Subscribe

Enter your email address below to subscribe to Kenders Musings!


powered by Bloglet

WARNING WILL ROBINSON

Feel free to post comments, rants, or even personal attacks. It simply shows your wish for taunting if you do the latter.

You can say anything you want here. But if you get stupid I reserve the right to point it out, call you lots of inventive names and laugh like hell.

Blogs I Like

In no particular order):
Note: "right" either means this blogger is correct or that they lean right. I know what I mean by it. How do you take it?

Iraqi Blogs

The Other Side Of The Street

New York Liberals that aren't all that bad
(for NY Libs)
The name say it all
(Pissed Liberals)
Luna Kitten
See? I told you I had a liberal friend!!!

Send me some greenbacks

The 101st Fighting Keyboarders

The Wide Awakes

There was an error in this gadget

Give me some love

You can email me here

Atom.xml

I am THE
Snarky Kender
of the
TTLB Ecosystem

New Tagline:
"Got Kender?"




Technorati

Technorati search

    Followers

    There was an error in this gadget

    Blog Archive

    Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

    First of all, I want to thank you on behalf of Stop The ACLU, all of our contributors, and supporters. It is an honor to have this interview with you. We appreciate the Alliance Defense Fund does for America by fighting the ACLU, and protecting life, and liberty.

    1 Could you tell us a brief summary of how ADF came about?

    Enough was enough. Dismayed by years of the erosion of liberty through activist courts in1993, thirty-five leaders of various Christian ministries came together to discuss the growing legal threats to religious freedom, the sanctity of life, marriage, and the family and the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) was born. ADF’s purpose was to develop sufficient means to win - through training, strategy, coordination, and funding to support litigation. In just eleven short years, ADF has trained over 850 allied attorneys, 405 law students, and provided funding for over 1,500 cases, including twenty-six victories at the Unites States Supreme Court.


    2. What inspired you to write your new book, The ACLU vs. America?

    In December 2003, I appeared on the O’Reilly Factor to discuss the ACLU’s legal attacks on the public celebration of Christmas. During that interview, Bill O’Reilly asked, tongue in cheek: “Isn’t the ACLU an organization that started out with good beginnings, but has just gotten off track over the past decade?” There was no way to answer it in a 25-30 second sound bite. Craig Osten (my-co-author) and I pondered O’Reilly’s question and realized that most Americans believe this myth that the ACLU had good roots. We knew that the truth had to be told: that the ACLU had a completely different agenda for America right from the start, an agenda that sought to legally undermine every American institution in order to reshape our nation as the ACLU and its founders saw fit.


    3. What would you say to those people who say that just because the ACLU was founded on Communism does not mean that they still have communist goals?

    Baldwin fastidiously claimed he was not a communist, and in fact, purged the ACLU board members who actually belonged to the party when Stalin and Hitler linked arms in 1939. Despite this, Baldwin had repeatedly expressed admiration for the Soviets and had many communist and socialist allies. In an interview a few years before his death, ACLU Founder Roger Baldwin said to Peggy Lamson (a former ACLU board member): “The Communists say, we don’t care what the majority says, this minority is right, and if we can impose our will on the majority, we will do so.” This type of self-image sums up the modern-day ACLU, which has demonstrated, time and time again, blatant disregard for the will of the people and the democratic process. For example, the ACLU has filed or supported lawsuit after lawsuit to either block public votes on constitutional amendments affirming traditional marriage, or to overturn the results (which have yet to be in the ACLU’s favor). When Alaskan voters passed a constitutional amendment in 1998 affirming marriage as between one man and one woman, the ACLU’s former executive director said: “Today’s results prove that certain fundamental issues should not be left up to a majority vote.”


    4. I have read in your book that the ACLU filed a brief in favor of legalizing child pornography. When I wrote about this, many people wanted solid proof. Where can one see in the record how the ACLU defended this?

    There are several examples. The files at the U.S. Supreme Court are a good starting point. In 1983, the ACLU submitted a friend of the court brief in the case of New York v. Ferber, arguing that the distribution of child pornography is protected by the First Amendment. The ACLU Policy Guide states: “The ACLU believes that the First Amendment protects the dissemination of all forms of communication. The ACLU opposes on First Amendment grounds, laws that restrict the production and distribution of any printed and visual materials even when some of the producers of those materials are punishable under criminal law.” (i.e. child pornography).

    In the mid-1980s, when I serving as the Director of the Attorney General’s Commission on Pornography, the then-legislative counsel of the ACLU testified that it was the ACLU’s position that once child pornography was produced, there should be no government restriction on its sale and distribution.

    5. Recently a judge in California ruled that the Mt. Soledad cross was unconstitutional despite the majority of San Diego voters supported keeping the cross. What are your thoughts on judicial activism in America today? Should judges be using international law in interpreting the Constitution?

    In his biography by Peggy Lamson, Roger Baldwin said: “I placed my faith in the courts…” What he meant by that was that he knew the ACLU could not achieve its aims through state and federal legislatures or by taking their case to the people. He knew that the courts would be the most useful method of imposing the ACLU’s agenda on the people. The outgrowth of that strategy is the judicial activism we see today, where the ACLU and its allies are using the courts to deny the expressed will of the people and to impose new laws via judicial fiat. In the Mt. Soledad case, the ACLU attorney James McElroy expressed his disdain for the majority when he said after the vote: "It still doesn't mean a damn thing. Voters should have never voted on it."

    ADF believes that judges should interpret the Constitution as written and consistent with its original meaning. It is not an “evolving document” with emanations from penumbras as judicial activists’ state.

    As far as international law, this is just another example of how the ACLU has tried to change the rules to get their way. They came to the realization that the Constitution can only be stretched in so many ways, that they are eventually going to reach a limit with how far they can advance their agenda with domestic laws and courts alone!

    I think Chief Justice John Roberts said it quite eloquently during his confirmation hearing when asked about international law. He said: “Looking at foreign law for support is like looking out over a crowd and picking out your friends. Foreign law, you can find anything you want. If you don't find it in the decisions of France or Italy, it's in the decisions of Somalia or Japan or Indonesia or wherever." He went on to state that international law was a misuse of legal precedent and we would wholeheartedly agree.

    Nevertheless, the ACLU, along with its former counsel Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, have been the biggest proponents of using international law as precedent to undermine our national sovereignty, which millions have sacrificed and died to defend and preserve.


    6. What do you find is the biggest threat to liberty in our society today? How can we counter this?

    The biggest threat to liberty today is the agenda of advocates of homosexual behavior, which Craig Osten and I detail in our previous book, The Homosexual Agenda: The Principal Threat to Religious Freedom Today. The ACLU has helped develop much of this agenda and has worked very closely with these advocates. The ultimate goal of many homosexual activists is to progressively silence and punish any dissenting viewpoints when it comes to homosexual behavior. In places such as Sweden and Canada, people with sincere religious objections to homosexual behavior are facing fines, loss of employment, and even imprisonment for expressing their views.

    How can we counter this? First of all, we can show up. When ADF and its allies have shown up against legal advocates of homosexual behavior in the courtroom, with the training, strategy, and coordination to win, we’ve been successful in defeating the agenda of homosexual advocates, including same-sex “marriage.”

    Secondly, it will take resources. The ACLU and its allies, including radical advocates of homosexual behavior, have tremendous financial resources at their disposal. The ACLU Foundation has $175 million in assets. The Gill Foundation, whose mission is to push the homosexual agenda, has spent millions of dollars to achieve its aims. The Human Rights Campaign, Lambda Legal and Defense and Education Fund, and Planned Parenthood, all have massive amounts of funds, including millions from corporate America, to spend.

    Thirdly, Americans need to become educated on the threats to liberty, and that is why we wrote the ACLU book, as well as our previous book on the homosexual agenda, to awaken the majority of Americans who still respect the values of life, liberty, and family that made our nation great.


    7. Is it possible to reform the ACLU? Can they be changed, or is countering them the only option?

    It’s not a public company and is controlled by a private board. It’s tough to “reform” an organization that had a very different agenda for America right from the beginning. In addition, they have had eighty years to build the legal precedents that they have used to advance their agenda, and even if the ACLU went out of existence today, those precedents would still be in place. Therefore, it is going to take a long-term, strategic effort to reverse those legal precedents, and put new ones in place that affirm religious freedom, the sanctity of life, marriage and the family.


