This Page

has been moved to new address

Bloviating Zeppelin

Sorry for inconvenience...

Redirection provided by Blogger to WordPress Migration Service
Bloviating Zeppelin: January 2007

Bloviating Zeppelin

(in-ep-toc'-ra-cy) - a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

Wednesday, January 31, 2007

Is Anyone Listening? Possibly. . .

Apparently the GOP is actually beginning to consider The Pledge, and may actually be listening to some of our 32,000 thoughts.

For those unfamilar with The Pledge, it states:

If the United States Senate passes a resolution, non-binding or otherwise, that criticizes the commitment of additional troops to Iraq that General Petraeus has asked for and that the president has pledged, and if the Senate does so after the testimony of General Petraeus on January 23 that such a resolution will be an encouragement to the enemy, I will not contribute to any Republican senator who voted for the resolution. Further, if any Republican senator who votes for such a resolution is a candidate for re-election in 2008, I will not contribute to the National Republican Senatorial Committee unless the Chairman of that Committee, Senator Ensign, commits in writing that none of the funds of the NRSC will go to support the re-election of any senator supporting the non-binding resolution.

I have one further admonition: no money to the RNC, as well.

Hugh Hewitt notes that Roll Call, "the newspaper of Capitol Hill since 1955" writes:

NRSC Feels Heat on War
Conservative Radio Host Leads Campaign to Block Donations
By David M. Drucker
Roll Call Staff
January 30, 2007
As differences over the Iraq War continue to bedevil President Bush and Congressional Republicans, the debate threatens to fracture the relationship between conservative activists and Republican Senators headed for tough re-election battles in 2008.


The Web site — — boasted around 30,000 signers as of Monday, and that’s a cause of concern for Senate Republicans.

NRSC spokeswoman Rebecca Fisher said Monday the committee is taking Hewitt’s effort seriously, indicating the NRSC is concerned about the practical implications it might have on fundraising and grass-roots support for GOP Senate candidates.

“Of course we worry about the effect something like this has on online fundraising,” Fisher said. “As we explore different methods of fundraising, we have to be sure that we can effectively take advantage of every available avenue. And with a response like this blog has received, we take notice.”

Folks, only by hitting people in their WALLETS will attention be paid. And as Conservatives, we want to be HEARD.




The Nature of War

I was pondering this a few days ago after hearing some folks from a local Air America station complain that President Bush started the war in Iraq completely by himself, for no reason whatsoever. The caller had somehow conveniently managed to forget UN Resolution 1441 (adopted by the UN on 11-08-2002), and the fact that the bulk of Democrats had signed off on the invasion of Iraq -- including Clinton, Biden, et al.

This was the same station where understanding, loving, all-embracing Randi Rhodes stated that she was certain Bush had his hand in the toppling of of the Twin Towers on 09-11-01. I'm sorry boys and girls, but that one statement simply and completely eliminates all veracity for that host and for the network that pays her -- and the overarching philosophy that would allow an idea like that to foment.

(Yes, I occasionally listen to LW Air America-type radio, read the Daily Kos and peruse the pages of The New Republic to keep up with the witless thought du jour.)

That said, what is the true Nature of War now and in the future?

I submit that the "wars" we knew, WWI and WWII, were the exceptions and not the present and future rules. From now on, any time this country, I postulate, openly declares a War on another country we will thence be talking about "throw weights," MIRVs, EMPs and megadeaths.

Absent that deadly threshold, there will be "wars" (small "w") in an attempt to prevent "Wars" (large "W"). And the size of the first letter will make all the difference in the world.

We are most definitely in a "war" with Islamists, Militant Islam, however you wish to couch or phrase it. As I wrote a few days ago, Iraq is merely one front or campaign in the continuing fight. For those who think that, once we "win" in Iraq, "all will be well," are grossly mistaken. If we were to pull out completely tomorrow and satisfy all LW Democratic Capitulists (LWDCs), Islamists would STILL plot and plan to take the war, AGAIN, to our domestic soil.

It shall not stop. It shall never stop. Islam and Islamists have been emboldened by the wavering and fluctuous nature of Western Civilization and the fact that our individual country regimes change like many of us change underwear.

There is "War," which we clearly should try to avoid at all costs, and there are "wars" which shall be ongoing and in many venues. Out of Iraq? Fine, sure, go ahead.

But do not think for a moment that you have even remotely eliminated the threat.

You will have done naught but embolden it.



Tuesday, January 30, 2007

A Mixmaster Post for Tuesday

Some of these photos say it all. Does this photograph not bespeak volumes?

Then, Al Franken has decided that he is leaving Air America. And Air America is being sold. Do you then wonder why the Democrats are pushing for a return of the Fairness Doctrine? The Left and the Democrats can't make it in the Free Market with free market forces, so they have to take other measures in order to force their views. Note to Democrats: if you're so fabulous, if your ideas are so wondrous, if you are lovingly-embraced by the masses -- then where's your darned ratings? Why aren't your minions putting their ears and cash where their politics are located? Hmmm? Perhaps something to do with "after all, content is king?"


"We the sensible people of the United States, in an attempt to help everyone get along, restore some semblance of justice, avoid more riots, keep our nation safe, promote positive behavior, and secure the blessings of debt-free liberty to ourselves and our great-great-great-grandchildren, hereby try one more time to ordain and establish some common sense guidelines for the terminally whiny, guilt ridden, delusional, and other liberal bed-wetters. We hold these truths to be self-evident: that a whole lot of people are confused by the Bill of Rights and are so dim they require a Bill of NON-Rights."

ARTICLE I: You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV, or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteeing anything.

ARTICLE II: You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone -- not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc.; but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be.

ARTICLE III: You do not have the right to be free from harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be more careful, do not expect the tool manufacturer to make you and all your relatives independently wealthy.

ARTICLE IV: You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes. (This one is my pet peeve...get an education and go to work....don't expect everyone else to take care of you!)

ARTICLE V: You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we're just not interested in public health care.

ARTICLE VI: You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim, or kill someone, don't be surprised if the rest of us want to see you fry in the electric chair.

ARTICLE VII: You do not have the right to the possessions of others If you rob, cheat, or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don't be surprisedif the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won't have the right to a big screen color TV or a life of leisure.

ARTICLE VIII: You do not have the right to a job. All of us sure want you to have a job, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful. (AMEN!)

ARTICLE IX: You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to PURSUE happiness, which by the way, is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an over abundance of idiotic laws created by those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights.

