The ingrates on the Left

Travelling home from work on Leftist invention MASS TRANSIT, I peered out my window and spied an idiot sitting in his rusted out Chevy Blazer (if you live in Minnesota, you understand the concept of "rust"); said Blazer was absolutely covered with bumper stickers of varying liberal wisdom.

I believe the phrase, "liberal wisdom" is paradoxical in meaning.

The bumper stickers consisted of typical statements discussing the intelligence of President George Bush, the "war on the environment," "coexisting" with patrons of other religions, etc. One in particular caught my eye:

"Civil Rights: Don't Leave Home Without It."

A couple of thoughts come to mind at such "brilliance."

First, as Terrence Jeffrey so aptly states in his article, "This has been President Bush's primary aim ever since Sept. 11, 2001. And no matter what else Bush's critics say about him, there is one thing they cannot say: He allowed Islamic terrorists to hit our homeland again. In the almost seven years since Sept. 11, 2001, Islamic terrorists have failed to carry out a single attack inside our country."

Juxtapose that with the terrorist acts that occurred under the watch of President Bill Clinton: the 2000 USS Cole bombing, the 1998 dual embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, the 1993 WTC bombing, the Khobar Tower bombings, etc. After each attack, our response was weak and ineffectual at best. Furthermore, when opportunity existed to either kill or capture Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, Clinton and Attorney General Janet Reno waffled, too concerned with 1.) how the world would view us; and 2.) the legal ramifications of either killing or capturing the terrorist leader.

Global opinion...we're hearing some of that familiar rhetoric now as Democratic presidential candidate Barry Hussein Obama returns to the United States after his "tour" (think "rock star" which is how the public and the American press treated him) of Europe, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Barry wants to correct our image in the world after eight years of a Bush Administration not giving a damn, and rightfully so, of world opinion.

As stated in a recent BBC article, "'In Europe, the view that America is part of what has gone wrong in our world, rather than a force to help make it right, has become all too common,' he continued. 'In America, there are voices that deride and deny the importance of Europe's role in our security and our future.'"

Look what world opinion did for us in the 1990's: between Clinton's philandering, and his emasculated responses to Islamic terror, terrorists reviled us for our immorality; moreover, they knew that any military retaliation to bombings, killings, etc, would be met with tepidness at best, further emboldening the terrorists.

So look where that has led us: to bitching and moaning from the Left that President Bush, in his efforts to prevent any further terrorist attacks in this country, has usurped the United States Constitution. The Leftist intelligensia has decried him for stealing their first amendment rights., for eavesdropping on all of our phone calls, for "spying" on us.

It's almost laughable...but it isn't when you see how liberals and their Democratic enablers are looking to restrict free speech through their reintroduction of the Fairness Doctrine. As the Heritage Foundation notes, "Legislation currently is before Congress that would reinstate a federal communications policy known as the 'fairness doctrine.'"

Note the following regarding the constitutionality of the Fairness Doctrine:

"The fairness doctrine's constitutionality was tested and upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in a landmark 1969 case, Red Lion Broadcasting v. FCC (395 U.S. 367). Although the Court then ruled that it did not violate a broadcaster's First Amendment rights, the Court cautioned that if the doctrine ever began to restrain speech, then the rule's constitutionality should be reconsidered. Just five years later, without ruling the doctrine unconstitutional, the Court concluded in another case that the doctrine 'inescapably dampens the vigor and limits the variety of public debate' (Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Tornillo, 418 U.S. 241). In 1984, the Court concluded that the scarcity rationale underlying the doctrine was flawed and that the doctrine was limiting the breadth of public debate (FCC v. League of Women Voters, 468 U.S. 364). This ruling set the stage for the FCC's action in 1987. An attempt by Congress to reinstate the rule by statute was vetoed by President Ronald Reagan in 1987, and later attempts failed even to pass Congress."

And now Nancy Pelosi and her Democratic cronies in Congress, rather than address real issues like opening up off-shore areas for drilling, wish to suppress our First Amendment Rights. As "Current FCC Chairman James Quello, has stated that, 'The fairness doctrine doesn't belong in a country that's dedicated to freedom of the press and freedom of speech.'"

The article makes the following points in its treatise:

Faulty Premise #1: The "scarce" amount of spectrum space requires oversight by federal regulators.

Reality: Although the spectrum is limited, the number of broadcasters in America has continuously increased.

Faulty Premise #2: "Fairness" or "fair access" is best determined by FCC authorities.

Reality: FCC bureaucrats can neither determine what is "fair" nor enforce it.

Faulty Premise #3: The fairness doctrine guarantees that more opinions will be aired.

Reality: Arbitrary enforcement of the fairness doctrine will diminish vigorous debate.

Once again, and doesn't history demonstrate this repeatedly, Liberals have displayed their hypocrisy and complete utter denial of the truth. God help us if Barry Hussein wins the presidency.

Message to Barry Obama: You're NOT running for European president

...so quit pandering to the weak, emaciated, spineless appeasers there.

Regarding the Iraq War and toppling Saddam Hussein and his murderous regime: we merely enforced 16 United Nations resolutions to which Saddam violated. Ousting the "Butcher of Baghdad" should have been done at some point in the 12 years prior to the 2003 United States invasion.

Furthermore, who's side is Obama on? In a pathetic attempt to grovel, Barry pandered to 200,000 fans at a rally in Berlin, undoubtedly appeasing those willing to cower and surrender, ultimately waiting for the United States to do their dirty work, than stand up for anything real.

We've heard from Barry, ad nauseum, that we need to emulate Europeans more; I'm assuming, besides adopting the horrors of socialized medicine, that includes the aforementioned appeasing, $10 dollar a gallon gas, shady deals with third-world despots, anti-semitism, and the inability (with notable exceptions: Britain, Poland, Bulgaria, etc) to combat terrorism and the intolerance associated with its "Religion of Peace."

Note this comment from Barry Hussein, courtesy of NewsMax.com:

"'Instead of worrying about whether immigrants can learn English,' Obama told a Georgia audience, '. . . you need to make sure your child can speak Spanish.”

Obama then quickly attempted to broaden and blur his statement, adding: “We should have every child speaking more than one language.

'It’s embarrassing,' he continued, 'when Europeans come over here, they all speak English; they speak French; they speak German. And then we go over to Europe and all we can say is ‘Merci beaucoup.’”

Typical elitist-speak from Barry. I'm surprised the McCain camp hasn't jumped all over the elitist rhetoric. Barry has demonstrated repeatedly that he's grossly out of touch with the general American populace. Furthermore, he and his Democratic brethren, while pandering to the environmental lobby, are bleeding this country.

Advice to McCain: move on this.

He cheated on his wife with...with...HER?

According to the National Ledger, "Edwards literally ran away from them as they tried to confront him in the early morning hours as to why he was in the same hotel as Rielle Hunter."

Furthermore, according to the National Enquirer, "Edwards had a fling with this woman and the magazine claims there is a love child that has now been born."

Dude, my advice to you: if you're going to be a complete a**hole and commit infidelity on your wife, thus forever tarnishing your marriage (not to mention your credibility)...do it right.

Of course, maybe that's the best he could have done?

Al Franken and other Democrats: Denying the Truth on Energy

Message to Stuart Smalley: it's called "reality on the ground."

According to a story in KAALtv.com, Franken states, "(A)s far as a solution to combat high gas prices… 'We need electric hybrid cars. We need rail. We need to have a rail that comes down to the Twin Cities to Rochester. We need to rethink our whole energy system,' said Franken.

Al Franken agrees with offshore drilling but says it won’t solve all our problems."

It won't?

The boneheads on the Left urge us to eliminate our dependence on foreign oil; furthermore, they advocate fairly unreliable energy solutions, such as wind and solar power. The bottom line is this: oil is a vital cog to the health of our economy. You eliminate oil/gas, the economy suffers. Cheap energy helps our businesses and keeps more money in our pockets.

According to Foxnews.com, "

The area north of the Arctic Circle has an estimated 90 billion barrels of undiscovered, technically recoverable oil and 1,670 trillion cubic feet of technically recoverable natural gas, the U.S. Geological Survey announced Wednesday.

The USGS said technically recoverable resources are those produced using currently available industry practices and technology.

The Arctic accounts for about 13 percent of the world's undiscovered oil and 30 percent of the undiscovered natural gas, the USGS reported."

That's a start...

