquisition by China of Gwadar, a Pakistani port on the Indian Ocean. The following paragraph sums it up-
Pakistan's Defence Minister Ahmad Mukhtar has said China is to take over operation of the strategically positioned port of Gwadar. The announcement has yet to be confirmed by Beijing, but if true it will see yet another addition to China's 'String of Pearls', a group of Indian Ocean ports that China has been developing, ostensibly for commercial use, but which could also have military purposes. CFW believes that a Chinese naval presence in Gwadar would greatly enhance Beijing's ability to project power into the Persian Gulf for the first time in the modern era, and would allow it to guard the western part of its crucial energy supply chain.
Note that this has strategic and military as well as commercial trade implications.
Bear in mind that these three countries together comprise almost one third of the population of the world, they are all three nuclear powers, and one is a sworn enemy of the other two, who are now seemingly joined at the hip in mutual cooperation on trade and defense issues.
Yet, the gravity of the situation seems to have escaped the attention of our government, for the most part. But it is an unfortunate truth that the US position has become so weakened over the years that the Chinese leadership knows they can do this with impunity, while publicly threatening our elected leaders with what can only be interpreted as a swift and strong response should we ever again deign to violate the sovereignty, as they see it, of Pakistani territory.
That means we are no longer evidently allowed to operate predator drones in the northwest territories without the express permission of the Pakistani authorities we have also supported financially, lest any forget, to the tune of billions of dollars yearly.
But more importantly, perhaps, is the implications pertaining to the long-running border disputes between the three nations. India will feel like its in a bind and must now negotiate from a weakened position.
Or at least that's what China hopes. It might not work out that way. I hope it doesn't. I hope the Indians stand firm and doesn't cave in to any demands or provocations, from either the Chinese, the Pakistanis, or both.
But I am certain the Chinese are right about one thing, at least-the Obama Administration will be less than useless to India, regardless of what happens.
In a sense, the man in the video is right about America and Britain's responsibility for all that's wrong with the world. Just not in the way he thinks he is.
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Palin Wins Ace Of Spades HQ Straw Poll-Ron Paul Excluded From Poll
Despite the fact that she hasn't declared yet, Sarah Palin has not only won Ace's Straw Poll, but she did so quite handily, at 34.88% of the vote coming in over ten points ahead of her closest competitor, Herman Cain, who polled a respectable 26.08%. In third place was former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, with 23.5%.
Everyone else was left in the dust, including Mitt Romney, who polled a mere 4.56%, coming in fifth behind Minnesota House of Representatives Member Michelle Bachman with 6.29% in fourth place.
In sixth place, curiously enough, was former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson at 2%, polling ahead of former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum at 1.5%.
Coming in with less than one percent of the total was former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman and, coming in dead last-Newt Gingrich, who might as well have hung it up before he ever got around to shooting himself in the foot while simultaneously cramming it in his mouth.
Now admittedly this is not a scientific poll, but I think its pretty accurate for a number of reasons. For one thing, Ace has a wide readership among conservatives and Republicans, and his site is in fact probably a bell-weather insofar as current Republican divisions and sentiment goes.
The second thing that makes this poll likely a credible reflection of GOP voter mood is that, although you can vote as often as you want in the poll, only the first vote is included in the final results.
Finally, the most fun part of the poll is the fact that the Paul-bots were excluded from skewing the results of this poll, as they have been so wont to do in so many others, in favor of their Messiah, Texas House of Representatives member Ron Paul.
Despair not, however, as if Paul was included and his numbers were an accurate reflection of his actual support, he would not move the numbers beyond what might well be classified (if this were a scientific poll) as the poll's margin of error.
And its always fun to make the Paul-bots fume and wack out, just for the comic relief, which is something we can all sometimes use.
In the meantime, since its starting to look more likely that Palin is getting ready to run, one can only wonder how her number will look when she does declare.