ARTICLE X: This is an English speaking country. We don't care where you are from, English is our language. Learn it or go back to wherever you came from!(Finally) Article:XIThis country was founded on the belief in one true God. And yet, you are given the freedom to believe in any religion, any faith, or no faith at all; with no fear of persecution.

Go about your day folks, God bless and be safe!


Monday, January 29, 2007

Where Are The Police, Our Protection?

The US Capitol Police allowed The People's building, our building, my building, the one funded by our taxpayer dollars, the United States Capitol, to be defaced over the weekend during the war protests.

From the internet version of the newspaper The Hill:

Anti-war protesters spray paint Capitol building
By Jackie Kucinich

Anti-war protesters were allowed to spray paint on part of the west front steps of the United States Capitol building after police were ordered to break their security line by their leadership, two sources told The Hill.

According to the sources, police officers were livid when they were told to fall back by U.S. Capitol Police (USCP) Chief Phillip Morse andDeputy Chief Daniel Nichols. "They were the commanders on the scene," one source said, who requested anonymity. "It was disgusting."

There's more:

Approximately 300 protesters were allowed to take the steps and began to spray paint "anarchist symbols" and phrase such as "Our capitol building" and "you can’t stop us" around the area, the source said.

"To get that close to the Capitol building, that is ridiculous," the second source said. "[Police] were told not to arrest anyone."

The second source added that police had to stand by and watch as protesters posed in front of their graffiti.

Who gave the order for the USCP to fall back? If the order sourced from the Chief, he should be fired immediately and without pay for failure to perform the very basics of his job.

If the order came from above -- who do you suspect were the culprits?

I have my thoughts. . .


Sunday, January 28, 2007

Moonbat of the Week, Part XXV: Jimmy Carter

Once again, Jimmy Carter manages to squirm into the BZ "Moonbat of the Week" award for, oh, perhaps the 214th time.

First, let me build bit by bit. From the Israel Insider:

The more we learn about Jimmy Carter's one-sided and biased views towards Israel and her supporters in this country, the more reason we have to be deeply troubled by what he represents and the dangerous mischief he continues to foment.

There is not enough space to repeat the detailed and well documented critiques of his best selling book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid. They are, however, aptly summarized by Dr. Kenneth Stein, one of the many former aides and colleagues publicly to have disassociated themselves from the former president, who charged that: "[the book] is not based on unvarnished analyses; it is replete with factual errors, copied materials not cited, superficialities, glaring omissions, and simply invented segments."

One of the book's most egregious - and now infamous passages -- is found at page 213, where Carter advises "the general Arab community and all significant Palestinian groups" to make clear that "suicide bombings and other acts of terrorism" will end once when Israel accepts the ultimate goals of the "Roadmap." Thus the former president sanctions -- indeed encourages -- continued suicide bombings until Israel meets Arab demands. In fact, what seems to trouble him most about such Arab acts is not that they kill innocent Israeli civilians, but that they may damage sympathy for the Palestinian cause.

Carter managed to go even a bit farther in his Moonbattitude:

And, let's not ignore his interview on the Al Jazeera network during which he astonishingly proclaimed that Palestinian missile attacks against Israeli citizens do not, to his way of thinking, constitute acts of terror. Even his apparent condemnation of the killing of children and bombing buses is problematic, as it is couched in terms of damaging sympathy for the Palestinian cause. This approach is reminiscent of that employed by Arafat who, to the extent he ever was in any way critical of acts of terror, complained only because he thought it was tactically disadvantageous.

As the purveyors of Ginsu Knives say: "But wait; there's more!"

From the WorldNetDaily:

Posted: January 27, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern

"Too many Jews."

That was the comment former President Jimmy Carter scrawled on a memo suggesting prospective members of the board of the Holocaust Memorial Council.

"Too many Jews."

That was the problem Carter saw with the names suggested by Monroe Freedman, executive director of the council, he revealed in a stunning interview with WND's Jerusalem bureau chief Aaron Klein this week.

"Too many Jews."

Naturally, Freedman was shocked by the statement – given the Holocaust Memorial Council's job was to establish the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington. The Nazi Holocaust took the lives of approximately 6 million Jews during World War II.

Jimmy Carter, not only are you a Moonbat, but you are stupid, ignorant and a dangerous man.



Saturday, January 27, 2007

The Pledge: Grabbing the GOP and the NRSC By The Bucks -- Our Only Choice Left

President Bush, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Lt. General David H. Petraeus (new 4-star commander in Iraq) all agree that the additional 20,000 soldiers to Iraq would be beneficial and that capitulation would be disastrous on a monumental scale.

Earlier, Democrats wanted an increase in troops. Now, because it's a different strategy pushed by Bush, the Defeatocrats do not want an increase in troops. And various Republicans are crossing or poised to cross the aisle over to the Dems' side.

It's time to take a stand. And time for Republicans to grow a spine.

We can help the GOP with this spine-building effort in terms of cash -- the removal thereof.

This is a war. And Iraq is not The War itself; it is merely one campaign in the larger war picture. Recently four of our soldiers were abducted and shot in the head.

The GOP Starts To Cave:

Senator John Warner (R-VA), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Gordon Smith (R-Oregon), Norm Coleman (R-Minnesota), Sam Brownback (R-Kansas), Lamar Alexander (R-Tennessee) and George Voinovich (R-Ohio) are some of the Republicans going soft, slimy and invertebrate on President Bush. Warner, specifically, introduced a resolution of opposition to Bush's plan which (naturally) is being embraced by many Democrats.

Minority Leader Mitch McConnell likewise needs to be reminded of his duty to assist in the reconstruction of GOP invertebrates.

General Petraeus nailed it when Hugh Hewitt interviewed Tony Snow yesterday:

HH: But Tony Snow, did you understand General Petraeus yesterday to say as I think he said, the Biden resolution, or the Warner resolution would provide encouragement to the enemy?

TS: I mean, I believe his answer to that characterization was, and I quote, “That’s correct, sir.”

Take The Pledge:

As a result of all this, Hugh Hewitt is offering The Pledge.

The Pledge says this:

If the United States Senate passes a resolution, non-binding or otherwise, that criticizes the commitment of additional troops to Iraq that General Petraeus has asked for and that the president has pledged, and if the Senate does so after the testimony of General Petraeus on January 23 that such a resolution will be an encouragement to the enemy, I will not contribute to any Republican senator who voted for the resolution. Further, if any Republican senator who votes for such a resolution is a candidate for re-election in 2008, I will not contribute to the National Republican Senatorial Committee unless the Chairman of that Committee, Senator Ensign, commits in writing that none of the funds of the NRSC will go to support the re-election of any senator supporting the non-binding resolution.