    8. What is your strategy in fighting the ACLU? Are there other ways people can get involved?

    ADF has a four-fold plan to fight and eventually defeat the ACLU. That plan is training, coordination, funding, and direct litigation. Our goals include training at least 5,000 allied attorneys over the next ten years to take on the ACLU and its allies and building an in-house attorney mentoring program - to train and equip the next generation of attorneys. But you train all the attorneys you want, and if they do not have a coordinated plan of action, it is not going to make much of a difference. That is why ADF focuses on strategic coordination to make sure that we are working in unity towards a common goal of reversing the legal damage inflicted by the ACLU and its allies on our nation, rather than working against each other. Thirdly, we make sure that when our allied attorneys show up in court to take on the ACLU, that they have the necessary financial resources to win. ADF has funded over 1,500 grants for legal cases and projects in just eleven years. Finally, ADF wants to grow litigators, lawyers on our staff who are actively involved in defending religious freedom, the sanctity of life, marriage, and the family.


    9. Currently there is legislation in the House by Congressman Hostetler that is asking to reform the attorney’s fees act in the Civil Rights Act to not apply in Establishment Clause cases. Does ADF support this?

    We talk about the need to reform this in our book, as it has become a financial cash cow for the ACLU and one of their weapons in their campaign of fear, intimidation, and disinformation to force public officials to bow to their agenda. While ADF does not delve into legislative issues, we hope this effort by the congressman passes to fix this loophole which the ACLU has exploited for years to bully towns and municipalities into compliance.


    10. Do you support grassroots efforts like Stop The ACLU.Com and Stop The ACLU.Org in informing the people of the ACLU’s actions and other civil liberties groups? How can we motivate others to get involved? What would your advice be in helping our organization’s success?

    ADF is thankful for any efforts that raise awareness of the ACLU’s dangerous agenda for America and encourages citizens to get involved in combating it. I believe that the American people are increasingly rejecting the ACLU’s agenda as more and more of it is brought into the light. Keep on doing what you are doing, highlighting the ACLU’s most recent outrageous statements and positions, and I am sure your efforts will be successful.


    This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please register at Our Portal, or email Jay at Jay@stoptheaclu.com. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 115 blogs already onboard.
    Linked in the title is a site that you should read. When you read it you will understand that when we lose our guns, our Freedom goes with them.

    Amendment II

    A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.



    I have been thinking of the second amendment of the Constitution more than usual lately.

    I will get to what the second amendment really means in a moment, but to lay a foundation for the importance of the second amendment, we must first look at the most likely outcomes of having the second amendment repealed here.

    Stories like this one, and this one are bad enough, showing that gun crimes have gone up in England and Australia since they banned guns, but what should really scare the readers of this article is this story here. The last one tells about the UN wanting to take guns away from every citizen in the world.

    These stories are a few years old, so my more senseless reader's may believe that they no longer apply. "After all", they'll say, "if the UN wanted to take guns they surely would have done it already. I mean, it HAS been four years since they said that."

    The UN does want to take our guns away from us.

    Kat has a great write up about this, and points out very well that the second amendment was meant to protect us from the government, and the ability to protect ourselves from the dregs of society that would prey on us is completely secondary to the purpose of the second amendment.

    I know at the time of the writing of the Constitution and it's amendments that the founding fathers couldn't have foreseen the vicious, violent world we live in, and the thought that criminals would be given such ardent defenders of their actions and that ordinary citizens would be treated as criminals for trying to protect their life and property certainly never crossed their minds. The ideas that have permeated modern society, those like socialism, where the state takes care of you and you are not responsible for your actions, where you need not worry of your fellow citizens because the government was there to save them for you, those ideas would certainly have been abhorrent to those men of self reliance and selfless sacrifice.

    They wrote the second amendment so that the government would think thrice before taking up arms against it citizenry. They, of course, wrote other provisions into those amendments that would keep the government from intruding into our hard won lives and trampling those bled-for rights, like Amendment III and Amendment V, regarding quartering soldiers in one's home and eminent domain.

    Eminent domain has been under attack recently, with the Supreme Court of the United States declaring that it is constitutional for cities to take property from private citizens to build up the economics of their town.

    Private property is one of the great hallmarks of America's system, being able to keep our weapons is another. One of those rights has been seriously eroded by an activist court. How long before they take the next one away even more than it has been already. We have more laws on the books regarding guns that most anything else I believe, some 11 thousand plus the last I read, (can't find that link at the moment), and that hasn't helped crime rates one bit.

    Take a look at this and you will see that the evidence clearly shows that less gun control means less crime.

    But back to that bit about the UN desiring our weapons. The U.S. military is prohibited from being used against U.S. citizens in the U.S., that is why when martial law is declared it is the national guard that goes in.

    Can you imagine if the UN has more power, more sway, and managed to get the U.S. to demand that it's citizens turn in their guns? When we refused the UN would bring in an international coalition of troops to "keep the peace" as U.S. Law Enforcment went about the business of chasing down all of the new "criminals" with guns.

    Article VI of the Constitution lays out the system for making new amendments, and it is a rather lengthy process, so that route, I would have to think, is one that is not worrisome. In other words, an amendment taking our guns would cause one hell of a fight, and may even start another civil war which would, much like the war on terror, have no defined boundaries, since one would be hard pressed to find an area in this country that was devoid of guns and gun owners.

    Of more concern to the country is Connally Reservation, which, in six words, may keep the U.S. from falling to the control of the UN and the International Criminal Court, (ICC).

    Before ratifying the United Nations Charter in 1945, the Senate was wise enough to amend the section dealing with the World Court by barring the Court from jurisdiction over matters which were essentially domestic "AS DETERMINED BY THE UNITED STATES."

    Those six words, authored by Senator Tom Connally (D-Tex), are known as the "Connally Reservation" and are the only thing which COULD prevent the World Court from interfering in American internal affairs on the pretext that our tariffs, immigration laws, school curriculums, etc., affect American relations with other countries and are therefore "foreign" and not "domestic."


    This very well may be the six most important words to ever be written down in this country. People have been trying to get that changed ever since, and it has been claimed that the Connally Reservation is a roadblock to world peace through world law.

    If and when the Connally Reservation is repealed, look for war.

    When that happens they will come for our guns.

    When they have our guns, our Freedom goes with them.

    Linked at Stop The ACLU
    See the first in this series here

    Open this in a new window and sing along with the latest horridly politically incorrect parody from Kender.

    Mama's Don't Let Your Babies Grow Up To Be Camelboys


    Camelboys aint easy to love but they're easy to kill
    They hide with the people or they live in a cave in the hills
    Turbans and bomb vests and dirty pajamas and new jihads every day
    They're dead wrong and they're evil and our military
    Is out to just blow 'em away

    Mama's don't let your babies grow up to be Camelboys
    Don't let 'em shoot AK's while riding in trucks
    Or go planting bombs on the roadside and such
    Mama's don't let your babies grow up to be Camelboys
    They'll never stay home and when they go roam
    We will just blow them all up

    Camelboys like killin for Allah and catchin' our bullets
    Wipin' their ass with their hands and man do they smell
    Them that don't know 'em won't like 'em
    And them that do still want to blow them to pieces
    They're so wrong it aint funny
    And it costs us money to make sure that they go to hell

    Mama's don't let your babies grow up to be Camelboys
    Don't let 'em shoot AK's while ridin' in trucks
    Or go planting bombs on the roadside and such
    Mama's don't let your babies grow up to be Camelboys
    They'll never stay home and when they go roam
    We will just blow them all up

    Mama's don't let your babies grow up to be Camelboys
    They'll never stay home and when they go roam
    We will just blow them all up
    My friend Seth inspired me to this, so blame him.

    The only music I could find for you to listen to while reading this, (if you so wish to do that) was here and it is a bit faster than the normal version. Open the link in a new window and sing along.

    And please feel free to offer up better lyrics than I pumped out in the last ten minutes. I changed a few words to go better with the faster version. And the end of the tune is cut off at the end.