Everyone else was left in the dust, including Mitt Romney, who polled a mere 4.56%, coming in fifth behind Minnesota House of Representatives Member Michelle Bachman with 6.29% in fourth place.
In sixth place, curiously enough, was former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson at 2%, polling ahead of former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum at 1.5%.
Coming in with less than one percent of the total was former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman and, coming in dead last-Newt Gingrich, who might as well have hung it up before he ever got around to shooting himself in the foot while simultaneously cramming it in his mouth.
Now admittedly this is not a scientific poll, but I think its pretty accurate for a number of reasons. For one thing, Ace has a wide readership among conservatives and Republicans, and his site is in fact probably a bell-weather insofar as current Republican divisions and sentiment goes.
The second thing that makes this poll likely a credible reflection of GOP voter mood is that, although you can vote as often as you want in the poll, only the first vote is included in the final results.
Finally, the most fun part of the poll is the fact that the Paul-bots were excluded from skewing the results of this poll, as they have been so wont to do in so many others, in favor of their Messiah, Texas House of Representatives member Ron Paul.
Despair not, however, as if Paul was included and his numbers were an accurate reflection of his actual support, he would not move the numbers beyond what might well be classified (if this were a scientific poll) as the poll's margin of error.
And its always fun to make the Paul-bots fume and wack out, just for the comic relief, which is something we can all sometimes use.
In the meantime, since its starting to look more likely that Palin is getting ready to run, one can only wonder how her number will look when she does declare.
Obama's Israel Problem, And Why The Progressive Solution Can Only Lead To Failure
A lot has been made out of Obama's speech calling for Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, with the pre-1967 borders as a starting point for negotiations. Its hard to make sense out of Obama's statements, but I think Netanyahu gets it. And he's made it crystal clear that he's not having any of it. And for his efforts at standing strong for his nation while trying to very diplomatically help Obama save face, he is now the newest political rock star, possibly the biggest since Clinton, or maybe even Obama himself. His reception first at AIPAC, followed by an appearance before a joint session of Congress, was a triumphal appearance by any standard.
That has to be a bitter pill for Obama to swallow, but if you saw the video of the photo-op White House press briefing with him and Bibi, it was obvious that Netanyahu had Obama on the verge of tears. It was an embarrassment for Obama, the President who first entered the White House under the aura of a cult of personality that was unprecedented in American politics, to be literally scolded by a foreign head of a dependent allied nation, right in the White House, all covered on live media.
So how could Obama overstep his bounds to such an extent? Did he honestly think killing Osama Bin Laden bought him that much political currency? Or is he just an incompetent fool.
The answer is, both reasons are true, but it goes beyond that and strikes at the core of the Progressive's, and liberal Democrats, views of the nation of Israel.
Remember, Israel is first and foremost a democracy, but it is also by definition a Jewish state. According to leftist definition, it is therefore by virtue of its Jewish character, a racist state. But it goes beyond that. By occupying land that it took in the 1967 war, it is also by definition, according to progressive ideology, an apartheid state.
That is the real sticking point, and further goes a long way towards explaining the unfathomable degree of support the Democratic Party yet commands among the American Jewish population, most of whom are progressives.
So when you hear a progressive like Obama, Kerry, or Clinton talk about protecting Israel, guaranteeing its security, and defending its right to exist, they aren't so much lying as they are blinded to and by their own ideological hang-ups.
Ask any non-politician progressive how they feel about the issue and they will tell you straight up, they should return to the pre-1967 borders, but even more importantly, the Israelis should agree to the "Right of Return", meaning the right of the sons, grandsons, and great-grandsons of Palestinians exiles from the current state of Israel, to return to the nation they hold was unfairly taken from them.
Only then, they argue, can there be peace. They know of course that this would be a demographic time bomb, but far from being a problem, they see this as the solution. Remember, to them Israel is a racist state. By engendering a majority Arab population at some point in the future, the twin problems of racist policy and especially apartheid will come to an end, and with them, any need for further agitation.