Once on this site, it asks you to commit to The Pledge by offering your name, zipcode, blog URL and e-mail address in support.


And DO NOT vote for any invertebrate Republican who votes for the resolution, DO NOT contribute ANY money to the NRSC and, the one further step I have determined to take: I will NOT contribute ANY money to the NRC either.






The Pledge

There’s 100 seats

Where the Senate meets

To deliberate our fate

And the derrieres

That sit on those chairs

Should be good and wise and great

They should lead the land

With a steady hand

And be humble at the chore

For they hold the power

At this crucial hour

When we find ourselves at war

Will they lead the way

With a naïveté

That a sane man would condemn

Could it be thus?

They’ll stop bombing us

If we just stop fighting them!?

No, it’s time to rise

And to tell those guys

Not to hem and haw and hedge

For the undersigned

Have hereby combined

And we vow to take the pledge

If you retreat

And invite defeat

We consider that a crime

If you cast your lot

With this sorry blot

Then we won’t give you a dime

Pitfalls are rife

In the public life

And the pits are deep and vast

And the public gents

With no common sense

Could find they’re falling fast.

There’s 100 seats

Where the Senate meets

And they serve at our command

As the derrieres

That sit on those chairs

Had better understand

As of the time of my writing this post, over 23,000 persons had signed The Pledge.

Please, go there now and sign.


Friday, January 26, 2007

A Thought On Friday: Keep This List

I responded to a comment in my Wednesday post and it compelled me to expand upon its primary thought. Gayle penned a comment and I wrote:

One BZ Prediction on which you can hang your hat: There WILL be an upcoming massive WMD event, possibly even nuclear, occur on domestic continental US soil. And until this day, this hour, this second, we will PURPOSELY have not enabled us to defend ourselves because we will have been alternately crouching or taking the fetal position due to political fear or a head-in-the-sand-this-really-can't-occur mindset. Mind you: this prediction WILL see fruition. We ARE that weak."

More reasons I feel this way:

First: WE CHOOSE NOT TO PROTECT OUR BORDERS (north and south):

President Bush, American politicians and many citizens still do not "get it."


Islam and its Middle Eastern adherents are still culturally lost in the Middle Ages.


To convert all persons to Islam, and kill all those infidels or nonbelievers who refuse to convert.


1. In 1972, Carlos the Jackal helped finance and planned the hijacking of a Lufthansa airliner, with one of the 172 passengers taken hostage being Joseph Kennedy, son of the late Robert Kennedy.

2. In 1973, U.S. Ambassador to Sudan Cleo A. Noel and other diplomats were assassinated at the Saudi Arabian Embassy in Khartoum.

3. In 1980, eight rescuers died after the U.S. embassy in Iran was taken over in 1979 and 52 American hostages were held.

4. In 1982, a Palestinian terrorist planted a bomb on a Pan Am flight to Honolulu; A 15-year-old Japanese boy was killed in the blast and 15 people were injured. In 1998, Mohammed Rashid was finally tried by the USA, also implicating him in two other airline bombings--one on a Pan Am jet in 1982 in Brazil, and another on a TWA airliner over Athens in 1986. Attacks were perpetrated under the auspices of an Iraqi-based terrorist group called the May 15 Faction.

5. In 1983, a suicide car bombing at the U.S. embassy in Beirut killed 63, including 17 Americans, and wounded 120.

6. In 1983, a suicide car bomb attack against the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut killed 241 servicemen and another attack on a French base (killing 58 paratroopers) was sponsored by Iran (Ayatollah Khomeini).

7. In 1983, the French and U.S. Embassies in Kuwait were bombed, killing 6 and injuring over 80 people.

8. In 1984, CIA Beirut station chief William Buckley is kidnapped and killed after prolonged torture, with his body hidden until 1991. 8(a) In 1984, the president of the American University of Beirut was killed.

9. In 1984, a truck bomb explosion outside the U.S. Embassy annex near Beirut, injured the US and British ambassadors, and resulted in 24 people killed (two U.S. military personnel).

10. In 1984, 18 U.S. servicemen were among 83 people injured in a bomb attack on a restaurant in Spain near a U.S. Air Force Base. 10(a). In 1984, Abu Nidal followers killed Grace Cutler, 66, and Ann Van Zaten, 31, in a Paris Café.

11. In 1985, TWA flight 847, a Boeing 727 hijacking, forced the pilots to fly to Beirut, Lebanon, where a U.S. Navy diver was killed and 39 Americans hostages were held.

12. In 1985, an Egypt Air airplane bound from Athens to Malta and carrying several U.S. citizens was hijacked, killing one American and 60 others.

13. In 1985, the cruise ship Achille Lauro was hijacked, and a 70 year old, wheel-chair bound American passenger was murdered and thrown overboard by Palestinian fugitive, Abu Abbas, detained 04/15/03 by US forces in the Iraqi capital, Baghdad; Abbas was a member of the Palestinian Liberation Front.

14. In 1985, suicide attacks are carried out against U.S. and Israeli check-in desks at Rome and Vienna international airports killing 61 others besides killing 7 & wounding 12 Americans.

15. In 1985, US journalist Terry Anderson, US academic Thomas Sutherland, and then American businessman Edward Tracy are successively kidnapped in Lebanon and not released until 1991.

16. In 1985, a car bomb at a U.S. military base in Frankfurt, Germany killed two and injured 20.

17. In 1986, a bomb was detonated as TWA Flight 840 approached Athens Airport, killing four U.S. citizens. 17(a) In 1986, Pan Am Flight 73 in Karachi, Pakistan, was hijacked and the attack resulted in 22 people -- including two Americans -- being killed.

18. In 1986, two US soldiers were killed and 79 were injured in a Libyan bomb attack on a nightclub in West Berlin.

19. In 1987, American citizens Jesse Turner and Alann Steen were seized in Beirut and held until 1991.

20. In 1988, U.S. Marine Corps Lt. Col. W. Higgins was kidnapped and murdered while serving with the United Nations' (UNTSO) in southern Lebanon.

21. In 1988, the explosion of a car bomb outside a USO Club in Naples, Italy, killed one U.S. sailor.

22. In 1988, Pan Am Flight 103 while over Lockerbie, Scotland, was bombed, with 189 Americans and 167 others murdered.

23. In 1991, Iraqi agents planted bombs at the U.S. Ambassador to Indonesia's home residence and at the USIS library in Manila.