    Ladies and Gents, lads and lassies, I give you;



    My Heroes Have Always Been Camelboys

    I grew up a dreamin' o' bein' a camelboy
    And lovin' the goatfuckin ways
    Pursuin' the life o' my implodin' heroes
    I burned up my childhood days
    I learned all the rules of a suicide bomber
    Don't ya press down the button too soon
    Just take a short bus ride, or go to a disco
    Go out with a scream and a boom


    My heroes have always been camelboys
    And they will be till I die
    Sadly adhering to eighth century ideals
    And a bunch of ragged old lies


    Camelboys are spreadin their own brand of misery
    By wiping their ass with their hands
    Some will die from a bomb in a safe house in Baghdad
    To be dropped in a hole in the sand
    Pickin at sand fleas while down on their damned knees
    And cryin to Allah each day
    Dirty pajamas an' diapers on their heads
    With their leaders a-hidin' in caves


    My heroes have always been camelboys
    And they will be till I die
    Sadly adhering to eighth century ideals
    And a bunch of ragged old lies

    Sadly adhering to eighth century ideals
    And a bunch of ragged old lies




    XPOSTED@The Wide Awakes, Cao's and The MadTech's
    Stop The ACLU
    This is a special post for all those out there that keep screaming about the WMDs that weren't found in Iraq and we shouldn't have gone there in the first place.

    These people don't understand STRATEGY. If you can read this story and still tell me that you don't understand, once and for all, the reasons behind the war then do us all a favor and actually get that lobotomy. After all you are simply some paper work and a short operation from being LEGALLY stupid, as opposed to CONSIDERED stupid.


    The Australian
    Edition 1 - All-round CountryFRI 26 NOV 2004, Page 013
    WMDs camouflage real reasons behind Iraq invasion
    By Frank Devine

    WHY are we in Iraq? It is not, as some ranters claim, because George Bush is stupid and bloodthirsty and John Howard a spineless crawler. Nor is it because the US has regressed to Wilsonian imperialism.
    For those seriously interested in the question I recommend a seriously interesting new book, America's Secret War by George Friedman. Friedman is founder of Stratfor, a private, subscription-financed global intelligence service, which I find consistently well-informed. Friedman writes of the struggle in Iraq in relentlessly Realpolitik terms.
    Although the US believed Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction, the WMDs were ultimately ``a cover for a much deeper game''. The big game began with the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan and the US enlisting the assistance of Saudi Arabia in backing the Afghan resistance. The Saudis provided financing and guerilla fighters. They influenced other Islamic countries to send guerillas.
    This international brigade included members of Islam's moneyed and educated elite (including Osama bin Laden) -- the core of al-Qa'ida.
    When the Soviet Union retreated from Afghanistan, this elite had become knowledgeable veterans of guerilla warfare, full of swagger about defeating the world's second superpower.
    The oil billionaires back home, impressed with themselves for ``bailing the Americans out'', financed the warrior elite and the fundamentalist Taliban regime in Afghanistan.
    From this fortress headquarters, Friedman writes, al-Qa'ida (``the Base'' in English) pressed its grand design for an Islamist world federation, a new Caliphate, which would ultimately match, if not dominate, other superpowers. Global terrorism would be the means. Al-Qa'ida's opening moves -- attacks on American embassies and other establishments abroad -- were aimed, in Friedman's opinion, less at damaging the US than provoking it to a reckless assault on Islam.
    This, al-Qa'ida believed, would stir the ``Islamic street'' to a confrontational mood with the West and rebellion against non-fundamentalist Islamic regimes, establishing the foundations of the great federation. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, however, the US, confident of its hegemony, had concluded that ``war was now optional'', that no power existed that could force it into war.
    The passive US response to its early pinprick attacks emboldened and frustrated al-Qa'ida. The jihadists, Friedman writes, ``needed to strike a blow that would be devastating, [breaching] the threshold between what was tolerable and intolerable for the US''. Their initiative was the September11, 2001, attack on New York and Washington, which shocked and disoriented the Americans. Their first reaction was to speculate almost in panic about a September 11 with nuclear weapons.
    This began an obsession with WMDs. US actions were practical and reasonably prompt, however. The US persuaded Russia and other countries of the former Soviet Union to make inventory of their nuclear weapons and strengthen security on them.
    Rather astonishingly, as Friedman reports it, the US pressured Pakistan -- the Muslim country most advanced in nuclear weaponry and the one in closest contact with Islamic fundamentalism -- into permitting US soldiers dressed as civilians to place a guard on its nuclear stockpile. To disabuse Islam of the illusion that the US was weak of will and, on the evidence of Vietnam, unable to sustain a prolonged war, the Bush administration decided to strike its own devastating blow in response to September 11.
    The invasion and speedy subjugation of Afghanistan staggered the jihadists. But the US, having succeeded only in dispersing al-Qa'ida and the Taliban, rather than eliminating them, believed it needed to strike another heavy blow.
    By then it had identified the jihadist campaign as ``a Saudi problem''. Most of the September 11 suicide attackers had been Saudis. Bin Laden was a Saudi. Saudi money trails were everywhere. An invasion of Saudi Arabia presented the tactical problem of waging war against a country of vast area and the strategic one of disrupting the world's oil supplies.
    The Americans had established and then strengthened a military presence in countries surrounding Saudi Arabia -- Yemen, Oman, Qatar, Bahrain and Kuwait. Invasion of Iraq would complete the encirclement.
    ``From a purely military view,'' Friedman adds, ``Iraq is the most strategic single country in the Middle East, [bordering] six other countries: Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, Turkey and Iran.''
    So the US struck, with consequences unfolding nightly on our TV screens. Friedman believes the US-jihadist war hangs in the balance. However, the measured actions of the US during the past three years, including its strong military presence in the Middle East, have caused significant moderation of the position on global jihad of Saudi Arabia and other Muslim regimes.
    The strategy of the jihadists has stalled: ``Not a single regime has fallen to
    al-Qa'ida ... There is no rising in the Islamic street. [There has been] complete failure of al-Qa'ida to generate the political response they were seeking ... At this point the US is winning ... The
    war goes on.''


    Linked at Stop the ACLU and Hard Astarboard
    This is how I see the American Right, where we stand and what we believe, without the religion tossed in.....YET!!!!

    We are tired of paying high taxes to support the dregs of society....pulling down the cream to raise the dregs is evil and supports laziness and rewards stupidity.

    Work Hard, no one owes you a living, a house or any education beyond basic reading, writing and math. If you want a better lot in life work for it, it is there for the taking IF you have the drive and intelligence.

    We won't let you starve in the streets but don't care if you want to be lazy and live under a bridge.

    If you are truly handicapped we will help you...A lot....but of you try to pull that mental handicap crap you had better be a real good actor or seriously demented. If you are seriously demented and you get violent we lock you up...for life, we don't need violent people wandering around.

    If you commit a crime you go to jail where you will be punished....A lot...we don't need stupid people walking around.

    If you kill someone and it is NOT in self defense you go to jail....we don't need violent people walking around.

    If you do it in a heinous manner we will kill you for it....not only do we want violent people locked up we don't want to house you for the rest of your life at our expense.

    The money we make should be, for the most part, ours.....not the governments to fritter away for more social programs.

    We should have a very secure border, and people that sneak in are criminals and should be bagged and tagged so they can never come back.

    A proactive offense beats the hell out of a reactive defense anyday....reactive defense is for cowards and victims....and we are neither.

    Our money that we pay in taxes should stay at home....countries that get aid from us and hate us anyway should be told to fuck off..it is not our governments job to make sure that people that live under corrupt third world governments and starve are fed.....that is THEIR governments job.

    The UN is an anti-American group and should be tossed out of America and told to shut their useless mouths.

    The ACLU is an evil organization that should be charged as a criminal organization.

    Capitalism is good, socialism is evil.

    The individuals socio-economic mobility is the backbone of a great country, and small business is the backbone of socio-economic mobility.

    Radical environmentalists have done more damage to business in the U.S. than any other single factor and should be taken to task for it.

    The individual should decide how much charity to give, and not government....my money is just that, MINE!!!!