Once this is all settled, then the soon to be minority Jewish population will, they are sure, live in peace with their Arab majority overlords.
It's called magical thinking, which is about the best way you can describe leftist ideology. Perhaps a more accurate term for it would be insanity manifest in the form of mental rot and moral equivalency. The Palestinians, you see, are murderous only because they have had this position thrust upon them. Give them what they, and progressives, feel is their just compensation for years of what they insist is a grave, multi-generational imposed injustice, and they will no longer feel the need to act out in savage, murderous fashion.
In other words, its an extension of the same kind of failed, progressive hug-a-thug policies that encourage you to think that criminals only commit crimes due to negative societal influences, and that with a few years of enforced, intense therapy, most of them can be totally reformed, and go on to lead normal, well-adjusted lives as good citizens and contributors to society. They just need a second chance, although admittedly in some extreme cases, they might need a third or a fourth chance. But we need to help them because, by golly, its just the right thing to do.
Progressives, liberal Democrats, and all of their ideological brethren, just don't want to admit, at least not openly, that there are some people that are just beyond reform or redemption. There are a great many, unfortunately, with whom you can and should only deal with in the harshest possible terms. When you find yourself put in that position, then you have no legitimate choice other than to act with firmness and sometimes without mercy. You must do so for the sake of you, your family,friends, and community. Sometimes it becomes necessary even for the overall well-being of any civilized society, to destroy them utterly.
That has to be a bitter pill for Obama to swallow, but if you saw the video of the photo-op White House press briefing with him and Bibi, it was obvious that Netanyahu had Obama on the verge of tears. It was an embarrassment for Obama, the President who first entered the White House under the aura of a cult of personality that was unprecedented in American politics, to be literally scolded by a foreign head of a dependent allied nation, right in the White House, all covered on live media.
So how could Obama overstep his bounds to such an extent? Did he honestly think killing Osama Bin Laden bought him that much political currency? Or is he just an incompetent fool.
The answer is, both reasons are true, but it goes beyond that and strikes at the core of the Progressive's, and liberal Democrats, views of the nation of Israel.
Remember, Israel is first and foremost a democracy, but it is also by definition a Jewish state. According to leftist definition, it is therefore by virtue of its Jewish character, a racist state. But it goes beyond that. By occupying land that it took in the 1967 war, it is also by definition, according to progressive ideology, an apartheid state.
That is the real sticking point, and further goes a long way towards explaining the unfathomable degree of support the Democratic Party yet commands among the American Jewish population, most of whom are progressives.
So when you hear a progressive like Obama, Kerry, or Clinton talk about protecting Israel, guaranteeing its security, and defending its right to exist, they aren't so much lying as they are blinded to and by their own ideological hang-ups.
Ask any non-politician progressive how they feel about the issue and they will tell you straight up, they should return to the pre-1967 borders, but even more importantly, the Israelis should agree to the "Right of Return", meaning the right of the sons, grandsons, and great-grandsons of Palestinians exiles from the current state of Israel, to return to the nation they hold was unfairly taken from them.
Only then, they argue, can there be peace. They know of course that this would be a demographic time bomb, but far from being a problem, they see this as the solution. Remember, to them Israel is a racist state. By engendering a majority Arab population at some point in the future, the twin problems of racist policy and especially apartheid will come to an end, and with them, any need for further agitation.
Once this is all settled, then the soon to be minority Jewish population will, they are sure, live in peace with their Arab majority overlords.
It's called magical thinking, which is about the best way you can describe leftist ideology. Perhaps a more accurate term for it would be insanity manifest in the form of mental rot and moral equivalency. The Palestinians, you see, are murderous only because they have had this position thrust upon them. Give them what they, and progressives, feel is their just compensation for years of what they insist is a grave, multi-generational imposed injustice, and they will no longer feel the need to act out in savage, murderous fashion.