24. In 1992, A bomb exploded in a hotel in Aden, Yemen, targeting U.S. troops but killing two Austrian tourists.

25. In 1993 the World Trade Center was bombed the first time, killing six and wounding over 1000 people; Iraq may also have contributed to the murders (along with involvement in the assassination attempt of the Pope) with two suspects finding sanctuary in Iraq for this atrocity.

26. In 1993, UN troops were sent into Somalia to maintain order in the face of civil unrest that was causing widespread famine and interfering with international aid relief; 18 USA based troops were killed.

27. In 1993, authorities prevented a plot to bomb various New York landmarks by eleven men.

28. In 1995, A car bomb goes off at the U.S. military headquarters in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, killing seven people, five of them Americans, with 37 other Americans wounded. In their confession, the four terrorists accused of the crime claim to have read bin Laden communiqués.

29. In 1995, two gunmen killed two U.S. diplomats and wounded a third in Karachi, Pakistan.

30. In 1996, 14 Iraqis were indicted on charges of murder and conspiracy for the bombing that killed 19 American servicemen in Saudi Arabia (directed by Iranian government officials).

31. In 1997, two gunmen shot to death four U.S. auditors from Union Texas Petroleum Corporation and their Pakistani driver in Karachi.

32. In 1997, a Pakistani militant randomly opened fire near CIA headquarters in McLean, VA killing two and wounding seven.

33. In 1997, two bombers, Mezer and Khalif, were about to bomb the New York subway system and were captured.

34. In 1998, 12 US citizens were murdered and 7 injured when the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed – (murder total was 224 people and thousands injured); the convicted murderers were Mohamed Rashid Daoud al-'Owhali and Khalfan Khamis Mohamed, assisted by Wadih El-Hage and Mohamed Saddiq Odehby.

35. In 1998, Yemini militants kidnapped western tourists, including 2 Americans; four victims were killed during a rescue attempt.

36. In 1998, Iraq's plot to use a car-bomb in Prague to blow up Radio Free Europe was thwarted. Jabir Salim, at the Iraq embassy in Prague, was the Iraq intelligence officer Saddam Hussein entrusted with the mission, with $150,000 to recruit terrorists who would not be traceable back to Iraq.

37. In 1999, a series of attacks involving rockets, explosives, and car bombs was directed at U.S. installations in Islamabad, Pakistan a few hours before UN sanctions against neighboring Afghanistan were due to take effect.

38. In 1999, Ahmed Ressam, was caught in December, crossing the U.S.-Canadian border with a trunk-load of explosives and detonators intended for the Los Angeles airport "millenium bombing"; his leader was Amar Makhlulif, also known as Haydar Abu Doha, referred to as "the Doctor" who supervised training camps in Afghanistan run by Osama bin Laden.

39. In 2000, the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan took four U.S. citizens hostage; the Americans escaped.

40. In 2000, the USS Cole explosion killed 17 and wounded 33 sailors.

41. In 2001, a plot to bomb the U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen was narrowly averted with the arrest of 15 people; eight of the group were believed to be connected with the plot.

42. On 9/11/2001, three thousand people were murdered and many more injured when four USA airliners were hijacked and destroyed.

43. In 2001, the homicide shoe-bomber was thwarted by flight attendants and passengers in his attempt to blow up American Airlines Flight 63 from Paris to Miami with 197 people on board.

44. In 2002, reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped; at least one witness says Pearl's throat was slit by a top al-Qaeda terrorist, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, a key organizer of the Sept. 11 hijackings.

45. In 2002, while in the Phillipines, missionary Martin Burnham of Wichita, Kan. was murdered and Burnham's wife, Gracia was wounded.

46. In 2002, a carbomb blast outside the U.S. Consulate in Karachi, Pakistan killed at least eleven people and wounded more than 40.

47. In 2002, an attacker at a LA airport ticket counter killed two people and wounded three others.

48. In 2002, bombers who "hate Americans" said their real targets were U.S. citizens in the nightclub attacks that killed nearly 200 people on the resort island of Bali, Indonesia.

49. In 2002, an assassination by Al Qaida of a US diplomat, Laurence Foley, occurred in Jordan; the two killers were captured.

50. In 2002, a gunman shot dead an American woman missionary (with three bullets to the head) at a charity clinic in southern Lebanon.

51. In December 2002, three American medical workers were shot and killed, and another critically wounded inside a Southern Baptist missionary hospital in southern Yemen.

52. In January 2003, Saudi border guards arrested a Kuwaiti sniper suspected of killing one American civilian, Michael Rene Pouliot, and critically wounding another, David Caraway, in an ambush in Kuwait.

53. In February 2003, North American leader Dr. Sami Al-Arian and seven other men were charged in a 50-count indictment with operating a criminal racketeering enterprise, since 1984, that supported Palestinian Islamic Jihad; among the 100 people allegedly killed by the terror group are two U.S. citizens: Alisa Flatow, 20, and Shoshana Ben-Yishai, 16.

54. In March 2003, one American missionary was killed and three Americans injured by a bomb blast at an airport terminal in the southern Philippines; the bomb killed 21 and injured 148 people.

55. In March 2003, a killer shot and killed two oil workers from the United States and Canada and then killed himself in an oil field near Sanaa, Yemen.

56. In October, 2003, the seven arrested members of the Popular Resistance Committees, bombers of a diplomatic convoy in Gaza (killing three and wounding one American security guard) were militant Islamist Extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 41.

For these reasons (and some others) I expand on the first sentences:

  • We will witness a massive NBC event on US soil;
  • There will be thousands of casualties;
  • This will have occurred not because we could not prevent it but because we chose not to prevent it;

We have charted a lethal course and destiny for ourselves that I fear we have not the will, the intelligence or the common sense to deter or deflect.


Thursday, January 25, 2007

Obama's Tune


Wednesday, January 24, 2007

A Novel Idea: Wild Fire

Leave it to novelists to stimulate reality -- or does reality sometimes follow novelists? It was Dan Brown and Tom Clancy who first wrote of using large commercial aircraft as "flying bombs" applied to American targets. And now another novelist, Nelson DeMille, has revealed a "novel" idea which, in my opinion, should be reality.

And that idea is "Wild Fire."

This post isn't about the book; you can read it or not. It's about the idea and the fact that something like this should exist. If it does not, this nation needs to draw up and enable the implementation of this plan immediately, ready to activate, should appropriate conditions come to term.

