Patriotism

Couple of things on the war front ...

Zawahiri ... working the Democrat talking points

I wrote about this a few days ago after the Bin Laden audio, and Amin (?) follows up with yet another validation of my point. In a videotape from the number two leader of the murderous terrorist group that wants to kill all Americans (and everybody else they don't like, for that matter) ... it became more clear that it is fairly difficult to distinguish between a speech by leaders of Al Queda and leaders of the Democrat party.

Bush is a loser (Zawahiri and Harry Reid)
Bush is a butcher / terrorist / whatever (Zawahiri, Kerry, Cindy Sheehan, Belefonte, et al)
Bush is a liar (Zawahiri, the entire democrap establishment, news media, etc)
Bush is responsible for the bad natural disasters happening in this country (Zawahiri, Nagin, Kennedy, etc)

OK, so everybody knows that the terrorists are saying the same things as the democrats ... that is nothing new ... so what is the point?

Well, one of the debates that is going on in this country has to do with Patriotism. More specifically, democrats are (or at least pretend to be) totally offended because they claim that Republicans are questioning their "patriotism". Let's ignore for the moment that I have not heard anybody actually use that term ... even in Rove's latest statement, he went out of his way to say that "Democrats are patriots, but ..." and then laid the case for Republicans and Democrats have different approaches (intellectual argument, something Dems have proven incapable of) ... but who the hell really cares what the name is? Democrats have had to once again redefine yet another term to basically make it totally meaningless ... you can say anything you want, anytime you want to whomever you want ... and the simple fact that you are bitching and complaining at all makes you a patriot in the eyes of a Democrap.

First off ... BULL!!! I will not try to define the term since the *real* meaning of Patriot is one of those things that people intuitively understand DESPITE not having to have a clear, black and white definition.

But let's ignore that for the moment and get to some *real* meat here ... something that more clearly articulates what is going on ... and that totally avoids any arguments about the arbitrary names or classifications. I can summarize the point with a set of simple questions (and I encourage you to use this, or some similar nuance of it, as often as you possibly can):

1) If you are a patriot, then please articulate for me exactly how somebody who is NOT a patriot would say something different from what you say?

or 2) How are your goals, tactics, etc. (adjusted based on the argument) any different from those of our enemies?

most pointedly ... 3) If you are not the enemy, then please articulate for me exactly how somebody who IS our enemy would be (or say something) different?

The fact that the terrorists are quoting from liberal talking points demonstrates that the liberals are NOT patriotic in any classical / normal definition of that term ... how many revolutionary war heroes are known to be parrots of King George?

How many hero memorials do we have in the United States to King George or the British military? How about to Adolf Hitler or other Nazis? I must have missed the memorials in Hawaii to the Japanese Kamakazi or their pilots that bombed Pearl Harbor.

Yet I have heard that the Viet Cong have memorials to John Kerry and the other war protesters of that time ... who credit Kerry and his klans with helping to secure the victory for the Communists by undermining the US Military at home.

Yep ... sounds like a true patriot to me. And it looks like modern democrats, including (once again) John Kerry, are looking to get into and future Al Queda war heroes' memorial as well. At the very least they will be able to (continue to) serve as speech writers for Osama and other terrorist leaders.

In case you missed it ...

Some figures have come out ... although I did not have the time to write down the sources ... American casualties are down in 2005, although deaths are up. So far, we're somewhere between 1000 to 2000 dead soldiers. Enemy casualties are mind-boggling ... (not including the actual invasion itself) ... 2004 - 24000 terrorist killed, and 2005 27000 terrorists dead.

That is a mind boggling number ... kill ratios of about 20-1. EVERY American soldier lost is a tragedy ... not to be minimized at all ... but I guarantee you that American soldiers themselves at any level would be ecstatic over kill ratios like that. And the numbers are getting better!!!

There is a bumper sticker that liberals love ... "We are making enemies faster than we can kill them". Looks the the amazing US military AND THE IRAQI military are once again proving what idiots the liberals are, even when they are trying to be funny!

Guess the media missed this one too ...

In another critically important development, which of course is being ignored by the media since it doesn't fit into the template of Bush lied, Iraq is going bad, etc. ...