In other words, its an extension of the same kind of failed, progressive hug-a-thug policies that encourage you to think that criminals only commit crimes due to negative societal influences, and that with a few years of enforced, intense therapy, most of them can be totally reformed, and go on to lead normal, well-adjusted lives as good citizens and contributors to society. They just need a second chance, although admittedly in some extreme cases, they might need a third or a fourth chance. But we need to help them because, by golly, its just the right thing to do.
Progressives, liberal Democrats, and all of their ideological brethren, just don't want to admit, at least not openly, that there are some people that are just beyond reform or redemption. There are a great many, unfortunately, with whom you can and should only deal with in the harshest possible terms. When you find yourself put in that position, then you have no legitimate choice other than to act with firmness and sometimes without mercy. You must do so for the sake of you, your family,friends, and community. Sometimes it becomes necessary even for the overall well-being of any civilized society, to destroy them utterly.
Monday, May 23, 2011
Some Muslims Are Glad The Jews Are In Israel
You don't believe me? . There's probably a lot more of them than you might think. The following video is proof that, yes, they are out there.
H/T Sister Toldjah
H/T Sister Toldjah
Sunday, May 22, 2011
The Progressive Media Cult Of Obama Chastises A Heretic
Its an open secret within the media, and without, that if they want to stay in the good graces of the Obama Administration, they have to toe the orthodox Democratic Party line. If they don't they could find themselves left out of the loop. Banned, like The Boston Herald, from covering the White House, excluded from press briefings or any other official White House functions.
Since this threat hangs heavy over the the editorial boards of the nations media organizations, and has not an insignificant effect on even hard news coverage, then it only stands to reason that a compliant media outlet would police its individual members. If one were to stray too far from the herd, he might well find himself in the unenviable position of editorial cartoonist Ted Rall. He could find his work facing constant, on-going rejections.
Rall is open about his problem with the many left-of-center, as he calls them, magazines and newspapers who, having once eagerly accepted his work during the Bush years, now reject it out of hand, due to his criticisms of Obama. He has even shared some of his responses, some of which are as follows-
A sample of recent rejections, each from editors at different left-of-center media outlets:
· “I am familiar with and enjoy your cartoons. However the readers of our site would not be comfortable with your (admittedly on point) criticism of Obama.”
· “Don’t be such a hater on O and we could use your stuff. Can’t you focus more on the GOP?”
· “Our first African-American president deserves a chance to clean up Bush’s mess without being attacked by us.”
I have many more like that.
So there you have it. Admittedly, what he calls "left-of-center" are such progressives magazines as "The Nation" and "Mother Jones", but it doesn't take much of a stretch to apply it to the more mainstream media, both print and broadcast. In fact, the atmosphere has been so poisoned with it you could cut it with a knife.
And remember, Rall is basically a free-lancer, although his cartoons are syndicated in many papers. Imagine what it must be like for a relatively unknown young journalist struggling to make a name for himself.
You are always conscious as to who and what provides the bread and butter.
Saturday, May 21, 2011
Another Media Jackass Fellates Obama, But This Time Swallows Too Much Wad And Chokes
From Newsbusters-
Watch David Gregory, moderator of NBC's Meet The Press, make a total jackass out of himself on MSNBC's Morning Joe. First he says Obama's speech-about Israel and how its pre-1967 borders is the correct starting point for any future Israeli-Palestinian negotiations-enjoyed widespread agreement and support in Israel. But when questioned about this, he stammers and can't come up with one single name. Here's how it went down, courtesy of Ace of Spades HQ-
DAVID GREGORY, �MEET THE PRESS� HOST: I just want to make a point here. Joe, I disagree with you. This is not just the view of the White House in terms of what they think Israel ought to accept. This also reflects prominent views within Israel that this speech was actually good news for the Israeli government for some of the points that have already been laid out here.
...
JOE SCARBOROUGH, HOST: Obviously, we talked about earlier, on the minds of a lot of people inside the White House and the state department is the U.N. vote coming up this fall, David, and this is seen as leverage obviously for that. We�ve talked about that. But you said this is also seen as good news for some in Israel. What major Israeli public figures have come out supporting the President's speech?