But first, a review of one bit of Cold War history. When tensions existed between the United States and the USSR there was a seldom-mentioned but, militarily, well known theory acknowledged by both sides called MAD or "Mutually Assured Destruction." In this concept, MAD ensured the phrase "whoever shoots first dies second." That is, the theory was based upon the assumption that it would be illogical for one nation to launch a nuclear first strike if it was known that such a launch would result in an automatic and even larger "fail deadly" strike towards the aggressor, which would effectively obliterate both sides.

Plan Wild Fire is MAD taken to a 21st century Islamic degree, and that is: should a nuke ever detonate on US soil, it would be assured that US nuclear-tipped missiles would rain down upon every Islamic stronghold across the globe and not simply one country.

Nelson DeMille writes:

Wild Fire is a pro-active response. It is a gun to the heads of Islamic countries - a gun that will go off if they fail to keep their terrorist friends from going nuclear," DeMille writes.

"This is a great deterrent because nobody wants to end the world as we know it," he told me. "In 'Wild Fire,' I pose that we have something very similar to MAD. Meaning, that if a nuclear bomb went off in America, the presumption of guilt against Islamic terrorists would be very strong; we wouldn't need the proof, we'd never have the proof.

"We would automatically launch against the nation of Islam, specifically against the cities of Mecca and Medina, and other places like Damascus where we don't care for the government, and this would be a deterrent against a nuclear bomb going off in America."

Mr. DeMille makes much sense. Further, he writes:

As a citizen of this country and the world, we are trying to keep it from happening, and the only way is to say, 'If it happens, we will retaliate in a nuclear way.' What else can we do, say we will launch an investigation and find out who blew up midtown Manhattan?

"That is a game we have played for too long. We never played that with the Russians, why play the same silly game with Islamic terrorists? Some say they don't have a country, but that is not true, they know where their homeland is and so do we."

For many, perhaps over 50% of my fellow Americans, this concept would go "over the top." But for me, it is the perfect Sword of Damocles and may actually engender some fear in Militant Islam for the following reasons:

  • It is simple and it is clear; if Action A occurs, then Reaction B shall occur;
  • It does not target one nation or one spot of earth; it would target many nations and:
  • More importantly, it would specifically target Islamic religious locations around the planet

Islamists do not quake in fear at the thought of an FBI investigation with harsh language, warrants and possible arrests; they know we are the quintessential Paper Tiger nation. For Wild Fire to work we would first have to approve and create the program and then, via special envoys or messengers let it be known, sub strata and unofficially, that Wild Fire would be enabled under certain nuclear conditions.

With a plan such as this in place we could perhaps begin to relax our presence in the Middle East and more lives could be saved. Absent this I fear, I know, that it is only a matter of time before we do witness a mushroom cloud, ala "24," over a city or feature on American soil.


Sunday, January 21, 2007

Change, Part III

I never really look for anything. What God throws my way comes. I wake up in the morning and whichever way God turns my feet, I go. ~Pearl Bailey

I woke up yesterday morning and I took a walk. I put on glasses so I could see.

There were flowers growing, though it was cold. I could reach out and touch them, they were physical, I rubbed my thumb and forefinger on their fragile petals. They were a living manifestation of beauty.

Along my path was a small brook cutting its jagged way down the hill, winding under the road and then emptying further down and disappearing into the pines beyond. I could hear its speech and watched blades of grass mix with the water and drift with the flow.

I walked further and could hear the lonesome horns of an approaching train, then heard the massive strength of its four locomotives struggling up the hill, the engines giving vibration to my lungs. I looked at a few leaves left on nearby trees and marveled at their greater, quiet, incredible strength this time of year.

I finished my walk in solitude, examined the crackling-sharp cerulean sky, awed with the majesty of the young and old pines and firs and having noticed what I should notice each day: the smallest bit of moss to the blue above and the ebon beyond. It is a miracle that I should have awakened today and a blessing if I do so tomorrow. Where have I been? How has my life passed so quickly to this point? What have I done? What is the point? What is my purpose? How were all these beautiful things possible? How did they get here? Big questions. My mind ached. I needed more than glasses to See.

I couldn't manage the problems I laid on myself

And it just made it worse when I laid them on somebody else

So I finally surrendered it all brought down in dispair

I cried out for help and I felt a warm comforter there.

And I came to believe in a power much higher than I

I came to believe that I needed help to get by

In childlike faith I gave in and gave him a try

And I came to believe in a power much higher than I

Nothing worked out when I handled it all on my own

And each time I failed it made me feel twice as alone

Then I cried, "Lord there must be a sure and easier way

For it just cannot be that a man should lose hope every day.

Yes, I came to believe in a power much higher than I.

-- Johnny Cash, I Came To Believe, American V, 2006

I don't think I happened to believe in God; I think I've come to believe in God.


Saturday, January 20, 2007

Moron Global Warming

A page ripped from the "Touting Global Warming Is Now Profitable Business And So Shut Up And Let Us Make Our Money" workbook:

Well, well. Some “climate expert” on “The Weather Channel” wants to take away AMS certification from those of us who believe the recent “global warming” is a natural process. So much for “tolerance”, huh?

I have been in operational meteorology since 1978, and I know dozens and dozens of broadcast meteorologists all over the country. Our big job: look at a large volume of raw data and come up with a public weather forecast for the next seven days. I do not know of a single TV meteorologist who buys into the man-made global warming hype. I know there must be a few out there, but I can’t find them. Here are the basic facts you need to know:

Billions of dollars of grant money is flowing into the pockets of those on the man-made global warming bandwagon. No man-made global warming, the money dries up. This is big money, make no mistake about it. Always follow the money trail and it tells a story. Even the lady at “The Weather Channel” probably gets paid good money for a prime time show on climate change. No man-made global warming, no show, and no salary. Nothing wrong with making money at all, but when money becomes the motivation for a scientific conclusion, then we have a problem. For many, global warming is a big cash grab.

Like we didn't already know this?



By the way, read the complete link. Quite interesting.

Friday, January 19, 2007

The Fairness Doctrine: Coming Back To A Licensee Near You

Those who read my blog know how certain factions operate:

Kids know: if Dad will say no, ask Mom.

Democrats know: if we can't pass our social agendas via the lawful vote, then we'll stack the courts with liberal judges and have the judicial branch invert the law.

Democrats know: now that the Right and Conservatives have found their voices by way of the new media, to include television news (Fox), blogs (too numerous to count), internet sites (too numerous to count), magazines, the occasional newspaper and, moreover, radio, now it's time to re-take absolute control of radio once again via the "Fairness Doctrine," and it's time to be punitive and take their pound of flesh because they can.