    Rapist, murderers, pedophiles, thieves, drug addicts and whiners are NOT "victims of their misunderstood childhoods"...they are rapists, murderers, pedophiles, thieves, drug addicts and whiners, and with the possible exception of the whiners they should all go to jail for a very long time....except pedophiles.....they should be shot upon conviction.

    Oh yeah....political correctness is bullshit....either grow a thicker skin or go away....sometimes life isn't fair....deal with it....and you have absolutely NO RIGHT whatsoever to NOT be offended!!!

    Any questions?


    **The above was a comment on another blog. I won't say which one as they deserve no more traffic, and I hate giving them any to begin with. However I stop by there to hone the old talons and it works well. Below is part of a response by them regarding the above statements.**

    From Fr*****: "Kender.....In case you are under the mistaken impression that your fulmination refutes the belief that you are a racist, fascist, sectarian, think again. Thanks for your input. IÂ’m sure we can put it to use as we define the American right."

    **My reply is below, and finally I have shown you, but more importantly myself, once and for all that the people on the other side of the street are indeed non-thinking, brainwashed people that truly wallow in their ignorance. I feel sorry that people such as this are so blinded by their hatred however, it gives me hope that the socialist left is indeed losing power like Dean after his scream.**


    ""Fr*****...how did what I say show one bit of racism? Or fascism?

    Fascism subjugates the individual in favor of the state.

    Racism is the belief that someone is inherently inferior because of their race.

    I am an individualist. The antithesis of a fascist.

    And unless "STUPID" or "LAZY" is now a race and I missed that memo I utterly fail to see how you can call me a racist.

    I am also not sectarian....the "sect" of success is open to those willing to work for it.

    You people really do not comprehend this do you???

    You honestly do not understand the meanings of the words you throw around and only see what you wish to see in what you read and not the truth, and I cannot believe that people that claim to be educated can read what I wrote and say it is fascist or racist.

    Now I am laughing at you guys.....I have been worried that socialism and EU style policies are a threat to America.....you guys aren't a threat, anymore than the dems are a threat.......you guys are truly brainwashed and nothing more than a joke that neither understands that which you are discussing nor the fact that you are utterly comical in your ignorance.

    Thank you for being so enlightening to me today.......I gave you your rope, and in true idiot fashion, you hung yourselves.""



    Nuff Said!!!!

    Linked at Stop the ACLU
    We've got a double treat for you today folks! Nedd Kareiva, founder of our parent site Stoptheaclu.org will be on the radio! But first we'll be having a live stream of Alan Sears, the president of the Alliance Defense Fund debating Barry Lynn of Americans United for the Seperation of Church and State.

    Alan Sears will be on Barry Lynn's radio show Culture Shocks from 5 to 6pm Eastern Time, 2 to 3pm Pacific time. He will be discussing issues such as the the ACLU's policy to legalize child porn, their defense of sexual predators, and their positions on sick organizations like NAMBLA. If you haven't heard of Alan Sears take a look at The Alliance Defense Fund's website. They are one of the biggest forces out there fighting the evils of the ACLU. You can also check out his interview with Bill O'Reilly, or his interview with Frontpage magazine.

    If you want to listen, tune in from 5 to 6pm Eastern Time, 2 to 3pm Pacific using KCAA's live MP3 feed. Choose between the free iTunes or Winamp players to listen.

    If you want to talk to call in live on Culture Shocks, call them at 1-800-259-9231. Don't forget to mention Stop The ACLU.COM!

    You can also hear Culture Shocks weekdays on your radio station, including KCAA 1050AM in the Los Angeles area, WCBR in Tennessee, KGGM in Louisiana, WASN in Youngstown Ohio and Newcastle, PA, and WARL in Providence RI. I wouldn't encourage listening to this guy's station everyday, but definitley tune in today. I'm thinking Alan will rip him apart.

    And now, for the good news about our movement!!! I put this last because it will be later in the night, but our own Nedd Kareiva of Stop The ACLU.Org will be on WRWL Radio with Pastor Ernie Sanders to discuss the ACLU and our plans to cripple them. Pastor Sanders has the longest running radio show in Ohio (28 years per his site), has been in court with the ACLU over 20 times and not paid one dime to them. He fiercely opposes the ACLU's agenda and he is looking forward to speaking with him. He will be taking your calls so let's show Ohio and America we mean business against the ACLU. He will be on as long as they wish. He will be discussing similar issues on the ACLU's support for child sexplotation, and also focus on its war against Christianity. He will mention the blog, so everyone try to call in and talk to Nedd.

    TIME: 9:30 PM EST, 8:30 CST, 7:30 MST, 6:30 PST

    TOLL FREE ACROSS AMERICA: (888) 677-9673, LOCAL: (216) 901-0933
    LISTEN: Via Crusader Radio live Internet feed or WRWL stations at its home page.

    SIGN THE PETITION TO STOP TAXPAYER'S FUNDING OF THE ACLU

    We are trying to raise money for an ad in the Washington Times. We need to raise $2500.00! We're half way there with a little over $1,300.00!

    Please consider a donation

    Or Buy a bumper sticker from our store!

    This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please register at Our Portal, or email Jay at Jay@stoptheaclu.com. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 115 blogs already onboard.

    Crossposted from Stop The ACLU
    From a report of a speech given in a synagogue by the director of a branch of CAIR in Florida comes this snippet;

    "He told a story about how the prophet Mohammed was told by God to pray
    50 times a day. Then Mohammed met Moses, who pointed out that Jews pray
    only three times a day. After some negotiating, God agreed to let
    Muslims pray just five times a day."


    Mo was kickin with the big boys and NEGOTIATED with God.

    No other religion, as far as I have found out, has a prophet that NEGOTIATED with God.

    I can just see that now;
    (wavy flashback lines)

    Mo: Fifty times a day God? But I will live on my knees and have no time for conquering the infidels who should be on their knees to make beheading them easier.

    GOD: I am sorry Mo, but I feel that the Jews aren't pious enough, and that whole "chosen people" thing that they have claimed is going to make your run at a worldwide caliphate much harder. You simply MUST be much more pious than them.

    Mo; I understand your wish for a more pious group of believers, but we have very little. We are poor tribesmen that wander the desert, and without a lifelong campaign of conquest and subjugation we will never rise to power in your name.

    GOD: Well, Mo, actually everyone can come to me if they simply believe in their hearts. I have to tell you that you really don't have a lock on this whole heaven thing.


    (Moses whispers in God's ear)

    GOD: Mo, how about this, since the Jews are praying three times a day, why don't you guys pray five times a day? That would make you 66% more pious than a Jew.


    Mo thinks it over, and discusses it with his closest advisor, Aii'l Su' Ya' Quik'li, (who happened to be the first ever islamic lawyer), and looks up with that famous glint of negotiation in his eyes.

    Mo;, Can we still pervert your words and lie about our goals to convert or kill those that won't follow our ways?

    GOD: I would prefer you didn't. You know, if you get too radical, Lucifer may invoke certain rights under the Good Vs. Evil clause and it would be out of my hands.

    Mo; I can take that chance, what is the word of Lucifer against my thousands of Warriors dedicated to Jihad?

    GOD: Mo, I don't believe you are completely understanding the whole concept of these visions, I really...

    Mo; Yeah yeah, contracts and obscure Holy Laws....I get it. Let me ask you, if I kill ten thousand Jews and send them your way do I get a commission?

    GOD: A commission? What would make you think that I would condone killing ten thousand people of any tribe? I want you to make people get along with each other and help create peace on earth. What is with all of this killing nonsense?

    Mo; Well, if people don't not believe that I have spoken to you then they will not adhere to the Holy Ways you have revealed to me. I am going to need proof.

    GOD: Mo, did you ever stop to think that the near starvation you are experiencing, coupled with those mushrooms you found, may be causing hallucinations or that I could be Lucifer in disguise trying to capture gullible human souls for the final battle?


    Moses hits "God" in the arm and whispers harshly "Shut up!!!! The mushrooms are becoming less intense, get this over with before he sobers up"

    "GOD": I'll tell you what, along with the praying only five times a day, anyone that dies in Holy service to me by killing infidels will get 70 virgins in paradise. Deal?

    Mo;, OK deal, but I may wish to renegotiate once I am able to stand up....why do you suddenly look like my camel?