GREGORY: Well, I (stammers), I don't think there have been major public figures that have, but some of the commentary that�s coming out of (stammers) the commentary in the press there and others who are looking at the situation are, are recognizing that some of these factors diplomatically are actually positive for Netanyahu.
See, when these motherfuckers tell you something, you're supposed to be stupid enough to just take their word for it. But if somebody, in this case program host Joe Scarborough, calls them on it, they can't deal with the contradiction. That's because in the case of Gregory, and plenty of others of his ilk, they are so arrogant it would never occur to them to be prepared in the eventuality somebody calls bullshit. This is especially true in the case of fellow journalist Scarborough, who I have to admit much of the time is about as big an asshat as Gregory. This isn't so much about Scarborough being a good, honest journalist as it is about him being off his game to the point he went off script.
Of course, to those of us who make the effort to pay attention, this comes as no surprise and is almost not really noteworthy. It's just too bad it happened on MSNBC, whose viewership doesn't pay attention, and more to the point, doesn't care. If it happened on Meet The Press, now that would have been a noteworthy embarrassment to Gregory's career as Democrat ass-kisser, which yes, is about what it amounts to.
Every time David Gregory is around Barak Obama, he should seriously have his stomach pumped afterwards. You can catch a disease doing that, especially if you have ulcers.
H/T The Other McCain
Watch David Gregory, moderator of NBC's Meet The Press, make a total jackass out of himself on MSNBC's Morning Joe. First he says Obama's speech-about Israel and how its pre-1967 borders is the correct starting point for any future Israeli-Palestinian negotiations-enjoyed widespread agreement and support in Israel. But when questioned about this, he stammers and can't come up with one single name. Here's how it went down, courtesy of Ace of Spades HQ-
DAVID GREGORY, �MEET THE PRESS� HOST: I just want to make a point here. Joe, I disagree with you. This is not just the view of the White House in terms of what they think Israel ought to accept. This also reflects prominent views within Israel that this speech was actually good news for the Israeli government for some of the points that have already been laid out here.
...
JOE SCARBOROUGH, HOST: Obviously, we talked about earlier, on the minds of a lot of people inside the White House and the state department is the U.N. vote coming up this fall, David, and this is seen as leverage obviously for that. We�ve talked about that. But you said this is also seen as good news for some in Israel. What major Israeli public figures have come out supporting the President's speech?
GREGORY: Well, I (stammers), I don't think there have been major public figures that have, but some of the commentary that�s coming out of (stammers) the commentary in the press there and others who are looking at the situation are, are recognizing that some of these factors diplomatically are actually positive for Netanyahu.
See, when these motherfuckers tell you something, you're supposed to be stupid enough to just take their word for it. But if somebody, in this case program host Joe Scarborough, calls them on it, they can't deal with the contradiction. That's because in the case of Gregory, and plenty of others of his ilk, they are so arrogant it would never occur to them to be prepared in the eventuality somebody calls bullshit. This is especially true in the case of fellow journalist Scarborough, who I have to admit much of the time is about as big an asshat as Gregory. This isn't so much about Scarborough being a good, honest journalist as it is about him being off his game to the point he went off script.
Of course, to those of us who make the effort to pay attention, this comes as no surprise and is almost not really noteworthy. It's just too bad it happened on MSNBC, whose viewership doesn't pay attention, and more to the point, doesn't care. If it happened on Meet The Press, now that would have been a noteworthy embarrassment to Gregory's career as Democrat ass-kisser, which yes, is about what it amounts to.
Every time David Gregory is around Barak Obama, he should seriously have his stomach pumped afterwards. You can catch a disease doing that, especially if you have ulcers.