Instead, we have a laughable, completely emasculated Democratic congress, led by the worst Speaker of the House in the history of the institution, Nancy Pelosi, has refused to allow any votes that would allow a vote on offshore drilling or ANWAR. Furthermore, she knows that's what the people wants, but the seditious, enemy-of-the-people, environmental lobby is more concerned with the "view from the coast" rather than the health and wealth of the American populace.

Here's a message to the Defeatist party: at one time you purported to represent the working class citizen. Instead, your part has become so such saturated with radical fringe groups that you've now become a shell of our former self. Every day you stall on the energy issue (e.g. refusing to allow votes to come to the Floor; or refusing to lift the off-shore drilling ban) is more nail in your coffin.

This country is in serious trouble, economically; cheap energy could be a boost.

U of M Professor's Threat to Desecrate the Eucharist

Where's the respect, you ignorant, godless f*ck?

After threatening to desecrate the Holy Bible on his blog, Pharangyla, University of Minnesota biology professor Paul Z. Myers has now vowed to desecrate both the Holy Bible and the Koran. According to Catholiconline.com, "Professor Myers says that 'Thanks to all those who have demanded that I treat that silly book [the Koran] with disrespect, I’ll have to treat both equally.'"

To be honest, it doesn't really make me feel better. In fact, Myers should have the common decency to refrain from taking a big dump, or whatever other vile act he wishes to commit, on both the Holy Bible and the Koran.

One of the hallmarks of our society is our ability to TOLERATE other beliefs, whether it's religious beliefs, political beliefs, etc. In this author's humble opinion, Myers should demonstrate his supposed sophistication and avoid said desecration.

"'The latest threat by Myers only makes matters worse. Instead of treating Catholicism with the respect he has previously shown for Islam, he now pledges to disrespect Islam the way he pledges to disrespect Catholicism (once again!). This is his idea of equal treatment.'"

Some of us on the Right abhor the Islamic faith to such a degree that if Myers had proposed to desecrate the Koran, we might turn a blind eye to such a disrespectful act. Personally, I think it's important to employ the WWJD (What Would Jesus Do) mantra when contemplating such acts. The Good Lord would want us to "turn the other cheek" and "love your neighbor."

There's a time and place to combat militant Islam; our just wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are evidence of that.

Compounding the "Myer's Problem" is that the University of Minnesota, in its Moral Relativism, has refused to excoriate Myers on the matter. According to CNA.com (Catholic News Agency):

"Daniel Wolter, the News Service Director in the Office of University Relations at the University of Minnesota, reiterated in an e-mail to CNA that Professor Myers’ views 'do not reflect the views of the University of Minnesota.'"

Chancellor Jacqueline Johnson, in a blatant display of leftist, pie-in-the-sky, elitist ignorance, has herself demonstrated 1.) an absolute disregard for organized religion; and 2.) implied that Myers is acting in the name of Science.

"She said personal and intellectual engagement at the school is done in 'in the framework of intellectual and critical inquiry, not from a platform of name-calling and derogation.'"

Growing weary of the Global Warming hoax? A review of the case AGAINST global warming

Anyone else getting tired of global warming politics being shoved down our collective throats? It's the far-Left's modus operandi to force their blithe, abhorrent agenda on us, whether it's the aforementioned global warming garbage, alternative lifestyles, open borders, socialized medicine, etc.

Three aspects of the global warming "phenomenon" drive me crazy:

1. The politics of the global warming hoax have seeped into our very existence, so much that conservative public servants are hoping to ride the wave of its popularity by sponsoring their own legislation to combat climate control.
2. The far-Left idiots in the environmental lobby are willing to murder millions of power, all for the sake of "clean air." They value "Mother Earth" over its children. Because of ethanol, for example, BLOOD IS ON THEIR HANDS.
3. The environmental lobby have so deeply infiltrated the ranks of the Democratic Party that its elected officials dare not lift the moratorium on the off-shore drilling ban or ease government regulations in order to help its traditional voters: working class Democrats.

According to the obnoxiously liberal Minneapolis Star-Tribune:

"Tougher gas mileage standards and a move beyond corn-based ethanol could help Minnesota exceed its goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from transportation by 2025, according to a study by the University of Minnesota's Center for Transportation Studies."

"Transportation accounts for 24 percent of Minnesota's total greenhouse gas emissions, which, by definition, are a key cause of global warming."

Let's establish something right off the bat:

The notion of global warming is an absolute joke. Note the following points from respected author (Conservative Comebacks to Liberal Lies) and talk show host Gregg Jackson (Boston WRKO). Arm yourself with information when some sanctimonious far-Left buffoon starts to pontificate on, for example, the perils of the polar bears.

1. If carbon dioxide is responsible for increasing temperatures on earth, how do you explain the observed temperature increases on Mars where there are no automobiles, airplanes, or industrial plants emitting CO2?

2. If human induced carbon emissions are responsible for the slight half a degree Fahrenheit rise in the earth's temperature since the 1970s, how do you explain the temperature increases during the Medieval warm Period from 900-1300 prior to the invention of the internal combustion engine?

3. If man is primarily responsible for increased levels of atmospheric CO2, how do you explain the Ordovician Period, about 450 million years ago, when the CO2 level was approximately 16 times higher than it is today? How do you reconcile CO2 levels 95 million years ago which were approximately the same as they are today since man wasn't even on the planet?

4. You claim that there is a Global Warming "consensus" and that the issue of human induced global warming is settled and that immediate action to significantly reduce anthropogenic global carbon emissions is required ( i.e. Kyoto). While the vast majority of climatologists do agree that the earth has warmed about one half a degree during the past century and similarly acknowledge that the earth is always warming or cooling, there is no similar "consensus" view among climatologists that human activity is primarily responsible for it. When you claim that there is a "consensus" among scientists that humans are largely responsible for global climate change, which scientists are you referring to? How many have said that man made carbon emissions are responsible for climate change? Are these "scientists" to which you refer well qualified to evaluate the effects of carbon dioxide on the Earth's atmosphere and climate? Finally, over 17,000 American scientists- two thirds with advanced degrees specializing in physics, geo-physics, climatology, meteorology, oceanography, environmental science, chemistry, and biochemistry, have signed a petition disputing the "consensus view" that man is responsible for climate change. http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p37.htm . If there is a scientific "consensus" that human carbon emissions are responsible for "global warming" how would you characterize the scientists who signed this petition? Are they merely heretical "deniers" in the pocket of Big Oil companies?

5. If man made carbon emissions are responsible for global warming, why did the temperature actually increase during the beginning of the 20th century prior to the greatest increase in carbon emissions after 1940? And why did the temperature actually decrease from 1940 to 1970 during the greatest increase in carbon emissions?

6. It is often asserted that human induced global warming is causing glaciers around the world to melt. Isn't it true however, that glaciers usually always melt or recede after cooling periods end? And isn't it also true that glacial retreat is highly selective in that glaciers are advancing globally in certain locations such as the Greenland Ice Sheet and retreating elsewhere (like the Alpine glaciers which have been retreating since the early 19th century)? If global warming is causing the glaciers to melt, isn't global cooling responsible for glaciers advancing?

7. The UN's own Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change found no statistically significant increase in sea levels corresponding to man's greatest amount of industrial activity and resulting carbon emissions during the last century. What empirical evidence can you cite that substantiates the common claim that "man made global warming" is responsible for rising sea levels?

8. If man made global warming is as "catastrophic" as you predict, then why don't you Democrats who control the Senate, vote to ratify the Kyoto Global Warming Treaty which was signed on November 11, 1998? Why are Democrats not holding a vote to ratify such an urgent global treaty? And if Kyoto is supposed to reduce global carbon emissions why are "Green" Europe's emissions rising at twice the rate of the US- a non-Kyoto member?

9. Only 2% of "greenhouse gasses" result from combustion emissions from SUVs and power plants. Since 98% of all greenhouse gasses - which make the earth habitable - are naturally occurring, how will reducing man-made carbon emissions have any meaningful impact on the earth's temperature? Can you cite one piece of empirical scientific evidence that restricting man made carbon emissions would reduce the earth's temperature? What would be the cost?

10. There are thousands of scientists who have concluded that there is substantial scientific evidence that increased atmospheric carbon dioxide can have beneficial effects on natural plant and animal environments of the earth. It is a well known fact that in similar "warming periods" such as the Medieval Warm Period that residents of Greenland prospered and that this period of even greater "warmth" that we are experiencing today could lead to unprecedented economic prosperity, overall well being, and reduced mortality. What evidence do you have that increased levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide are "catastrophic?"