Recent developments are showing a massive crumbling of the "your enemy is my enemy makes us friends" network between Zarquawi and the Sunni insurgents. Seems like the Zarquawi downside is beginning to weigh on the Sunnis, along with the fact that the foreign terrorists cannot be real happy about the overwhelming participation of Sunnis in the elections.

Oh ... you remember the elections ... that was that incredibly successful event that happened this month that the major news media buried. The election signaled a turnaround given the participation of ALL parties this time around (including the Sunnis that sat out the last time). Yes, they have had some problems and contentions, a point that the hate-Bush crowd loves to emphasize (kind of odd that they are so enthralled with the aftermath of the elections given how they poo-pooed the event itself), apparently oblivious to the fact that they themselves were totally screaming and throwing fits and questioning the legitimacy of OUR elections.

So anyway ... now that the Sunnis are starting to turn on the foreign terrorists, the terrorists are finding themselves as exposed as, oh ... say ... a uniformed person (cop, military, etc), the difference being that there is a huge profit for the head of a terrorist. I commented a few articles previous about how one of the top bomb-makers was dragged into a police station bruised and bleeding ... it appears that the tips are coming in fast and furious as the former "hosts" of the terrorists are starting to turn on them.

If the Sunni "wall" falls, the end-game is in sight. Expect that the last grip effort by the leftie, anti-bush crowd emphasizes the conflicts regarding sharing of power, and try to keep from puking when Democrats try to say "I told you so" when we're able to draw down the troops (by the way, they won't be fooling anybody but themselves), although I don't expect to see the welcome home parades on any news broadcasts. All efforts by the liberal machine, anti-war crowds have failed, and they will not be able to stop the SECOND victory in Iraq. Cap that off with a Sadam execution, hopefully around the October time frame, and we could be talking about gaining a super-majority across the board.

Who's side is God on?

Dangerous territory, I know. After all ... Robertson and Nagin and all sorts of other kooks (on both sides) all love to tell you what God wants, and make it match their particular view of the world. Ever notice how all of these guys have always been demonstrated as total kooks by God Himself!?! But I digress ...

So anyway ... I got to thinking about a couple of things happening recently ... namely the Alito confirmation at that freak judge in Vermont ... would seem totally unconnected until I realized what the association was. It was at that point that a thought popped into my head that God must really love making the Democrats look like total asses (and I realize that it really does not take all that much).

This is not the first time circumstances seem to line up way too well to be just coincidence ... just when we are about to the fight over Chief Justice Roberts, the Supreme Court radical leftists issue a ruling that says the government can come in and take your property anytime they want, including when there is no more reason than lining the pockets of politically connected fat cats that make large campaign donations. So now instead of being able to focus cannons on Roberts, Democrats end up having to call up all their local and state level socialists from their party and beg them not to throw any grandmothers onto the street until after the judiciary committee democraps get a chance to smear Roberts as a tyrant.

In a similar "way to coincidental to be mere chance" situation, during the Alito hearings we have this kook freak leftie judge in Vermont that decides he wants to be King and Dictator, sending a message of his power to the other branches of government by sentencing a guy who rapes a 6 (-> 10) year old girl over a period of 4 years, to only 6 months of jail time. Why? Well, because this Judge Edward Cashman believes that the perp cannot be sufficiently treated / rehabbed under current conditions.

Excuse me? Who the hell is this judge to dictate to the other branches of government how to set laws and treat prisoners? This guys jail term is LESS than the amount of time he spent torturing this child ... her sentence will be to relive the hell of his crimes (both the rapist AND the judge) against her for the rest of her life.

Oh, and one other little thing that has not really been covered all that well, for you soft lefties who actually believe that this is just some social disorder in the rapist and are concerned about his rehabilitation ... this guy isn't just some maladjusted loner ... in addition to his own indescretions, he also invited one of his buddies to go along on one (perhaps more) of the rapes. This bastard is evil personified.

Wait a minute, R, how can you try to tie this despicable creep (Judge Cashman, that is) to the Alito hearings.

Well, think it through ... this is another clear example of what a *real* judicial activist is versus this new (garbage) definition of activism that the Dems have been using to try to redefine the term. This may not be your typical example of what judicial activism is, but it absolutely personifies how dangerous these judges are ... turning this crazed lunatic loose against the children of the world. If you think you're safe because of the distance ... let me ask you this: do you really think this scumbag is going to go back to his hometown when they free him? And when he does come to your neighborhood, do you really trust that the sexual predator systems available are never going to let people like this slip through the cracks?