    (wavy flashback lines)

    And there ya have it folks, the "truth" about Mo's "talk" with Moses and God.....hey, it's about as true as that book Mo had a hand in creating.

    XPOSTED@MadTech's and Cao's

    Linked at Stop the ACLU
    I can't stop laughing.

    Linked in the title is a gem I found while checking my sitemeter stats.

    It seems that I have pissed off some bedwetter, to the point that he is linking not only to me, but to Jay, Ogre and a few others. Of course, no list of bloggers that make liberals foam at the mouth would be complete without a link to the Number One Liberal Bashing Blog, and, like a good little drone, our friend at Endorphin Cult does toss in a link to Cao.

    Now, I expect Cao to get better reviews than I do, as she has been at this longer and has a bigger following of moonbats, cretins and other assorted crapbags from the left side of the street, so this bit was no surprise;

    This Midwestern bumpkinette is the source of all of the garbage cut and pasted from creationist sites and thrown haphazardly into a number of arguments on the other blogs. She thinks that John Kerry is a criminal but that Tom DeLay is on the level, placing her firmly in the upper echelon of the mudbrain brigade above.


    But to see that I got a special mention at the end of the article made my day.

    Kender, for example, uses the tagline "Pissing off liberals since 1968," which means, much to my horror, that he's at least 36 (whether he started his campaign as an infant or as a 20-year-old makes little difference in the intellectual league his team's in, but I had gigured him for 16 or 17).


    The writer goes on to spew such gems as;

    In addition to whining, lying, dodging with all of the deftness of drunken wallabys, and confabulating, these bloggers have kept interlopers at bay by employing strategies ranging from editing comments, deleting comments and prohibiting comments altogether to retiring from the blogosphere.


    Which makes me wonder just which crapbag this is that has obviously been banned from someone's site, (most likely Cao's), and causes me to chuckle that this moron still doesn't understand that free speech doesn't apply to personal blogs.

    And this gem;

    Taken as a unit, these people are therefore a bunch of weak-minded, pre-programmed, God-fearing freak-fucked buffoons who are in fine form when they're got only each other for company, but are unable to withstand genuine challenges to their ideas.


    Ah, I laugh everytime I read this stuff. What genuine challenge to our ideas? The point is that our ideas are correct, and folks like these don't like being told they are wrong, stupid or whiny losers.

    Anyway, to the writer of these comments, one very disturbed and obviously non-medicated "kemibe Dark Lord of the Inner Circle", I say thank you. Your review made my day. I am still laughing.

    One question though.

    Would that inner circle that you are the dark lord of be your sphincter?

    Linked at Stop the ACLU
    A big tip o' me tam to jcrue for this one.

    Back in August I pointed out that Italy was supporting terrorism. They proved then they are not a true ally of the U.S., joining such other faux allies as france and germany.

    It should come as no surprise then that Spain has decided to join the club.

    It seems that a Spanish judge has decided to issue arrest warrants for three American soldiers in regards to the death of a Spanish journalist and his Ukrainian cameraman during the Iraq war.

    The U.S. military has investigated the incident, and have stated that the soldiers believed they were under attack when they fired a round from their tank into The Palestine Hotel where several reporters were staying to cover the war.

    First off, let me say that a war zone is inherently dangerous. If you wander into a war zone you take your life into your hands, and really shouldn't be surprised if you end up dead.

    Secondly, what kind of moron would sit on a balcony of a hotel in the middle of a raging battle surrounded by people shooting at each other from all sides and have the stupidity to lift a camera onto their shoulder and point it at a tank? Especially an American tank? The Abrams tank is one of the deadliest fighting machines ever unleashed on the world, and the crews that man them are highly trained soldiers. One of my best friends happens to be a tank driver, and his descriptions of the capabilities of that vehicle are awe inspiring.

    Let's forget for a moment about the Fog of War, and focus instead on the Spanish law that says "a crime committed against a Spaniard abroad can be prosecuted here (in Spain) if it is not investigated in the country where it is committed."

    The Spaniards have requested interviews with the soldiers and have been turned down, as well they should have been. It is not the place of the Spanish government to interrogate American soldiers that were engaged in battle, protecting themselves and their fellow soldiers and doing what they were trained to do.

    It was the responsibility of the journalist and his cameraman to report the war and stay alive. Pointing things at American tanks tend to make that last job a bit hard, even when it is just a camera.

    It boils down to this; In the middle of a heated battle a cameraman pointed his camera at a tank that had been taking fire from buildings, unfortunately for him, and his reporter, he was spotted by a tank crew and that crew, believing they were about to be fired on yet again, took defensive action.

    If another tank crew goes through this, and sits wondering if what is being pointed at them is a camera or a weapon and their hesitation causes them to die, can we sue the Spanish government for causing our soldiers to die because they were worried about being arrested for doing their jobs?

    So now we must add the Spaniards to the growing list of "allies" that are actually unfriendly to us. That's ok though. I haven't trusted the french for years, I certainly don't trust the germans, the russians or italy anymore.

    Remember, it was these cowards that buckled to terrorists when their subway was bombed right before an election and voted in a bunch of appeasing weaklings. So should we continue to trust the spanish?

    I believe the Dread Pirate Roberts said it best when he said "No good, I've known too many Spaniards".

    XPOSTED@Cao's and MadTech's

    Linked at Stop the ACLU
    Go here to read about a school where the final exam, if they can find someone to perform a final exam on, must be strictly pass/fail.

    I wonder if one would get extra credit for taking projectile vomit to the head?

    XPOSTED@MadTechs and Cao's
    Do people with large bug eyes have better peripheral vision?




    Linked at Stop the ACLU
    Yes I said it.

    Actually what caused me to come to this conclusion was posting a comment over here at Jay's to a moronic moonbat. Come to think of it, all moonbats are moronic, so I repeated myself there.

    Anyway, let's compare the classic undead, such as vampires and werewolves to the american left and especially the ACLU.


    Classic Undead;
    Vampire;
    A soulless creature that cowers at the sight of a crucifix and lives by sucking the blood of other creatures that it ambushes in the dark. Cannot be seen in a mirror's reflection.


    American Left Undead;
    ACLU Lawyer;
    A soulless creature that cowers at the sight of a crucifix and lives by sucking money from the government by suing Christians it ambushes. Refuses to be seen in any media interview, since the glaring light of truth shone upon the world through an honest question is the ACLU Lawyers equivalent of a mirror.


    American Left Undead;
    Liberal Whiner;
    A soulless creature that cowers at the sight of a crucifix causing an immediate call to it's brethren at the ACLU and wants everyone to live in a dream world by sucking hardearned money away from those with drive to coddle those with no drive. Can usually be seen braiding pit hair in San Francisco or following Cindy Sheehan like a slavering moron.


    Classic Undead;
    Werewolf;
    A diseased creature that appears normal during the day but changes hidiously during certain times of the month into an unrecognizable creature of destruction, as do some women.


    American Left Undead;
    ACLU Lawyer;
    A diseased creature that appears normal until they enter a courtroom, where they immediaately turn into a creature with hypnotic powers over judges that twists reality to attempt to switch the world to their dreamland version of reality, an example of which is the European Union. This version of reality is failing miserably.


    American Left Undead;
    Liberal Whiner:
    A diseased creature that appears normal when you talk to them in polite company but readily becomes a raving madman at the mention of Bush, the Global War on Terror or Rush Limbaugh.


    Classic Undead;
    Zombie;
    A soulless brain eating creature that wanders through the land randomly attacking people to further it's agenda of destroying people to consume their brains. Unable to think for itself.


    American Left Undead;
    ACLU Lawyer;
    A soulless, brainless creature that wanders through the land looking for other brainless creatures to further it's agenda of of destroying the U.S. by brainwashing it's gullible inhabitants. Unable to think for itself.


    American Left Undead;
    Liberal Whiner;
    A soulless, brainless creature that wanders through the land looking only at the liberal slanted media and believing that up is down, the palestinians and radical muslims are peaceful people and the war in Iraq is illegal. Unable to think for itself.


    As you can see, just my cursory look at the New Undead has opened my eyes, and I am sure, your eyes also.

    The only question remains is this;

    Do we use stakes through the heart, silver bullets or beheadings to protect ourselves and our country?