Australia's "The Age:" Iraq War was a failure

According to Australian "The Age," "Iraq is an example of a profound failure of US policy. Afghanistan must not fall victim to a similar failure by either of the rivals for the White House."

It was?

Our invasion to remove a psychotic murderous despot who violated 16 U.N. sanctions was a failure?

The fact that we established a DEMOCRACY in a hotbed of theocratic, human-right violating, totalitarian countries was a failure?

How was it failure? Because we couldn't convince feckless European countries with close ties to Saddam to assist in the military option?

Some points:

"Senator Obama, who opposed the war from the outset, says he will withdraw America's combat troops from Iraq by mid-2010. "We made a strategic error," he says of the invasion."

First, Obama was not a Illinois senator during 2002, which precluded him from taking a stance on the Iraq War. More than likely he, like his Democratic brethren who authorized military action in 2002, he would have voted FOR said military action. Second, undoubtedly the Bush Administration made strategic errors AFTER we topped Saddam's Baathist regime; but let their be no doubt that the invasion and the way our military prosecuted the war was NOT a strategic error. One could almost grant the opposition that it would have been better to leave Saddam as a counterweight to the growing Iranian hegemony, but a moot point exists.

Second, we in the United States hear too often from foreign countries that we have not ingratiated ourselves around the world. For that matter, we have tarnished our image by "occupying" a Muslim country, say some.

Of course, those dissenters forget that according to the Development Assistance Committee of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (DAC/OECD), "the United States remains the largest donor of "official development assistance" at $23.53 billion in 2006."

Those same naysayers also forget the the billions of dollars in foreign aid we give during global catastrophes; for example, we gave over two billion dollars in foreign aid, the most of any country, in response to the 2004 tsunami that struck Indonesia, Sri Lanka, etc.

Or the critics disregard the fact that we deposed of a violent thug in Saddam Hussein, a man who used chemical gas on Kurdish dissidents in Halabja (just one event in a campaign where Saddam called for the extermination of the entire Kurdish population; he ultimately butchered 182,000 people), killed 148 Shiite militants in 1982, murdered 8,000 members of Masoud Barzani's clan (leader of the Kurdistan Democratic Party, reduced the population of the Shiite Marsh Arabs from 250,000 to 30,000 through starvation and forced migration, and ultimately murdered approximately 500,000 Shiites in the aftermath of the 1991 Persian Gulf War.

Furthermore, according to About.Com: Civil Liberties:

"Although most of Hussein's large-scale atrocities took place during the 1980s and early 1990s, his tenure was also characterized by day-to-day atrocities that attracted less notice. Wartime rhetoric regarding Hussein's "rape rooms," death by torture, decisions to slaughter the children of political enemies, and the casual machine-gunning of peaceful protesters accurately reflected the day-to-day policies of Saddam Hussein's regime. Hussein was no misunderstood despotic "madman." He was a monster, a butcher, a brutal tyrant, a genocidal racist--he was all of this, and more."

So where's the love? Why is the United States vilified? It is because the appeasers in ineffective Europe and other supporters of Saddam's murderous regime did not want the thug deposed? Is it because they did business with the man, despite numerous United Nations sanctions? Or could it be they despised the United States for finally growing a set and usurping the murderous tyrant?

Obama's problem

So Barry Hussein Obama FINALLY visited Iraq; the streak of 900 plus days since the Democratic presidential candidate, who is absolutely unequivocal in his belief that United States military forces should be withdrawn from the country, is over.

The man, the agent of change, has presumably conversed with American military commanders and seen the progress of the surge on a microscopic level. So will the hard deadline of 16 months to remove all aforementioned troops stand?

On the whole we've seen Obama covertly, almost sneakingly, gravitate towards the political middle. According to the Baltimore Sun:

"He has softened or abandoned his earlier positions on a parade of issues, including wiretaps, abortion, trade with Mexico and Canada, gun control and public funding of his own campaign."

Of course, the morons on the far-Left are sulking that Obama abandoned the ideals that attracted them to his campaign in the first place. But, as I think most of us on the Right have established, 1.) despite efforts by the far-Left minority to establish the United States as Europe-lite, we are a CENTER-RIGHT country; 2.) Obama KNOWS that the key to his winning the presidency lies with working-class, sensible Democrats; those who "cling" to their guns and God, who have friends and family serving in the United States Armed Forces, and whose incomes are affected by obnoxious, far-Left induced, gas prices.

Barry may be understanding that the beliefs of the far-Left do not even remotely embody those of the rest of the country. I work with a gal whose views closely parallel the vile, odious far-Left: 1.) she is elitist; 2.) loathes those of us who adhere to a Judeo-Christian moral standard; 3.) lives in a fantasy world where terrorists are viewed as romantic freedom fighters waging a just war against marauding American imperialistic crusaders; 4.) mistakenly believes that George Bush and his neoconservative cronies created terrorism.

To whom does Barry wish to cavort and identify? Is it the far-Left? Or is it the working-class Democrat to whom rival Hillary Clinton empathized?

The RepubliCAIN's plan of attack: Exploit the Energy Issue

There's a critical issue at stake in the forthcoming 2008 election; it doesn't take a Pulitzer Prize winner in Physics or Chemistry to figure out what it is either:

It's all about the energy, baby.

Really, it's an extension of the elitist attitude prevalent in Democratic presidential candidate Barry Hussein Obama. His true colors became evident a few months ago when he stated to a group of San Francisco liberals that small-town Americana "get(s) bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

It's this elitist, "chablais-and-brie" crowd (courtesy Pat Buchanon) to whom Obama and his Democratic counterparts in Congress are pandering. Rumor has it that back in the day Democrats SUPPOSEDLY represented the working class.

You could fool me, because right now certain policies practiced by the know-nothing Democrats are completely alienating mainstream, middle-class, and working-class America: their policy on energy and the open border crowd.

Regarding open borders, the bottom line is this: you can't purport to represent working class families, yet pander to the La Raza-type groups that believe we should allow immigrants to 1.) illegally stream over our border; 2) stay in this country; 3.) steal jobs; 4.) cost taxpayers millions in education and health care costs; 5.) support sanctuary cities.

It's time the Republicans took this election back from the Democrats. For this purposes of this treatise, the Republicans, led by presidential candidate John McCain, should "drill" (no pun intended) the liberals and their Democratic enablers on energy.

Of course, rather than take a real course of action, in other words, drill for oil in Alaska or off-shore, the Democrats want oil companies to further explore for oil on already developed/purchased lands.

In an absolutely disdainful maneuver, the Democrats would rather offer bullshit solutions, such as the one above, or offering plans that include solutions that are either too expensive to implement, or ultimately worthless.

Dick Morris said it best yesterday:

Meanwhile, McCain and the Republicans have finally found an issue - oil drilling - exposing how the Democrats oppose drilling virtually anywhere that there might be recoverable oil. Not in Alaska. Not offshore. Not in shale deposits in the West. The Democratic claim that we “cannot drill our way out of the crisis in gas prices” begs the question of whether, had we drilled five years ago, we would be a lot less dependent on foreign market fluctuations.

The truth is that the Democrats put the need to mitigate climate change ahead of the imperative of holding down gasoline prices at the pump. If there was ever a fault line between elitist and populist approaches to a problem, this is it. In fact, liberals basically don’t see much wrong with $5 gas. Many have been urging a tax to achieve precisely this level, just like Europe has done for decades.

It's also an opportunity for Republicans to reinvent themselves; it's time for the Grand Ol' Party to return to days of fiscal responsibility. Balance the budget, shrink government, and demonstrate some damn restraint. Do NOT give the Defeatocrats any ammunition.

Rage Against the Machine: Bush should be tried for war crimes

It pains me to say; it pains me deeply, but I need to vehemently disagree with the rhetoric of one of my favorite bands. According to Jason Gregory of Gigwise,

"Rage Against The Machine frontman Zack De La Rocha has called the US president George W Bush to be tried as a war criminal.

De la Rocha's comments came during the band's headlining set at the T in the Park Festival in Scotland last weekend.

Addressing the crowd, he said: "They said we had said George Bush should be assassinated. We did not say that. We said he should be tried for being a war criminal."

As an avid guitarist and music-wannabe-aficionado, I was instantly entranced as a college freshman by the unique blend of funk, hardcore, and hip-hop that Rage Against the Machine conceived. As an 18 year old who really didn't know better, I was also attracted to the fiery brand of leftist rhymes De la Rocha articulated.