Generally Republicans use the term activism to describe a judge that attempts to legislate from the bench, striking down a law by magically finding (more like manufacturing) some excuse that they claim is supported by the Constitution. Funny how this is usually some leftist position ... they never seem to find excuses for striking down laws that grow government, just the ones that limit government ... go figure. Basically, the radical judges are rejecting the will of the people for the will of a tyrant (the judge).

This rape case, however, is another form of activism ... a whacked out liberal judge wants to inflict his idea of justice, based on the idea that society should treat its worst criminals better than the victims, on the rest of society, so he lets off the worst kind of slime with light sentences. This type of activism not only is way beyond the scope of what a judge is supposed to be doing, but a direct violation of childrens' and families' rights to be free from the danger the rapist presents.

In the Alito hearings ... we keep hearing about all the bad things that will happen when he acts too conservatively. Tell ya what ... I would rather have the president have too much power (not like I am acknowledging Kennedy's assertions as valid ... Kennedy is still a fat, drunk radical goof) than have child rapists being turned loose because the judges are concerned about the perps' rehabilitation.

"Pack" the court

At what point can we argue that (at least some) of these Democrats are certifiable ... deranged ... no ... insane. I am serious ... what is the clinical definition of insanity, and do these Senate democrats not meet the criteria?

I am thinking, in layman's terms of course, that a definition of insanity might involve living out one's existence in a false perception of reality, then acting on that perception? Perhaps this would not be sufficient ... because all of us live, to one extent or another, in the reality that we create for ourselves within the context of (hopefully) the "real" world: it is basically our wrapper around what "is" and often times it is not totally accurate ... but I digress. I think the idea of "certifiable" comes in when a person actually takes an action in the context of a completely unreal perception, proving that they are completely out of touch with the real world and do not even know it.

In the case of some of the Senate democrats, they have now coined the term "Packing the Courts" to refer to Mr. Bush's carrying out his Constitutional responsibility to appoint QUALIFIED people to serve on the federal judiciary, including the Supreme Court. The reason why I argue that these people are completely insane is that the ONLY evidence of packing has come from the extreme leftist lunatics that now comprise the leadership of the Democrats.

• Democrats are the ones that vote against nominees based not upon qualifications, but upon ideology. If they want to make new rules (vs. the practice carried out over the last 200+ years), OK ... the Constitution is sufficiently vague on exactly what the Senate "advise and consent" means. However, do not sit there and accuse the other side of "packing" when, in fact, they are doing nothing more than what has always been done, and the DEMOCRAPs have completely gone off the deep end in terms of picking exclusively radical leftists. To wit: nobody has ANY question or doubt what Ginsburg will rule, ever. She will find OR MANUFACTURE an excuse to vote the most radical left line on every ruling.
• Democrats are the ones that spent 26 of 30 minutes pontificating their lunatic assertions in confirmation hearings (causing even their fawning media to gulp and admit it was a horrendous performance). The goal was not to actually allow the nominee to answer, but to make totally outrageous assertions and then continue to talk and talk and talk and never allow the nominee to respond. After all, if the nominee was permitted to talk, he would demonstrate what ignorant, moronic fools the democrats are, the way Judge Roberts did.
• Democrats are the ones that whine and complain about not having a paper trail on Judge Roberts, but then ignore 15 years of judicial decisions in Alito's confirmation process because they realized his judicial record proves not only what a brilliant jurist he is, but also how HE IS MORE IN TUNE WITH AMERICANS AND THEIR VALUES THEN ANY DEMOCRAT WILL EVER BE.
• Democrats are the ones that actually invoked a fillibuster against judicial nominees ... literally pulling a stunt that HAS NEVER been done before. Then the leftie apologists drum up all kinds of lies about whether or not it has ever been done ... do these lunatics really think there are no records of history??

Shall I go on?

As a contrast, a demonstration of a civil process that shows how things have been done for several hundred years and is now ONLY practiced by Republicans: Bill Clinton nominates two of the most radical, left wing freaks around ... one of whom was in the leadership of the ACLU and openly argued that 12 year olds should be able to consent to sex (that's 5th or 6th grade, in case you are not counting) with an adult ... and prostitution should be legal (i.e. A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT). Yup ... that sounds like mainstream America to me! I dare say that a view like that isn't even mainstream amongst the lunatics that now make up the Democrap party.