    I vote for silver bullets. A stake through the heart means you must get within their reach, and I am leaving the beheadings to the "peaceful radical muslims".


    Now, how many more can you come up with?

    XPOSTED@Cao's and The MadTechs

    Linked at Real Teen
    Linked in the title is
    Kit's post at The Wide Awakes.

    Kit started the Guard Our Borders blogburst to point out why we need to secure our borders and to bring more attention to the fact that our borders are basically open.

    She has a story up about 14 illegal immigrants gang-raping a woman in Florida, go rad that.

    Some others in the blogroll to help save our country are:

    The Mary Hunter over at his little slice of correct thinking cyber-heaven. Go read what he has to say about the idiots that opened the floodgates to the American Dream and actually have done more damage with their short-sighted goals and pandering policies. Don't be surprised when you see that the Democrats were behind this one.

    Over at Cao's we get a short reminder that the mexican government publishes comic books on how to sneak into the U.S. Let me ask you, do you really want people coming here, illegally or not, who have the comprehension level it takes to read a comic book? Me either.

    Mustang over at Social Sense has a post up wondering why so many people don't seem to care about our border's security. Damned good question my friend.

    Go visit more of those signed up for this blogburst. At this writing (early AM) many people haven't had time or been awake long enough to get their nickel's worth in yet.

    XPOSTED@MadTechs
    My buddy The Mary Hunter thoughtfully tagged me with one of those damnable memes. He was tagged by David at Third World County. David, just to let you know, started this meme. Usually I hate these things, but since this one let's those tagged bash the ACLU, I am gladly joining in.


    David is asking one simple question;


    “If you could hang a sign on the ACLU building to …draw attention to it, what would you put on your sign?”


    I got tagged along with these other vict.....I mean bloggers.

    Oregano at Cafe Oregano
    Jo at Jos Cafe
    Gribbet at Conservative Angst
    and
    William Teach at Pirate's Cove.

    Before I give you what my sign says for the ACLU, I am tagging these fine folks that should go read the fine print at TMHBaconbits.

    I tag Ogre and The MadTech, along with Jay, who may very well already be tagged but I am sure he can come up with more than one sign, and finally, (and I know I am being ballsy here), Rick over at RightWingNutHouse.

    Here are some rules for you guys.

    Next steps for those tagged:

    1) Write a cool sign;
    2) Add your name and a link to the bottom of The Linkie List below (don’t remove names from the top);
    3) Trackback either to the originating post or to the post of the post that tagged you (that would be this one);
    4) Tag five more blog buddies to follow these instrux… that’s all!

    The Linkie List (to add your blog name beneath):

    Euphoric Reality
    Third World County
    TMH’s Bacon Bits
    Kender


    As for my sign? It would be a simple large yellow sign and would state in large black letters;


    CAUTION
    DEMOLITION IN PROGRESS





    Linked at Stop the ACLU
    Linked in the title is a story about environmentalists that are now fighting wind farms.

    Seriously.

    Apparently these wind farms are allegedly responsible for the deaths of some predatory birds that use it the land they are on as a feeding ground.

    Environmentalists claim that they aren't against wind farms, but that their locations should be chosen more carefully, so as to avoid having an impact on wildlife. I am wondering just where that place may be.....Mars? Mars has wind. How about in the middle of the city? NonononononoNO......pigeons live there, and we wouldn't want any precious little pigeons getting their stupid asses whacked by a windmill now would we?

    Oh wait....how about out at sea? Yeah, there is plenty of wind at sea, and peoplel have been harnessing that wind for thousands of years, so that would be ok to build wind farms at sea right? What?

    WTF do you mean no, building it offshore would not only endanger seabirds but would be an eyesore to beachgoers?

    OK FINE!!!!!

    You know what? I give the hell up. Let's just go do what this guy here has done and be done with it.

    But just know that if you bitch about one little worm losing his home I am so gonna kick your ass!!!!

    XPOSTED@MadTechs
    and linked at
    Stop the ACLU
    Cao's
    Euphoric Reality
    A tip o' me tam to Jay at Stop the ACLU, who of course gives rightous props to Peakahs Provocations for the story about the the dumbass ACLU filing a comlaint about a Christian comedy team.

    It seems that this team performs at schools and invites kids to an off campus pizza party where they deliver a religious message.

    As referenced here, atheism IS a religion, and that is exactly what the ACLU is pushing on everyone.

    In case you missed that, let me put it in plain terms so you tards out there that need everything spelled out for you, (and you know who you are **coughlefties**) can better understand the implications of what I just said.

    The ACLU is TRAMPLING on the First Amendment rights of most of America by pushing the RELIGION of ATHEISM down everyone's throat.

    Fuck the ACLU!!!!

    Monday, I am going to call them, yet again, and this time I am going to ask them why they seem to think that pushing one religion over another is ok.

    I am so damned angry over this constant barrage against everything decent by the ACLU and the dumbass, cowardly fucktards on the left, (and the idiots on Err America can suck my left.....toe) that I am honestly hoping one of those jackasses on the left dares to cross me.

    Every fukin one of 'em have earned a broken nose, (at the least), and they, like the radical muslims, are going to keep pushing until decent people just won't stand for it anymore.

    I don't want to see that happen, but if they keep pushing their radical agendas to the ruination of our country then what they claim to be fighting against will actually come to pass.

    Do you idiots on the left really fear a society where morality is legislated?

    Keep pushing your radicalized secular agenda and that just may occur as a backlash to your appeasing, morally bankrupt deviance that you are trying to foist off on America.

    By the way, if you are one of those lefties that have earned a broken nose, come see me, I will be glad to oblige just about any of you mattress thrashing gutter slugs.

    Bitch!!!

    XPOSTED@The Wide Awakes
    R'Cat sent me here to Kobayashi Maru's and the post about his brother's imminent passing.

    In the last few short years I have lost some major actors from my play. Parts that, most likely, I will never be able to recast. This month, in a twelve day span, both of my grandfathers passed. One of them I had met recently, (don't ask, funky familial dynamics ok?), and one that I grew up with. The one I had grown up with hit hard of course, but upon recently meeting my paternal grandfather I knew, simply KNEW, that I had made a huge mistake not coming earlier and getting to know this man.

    Before them one of my best friends Bill passed, peacefully, in his sleep, which completely blew the pool we had going on him.

    Even before that though there was my friend Charley. (Before that was my grandma I grew up with, and while that hurt it was rather expected)

    Charley was a bard. I have written about Bill and Charley, and one of my grampa's here, (in depth I was told regarding gramps) but I covered Char in somewhat of a cursory manner.

    That won't change. But like I said, he was a bard, and could sing and tell stories and had an almost encyclopedic knowledge of history, especially the history of the celts and Scotland and, indeed, all the isles. He was a huge Tolkien fan, and could recite the LOTR (and the Hobbit), as if he were reading it aloud, never missing a beat.

    Tolkien wrote a poem called Bilbo's last song, and one year, while Char was away in the Army and couldn't get home for the holidays he set that poem to music.

    I don't have the tune for you, but I do have the words. It is, without a doubt, one of my all time favorite songs, ever, and has been, along with a piper, been heard at every funeral I have gone to since Char passed.

    Today, I dedicate this to Kobayashi Maru's brother. May they find Peace within the choices the Lord lays before them.


    Bilbo's Last Song

    Day is ended, dim my eyes,
    but journey long before me lies.
    Farewell, friends! I hear the call.
    The ship's beside the stony wall.
    Foam is white and waves are grey;
    beyond the sunset leads my way.
    Foam is salt, the wind is free;
    I hear the rising of the Sea.

    Farewell, friends! The sails are set,
    the wind is east, the moorings fret.
    Shadows long before me lie,
    beneath the ever-bending sky,
    but islands lie behind the Sun
    that I shall raise ere all is done;
    lands there are to west of West,
    where night is quiet and sleep is rest.

    Guided by the Lonely Star,
    beyond the utmost harbour-bar,
    I'll find the heavens fair and free,
    and beaches of the Starlit Sea.
    Ship, my ship! I seek the West,
    and fields and mountains ever blest.
    Farewell to Middle-earth at last.
    I see the Star above my mast!

    -- J. R. R. Tolkien
    You may ask why I would say that.