But for the last eight years, we've been bombarded with concocted rhetoric regarding the Iraq War spewed from various liberals, their Democratic enablers, and ultimately disseminated vis a vis the Mainstream Media. In liberal fantasy-land, President Bush is a pariah, while the true crimes against humanity committed by Iraq despot Saddam Hussein and his Baathist cronies are either overlooked or completely forgotten.

It's truly unbelievable.

Let's review the facts for those of you still deficient on your history of the past 18 years:

1. After the 1991 Gulf War, a CEASE FIRE was signed; for the duration of the 1990's, the United States Air Force and Navy, primarily, engaged in low-level military action against the Iraqi government, destroying fighters, radar installations, and other military targets. These attacks were not without provocation, however, as Saddam's military perpetually violated terms of the cease-fire by entering the no fly zones that existed over Iraq or building military installations in said no fly zones.

2. After the resultant 1991 cease-fire and the 2003 invasion of Iraq by a United States-led military coalition, Saddam violated sixteen United Nations violations, which called ultimately for military action against the Iraqi government.

3. Iraq flouted by using chemical weapons against the Iranians during the 1980's Iran-Iraq War.

"Iraq's chemical weapons program was mainly assisted by German companies such as Karl Kobe, which built a chemical weapons facility disguised as a pesticide plant. Iraq’s foreign contractors, including Karl Kolb with Massar for reinforcement, built five large research laboratories, an administrative building, eight large underground bunkers for the storage of chemical munitions, and the first production buildings. 150 tons of mustard were produced in 1983. About 60 tons of Tabun were produced in 1984. Pilot-scale production of Sarin began in 1984. Germany also supplied reactors, heat exchangers, condensers and vessels. France, Austria, Canada, and Spain provided similar equipment."

Furthermore, Iraq also used chemical weapons on its own citizens, primarily the Kurds in Halabja.

"The Halabja poison gas attack occurred in the period March 16–17, 1988, during the Iran-Iraq War. Chemical weapons (CW) were used by the Iraqi government forces in the Iraqi Kurdish town of Halabja, killing thousands of people, most of them civilians (3,200-5,000 dead on the spot and 7,000-10,000 injured^[1]). Thousands more died of horrific complications, diseases, and birth defects in the years after the attack.^[2] The incident, which Human Rights Watch (HRW) defined as an act of genocide, was as of 2008 the largest-scale chemical weapons attack directed against a civilian-populated area in history."

Furthermore, De la Rocha added, "'If in protest to their war you burn down the American embassy...it's up to us, generation after generation to beat the system which perpetuates war. Wake up,' he said."

So how is Bush a war criminal? Because he used British and Russian, but intelligence gathered during the Clinton Administration? Because he merely acted on claims made by Bill Clinton, Al Gore, et al. made during the 1990's? Because it was time to depose a wily but pathological dictator, who slaughtered over 500,000 of it's civilians?

Can anyone truly answer this?

Defending the Terrorists

...or "freedom fighters," as romantic liberals are wont to say.

This article, courtesy of liberal spin machine MSNBC, is sure to draw the ire of the collective liberal community.

"Lawyers for a Canadian prisoner at Guantanamo Bay released excerpts of videotaped interrogations Tuesday, providing a first-ever glimpse into the secretive world of questioning enemy combatants at the isolated U.S. prison in Cuba."

The video, recorded by a hidden camera, shows 16-year-old Omar Khadr sobbing during a 2003 interrogation. This video, according to MSNBC, "provides insight into the effects of prolonged interrogation and detention on the Guantanamo prisoner."

Khadr is a Canadian citizen and is accused of throwing a grenade that killed an American soldier in Afghanistan. In the video, Khadr is being questioned by Canadian agents. Furthermore, the 16-year old detainee claims that he was tortured while at an American detention facility in Bagram, Afghanistan.

My first reaction? What the hell is this kid doing in Afghanistan? I'll tell you what he was doing, like many young, angry Muslim men that "heeded the call" of the mujahadeen during the 1980's, during the emasculated American response years of the 1990's, and post 9/11, they were fighting the dreaded "infidel (that's you and me)."

Where's the evidence of torture? Purportedly, the detainee was moved every three hours to deprive him of sleep and familiar cell mates. And THIS is torture? What would the touchy-feely liberal community have us do when interrogating TERRORISTS? Snuggle up to them? Rub their feet?

No, what the leftist idiot community fails to understand is that, in the misogynist Muslim world, only strength is understood. Moreover, the spineless left also won't admit that Guantanamo Bay is virtually a country club to its detainees. These detainees almost assuredly have been treated better than prisoners in this country, or better than a non-Muslim in a Muslim country.

Furthermore, former 9/11 architect Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, himself detained at Guantanamo Bay, states that "we are in hell." Why? Because allegedly, "the military has not given him paper in his cell and failed to deliver a legal motion he wrote to the judge on this U.S. Navy base in southeast Cuba."

Let the leftist uproar continue.

What the leftists refuse to fathom is that the "freedom fighters" in their vernacular, seethe hatred and are desperate to murder as many "infidels (once again: that's you and me)" as possible. According to one of the co-conspirators, he was proud to have trained and participated in attacks on the United States and her global interests:

"'Any attack I undertook against America, or even participated or helped in, I am proud about it, and I am happy, said Waleed bin Attash, a Yemeni who allegedly ran a training camp in Afghanistan for Sept. 11 hijackers."

What the terrorists, and their liberal benefactors will not admit also, is that, according to Marine judge Col. Ralph Kohlmann, "they will not be allowed to see classified material because they lack security clearances and would risk a greater chance of being convicted."

Offshore drilling moratorium lifted

According to the Associated Press, President Bush, in an act of sheer brilliance, "lifted an executive ban on offshore drilling that his stood since his father was president."

With that said, lifting the ban from the executive end is only one hurdle; now, Democratically-controlled Congress, in order to establish the possibility of off-shore drilling, must lift a ban as well.

It's up to the Democrats now; within days and weeks, we'll find out just who they represent. Will they heed the call of the working class Democrat, the constituent who's way of life and his/her pocketbook has been hit hard by rising energy prices? Or will Democratically-controlled Congress bow to the wishes of the environmental lobby, which has perpetuated the lie of global warming as well as the evil of fossil fuels?

Here are the FACTS, sentiment for cultivating our natural resources is growing: whether it's drilling for oil off our coasts or in Alaska, using coal as a fuel, or building more nuclear reactors. According to the Pew Research Center, a June survey indicated that 50% of the public believes we should drill in Alaska, compared to 43% who are opposed (up from 42% in a February survey). Furthermore, more people now believe that developing our energy infrastructure is more important than protecting our environment (by a staggering 60%-34% margin).

With that said, there should be a compromise. Drilling technologies have changed drastically over the years; oil companies can drill for oil without leaving a footprint.

The environmental argument is fading; in the past few years, we've seen the Democrats side with Islamic fundamentalist, the environmental lobby, and the open border crowd. How much longer will we tolerate their indefensible attacks against this country?

Yellowcake Uranium found in Iraq: Vindication, but no thanks to the MSM

It's really quite sad how biased our media has become. I was browsing the web yesterday, looking for topics upon to pontificate, when I came across an op-ed piece written by Christopher Merola on Townhall.com. This column, entitled "Have Your Yellowcake and Eat it too," discusses a recent Associated Press report about how the our military recently shipped approximately 550 tons of yellowcake, FOUND IN IRAQ, back to the United States for safe keeping.

Yet, we've heard virtually nothing in the mainstream media, which, in case you've been living in a cave for the past 20 years, is OVERWHELMINGLY liberal. In fact, reading liberal media, the consensus is either that the Bush Administration PLANTED this uranium in Iraq or his father's administration (H.W.) clandestinely allowed Saddam to keep 550 tons of yellowcake uranium so his son (Dubya) could have impetus to invade Iraq 12/13 years later.

It's almost laughable, but it isn't. For three, four, five years we've been told that George Bush lied to us, that he waged war against Iraq illegally. We were told that Saddam NEVER possessed WMD; in fact, neo-cons and their Republican benefactors recklessly cost us blood and treasure for oil, to retaliate against a regime and a man that attempted to assassinate H.W. Bush, or merely for the fun of it.

We've been told that Former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who was sent on a fact-finding mission to Niger with the hope of investigating claims that Iraqi agents attempted to purchase yellowcake uranium (to aid in the nuclear process), found no evidence of any transactions or even attempts to purchase said yellowcake uranium, despite intelligence to the contrary not just from the CIA but from British and Russian intelligence.