This ignores the fact that the organization she actively led (and WHILE SHE LED IT) supports NAMBLA ... who's motto is "If they (young boys targetted for homosexual rape) are 8, you're too late" ... and who's sole purpose is to assist adult sexual deviants (men) on how they can criminally sneak children (young boys) away from their parents, molest them in the most perverse fashion imaginable, and then cover up their crimes through mental intimidatation and persecution of the victim. And Kennedy thought Alito's very distant association with a group that favors allowing ROTC on campus at Princeton is bad?

And this wench passed the REPUBLICAN Senate 96-0 ... based upon her legal skills, not her (demonstrably radical) ideology. Not only that, she was treated with dignity and respect ... given how Alito was treated for the trivial Princeton group, could you IMAGINE what would have happened if he would have been caught up with something as disgusting as the swill Ginsburg rolled around in? Never mind ... he would never have been nominated.

What is even more insane, that the Democraps are screaming about balance on the court when we have this repulsive ruling on "Eminent Domain" that now allows government to take away any property they want, anytime they want; for no better reason than to fill the pockets of rich fat cats and their political lapdogs with money. OOOOHHHH Baby, we definitely need more radical left, socialist justices to even things out, eh?

Nope ... Nope ... "Bush is packing the court" ... just insane.

Note: I am not arguing the merits of the Alito nomination ... or even if any particular Democrap should vote "Yea" or "Nea" on the confirmation. It doesn't matter, they are losers anyway and won't be coming back into power anytime soon. I am simply asking everybody to consider how insane it is that a party that has made packing the courts their last gasp at inflicting their deranged, socialist ideology down our throats, arguing that Mr. Bush is "packing" based upon the fact that he is nominating people that the overwhelming majority of American people agree with, nevermind somebody that agrees with the President's judicial philosophy.

INSANE!!!

Could you imagine if we actually had a reasonably balanced media???

Democrats and Terrorists : The message is the same

Once again Osama demonstrated his love and respect for the democrat party by quoting their leaders time and time again. Of course, Osama was talking about destroying this country and taking over ... hmmm, well I guess the Democraps are too (could not resist that one, could I?).

One might imagine that sooner or later the Democrats would realize the political suicide that they are committing by personifying their politics as strictly "Hate Bush". Time and time again they have said really stupid things that literally plays into the hands of the worst people on earth ... Zarqawi, bin Laden, AlSadr, Kim Jong-il, Chavez, etc. ... setting these tyrants up to literally quote them (democrats) word-for-word.

I hope that in the upcoming elections, Republicans make it a priority to point out who is quoting whom. I know sometime in the past where Rush did a parody of Algore by reading parts of Al's book and parts of the Unibomber's manifesto, and would have the audience try to guess who wrote which part ... effectively demonstrating that Algore and the Unibomber minds were one in the same (which Algore has only too happily validated since 2001).

At the very least, this might force the press to acknowledge that similarities exist, given how they have put no coverage of this whatsoever in their normal reporting ... go figure.

Think about that one for a minute ... during the Alito Confirmation hearings, Teddy spent hours and hours grilling Alito on some article (which has now been reported as intentional 'over-the-top' satire) that was written by somebody else from some organization that Alito never had much to do with ... whereas in the REAL world, terrorist murderers are using the EXACT WORDS of the leaders of the Democrat Party. If Kennedy can assert that Judge Alito is a racist from this ridiculous association, exactly why should we not be able to conclue that the Democrats are terrorists (or at least solid supporters thereof)???

MLK day ... perspective

Well, another Martin Luther King day has passed. From my perspective ... thank God that Dr. King is not here to see what has become of his legacy:

- the two prominent figures representing black americans today are a lying, tax cheat poverty pimp who fills his own pockets with money extorted by threats and intimidation, the other promotes hatred and separation and says he visits a "mother ship" for prophecy.
- the largest organization for "Colored People" has been hijacked by a Democrat Party operative and is now simply a "mindless zombie" wing of that party
- black children are now 70-some odd percent likely to be born out of wedlock, a situation that virtually guarantees a lifetime of poverty / dependence.
- black voters overwhelmingly support a party that rabidly supports an organization that was specifically founded to kill as many undesirables (i.e. black children) as possible

Somebody grab a generator and hook it to Dr. King's corpse ... we could probably generate enough power for a small city from him spinning in his grave.