    You may even think I am insane for even thinking it, but a very valid reason can be read right here

    How long before other people without Doron Almog's connections step off of a plane somewhere in Europe only to be held as a war criminal?

    I know Kissinger is wanted on "warcrimes" charges.

    How long before it is a soldier?

    Forget saying "Fuck the french", Fuck Europe!!!!!
    A tip o' me tam to R'Cat.

    Many people are writing about this today, after all, as Chris Muir pointed out, Kos was supposed to have taken the DLC to task, promising;

    No calls for a truce will be brooked.

    Wow.....a liberal calling for a no surrender fight? How very unfrenchmanlike. Frankly, most of today's liberals calling for war is almost a joke. Even the war of idea's and solutions is being lost by them, but then it is very hard to fight a war without ammunition, and even the libs realize they have nothing left but to throw their empty weapons over their shoulders as they run away.

    If the libs want to take the DLC to task they had better have a better plan than the DLC has right now, which is nothing. They spew such goofy sentences as;

    The right course now is neither to give the terrorists a victory by withdrawing, nor to continue Bush's failed policies.

    Hhhmmm...and exactly what does that mean? Since I have your attention I will proceed to highlight some bits from the "progressive" ideas put forth by the DLC and explain just WHY those ideas are idiotic.

    First bit; (emphasis mine)

    First, we should formally disclaim any interest in permanent U.S. military bases in Iraq;

    Sounds good huh? It will happen. Yes, we are building bases over there, but we aren't going to live in tents for the next few years while we beat back these goat-shagging sheet-heads, and the Iraqi's are gonna need bases eventually.

    clearly shift the primary responsibility of defending the country to the Iraqi military (with embedded Coalition troops), and adopt a joint military strategy based on proven principles of counterinsurgency.

    First off, the Dems understand proven principles of counterinsurgency? I doubt it. I know they understand the French Principle of Counterinsurgency, which is make sure the counter is clean when the insurgents come into your lil' bistro for dinner, but seriously, the next statement shows the idiocy behind their derailed train of thought;

    The last point means abandoning Vietnam-style "search and destroy" missions against the insurgency, and instead focusing on progressively securing territory where reconstruction can proceed and normal civic life can resume.

    Now, let us follow this convoluted line of thinking. Don't chase the "insurgents" down and kill 'em, just keep 'em out of the neighborhoods where you are rebuilding, then move on out of your "secured" territory, to "secure" more territory, and watch the "insurgents", who happen to work at blending in with the local populace, and sometimes ARE the local populace, wander back in to destroy the buildings you just finished, along with killing some civilians and maybe a soldier or a few cops.

    Good plan? HELL NO!!!! You can see from the bit above that the DLC really has no clue who they are dealing with in Iraq, and have their heads firmly implanted in a place of dreams and utopian ideals. It is no coincidence that the liberals dreamland is such a ball of shit, because that is exactly where their heads actually are....up their asses.

    Let us continue with this dissection of the "progressive policy of incompetence" shall we?

    Paragraph two; (again, emphasis mine)

    Second, we should launch a new political strategy aimed relentlessly at winning Sunni support for the new government, and at isolating jihadists.

    First they want to abandon hunting terrorists, now they want to isolate them. The best, proven method of isolation for a terrorist is to isolate them in a hole in the ground, either by chasing them to the ends of the earth and keeping them penned up in a cave or by tossing them in a hole with a load of shrapnel or bullets in them. I prefer the latter method. As for gaining Sunni support for the new government, that will only come over time, as the Sunni's are (rightfully) leery of the Shia's (and after centuries of inter-tribal warfare wouldn't you be? I mean, these people have looooong memories and hold grudges that are generations removed from the offenders), and I am still not convinced that the Shia's won't decide to revive old grievances.


    We still have considerable leverage among Shi'a and Kurdish leaders; we should use it to push for confidence -- building measures like the integration of communal militias into the Iraqi army and police forces; a blanket amnesty for former Baathists not implicated in atrocities; and for intensified talks with Sunnis on supplemental protocols to the proposed constitution that would ensure a viable central government and minority rights.

    As I said above, I am not sure if the Shia's and Sunni's will ever completely get along. But we will see won't we?

    Paragraph Three; (same disclaimer as above)

    Third, we should muster all our diplomatic resources to create a more supportive international environment for the new Iraqi government. It should not be that hard to establish a UN-authorized international contact group to coordinate political support and economic assistance

    This is one of my many MAJOR problems with the DLC, and in fact, the american Left, (at least those in power). They are always ready, willing and able to run to the UN whenever the first little hiccup occurs or they feel that "someone should be in charge".

    They treat the world like 6 year olds, and bow to the UN as the parents of everyone. As for it not being that hard to establish a UN-authorized international contact group? It isn't that hard to get the UN to establish any group.

    It's getting the UN to actually do anything, (except send pedophiles as peacekeepers, or take kickbacks and bribes), that borders on the miraculous.

    So there ya' go KOS, you apparently chickened out, or got too busy rubbin' your nub, or probably realized that to take the DLC to task, (especially in a take no prisoners fashion), that you would be expected to actually have ideas that would work, and realizing that the only ideas that even have a chance of working right now are firmly considered "conservative idea's", you decided to give up and take a drubbing for talking such big shit.

    S'ok though KOS, you can always get a glass belly button or a cranial-rectal-otomy and defect to the side that knows what the hell to do besides whine about it, but then, where would we get our laughs?
    I hate the fact that there is a Miss Black America out there.

    No, not the British Rock band, although I bet they really pissed off the Miss Black America Pageant People.

    And I am not talking about the book either.

    Nope, I am talking about the pageant, and not Miss Black America herself.

    It is about goddamned time that someone stood up and said

    Enough is fucking enough people!!!!!


    Fer chrissakes, people say racism is alive and well in the good ol' U.S. of A. and they are fuckin right.

    But it aint us whities that are the ones being racist now is it?

    It's all you stupid motherfuckers out there on the left whining like a bunch of little bitches about slavery (which was bad) and crying about shit that happened well over a goddamned century ago and letting racism run through the streets and not saying a fucking word about because it is against everyone EXCEPT the blac....excuse me, african am....NO...FUCK THAT SHIT TOO BITCHES.

    BLACKS...There I said it....

    BLACKSBLACKSBLACKS!!!!!

    If I decided to start a Miss White America Pageant how fast do you think they ACLU, NAACP and a whole host of other groups would be on my ass like cat in a kettle in a chinese restaurant?

    At about the same damned speed, and that's fast.

    So, to all of you out there that aren't black, and aren't saying a damned word about Miss Black America, (which should politically correctly be called "Miss African American America", but that doesn't have a good ring now does it?), all of you whiny ass bitches out there on the left with your fucking PCitis and your overly sensitive wailing hearts and lack of common fucking sense should take a good hard look at yourself in the mirror and realize that what happened over a hundred years ago is in the past, and the best way to make up for it has already been done. There are no special laws for black vs. white. It is all equal.

    So Pray to ST.FU and realize that in your whining guilt ridden quest to make everything right and not feel like such an asshole because you have more than someone else you are promoting the very thing you set out to eradicate.

    Fucking Dumbass Liberals Fucktards.
    With a great tip o' me well worn tam to Duncan at Parrot Check (just how does one cash one of those anyway?) who gave a hat tip to Rusty at My Pet Jawa, do I bring you today's musings.

    It's funny really, that this happened across my desktop when it did, as at the time I was reading about banned cartoons. You know those old greats from when we were kids and cartoons were only on, for the most part, on saturday morning.

    We would get out of bed (eventually) and scarf down some Frosted Flakes or Capt. Crunch, or any of a dozen other sugary treats just chock full of vitamins and minerals and drowning in **gasp** WHOLE MILK while sitting in front of the TV, (which most likely did NOT have a remote) and get a full days serving of sarcasm and innuendo and never once realize that we were actually getting a wonderful foundation for our adult years, (where we would need a lot of sarcasm and innuendo), while laughing madly at Bugs Bunny making a fool of Yosemite Sam or secrectly rooting for Wile E. Coyote to finally catch that annoying little bastard of a bird.

    Remember this?

    "Yipa yipa, andele arriba".