What you won't hear from the supposedly impartial mainstream media is that in fact the Butler Report from the British Parliamentary found CREDIBLE intelligence that Iraq attempted to purchase 500 tons of yellowcase from Niger in 1999. According to Gregg Jackson's "Conservative Lies to Liberal Comebacks," the Butler Report stated that in order to disparage the Bush Administration and the war effort, someone forged documents and openly distributed them, saying that Saddam had tried to purchase yellowcake uranium. They SO badly forged the documents, they had to make the yellowcake claim to be a lie. MOST, including the mainstream media, elitist liberals, and the rest of the sheeple on the Left, believed it.

We've also been told that in response to Wilson's "claims," Vice President Dick Cheney revealed to columnist Robert Novak, that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, was a COVERT CIA agent. Furthermore, we've been told that Wilson was sent at the behest of Cheney. Finally, we've been implored to believe that Plame was an active CIA agent. But despite what the mainstream media would have you believe, the FOLLOWING is actually true: first, the revelation that Plame had worked for the CIA came from Deputy Secretary of State, Richard Armitage, who vehemently opposed the Iraq War; second, the request for Wilson to investigate the yellowcake claim came at the behest of Plame herself; finally, Plame had not worked "undercover" (considered a covert agent) for over six years...in fact, she was assigned to a desk job.

I write this because I was having a conversation with my fiance about another lie perpetuated by liberals and their enablers in the media: global warming. She had expressed a desire to know what the TRUTH is about rising gas prices, carbon dioxide, melting icebergs, etc. She subsequently stated that it would be nice if one could navigate to a website that actually stated the facts.

Ironically, this conversation occurred after reading the recent report about the recent shipment of Saddam's yellowcake uranium. It's time for us in the conservative blogosphere to spread the message: we refuse to tolerate the lies and vitriol spread from the left.

Blunderin' Barry Obama

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's speech in Powder Springs, GA was just another series of gaffes in an even longer SERIES OF GAFFES.

Let's review the following:

"Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama lamented legislative pushes to make English the official language of the United States and said Americans should instead focus on making sure their children learn Spanish at a recent campaign stop."

I interpret this as tacit acceptance of increased immigration, more than likely illegal. I further interpret this as a sign, if elected, Obama and his Democratic counterparts in Congress, will do NOTHING to stop the spread of illegal immigration. Moreover, I see this as blatant pandering to the open borders crowd.

And the radical far-left is worried that Obama is shifting to far to the MIDDLE?

"As an Illinois senator, Obama voted against a measure to make English the official language of the United States in June 2007. He was one of 34 senators who voted against the measure.

At a Democratic primary debate Obama said he voted against it because 'This is the kind of question that is designed precisely to divide us,' he said. He also called the issue a 'distraction' a word he commonly uses to describe controversial issues. Obama remarked, 'When we get distracted by those kinds of questions, I think we do a disservice to the American people.'"

According to Obama, decreeing that English should be the official language of the United States is a "distraction," or "divisive."

Give me a break...this is coming from the King of Divisive, and his twenty year relationship with Reverend Jeremiah Wright, that man who stated, "God Damn America," accused the United States of being "the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today" and incorrectly accused the U.S. government of infecting young black with syphilis. Furthermore, the man also accused European-Americans of believing that blacks were inferior.

While Obama himself did not make these claims, it took him months after said claims were exposed to finally quit Wright's church. Moreover, how can one, while attending Wright's church for over TWENTY years, one could safely assume that Obama tacitly endorsed Wright's views. How could one NOT make that deduction?

"He continued his thoughts by expressing embarrassment at Americans’ language skills compared to the Europeans. “You should be thinking about how can your child become bilingual,” he said. “We should have every child speaking more than one language. It’s embarrassing when Europeans come over here, they all speak English, they speak French, they speak German. And then we go over to Europe and all we can say is merci beacoup, right?'"

The above is typical rhetoric uttered by the Left: we need to be more like Europe. Why is that, oh mindless liberals, so we can appease terrorists, give back 80% of our paychecks to the government, have sub par health care, and work 30 hour weeks because our socialist lifestyles dictate that we should strive to be mediocre?

Yes, by all means, let's emulate Europe (rolling eyes).

So Ahmadinejad does or doesn't want to wipe Israel off the face of the planet?

MSNBC.com is reporting that Iran "test-fired nine long- and medium-range missiles Wednesday during war games that officials said were intended to show the country can retaliate against any U.S. or Israeli attack, state television reported."

Instinctively, my first reaction was one of perverse gratification: you SEE liberal bastards, Iran is not a peaceful nation, representing a "religion of peace." No, on the contrary; they're terrorist group financiers (in terms of weapons, logistics, and cold hard cash) and they've killed and maimed hundreds of OUR soldiers in Iraq.

Yesterday, I chronicled Wisconsin congressional candidate, Kevin Barrett, essentially disputing the notion that Iran desires to see the "tumor" of Israel "wiped off the map." Why ELSE would Iran be developing a nuclear arsenal?

On the news today, I saw mindless idiots protesting not only the Iraq War, but any potential action against Iran as well. You on the Left just do NOT get it, do you?

"Oil prices jumped on news of the missile tests, rising $1.80 to $137.84 a barrel in electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange by afternoon in Europe."

Doesn't this also indicate the need for this country to 1.) become less dependent on foreign oil; 2.) cultivate its own energy resources: off-shore/ANWAR oil; nuclear power; coal; oil shale?

Footage showed at least six missiles firing simultaneously and said the barrage included a new version of the Shahab-3 missile, which officials have said has a range of 1,250 miles and is armed with a 1-ton conventional warhead.

That would put Israel, Turkey, the Arabian peninsula, Afghanistan and Pakistan within striking distance.

'Our hands are always on the trigger and our missiles are ready for launch,' the official IRNA news agency quoted Salami as saying Wednesday."

It's entirely for "peaceful" purposes, I'm sure.

And you still propose to negotiate with this crazed madman, Obama?

I just hear the Defeatocrat crew coming to Iran's defense, despite the man's convictions about non-Muslims, women, and homosexuals...you know, issues you TRADITIONALLY immerse yourself in?

"Iran HAS to defend herself against the marauding imperialistic United States."

"Iran is only developing a PEACEFUL nuclear program."

"Iran is misunderstood."

And on, and on, and on...

Really, it's like pissing in the wind with the Left; they'll never get it, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, they just can't see the truth. You'd think 9/11 would have shook them.

But it didn't.

Wisconsin Congressional Candidate: Ahmadinejad never stated that Israel should be wiped off the map

And this statement did NOT come from a Democratic appeaser, but rather from Libertarian Kevin Barrett, whom, according to OpEdNews.com," has issued a demand of Ron Kind, the Democratic incumbent, to retract his endorsement of the claim that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad has called for Israel to be 'wiped off the map.' According to Barret, an Arabist who has taught university course on Islam and is fluent in French and Arabic, Kind's position is based upon a false atribution and represents a mistranslation."

What we have here, folks, is a good old-fashioned apologist.

Here's another sign that people in Wisconsin aren't quite right.

"The candidate's demand concerns an extremely sensitive and important claim, which has frequently been cited by the Bush Administration to support its desire to take military action against Iran. According to Barret, the origin of the alleged quote is not the President of Iran but Ayatollah Khoemeni, whom Ahmedinejad was citing rather than making an assertion of his own."

Three points: First, the Bush Administration has not expressed any desire to attack Iran. In FACT, it is exhausting every means necessary, diplomatically, to stave off the Iranian nuclear threat. Again, more lies perpetuated by the Left. Think back to 2002: the Bush Administration exhausted every possible diplomatic means before toppling Saddam's regime to continue a CEASE-FIRE that was declared after the 1991 Persian Gulf War. Also, Saddam violated 12 UN sanctions that called for military reprisal. In addition to Saddam profiting from the Oil-for-Food programs, countries that opposed the 2003 war, France, Germany, and Russia, profited extensively as well.

Second, so I guess one can safely assume that the Iranian despot wishes to seek normal relations with Israel? I don't think so. Regardless of this particular claim, didn't Ahmadinejad state that the Holocaust was a myth? Furthermore, he believes that he can hasten the return the of the Mahdi (or 12th imam) by waging an apocalyptic war against Israel, as well as other non-infidels (that's you and me). According to the Christian Science Monitor,

"From redressing the gulf between rich and poor in Iran, to challenging the United States and Israel and enhancing Iran's power with nuclear programs, every issue is designed to lay the foundation for the Mahdi's return."

Someone with plans on hastening the apocalypse through nuclear conflict has to be someone with whom perhaps-President Barry Obama could negotiate? Right, appeasers?