Not to say that progress has not been made ... I think that the kind of racism from Dr. King's time ... the prevaling mindset that folks of other races were somehow "inferior" ... is pretty rare. Folks certainly still have stereotypes about this and that ... something that Reggie White clumsily tried to describe in a speech to the Wisconsin Legislature ... but that has little to do with any kind of harmful intentions. Statistics show that generally from an economic perspective, the races are pretty much equal WHEN THE DEMOGRAPHICS ARE FIGURED IN ... college grads make about the same, married couples about the same, etc. (the numbers are only terribly skewed when *total* populations are figured in).

Sad to say, a new kind of racism has evolved ... one spawned less for social reasons and more for economic (loosely defined ... better defined as "get rich quick") ... a "fear" of minorities from caucasions due to the threat of civil retribution. If you have anything bad happen with somebody ... be it an employee, subordinate, coworker, even an acquaintance or complete stranger ... the odds of a civil action happening increases significantly when one of the parties can throw down the "race" card.

I do not even have to point to the likes of Jesse and Al and Calypso Louie ... I have seen and experienced it myself.

I also cannot see any good way out of it ... heck I am not sure I would not play the race card if it was to my advantage. I had a great friend that one time, admittedly to his complete embarassment, related the story of his experience at work where a burnt out fool uttered something bad (could even have been the "n" word) and my friend came back with "this will make for a nice lawsuit". It all played out the way the stories go.

As he told the story, I could see in his eyes he was crushed inside ... this was not his way ... he could not figure out "where that came from". I was profoundly disappointed in him (more shocked than anything), but nothing like what he felt for himself. He was incredibly intelligent, profoundly honorable, and acutely aware of the nuances of life ... but when things got hot, he just went nuclear. I cannot believe that I am any better than he.

I am not sure where this ends ... I know that the people in general are growing weary of the charletons ... it is the new mafia and you know what happened to the "old" mafia. Economics, however, is a powerful "trump" card ... I don't see anybody giving up their cards anytime soon. Hopefully it will happen before the new fear-based racism has a chance to become entrenched.

Other random musings

Once again, the democraps prove how unabashedly hypocritical they are ... Nagin with his "chocolate" comment and Hillary with her "plantation" reference.

I had a girlfriend onetime that spoke of "chocolates" ... and it took me about 15 minutes to figure out what the heck she was talking about ... I am best described as anti-racist ... so the term was so far out of my realm of thought that I could not even make sense of the statement. I won't go into how that one played out ... suffice it to say that this was before I was a Christian and it would have been one of the (many) things I needed forgiveness for.

So when Nagin used that term I was just blown away ... the thought is just "yuck" ... ya know? But just try to get your mind around what would have happened to a conservative if something even half as ugly as that was said?

I am ignoring the totally racist garbage about making it a "black" city again ... What are you saying, Ray? I trust that an awful lot of decent, upstanding folks do not consider your identifying "blackness" with the garbage heap that was New Orleans.

Try this one on, Ray ... let's invite all enterprising, hard working folks back, regardless of color. I realize that a clown like Nagin will never get elected in that situation ... but at least it would be a positive message and one that promotes *real* diversity.

The Holiday

Several commentators hit on the annual theme of "non-participation" ... how MLK day is the least celebrated in terms of corporate participation. The speculation ran wild ... it just got goofy. Here is a clue to the goofballs trying to create all sorts of bizarre theories from this ... "yet another holiday" with nobody working directly yanks money out of the system. What's more, setting this day so close to the Christmas holidays seals the deal ... people are not even all that upset about not having it off as the burnout from Christmas is still burned into their minds. I would imagine slapping it down late spring or in the middle of summer would have had a much greater impact. If I am not mistaken even Andy Rooney quipped about a similar topic in one of his hairy rants.

Robert Coleman is still guilty, and still dead ...

Once again, the looney anti-capital punishment crowd end up with more egg on their face, now that yet another set of DNA results solidify the fact that this guy brutally raped and murdered his sister-in-law.