    Yep. Speedy Gonzales.

    This should bring back memories.

    "How many lumps do ya want?"

    "Oh three or four."

    "BAMBAMBAMBAMBAMBAM"

    "Oh, sorry, one lump too many."


    Or how about this one?

    "Listen to me, I say, listen to me boy. Do ya think I'm just talking to hear my lips flap?"


    and these classics;

    "Goldarn Rabbit", Beepbeep", "Sufferin' succotash"


    Yeah, good memories.

    I was getting a bit old when the Smurfs hit the U.S. I hated the smurfs. My little sister loved the smurfs. I hated them, And that little bitch Strawberry Shortcake. And the whole Hello Kitty thing I never got either.

    Give me the good old cartoons anyday of the week. Few cartoons have measured up in recent times. Ren and Stimpy, The Animaniacs, Beavis and Butthead (though I will admit they are a guy only thing for the most part), Southpark. I am probably forgetting a few, but the point is well made that few new cartoons even approach the old days.

    However, a new cartoon may have come out that I completely have been ready to enjoy for many years. Unfortunately it is an ad campaign for UNicef.

    UNicef, for those of you with your head under a rock, is the United Nations Childrens Fund. Being against the UN in general I am of course not enamored of UNicef, or any offshoot of that most corrupt organization.

    However, is it really wise for UNicef to use funds that are supposed to go to saving children for a cartoon showing that war is bad? We all know war is bad, but also sometimes necessary. And as a fund raiser to boot?

    Of course, most libs probably have a great memory of the Smurfs, and seeing them bombed into oblivion, (where they belong, BTW, I always rooted for Gargamel) will probably get them to send money to UNicef so it can be misappropiated, misspent or doled out to lawyers defending the UN's African Rape Corps.

    But I say Good Riddance to the Smurfs. I am glad they got bombed. Papa Smurf, (a dirty old man that used Smurfette as a sex slave before the ACLU stepped in at NOW's urging and demanded that Papa Smurf take picture's of his debauchery to sell or share her with all the Smurfs, hey, fair is fair), is rumored to be in league with, and possibly related to OBL. Look at the facts. They both have a beard, they both wear a funny hat, they both have a huge nose, they both have followers that do as they say with a blind obedience and they both live where nobody but those followers can find them. In fact, they both live in a place that one needs their permission to enter.

    So, good, bomb the Smurfs. Damned blue little bastards.

    Good riddance to 'em.

    While we're at it can we take out Dora the Explorer, Barney, Spongebob and all the other nitwits and please bring back some actual cartoony goodness?

    That's all I want.

    Bugs, Daffy, Marvin the Martian, Yosemite Sam, Wile E. Coyote, Foghorn Leghorn and the rest.

    I miss those old days.

    I say kill most of the current crop of crap 'toons and bring back the classics, but it has to look legal.
    As you well know by now, the blogosphere, and the Right, especially the right, have exploded in punditry and opinionated comments, posts, rants and diatribes regarding the selection of Harriet Miers by President Bush for a seat on the Supreme Court of the United States to step in for a retiring Sandra Day O'Conner.

    I haven't said anything on this subject yet, because unlike some people, (and like my friend Kit pointed out about some of those people), I am not going to sound as if I have been living across the street from her family for twenty years.

    I, like most of you out there, had no idea this woman existed until Bush nominated her. I had heard her name, but paid so little attention that I may as well have not heard of her at all, so as I said, I really had no idea that she existed.

    Now, Time Online has a sampling of Ms. Miers writings.

    Before I get to that I wish to point out that The Washington Post had it right on September the 28th when they wrote that some expected Bush to tap Miers to replace O'Conner.

    Now, we have all heard that Miers was with a big law firm when they got embroiled in a ponzi scheme, (paid subscription needed for access to original article, so I linked to one of a very few bloggers that were willing to pay for it), and it makes me wonder, since she was a managing partner of the firm at the time, just how much she knew about it.

    We have also heard that she donated money to Gore and The DNC, but even Reagan was a democrat once upon a time, and unlike the left, those folks in and of the Right have always shown a remarkable ability to forgive the past transgressions of those that were once a Jackass!!!

    Has anyone out there even stopped amidst all of this hysteria to ponder if perhaps this leopard changed her spots, as so many have before her?

    Here are some of the things that Time Online have dug up from some of the things that Miers has written;

    "The same liberties that ensure a free society make the innocent vulnerable to those who prevent rights and privileges and commit senseless and cruel acts. Those precious liberties include free speech, freedom to assemble, freedom of liberties, access to public places, the right to bear arms and freedom from constant surveillance. We are not willing to sacrifice these rights because of the acts of maniacs."


    I want you to pay very close attention to that last sentence.

    We are not willing to sacrifice these rights because of the acts of maniacs."


    I don't know about any of you, but I like that sentiment.

    Let us not forget this gem either;

    "Punishment of wrongdoers should be swift and sure. Only then can the criminal justice system serve as an effective deterrent. Those who would choose a rule of man rather than the rule of law must not escape fitting penalty......


    Now I can't decide which of these two quotes I like better.

    However there is always some darkness with the light, and Harriet provides us a small glimpse into that darkness that lurks in the hearts of dems everywhere;

    "We all can be active in some way to address the social issues that foster criminal behavior, such as: lack of self-esteem or hope in some segments of our society, poverty, lack of health care (particularly mental health care), lack of education, and family dysfunction."


    Let me highlight a very important phrase in that quote;

    "....the social issues that foster criminal behavior, such as: lack of self-esteem...."


    She wrote that in 1992, when she was President of the Texas State Bar. That was after she gave money to the Asses on the left, but long before she joined Team Bush.

    It is hard for me to pin down when she broke ranks with the left, but it appears that she has, and the fact of Harry Reid (D-NV) seeming to like her has me wondering what he may know that we don't.

    Of course, this could be a ruse from the Left, however I doubt it. They have rarely, if ever, missed a chance to rail against Bush and frankly, even with all the education and degrees that the left brag about notwithstanding, I don't think they have the collective intelligence to pull something so spectacularly devious out of the bag on such short notice. The Left, after all, relies on division, race-baiting and diversion to accomplish their longterm goals of socialism, and have been shown to be incapable when it comes to pulling a fast one out of the hat, if I may mix metaphors. To sum that up, the left don't think very well on their feet. In fact, I believe they do their best thinking sitting down and clearing their heads, so to speak, while on the commode.

    Now, I don't know if Miers is going to be confirmed, and am very interested in what the Dems will do once they have her under the gun. If they go too nice on her, and don't try to give her the grilling they tried to give Roberts, then suspicions on the Right will heighten that Bush sold us down the river or gave in to cronyism. If, however, they try to crucify her and vote against her, then I will surmise that Harry Reid was being nice, and that the Dems were trying to pull a fast one on us after all.

    Where does the Right fall in all of this?

    Good question.

    I guess we will have to see how they vote now won't we?

    XPOSTED@The MadTech's and Cao's
    Let me ask you? Do you hate the french? I do.

    Almost as much as I hate all of those stupid jihadists.

    As far as I am concerned the french are almost completely irredeemable, an almost complete waste of protoplasm and air.

    Forget for a moment that they are the masters of appeasement, preferring to attempt to "get along" with the radicals in their midst at the peril.

    Never mind that they have no heart for protecting themselves and would rather surrender than fight.

    Don't even begin to take into consideration that they haven't actually won a war, with the notable exception of the french revolution.

    Come to think of it, they were in the Phillipines and Viet Nam before we were, and we had to go in and fight there also. The french have no ability to fight for Freedom.
    I know, I know...they came over and helped the U.S. against the Brit's during the Revolutionary War. Any indebtedness we felt for that was paid off long ago.

    No, today's rant about why the french suck is because they have more in common with the radical jihadists than they do with us.

    Now I realize that sounds like a bold statement, but consider for one moment that, according to what I have read, the radicals hate dogs. All of the dogs in paris notwithstanding if you will read this story you will see that the french seem to hate dogs too.

    STRAY dogs are being skewered on hooks and dragged behind boats as live shark bait,...


    As I said, the french suck, and the more I learn about them, the more I despise them.

    XPOSTED@The Wide Awakes and Cao's