Of course the leftist apologists will state (and have stated on numerous occasions) that fundamental Christians are just as dangerous as Muslims.

"'This kind of mentality makes you very strong,' says Amir Mohebian, political editor of the conservative Resalat newspaper.

"'Bush said: 'God said to me, attack Afghanistan and attack Iraq.' The mentality of Mr. Bush and Mr. Ahmadinejad is the same here - both think God tells them what to do," says Mr. Mohebian, noting that end-of-time beliefs have similar roots in Christian and Muslim theology.

'If you think these are the last days of the world, and Jesus will come [again], this idea will change all your relations,' says Mohebian. 'If I think the Mahdi will come in two, three, or four years, why should I be soft? Now is the time to stand strong, to be hard.'"

Mohebian mistakenly believes that because Christians believe that the Lord Jesus will return as well, we will engage in open conflict and aggression.

Incorrect...in fact, if anything, Christians will attempt to "do good" in terms a moral code (no thanks to the moral relativism that the Left is pushing down our throats): good deeds, love, forgiveness, etc.

Third, many "expert" think it's the mullah who run the country. Assume for a moment that Ahmadinejad purportedly did state that Israel was a tumor that should be wiped off the map, instead it was the Ayatollah; do they (the mullahs) not hold the reins in that country?

The Swiss: Coming to their senses on Islam

In a sign that Europeans may be coming to their senses, "Switzerland will hold a nationwide referendum on whether to ban the construction of minarets where Muslims traditionally issue the call to prayer, officials said Tuesday," according to PR-Inside.com.

Upon first glance, this may seem a little excessive. However, this may be the sort of response necessary to combat the spread of militant Islam throughout the continent. Is it fair to say that Europeans grow tiresome of bowing to every Muslim's wish, while seeing that said Muslim will not reciprocate?

Yesterday, I documented that two seventh graders in England were given detention for refusing to pray to Allah. Appropriately, a grandfather of one of the students stated, "But if Muslims were asked to go to church on Sunday and take Holy Communion there would be war. "

"The U.N. expert on racism, Doudou Diene, has said the campaign is evidence of an «ever-increasing trend» toward anti-Islamic actions in Europe."

Can anyone imagine why that is? Could it be that a significant portion of Muslims have demonstrated to other religions, not just in countries where Islam is the primary religion but in countries that are and have been predominantly Christian or another religion? We've seen, read, and heard about instances where Muslims have demonstrated their intolerance, whether it was the Muhammed cartoon flap of a couple years back, the murder of Theo Van Gogh, or the threats against Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

Yet, we're supposed to demonstrate how tolerant we are in the west, while Muslims trample over basic rights of speech and religion.

We've seen, in England, Lord Chief Justice Phillips state that a Muslim could essentially practice Sharia but yet not conflict those beliefs and practices against standard British law: "He supported the idea that Sharia could be reasonably employed as a basis for "mediation or other forms of alternative dispute resolution". He went further to defend Williams's position from earlier in the year, explaining "It was not very radical to advocate embracing sharia law in the context of family disputes, for example, and our system already goes a long way towards accommodating the archbishop's suggestion." and "It is possible in this country for those who are entering into a contractual agreement to agree that the agreement shall be governed by a law other than English law."

Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams, stated the same thing in February: "Noting the anxieties which the word Sharia provoked in the West he drew attention to the fact that there was a debate within Islam between what he called "primitivists" for whom, for instance, apostasy should still be punishable and those Muslims who argued that Sharia was a developing system of jurisprudence that such a view was no longer acceptable. He made comparisons with "Orthodox Jewish practice" (Beth Din) and with the recognition of the exercise of conscience of Christians."

The Swiss people are getting it right.

Now, if only the rest of Europe would follow suit...

MSNBC: Joint Chiefs head: Iraq security gains holding

So why withdraw troops now?

Nationally, we've heard the cavalcade of "bring 'em home" chants from our leftist elected officials. On the Minnesota front, Democrat challenger to Senator Norm Coleman, Al Franken (aka Stuart Smalley) has made troop withdrawal a hallmark of his campaign platform.

According to MSNBC, "Iraq appears on track to establishing sustainable security — a key step toward withdrawing U.S. troops — the top U.S. military officer said Monday after visiting the newly quiet Sadr City section of the capital."

So tell me again why we want to withdraw now, as Iraq appears well on its way to becoming a bastion of democracy in the Middle East? Why would we throw away not the hard-fought successes we've gained in the past five years, but the four-thousand plus deaths of our fighting men and women.

I guess what they say about liberals and Democratic enablers is true: human life really is unimportant, especially if it's an American life. But, try to tell me that those opposed to freedom and democracy (see: Al Qaeda, or any other Islamic group of murderers, Guantanamo Bay detainees) lives are NOT more important in the eyes of the Left.

Because it ain't true.

You see, the Democrats have hedged their bets; they've allied themselves with the terrorists in a perverse arrangement whereby Islam uses the Democrats, and the Democrats conveniently forget that this "religion of peace" fundamentally opposes women's rights, multiculturism, alternative lifestyles, etc.

Yet, the Democrats, so blinded by the hatred for George Bush, as well as that of Christianity, have offered up their multicultural umbrella, in the hope that the poor Islamists will join them.

Minnesota Update: Poor Stuart Smalley

Washington Post columnist Michael Kinsley feels the need to defend Al Franken's boorish behavior, all the while failing to point a finger at the real culprit.

In case you're unaware of the Minnesota senate race, Democratic challenger Franken is attempting to usurp Republican Senator Norm Coleman.

According to Kinsley, we've all become a little too sensitive to jokes about raping women and three-way sex with women (the latter, I could care less). Really, fella? I wonder why that is? I wonder why we've become so "sensitive?"

Let me proffer a guess: you and your fellow liberals have empowered everyone to be "sensitive;" of course everyone to you and your fellow elitist liberals, consists of every minority and alternative lifestyle group.

The notable exception: Christian American, which is not protected from the politically correct police.

And now you actually have the gumption to blame someone other than the "cultured sophisticates" in your party; those who look down at their noses at humor itself. With that said, attacks against President Bush for being a Christian redneck is perfectly acceptable within the confines of your narrow world.

Personally, when I was in junior high/high school, I found his Stuart Smalley skits on SNL mildly humorous. But what I find more comical is the notion that he would contemplate running for office; "Senator" Smalley, now THAT is high comedy.

World Net Daily: Boys punished with detention for refusing to pray to Allah

Have you heard this story?

According to WorldNetDaily.com, "Two seventh-grade boys were given detention and their classmates forced to miss their scheduled refreshment break when the pair refused to kneel and pray to Allah during a religious studies class."

The school in which the boys attended wasn't in Pakistan or Saudi Arabia, but rather in jolly old England.

This is dhimmitude at its finest. Countries like England, France, and Belgium have pandered to Islamic immigrants for decades, to the point that these immigrants are demanding that the their host countries bow to their wishes.

One of the seventh-grader's parents sums it up perfectly:

"I am not racist, I've been friendly with an Indian for 30 years. I've also been to a Muslim wedding where it was explained to me that alcohol would not be served and I respected that. But if Muslims were asked to go to church on Sunday and take Holy Communion there would be war."

Here's the complete story:

Boys punished with detention for refusing to pray to Allah
'If Muslims were asked to go to church on Sunday and take Holy Communion there would be war'

---

Posted: July 04, 2008
6:15 pm Eastern

---

WorldNetDaily

Two seventh-grade boys were given detention and their classmates forced to miss their scheduled refreshment break when the pair refused to kneel and pray to Allah during a religious studies class.

Outraged parents called the punishment of the boys for not wanting to take part in the practical demonstration at Alsager High School near Stoke-on-Trent, UK, of how Muslims' worship Allah a breach of their human rights.

"This isn't right, it's taking things too far," parent Sharon Luinen told the London Daily Mail.

"I understand that they have to learn about other religions. I can live with that, but it is taking it a step too far to be punished because they wouldn't join in Muslim prayer. Making them pray to Allah, who isn't who they worship, is wrong and what got me is that they were told they were being disrespectful.

"I don't want this to look as if I have a problem with the school because I am generally very happy with it."

Last month, WND reported Principal Robin Lowe was reassigned after staging a mandatory lesson in Islamic religious beliefs for nearly 900 students at her Houston-area school.

The controversy erupted at Friendswood Junior High when students were diverted from a scheduled physical education class and taken to a special assembly.