H/T The Other McCain
Friday, May 20, 2011
RIP Macho Man
Bullshit or not, Macho Man Randy Savage was arguably the most entertaining professional wrestler of all. Dead now at 51, from an auto accident in Florida. I guess those fucking Slim Jims are only good for so much.
Thursday, May 19, 2011
Obama To Redistribute American Wealth To The Muslim World As Creeping Shariah Infiltrates The US Executive Branch
Creeping Shariah is gaining yet another foothold, in the US Executive branch, particularly the Justice and Homeland Security Departments. No longer can federal investigators enter a Muslim home to question a Muslim wife outside the presence of her husband, while an Arab mosque will now be, for all intents and purposes, the equivalent of an embassy. In order to insure that all federal officers are properly trained, a training video has been made to help our beleaguered officers conduct themselves properly-
“The First Three to Five Seconds: Arab and Muslim Cultural Awareness for Law Enforcement” is an outrageous example of the U.S. government appeasing the very worst elements of Islam, even at the expense of our own laws and values. This training film not only instructs law enforcement officers to obey Sharia gender rules when conducting investigations, it’s also a flagrant piece of pro-Islamic propaganda that presents Muslim gender discrimination as proof of Islam’s “strong connection to God.”
“The First Three to Five Seconds” was initially developed by the Department of Justice, and it’s now used by both the DOJ and the Department of Homeland Security to train all of their law enforcement personnel. “The First Three to Five Seconds” is described on the DHS website as a film that “introduces law enforcement officers to basic principles of the Arab American and Muslim American cultures.” However, the DHS description hardly does this instructional film justice.
In the closing credits of the following film, one of the organizations thanked for its assistance in the making of the film is the Dar al-Hijrah Islamic Center, the Hamas-connected mosque at which current al-Qaeda commander Anwar al-Awlaki served as Imam. You can also view the film at the Department of Homeland Security website, where you will be asked to fill out a form after viewing the video.
In the meantime President Barak Obama, in a speech due sometime today, Thursday May 19th, 2011, will announce a multi-billion dollar aid package intended to primarily benefit the nations of Egypt and Tunisia.
The package will consist of one billion dollars in debt relief and another billion in loans, with several billion more to be funneled through the World Bank. It is intended to promote jobs for Muslim youth, and to push for democratic reforms. Obama hopes this will increase America's prestige abroad, particularly in the Muslim world.
Of course, once the spigot is turned on, it will be next to impossible to turn it off, or for that matter to even slow it down. It will be expected to continue from now on, until the end of time, i.e., when the US economy completely collapses.
You can also expect an increase in the uptick of Muslim immigrants to the US. And of course, all of us will as always be expected to learn to be sensitive toraghead Muslim sensitivities.
“The First Three to Five Seconds: Arab and Muslim Cultural Awareness for Law Enforcement” is an outrageous example of the U.S. government appeasing the very worst elements of Islam, even at the expense of our own laws and values. This training film not only instructs law enforcement officers to obey Sharia gender rules when conducting investigations, it’s also a flagrant piece of pro-Islamic propaganda that presents Muslim gender discrimination as proof of Islam’s “strong connection to God.”
“The First Three to Five Seconds” was initially developed by the Department of Justice, and it’s now used by both the DOJ and the Department of Homeland Security to train all of their law enforcement personnel. “The First Three to Five Seconds” is described on the DHS website as a film that “introduces law enforcement officers to basic principles of the Arab American and Muslim American cultures.” However, the DHS description hardly does this instructional film justice.
In the closing credits of the following film, one of the organizations thanked for its assistance in the making of the film is the Dar al-Hijrah Islamic Center, the Hamas-connected mosque at which current al-Qaeda commander Anwar al-Awlaki served as Imam. You can also view the film at the Department of Homeland Security website, where you will be asked to fill out a form after viewing the video.
In the meantime President Barak Obama, in a speech due sometime today, Thursday May 19th, 2011, will announce a multi-billion dollar aid package intended to primarily benefit the nations of Egypt and Tunisia.