The Fairness Doctrine:

From 1949 until 1987 (when it was discontinued by the Federal Communications Commission) broadcasters, as a condition of getting their licenses from the FCC, were required to cover controversial issues in their community, and to do so by offering "balancing views."

Following a 1974 US Supreme Court ruling (Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Tornillo (418 U.S. 241) where the Court wrote that the doctrine "inescapably dampens the vigor and limits the variety of public debate," a second ruling, the 1984 SCOTUS case FCC v. League of Women Voters, 468 U.S. 364, concluded that the scarcity rationale underlying the doctrine was "flawed" and that the doctrine was "limiting the breadth of public debate" once again.

The FCC then, in 1987, discontinued the Fairness Doctrine and wrote:

We no longer believe that the Fairness Doctrine, as a matter of policy, serves the public interests. In making this determination, we do not question the interest of the listening and viewing public in obtaining access to diverse and antagonistic sources of information. Rather, we conclude that the Fairness Doctrine is no longer a necessary or appropriate means by which to effectuate this interest. We believe that the interest of the public in viewpoint diversity is fully served by the multiplicity of voices in the marketplace today and that the intrusion by government into the content of programming occasioned by the enforcement of the doctrine unnecessarily restricts the journalistic freedom of broadcasters. Furthermore, we find that the Fairness Doctrine, in operation actually inhibits the presentation of controversial issues of public importance to the detriment of the public and in degradation of the editorial prerogative of broadcast journalists."

In 1987 President Ronald Reagan vetoed another FD bill and, in 1991, President GHW Bush vetoed as well.

Opponents of the Fairness Doctrine have included New York Governor Mario Cuomo, and broadcaster Rush Limbaugh. Cuomo argued that, "Precisely because radio and TV have become our principal sources of news and information, we should accord broadcasters the utmost freedom in order to insure a truly free press." Limbaugh argued that there should be no government fairness standards on broadcasters, since there are none on the print press.

But now that the Democrats are in majority, the sterling Dennis Kucinich has reintroduced a bill to bring back the Fairness Doctrine because, you see, it's all about control and what you can't have via the fair marketplace or by the fair vote, one must acquire by the unfair ruling or unfair bill.

It's a means of turning commentary into news. The Left cannot stand free market ideas. I doubt the idea would be surfacing now if, for example, Air America were making millions and millions of dollars.

This has absolutely nothing, particularly being sponsored by Kucinich (an out-and-out Ohio nutjob), to do with "fairness" or "equinimity." It has to do with power, control, and an attempt to smash a voice of the Conservatives now that, only after a few years, we have found our voice.

From the Radio Equalizer:

At the "Conference for Media Reform" in MEMPHIS FRIDAY, Rep. DENNIS KUCINICH (D-OH), making a surprise appearance, said that in his new capacity as Chairman of the Domestic Policy Subcommittee of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, he would hold hearings on media ownership and the restoration of the Fairness Doctrine.

"We know the media has become the servant of a very narrow corporate agenda," KUCINICH said, adding that "the entire domestic agenda has been ignored while the focus has been on the acceleration of wealth upwards." "We are now in a position to move a progressive agenda to where it is visible," the OHIO Congressman and Presidential candidate said.

Very narrow corporate agenda? How many massive conglomerates own newspapers? How many massive conglomerates own TV broadcast stations? How many conglomerates own strings of magazines -- to include off-shore interests (Hachette-Fillipacci)?

If this goes down again, moreover, how will this affect blogs? We've already had the issue with the potential licensing of blogs which tend to express one view over another.

This is another shadowed Left/Democratic idea that attempts to make everyone and everything equal. Life isn't equal. Life isn't fair. The market determines to a great degree what will succeed. And of course, an equal application of the FD -- will it apply equally to Air America and to individual Left/Liberal broadcasters? What about blogs? Absent that, if the FD comes back to life broadcaster Michael Savage has already publically stated he has acquired a First Amendment attorney who will sue to ensure that he will have equal time on ABC, CBS or NBC.

What about e-mails?

Another stupid Democratic, whining idea -- an idea applied to one area and not another. Huh. Maybe like Starkist and the federal minimum wage not being applied EQUALLY in American Samoa because -- imagine this -- Pelosi's husband owns a ton of stock in Starkist?


Thursday, January 18, 2007

What Is Bush Thinking?

From The Financial Times:

The White House has agreed in a significant policy reversal to place its controversial domestic spying programme under court supervision .

President George W. Bush will not reauthorise the “Terrorist Surveillance Programme”, which allows the National Security Agency to intercept the communications of Americans suspected of links to al-Qaeda or affiliated groups without a court warrant.

Is it likely that Bush knows the Democrats will come out swinging on this issue, as well as what we've seen on others, to include extra troops in Iraq? Or, is it because Bush knows he won't get support from his own party?

Are we now simply conceding everything to the Democrats, no matter the cost, no matter the stand, no matter the issue?


Tuesday, January 16, 2007

Change, Part II

This "agnostic" thing isn't working out well for me.

I sense a profound change in the air.


Monday, January 15, 2007

Clyde Crashcup Presents:

A COMPILATION OF VERY IMPORTANT BUT LITTLE-KNOWN SCIENTIFIC PRINCIPLES related to Certain Peculiar Laws of Inexactitude, Perversity and Whimsey in Scientific Endeavor.

MURPHY'S LAW: If anything can go wrong, it will.

SKINNER'S CONSTANT: That quantity which, when multiplied by, divided by, added to, or subtracted from the answer you get, gives you the answer you should have gotten (this is known in some circles as Finnegan's Fudge Factor).

HORNER'S FIVE-THUMB POSTULATE: Experience varies directly with equipment ruined.

CAHN'S AXIOM: When all else fails, consider reading the accompanying instruction sheet.

SPARE PARTS PRINCIPLE: The accessability, during recovery of small parts which fall from the work bench, varies directly with the size of the part -- and inversely with its importance to the completion of the task underway.

GUMPERSON'S LAW: The probability of a given event occurring is inversely proportional to its desirability.

THE ORDERING PRINCIPLE: Those supplies necessary for yesterday's experiment must be ordered no later than tomorrow, noon.

TRANSCRIPTION SQUARE LAW: The number of errors made is equal to the sum of the "squares" employed.

CHISHOLM'S LAW OF HUMAN INTERACTION: Anytime that things appear to be going better, you have overlooked something.

RIDDLE'S CONSTANT: There are coexisting elements in frustrational phenomena which separate expected results from achieved results.

THEORY OF INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF PHILOSOPHIC ENGINEERING: In any calculation, any error which can creep or slink or sidle in, will.