In the 40-minute session, representatives of the Houston office of the controversial Council on American-Islamic Relations, an organization critics link to terrorist groups, presented a lesson in the religious beliefs and requirements of Islam.

The CAIR representatives instructed students that Adam, Noah and Jesus are prophets; announced "there is one god, his name is Allah"; taught the five pillars of Islam; told students how to pray five times a day; and gave instruction on Islamic religious requirements for dress.

The assembly had not been authorized by the district, officials confirmed.

In May, officials at a Minnesota charter school, housed in the same building as a mosque, attacked a television news crew investigating whether the publicly funded institution had complied with a state order to stop accommodating Islamic prayers and religious programs.

The investigation followed revelations by a substitute teacher who observed children being forced to participate in Islamic prayers.

In the Alsager School incident, the religion teacher, who was not named, made the class wear Muslim headgear and watch a short film. Afterward, she took prayer mats from her cupboard and said, "we are now going out to pray to Allah," parents claimed.

"I am absolutely furious my daughter was made to take part in it and I don't find it acceptable," said parent Karen Williams.

"Not only was it forced upon them, my daughter was told off for not doing it right. They'd never done it before and they were supposed to do it in another language."

"My child has been forced to pray to Allah in a school lesson," the grandfather of one of the students said. "It's absolutely disgusting, there's no other way of putting it. My daughter and a lot of other mothers are furious about their children being made to kneel on the floor and pray to Islam. If they didn't do it they were given detention.

"I am not racist, I've been friendly with an Indian for 30 years. I've also been to a Muslim wedding where it was explained to me that alcohol would not be served and I respected that. But if Muslims were asked to go to church on Sunday and take Holy Communion there would be war."

Keith Plant, Alsager's deputy headmaster, said with summer break, many of the staff was unavailable and he could not comment fully.

"I think that it is a shame that so many parents have got in touch with the press before coming to me. I have spoken to the teacher and she has articulately given me her version of events, but that is all I can give you at the moment."

Cheshire County Council issued a statement telling parents "inquiries are being made into the circumstances as a matter of urgency.

"Educating children in the beliefs of different faith is part of the diversity curriculum on the basis that knowledge is essential to understanding. We accept that such teaching is to be conducted with some sense of sensitivity."

Revelation of the incident follows this week's pronouncement by the UK's top judge, Lord Chief Justice Lord Phillips, that Islamic sharia law should be used in the UK.

In a speech to an East London mosque, Phillips said, "Those entering into a contractual agreement can agree that the agreement shall be governed by a law other than English law.'

"Those who are in dispute are free to subject it to mediation or to agree that it shall be resolved by a chosen arbitrator. There is no reason why principles of sharia law or any other religious code should not be the basis for mediation or other forms of dispute resolution."

Phillips signaled approval of sharia principles as long as punishments – and divorce rulings – complied with the law of the land.

In February, WND reported Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, chief of the 70-million-strong worldwide Anglican Communion, advocated the establishment of Islamic law in Britain.

Star Tribune: $4 gas has drivers eyeing pump's accuracy

I just don't get people sometimes. While I understand how the insane gas prices have made us all a little testy, isn't time we blamed the right people? Rather than blame the oil companies, who make their prices based on supply and demand (Economics 101), it's time to cast aspersions at the real source of the problem: the environmentalists and their Democratic handlers.

According to the Star Tribune, drivers "are calling Minnesota's Department of Commerce to report suspicions that they're not getting as much gas as they're paying for."

You're right, fellow Minnesota drivers. We're not getting as much as we paid for. Thanks to the environmental movement and lie known as global warming, we're forbidden to cultivate our own resources, whether it's oil in Alaska, our vast coal supply, or nuclear power. Rather, the Left would rather us practice conservation, depriving us of the happiness of road trips, boating on the lake, or RV trips.

For those of you planning on voting Democrat in this election, does your beloved party represent you or groups like the environmental lobby, which doesn't give a rat's ass about working class folk like you or me?

Here's the complete story:

$4 gas has drivers eyeing pump's accuracy

Associated Press

July 7, 2008

ST. CLOUD, Minn. - There's nothing like $4 gas to make drivers pay attention to the numbers on the pump. And more of those eagle-eyed drivers are calling Minnesota's Department of Commerce to report suspicions that they're not getting as much gas as they're paying for.

A year ago, drivers called investigator Jeff Anderson maybe once a month to report suspicions that a pump was faulty. Now he gets about two to three calls a week.

The state said most pumps are within its standards for accuracy. The St. Cloud Times found that during the year leading up to April 1, 2008, about 6 percent of gas pumps failed inspections in Stearns, Benton, and Sherburne counties. That works out to about a dozen pumps each month during that year.

"What we want is a gallon (of gas) to be a gallon everywhere," said Julie Quinn, assistant director of the Weights and Measures division of the state's commerce department.

Pumps are tested with a margin of error of 6 cubic inches, or about a quarter of a can of soda. For a regular pump at $4 a gallon, that's a margin of error of about 10 cents. New pumps or those that have been worked on in the past 30 days are allowed half of that margin of error.

Anderson tests the pumps by filling two five-gallon stainless steel containers to measure the gasoline. (He pours the gas back into the station's underground tank afterward.)

Pumps fail inspections for many reasons. Sometimes pumps give too much gas. Sometimes hoses leak. Sometimes the meter is broken.

The problems usually occur because of normal wear and tear, Quinn said. She said she's surprised more pumps don't fail, considering all the wear and tear they endure.

Anderson slaps problem pumps with a yellow tag or a red tag, depending on the severity. The red tag means it can't be used until it's fixed. The yellow tag means it can be used but must be fixed within 30 days. The gas station must pay for the repair. The owner does not receive a reprimand, no matter how many yellow or red tags the station gets.

"The station owner generally doesn't have the tools to know whether he is shorting people or giving gas away," Quinn said.

Anderson inspects about 30 to 40 pumps a day, or two to three gas stations. Most of the time, drivers get what they pay for, he said.

"Ninety-nine percent of times, the pump is right," he said. "I wish I'd find something that's off."

Sometimes a consumer's complaint is valid. A gas station in Waite Park, for example, last year had an inspection that was off by 130 cubic inches — meaning customers got about 4 1/2 gallons of gas for every 5 gallons they paid for. An inspector flagged the pump for repair. The station did not respond to a St. Cloud Times request for an interview.

That was the only pump off by that much in the three-county area, according to the data.

Sometimes the pumps give some gas away for free. At Rooney's Texaco in Belgrade, one test showed a pump was giving away as much as a quarter-gallon of gas for every five gallons pumped. It was immediately flagged and fixed.

It was normal wear and tear, said owner Russ Rooney.

"Once a year they come on in and test our pumps for accuracy," he said. "There's times it floats the other way. You just shrug and say, 'Shucks.'"

Barry Obama: "A Significant Realignment"

Those words were uttered in a recent speech by Democratic presidential candidate Barry Obama regarding the election prospects for his party this coming fall.

What exactly does "Significant Realignment" mean? Well, let us hypothesize for a minute: assume Obama wins the presidency; couple that with more gains in Congress for the Democrats, and we're looking at an obscene policy shift to the left.

In other words, socialism.

The Democrats have on record, stated that we should mold our lifestyles, our government, and our morals to resemble that of Europe, whose countries are mostly socialist.

So here's what a Democratic president and Democratically-controlled Congress will do, as public servants:

Wait for it...

Wait for it...

Public health care/socialized medicine, governmental oversight on restoring Social Security, more entitlements, reducing our energy output by 25% to reduce carbon emissions and comply with the Kyoto Treaty.

So how will this be accomplished? Well, the government needs to get the money somewhere...and guess what, it's coming out of our paychecks to the tune of at least 50% taxation. We're either in a recession or the cusp of a recession; experts on fiscal policy all concur that you don't tax your way out of a recession. Rather, it would sound fiscal policy to ensure the Bush tax cuts remain, while reducing taxes on small businesses.

Moreover, one way to fight a recession would be to produce cheap energy. In other words, develop our OWN resources, be it oil off our coasts or in Alaska, oil shale, or not to mention our near-endless supply of oil. But thanks to the environmental lobby, we're forbidden to cultivate our resources, thanks to the lie of global warming.

What else will a Democratic president and legislature accomplish? Continued appeasement of terrorists, "dialog" with maniacal despots like Iranian "president" Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or North Korean dictator Kim Jung Il, or further pandering to Hamas and Islamic Jihad, those groups opposed to the legal state of Israel. Finally, we'll see the Democrats unequivocally withdraw our troops from Iraq, ensuring that, just as the Iraqi government can sustain itself, sectarian violence is renewed as well as the return of extremist elements (e.g. Al Qaeda).