The package will consist of one billion dollars in debt relief and another billion in loans, with several billion more to be funneled through the World Bank. It is intended to promote jobs for Muslim youth, and to push for democratic reforms. Obama hopes this will increase America's prestige abroad, particularly in the Muslim world.
Of course, once the spigot is turned on, it will be next to impossible to turn it off, or for that matter to even slow it down. It will be expected to continue from now on, until the end of time, i.e., when the US economy completely collapses.
You can also expect an increase in the uptick of Muslim immigrants to the US. And of course, all of us will as always be expected to learn to be sensitive to
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Necrophilia-Now It's Halal
That means it acceptable for an Islamic man to have sex with the corpse of his dead wife. It's also acceptable, provided it's possible, for an Islamic woman to have sex with the corpse of her dead husband.
But hey, don't take my word for it, take the word of Sheikh Zamzari Abdelbari, an Islamic scholar and Imam from Morocco. According to him, the marriage bonds are not severed by death. That is because the Koran explicitly states that a man and his wife-wives where applicable-will be together in paradise after both have died. Therefore, they are still married, even during that time when one might be separate from the other.
Now, granted, it is disgusting, he concedes, and should be avoided-but there it is. It is halal, and thus acceptable. And not to put too fine a point on the matter, but he didn't say all this in the course of a casual conversation over some hookah at a local Casablanca juice bar. No, this declaration comes from the imam in the form of a a fatwa.
But naw, we shouldn't worry that these people might take the words of the Koran too literally, or maybe completely out of context, should we now?
But hey, don't take my word for it, take the word of Sheikh Zamzari Abdelbari, an Islamic scholar and Imam from Morocco. According to him, the marriage bonds are not severed by death. That is because the Koran explicitly states that a man and his wife-wives where applicable-will be together in paradise after both have died. Therefore, they are still married, even during that time when one might be separate from the other.
Now, granted, it is disgusting, he concedes, and should be avoided-but there it is. It is halal, and thus acceptable. And not to put too fine a point on the matter, but he didn't say all this in the course of a casual conversation over some hookah at a local Casablanca juice bar. No, this declaration comes from the imam in the form of a a fatwa.
But naw, we shouldn't worry that these people might take the words of the Koran too literally, or maybe completely out of context, should we now?
Pima County's Democrat Sheriff Dupnik Strikes Again
Remember the shooting of Gabrielle Giffords by Jarod Loughner, and how Sheriff Dupnik blamed it on conservative political rhetoric? Then it turned out that he dropped the ball with the troubled Loughner, whose mother was a county employee and colleague of the sheriff. I went so far as to propose that Dupnik might even have been tacitly involved in the shooting in a move to replace Giffords, a Blue Dog Democrat, with a more progressive House Representative with whom he might exercise more influence.
Admittedly, that was more a matter of spit and vinegar on my part, although I did think the theory had at least some merit. Now, after what recently happened just earlier this month, I am more convinced than ever that Dupnik is one evil motherfucker.
A Pima County Swat team, on the 5th of May, acting on what I have to suspect were trumped up charges of drug trafficking, attacked the home of Jose Guerena-a former Marine, a veteran with no criminal record. They went in with guns blazing. By the time it was over Guerena, their targeted victim, was dead, shot multiple times.
According to Guerena's wife, the Pima County Sheriff's charges are without merit, but the SWAT team removed what they alleged was "evidence" from the home, including a computer.
Dupnik recently survived a recall effort in Pima County, and I have to wonder if this might have been an attempt to stage a warning to his enemies-"don't fuck with me". It might also be a way to make him look tough on Latino drug gangs. The problem there is, while Guerena was Latino there is no evidence he was ever involved with any Latino gangs, or for that matter, drugs of any kind. No, he appears to have been nothing more nor less than a hard working husband and father of two who never knew why he was being targeted by the Pima County fascists that pass for a Sheriff's Department.