RULE OF ACCURACY: When working toward the solution of a problem, it always helps if you know the answer.

COROLLARY TO THE RULE OF ACCURACY: Provided, of course, that you actually know there is a problem.



Sunday, January 14, 2007

Our Coming Military

Bushwack, under his newly-revamped blog American and Proud, has a wonderful post about the clear and significant contrast between the USS Ronald Reagan, CVN 76, and the USS William Jefferson Clinton, CVS1. Please check out the post and note the historical, mechanical and operational differences. Bravo, Bushwack!

In keeping with this theme, I should like to submit my views of our future military, impacted as it likely shall be if the Democrats are completely in charge of the House, Senate and Presidency. Though these images are indeed disturbing and not for the faint of heart, please note: no Republican bytes were harmed in the creation of this post.

To wit:

Saturday, January 13, 2007

Democratic Womyn: Not So Nice, Not So Truthful

Two Democratic womyn have made headlines recently and no, they haven't much been truthful or nice. Yes, I know, here comes the sound of cheeks being slapped. Shut up!

Barbara Boxer: Role Reversal?

For whatever reason, Fornicalia Senator Barbara Boxer decided it was time to unload on Condi Rice yesterday when the Secretary of State spoke in front of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in support of President Bush's strategic change in Iraq with regard to the addition of troops.

According to the New York Post, Boxer barked:

"Who pays the price? I'm not going to pay a personal price," Boxer said. "My kids are too old, and my grandchild is too young."

Then, to Rice: "You're not going to pay a particular price, as I understand it, with an immediate family. So who pays the price? The American military and their families."

Slap. Right cross. Uppercut.

(As an aside: this is the same military staffed, according to Charlie Rangel, only by po' black folk and other minorities with higher melanin counts -- not. See this report from the Heritage Foundation.)

Here's what happened: Barbara Boxer essentially said that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is an ineffective leader and cannot make appropriate, lawful, logical and cogent decisions regarding the war in Iraq because she has no children to sacrifice to this war.

Let's stand back and examine this, on its face.

First: the prior Democratic administration, that of William Jefferson Clinton, he of the most ethical presidential administration in history (he said it), did not find it within himself to appoint a black Secretary Of State. Nor a black female SOS. Nor a black unmarried female who has chosen career over child-rearing.

And, am I wrong in thinking that the Democrats are the party of not only tolerance but that of diversity on all levels? How much more diverse is Condi Rice? Black? Female? Career woman?

But you see, in truth, as the Democrats have clearly revealed here, it's not about tolerance or diversity. It's about agenda.

Besides, as Barbara Boxer has so wonderfully explained with her insulting and ridiculous comments here, she considers Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice nothing more than Bush's House Nigger and, as the BHN, subject to any inane blathering or series of insults she wishes to heap upon Secretary Rice, the quintessential political professional, so much so that many openly advocate her running for President in 2008.

Rice, of course, made good account of herself in response:

I guess that means I don't have kids. Was that the purpose of that?" Rice said. "Well, at the time I just found it a bit confusing frankly. But in retrospect, gee, I thought single women had come further than that. That the only question is are you making good decisions because you have kids?"

I like to put the shoe on the other foot, so I ask: did this little act make anyone's MSM page 1? Anywhere? Takers? Links? Proof? I thought not. The DEM (Defeatist, Elitist Media) have buried this little gem back a few pages near the produce ads for Piggly Wiggly.

But what, Boys and Girls, do you think would have happened had a GOP'er made a similar comment to a black, female, career DEMOCRAT? Or if that commenter had been, even worse, a male and (Heaven forbid!) Caucasian?

Boxer, you're an idiot.

Democratic Speaker Nancy Pelosi: A Fishy Minimum Wage?

On Wednesday, January 10th, the House voted to raise the federal minimum wage from $5.15 to $7.25 per hour. That's an issue for another post entirely. Absent that, the bill also brings, for the first time ever, a minimum wage to the US territory of the Northern Mariana Islands. However, it exempts American Samoa, another Pacific island territory numerous miles to the southeast, that would become the only US territory not subject to federal minimum-wage laws.

But wait: why would that be?

Could it be because Del Monte Corporation, which owns StarKist Tuna, has its global headquarters in San Francisco which -- ta-da!! -- is represented by Speaker Nancy Pelosi?

But wait; there's more: one of the largest opponents of the federal minimum wage in Samoa is StarKist Tuna, which owns one of the two packing plants that together employ more than 5,000 Samoans, or nearly 75 percent of the island's entire work force.

The Democrats were all about how theirs would be the flowering Dawn of a New Era. Again: not. And now that they've come into majority theirs, so ridiculously soon, is nothing more than hypocrisy abetted by the DEM.

Insults, coverups and lies from the Dems' sterling womyn -- and it's only the first month.


Friday, January 12, 2007


There are certain things that many of us suspect regarding the denizens of New Orleans -- to include the city administration as well -- things that might have something, perhaps, to do with the molasses-like repair of the city itself. I really do not believe I have to be any more precise or explicit than that. I'm sure you're reading adequately between the sentences.

So it should come as no shock to you -- and clearly was no shock to me -- to recently learn of the following situation in the city of New Orleans abetted by their current (but elected!) do-nothing administration. From the Associated Press:

Thousands marched on City Hall on Thursday (January 11th), seeking an end to the violence that has claimed nine lives in this struggling city since New Year's Day.

Further, the story indicates:

Mayor Ray Nagin, the object of many marchers' jeers and protest signs, watched from behind a podium but did not take part in the rally at the behest of organizers.

"We want to open a dialogue, but this was not the time. It would have been too big a shift from listening to the people to suddenly have a politician talking," said Baty Landis, a Tulane University professor and music club owner who helped organize the march.

Oh fine. Enough with the punch-pulling. New Orleans is a corrupt city, in a corrupt state, run by corrupt, cerebrally-challenged officials led by Mayor Ray Nagin who is himself, on the finest of days, a complete dolt, not to mention a racist.

Nagin no more has an idea how to stop these murders than does my friend's hamster, Wally. And sadly, no one within that city can stop the murders, should further murderers decide to continue the trend. Oh, and a little statistic for you: New Orleans had 161 homicides last year, the lowest total in 60 years. But the population was way down from its pre-Katrina total of 455,000, and is still only about 200,000. In comparion: Sacratomato City and County in Fornicalia has 1.7 million people. Last year there were a combined total of 58 homicides.

New Orleans is a morally and culturally bankrupt city, inhabited by many morally and culturally bankrupt citizens and "managed" (sorry, I absolutely could not bring myself to write the word "led") by a morally and culturally bankrupt administration.