Are you ready?

"This (establishment-insert name of business here) bans handguns unless...

you're black, asian, native american, muslim, buddhist, hindu, etc. If you're a white Christian, you are expressly forbidden to carry a firearm on your possession, even if you have a conceal-and-carry license and have never committed a crime."

Doesn't it feel like the liberal, political correct, madness essentially is stating that?

It's been a few days since the United States Supreme Court ruled that a Washington DC law banning handgun and obviously the Liberal Demogogue is in an uproar.

GUNS KILL PEOPLE, they cry!!! Banning guns reduces crime!!! Sure it does, idiots.

It's high time this country woke up to the lies liberals are spouting, whether it pertains to the myth of global warming, the claims of the Iraq War as "an illegal war," or that the United States is the cause of terrorism.

Thank you Supreme Court for restoring a semblance of common sense to our lives by overruling this gun ban; it's high time we stop emasculating the good citizens of this country while arming the criminals. Naturally, liberals hector those of us that truly understand the Constitution that the 2nd amendment only safeguarded the rights of a well-armed militia.

Hopefully this will shut them up. For the "intellegensia" that the liberals represent, they're not really quite short on common sense. In their perverse world, persons of all shapes, colors, and beliefs cohabitate peacefully; in said world, we negotiate; we engage in dialog. There are no need for wars, for guns, for bombs. In said perverse world, we rehabilitate criminals, we trust them to not make the same mistakes made in the past, to not prey on children, elderly, women, or the weak.

But this is the real world.

Attacking McCain's "Patriotism"

Is it any wonder that the Liberal smear machine, led by Democratic presidential candidate Barry Obama, is attacking the credibility and patriotism of rival John McCain?

In the age of Defeatism, when a liberal (Obama) has to perversely explain how his patriotism is a different brand of patriotism, it all oddly makes sense. Recently, we've had conservative-turned-liberal, General Wesley Clark, explain how McCain is NOT a war hero, or isn't patriotic.

Just because McCain's fighter jet was shot down during the Vietnam War, just because he was held captive in the Hanoi Hilton, just because he SERVED HIS COUNTRY, does not a war hero make, according to Clark. This coming from a man who's tenure as Supreme Allied Commander of NATO was cut short due to integrity and character issues.

" He continued, "I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president."

Now of all times, with the flood of defeatist, godless liberal pummeling the very foundations of this country, we need a hero, someone with a vision to assume the mantle of leadership carried by President George W. Bush, someone NOT worried about "inflaming" the sensitivities of islamo-fascism, someone not afraid to tap into our vast energy resources, someone who return the great Republican party back to FISCAL CONSERVATISM.

As for Obama, he's imploring voters to take his word that despite refusing to wear an American flag pin, calling for a speedy withdrawal of troops from Iraq, pandering to Islamic terrorists, etc, that he IS patriotic (don't forget his wife's run of denigrating remarks of the United States as well):

"Barack Obama yesterday sought to portray himself as a mainstream American patriot and put his Republican opponents on notice that he would "not stand idly by" when others questioned his support for the US flag."

McCain might not be the most idyllic Republican nominee. Often he has not ingratiated himself to fellow Republicans with his proclivity to stepping across the proverbial aisle and working with Democrats on a compromise legislation. But with all the bluster Obama has raised regarding "change" and "unification," it's in fact McCain that has demonstrated unity and compromise.

The Coming Economic Night

Is there any hope for the American economy? The news is in...and it is all bad, every single piece of it. Bad news from the people, bad news from the banks, bad news from the government, and bad news from the corporations. We're broke. No one is saying America is broke, but it is. The shoes haven't all dropped, there are still mountains of untold debt hidden, almost ready to burst through the door, the keepers of the secrets sweating and groaning to keep it back. They are almost exhausted and the night is about to splash forth.

The secrets are already slipping out on the people side: foreclosures are up, inflation is up, bills are up, and credit is down. Job cuts have started, tent cities are growing, and families across America toss and turn more each night, wondering how to pay the bills, wondering what will happen if that unexpected medical expense happens, wondering if they'll be living out of their car soon.

Now the news on the government side is carefully massaged and managed. Millions in taxpayer money goes into the statisticians payrolls to crunch the numbers and tell us that core inflation is low, that life in America is better than it was a generation ago, that our future is on track. The data is carefully rolled out and the government spokesmen are well rehearsed, comfortable in the lime light, glib with the half-truths their mathematicians have spun. The people are lulled asleep by these monotonous, soothing voices, not realizing they are listening to sirens luring them onto the rocks.

The banks have the strongest game in town. Surrounded by the creme de la creme of Wall Street marketing, they can sell fire to a demon burning in the pits of Hell. Money, investments, dividends, astronomical returns, all of these are the tricks of their trade. They live by selling financial products, charging fees and interest. Whether the product actually benefits the customers, well, buyer beware. Who could not love the opaque financial instruments they've created: the derivatives, the CDS's, the CDO's, and the multiple tranches of the subprime MBS's? Such terms sound imposing so they must be worth millions and you know your future is secure because your portfolio is stuffed with these exotic financial instruments. But hidden in the small print, on page 87 at the bottom, in 6-point font, it reads that returns promised will only happen if a secondary market forms for these instruments. So look around you: are people actively trading this alphabet soup? Only kind of and certainly not for a profit? These instruments are in every drawer and every vault of every pension plan, municipality, bank, credit union, in every country of the world. Surely this would mean that people would be buying and selling, cranking the value of the alphabets upward to the stratosphere. You could retire early, if they were being traded at their market value, but they're not. Instead, they're being hidden down on Level 3 and not counted toward the bottom line. Marked to market, its called, and everyone says it has value. But you know, and everyone else that bought into this scam knows -- the paper declines in value every day and is headed for worthlessness. When everyone finds out how worthless it is, when the instruments are brought from Level 3 into the light of day, a great wailing, a great keening cry will cross our land. The instruments will dissolve when examined and be shown for what they really are: nothing, things with no value. Everyone spent billions, maybe trillions, they gambled on a new money and found only the old confidence game. So you really believe you have any money left in your bank? It's gone, now and forever, eaten alive by alphabet soup.

The corporations will keep America together. They will be there as a foundation for a new future and a new wealth. Our corporate might brought us through 2 world wars and a depression. It is unequaled in the world and it will keep us great. Except, it is gone, a hollow echo of its former glory. Plants are closed, natural resources are locked behind laws, corporations are about servicing other companies or about compliance with government law. How exactly does this build wealth? Most real manufacturing has been outsourced overseas, leaving Americans with fewer opportunities to earn a decent wage. Wages stagnate, our economy stagnates, our government and taxes grow, and the American dream is squeezed out because multi-national corporations followed the profit principle, greed comes before all else.

So here we sit with a government that lies to her people while gorging on whatever wealth remains, a banking system that hides toxic financial secrets in the dark, a citizenry growing poorer every day, and corporations that are treating their employees not that differently than Pharaoh treated his slaves. There is gloom growing across our land. I for one am glad for the darkness because it helps me to hide my shame. Our ancestors, our mothers and fathers, our grandparents, gave us an inheritance, and we spent it on geegaws from China, on pointless foreign wars, and on worthless, shiny financial instruments. We are fools here in America, all of us. We have lost our way, we have forgotten the freedom and liberty that was given to us. We did not respect our heritage, we have sold it for a bowl of stew, and like Esau, we have lost our birthright too.

The coming economic night is spreading thickly over our land and no morning will dawn from it. It will stay until our shame and foolishness is squeezed from inside all of us, until our common sense returns, until we remember who we are, what we value, and the great land that is America. This long night will cost lives, maybe millions of them. It will cost misery unlike anything that our country has experienced before. It will be a refining fire. We have worshipped the false god of mammon and received darkness in return.

Now while there is still time, learn how to bring light into your soul. Remember all that is good and right. Know what is true and honest and value it, no matter the cost. Only by holding on to the values that made us great, can we be great again. Not great as a conqueror but great in character, great in honor, great in mercy, and great in our humility. Against such, no military can stand, no disaster can have power. America can be reborn after the coming economic night but only if something bright burns in the bosom of each of us. Build and stoke that fire now. There is no stopping the coming night, but we can endure it. Make a pact with yourself that you will endure it. The America on the other side of this night will indeed be a country of legend and a country where another economic night can never happen again.

Take your medicine. It's good for you.

CodLiverOilGuy