Or maybe he did. Maybe somebody at the Department had it in for him. Maybe it was personal. Or maybe it was professional. And maybe, just maybe, that person was Dupnik.
It also bears noting that none of the usual leftist suspects, including the Three Sonorans, are raising a ruckus about this, despite the fact that here is a Latino murdered by an Arizona Sheriff's Department. Not only are they not complaining, or so much as asking questions, they as of yet haven't mentioned it at all, nor has any of the liberal progressive bloggers in the Tucson area. But of course, Guerena was a law-abiding American citizen, while Dupnik is, after all, a liberal Democrat.
Do you even want to imagine what their reaction would be if the victim was an actual Mexican drug smuggler, and the Sheriff's Department was, say for example, that of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio. The wolves would be descending on Phoenix and foaming at the mouth as I type this post.
Unfortunately, the video I attempted to embed here will not work right, but if you go to the post linked here you can get a sense of just how suspicious this whole sorry affair is.
Admittedly, that was more a matter of spit and vinegar on my part, although I did think the theory had at least some merit. Now, after what recently happened just earlier this month, I am more convinced than ever that Dupnik is one evil motherfucker.
A Pima County Swat team, on the 5th of May, acting on what I have to suspect were trumped up charges of drug trafficking, attacked the home of Jose Guerena-a former Marine, a veteran with no criminal record. They went in with guns blazing. By the time it was over Guerena, their targeted victim, was dead, shot multiple times.
According to Guerena's wife, the Pima County Sheriff's charges are without merit, but the SWAT team removed what they alleged was "evidence" from the home, including a computer.
Dupnik recently survived a recall effort in Pima County, and I have to wonder if this might have been an attempt to stage a warning to his enemies-"don't fuck with me". It might also be a way to make him look tough on Latino drug gangs. The problem there is, while Guerena was Latino there is no evidence he was ever involved with any Latino gangs, or for that matter, drugs of any kind. No, he appears to have been nothing more nor less than a hard working husband and father of two who never knew why he was being targeted by the Pima County fascists that pass for a Sheriff's Department.
Or maybe he did. Maybe somebody at the Department had it in for him. Maybe it was personal. Or maybe it was professional. And maybe, just maybe, that person was Dupnik.
It also bears noting that none of the usual leftist suspects, including the Three Sonorans, are raising a ruckus about this, despite the fact that here is a Latino murdered by an Arizona Sheriff's Department. Not only are they not complaining, or so much as asking questions, they as of yet haven't mentioned it at all, nor has any of the liberal progressive bloggers in the Tucson area. But of course, Guerena was a law-abiding American citizen, while Dupnik is, after all, a liberal Democrat.
Do you even want to imagine what their reaction would be if the victim was an actual Mexican drug smuggler, and the Sheriff's Department was, say for example, that of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio. The wolves would be descending on Phoenix and foaming at the mouth as I type this post.
Unfortunately, the video I attempted to embed here will not work right, but if you go to the post linked here you can get a sense of just how suspicious this whole sorry affair is.
Monday, May 16, 2011
A Warning To America
From Geert Wilders, courtesy of The Brussels Journal. It's a sobering read. Wilders speaks from experience. He's lived the life of a modern European who is ruled by political correctness, and whose rights are trampled under a hateful regime of hate speech laws regarding expressions of opposition to the growing encroachment of Islam is Western countries. Of course, to the left, Wilders is a symbol of "Islamophobia" and "intolerance".
In my opinion there is arguably one thing worse than Islamists, and that is the non-Islamic American leftists who are their apologists and enablers. To the Islmists, we should shut our doors, but only after we have opened it wide enough and long enough to give their leftist supporters the heave-ho.
But whatever you do or now believe, read the article.
In my opinion there is arguably one thing worse than Islamists, and that is the non-Islamic American leftists who are their apologists and enablers. To the Islmists, we should shut our doors, but only after we have opened it wide enough and long enough to give their leftist supporters the heave-ho.
But whatever you do or now believe, read the article.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)