For Christ's sake people, you re-elected the fool -- what did you think you would get?


Thursday, January 11, 2007


"What a long, strange trip it's been."
Truckin', by The Grateful Dead
I recently returned from an ocean trip with my fiance to the Fornicalia coast. We saw the crashing twenty-foot winter waves assaulting the cliffs of Mendocino. We stayed in a hotel with a jetted hot tub just underneath a window providing a western view to the Pacific and the jetties lining the entrance to Noyo Harbor. The photo below is what I saw through the window.
Adjacent to the tub was a gas fireplace. At dusk the gulls and other birds wheeled by at eye-level whilst the waves pounded, the surf hissed as we listened through the slightly open patio door, and we watched the sun dissolve into the horizon as the fog approached, a foghorn sounding.
And yet, despite that, there is a serious unease I sense in my world. What should be comforting and relaxing merely delayed what I somehow knew was coming, lurking, hulking, in the back of my mind. A sense of something more than myself, of anxiety, of a pressing, looming presence, that nagged at the back of my brain while I attempted to enjoy my fiance and the surroundings.
It wasn't until I had gotten home a few nights ago that I recalled the significance of this new year; it wasn't that I hadn't made resolutions. No; I had made them and then, buttressed by this feeling, decided that I was going to take these resolutions most seriously. I would change my health patterns entirely.
It wasn't until this morning that I realized the source of my bad feelings.
I awakened at 4:30 am, sat bolt upright in bed and put on my clothes. It was pitch dark outside, the pines slightly blowing. I checked the thermometer: 25-degrees. I felt enclosed, trapped in the bedroom. I had to get outside. I grabbed the keys and began driving and thinking.
And then it came to me, the reason for my anxiety: it was 2007.
In my life, as far back as I can recall, very bad things have occurred to me in years ending with the number 7. To mention a few things not too private to express in public:
  • 1977: I ended a tumultuous relationship with a serious girlfriend and lost my job;
  • 1987: I was told my wife wanted a divorce; I got into a major accident on I-5, that made my vehicle a full 2' less wide than when issued from the factory; I was shot at twice while on my new job;
  • 1997: I had some other personal experiences that almost completely severed the relationship with my parents; I had to leave one privileged assignment for a completely demeaning assignment due to a series of political maneuvers and lies at work;
  • There were many other issues I cannot mention.
And now 2007. I have a crushing anxiety. Sleep has been minimal. I have a very bad feeling about this year. And I have a overarching sense of mortality, such that I have been re-evaluating every aspect of my life and asking various Large Questions. Important questions.
Change is in the air for me. I know not how or when, or if it will be good or bad. It is not helping that my fiance has just now been assigned to a new work schedule which leaves us with roughly one congruent day off together. I will not be able to share any more meals with her. I will be asleep when she returns from work, and I will leave for work while she sleeps. My bed was empty last night. It will be empty tonight.
There is a shoe present and I sense it is about to fall.

Wednesday, January 03, 2007

Resolutions for 2007: The GOP

Many people determine to make resolutions for the coming New Year; the New Year is now here. Question for you: what do you believe the GOP needs to do to remake itself for 2007? What should the GOP do in order to make itself credible, powerful and more aligned with its Conservative goals?

I have a few thoughts. To wit:

  • We need to simply spend less;
  • We need to have an enforced firm, consistent and fair ethics set;

Globally, the GOP needs to:

  • Stand up
  • Bark back
  • Bite back

The GOP seemed, to me, to have forgotten for the past 6 years what to do with Power. They need, further, to:

  • Limit government;
  • Lower taxes across the board or even create a Flat Tax;
  • Secure our borders absolutely;
  • Push for Energy Independence, starting with ANWR;
  • Defend this country from within and without.

America needs:

  • Honesty and Truth in Government;
  • Honesty and Truth in Bills: no riders on any bill whatsoever -- clarity only.
  • Honesty and Truth in Funding: when specific individual bills encumber money, they can ONLY encumber money for that specific bill; the cash cannot be diverted for any other purpose;
  • Honesty and Truth in Campaigning: campaign funding limited to $100 maximum per person or corporation;

And trust me, the Democrats will not be extending hands across the aisle.

The Democrats take control of Congress this Thursday and are planning to kick Republicans under the bus from the get-go, deciding to press for new ethics rules for lawmakers (on its face, a good idea -- but will ethics apply to both sides of the aisle if, in practice, at all?), a minimum wage raise (on the heels of Fornicalia's doing precisely this, now to $7.50 from $6.75, with the City and County of San Francisco changing their minimum wage to $9.14), more cash for stem cell research and interest rate cuts on student loans.

From the Washington Post:

But instead of allowing Republicans to fully participate in deliberations, as promised after the Democratic victory in the Nov. 7 midterm elections, Democrats now say they will use House rules to prevent the opposition from offering alternative measures, assuring speedy passage of the bills and allowing their party to trumpet early victories.

This is in keeping with Pelosi saying there will be no witch-hunt committees to impeach Bush or impale him with endless investigations. Read: they will conduct endless witch-hunts and instigate endless investigations.

That was my list of GOP Resolutions for 2007.

What's yours?



I will be away from the Blogosphere for a bit, as I take my fiance to the Fornicalia coast for a Crab Festival, a very nice hotel, a "couples massage" and some whale watching tours.

Likely it will be raining -- perhaps even horizontally so -- at the coast and we are well aware of that chance. However, should this occur, we have brought books and are looking forward to spending time reading together. Ever exist in a relationship wherein you're sufficiently comfortable that just being with that person in the same room is comforting? It's a wonderful feeling of comfort and security. If I acquire decent photos, I'll post some when I return.

Take care, and hold the ones you love close; never miss an opportunity to tell those you love precisely that.

Tuesday, January 02, 2007

Welcome to 2007 From Iran: More of the Same

Ah yes, things wouldn't be the same without our good Iranian friend, President Ahmadinnerjacket, who deigned to ring in the new year (does Islam recognize the calendar system? Something tells me I should know this) with another standard Moonbat proclamation (along the lines of the Holocaust never occurring): "I want you to know that the Iranian nation has humiliated you many times, and it will humiliate you in future."

Ahmadinnerjacket was responding today to the United Nations' Security Council's unanimous resolution, last month, to ban all countries from selling materials and technology to Iran that could contribute to its nuclear and missile programs.

The UN also froze the assets of 10 Iranian companies and 12 individuals related to those programs.

Any thoughts or feelings about the future of Iran/US relations in 2007?