Oops!

Pro-capital punishment blogs and sites are shouting the news from the highest rooftops ... especially since this guy seemed to have been the biggest and best shot they ("anti" crowd) had at proving an "innocent" man died.


I have argued over and over again (here and elsewhere), that the personification of this issue, particularly by trying to "humanize" and soften the perps, is a disasterous course of action that will only serve to push more people to the "pro" side. The people that are put to death overwhelmingly do, in fact, deserve to die ... that is not the problem with this form of punishment. The problem is that there are an awful lot of people in the system that, when they do deserve to die for doing essentially the same things, are not even subject to the same degree of punishment ... particularly the rich and powerful.

Now do not go down the path of pulling out the pictures of the "poor" black perps ... again they still deserved what they got. To some extent the statistics about the demographics of the perps are a step in the right direction, but these are falling on deaf ears for a completely different reason ... the poverty pimps like Jackson, Farrakhan and Sharpton have been playing those cards for so long that people are now totally innoculated against the numbers.

The REAL story to this, in my humble opinion, and the one that the Anti- crowd should zero in on, is the huge effort of various representatives of the government to stop the DNA testing. Now, I do not pretend to know all of their motivations, some of their opposition admittedly could be legitimate and I admit that the only result of testing "after-the-fact" is to totally humiliate the prosecuters.

Nonetheless, I have seen where there have been attempts to ban confirmation testing where the perp has not received the punishment yet! We have got to demand to know exactly why they would not want to do everything that is humanly possible to make sure we are not taking out the wrong person.

THIS is the best case against capital punishment ... the inherent, systematic corruption of the individuals involved and the system itself.

Wow! Could the Alito hearings have gone better?

Democrats are realing from the disasterous outcome of the Alito hearings.

No, they will not admit it. But even they know that they have just dealt themselves a devastating blow. Yes, they may have garnered some additional money from the screwball freaks that now support them, but in the eyes of Americans they took a monstrous hit.

Biden, with the Perky Katie Couric, says that these hearings are a waste of time, and that they should just have bypassed them and gone to debate on the floor of the Senate. Hello? Bypass hours and hours of news coverage, guaranteeing your miserable face is on every major newscast for days on end? The ONLY way Biden wants to avoid that kind of coverage is if he is being totally humiliated ... and of course he and his Comrades were.

So what would a debate on the floor offer? Simple ... the unabashed ability to smear Alito without any opportunity for Alito to respond, and especially without having the American people seeing the onslaught of lies and character assasination while Alito is forced to endure it in the most judicious manner. If anybody with any sense of decency could ignore that, then Mrs. Alito's finally breaking down after days of this viscious garbage should have sealed the deal for all but the most heartless bastards (i.e. Democrats).

We also were witness to some of the most incredibly pathetic attempts to somehow paint Alito as a racist, biggoted dirtball. Ignoring the fact that his record of achievements and REAL LIFE experiences and activities are a testimony of a man who is completely honorable, particularly in matters of diversity: Alito is a man who demonstrably CHANGED THINGS ... not just went along with the status quo. However we are to ignore all of that because Alito had some type of incredibly distant association with a COLLEGE level group over 20 years ago that had one guy one time write an article that Teddy considered offensive??? IMAGINE THAT ... a college kid wrote something stupid related to a highly controversial subject!!!

The hypocrisy is what gets me ... just incredible. Ignoring the fact that Kennedy was thrown out of college for cheating and murdered a woman in a drunken stupor WHILE IN THE CONGRESS (one would imagine he might want to avoid discussions of problems in the distant past). The incredible hypocrisy is that Kennedy himself was a member of a highly exclusive, racist and bigoted organization ... one which only allowed extremely rich, white, men ... while he was in college. Even if the worst scenario that Kennedy can paint was true ... the CAP organization was not racist or sexist. This also ignores the fact that many of the old time Democrats not only ASSOCIATED with questionable organizations, THEY WERE the racists and segregationists, and a former high ranking official of the Ku Klux Klan is a senior member of the Democrat leadership (Robert "sheets" Byrd).

I have pointed out that when Charles Wrangle and other looney poverty pimps go off on one of their stupid rants about Republican "racism", they always cite examples of bad people from the past (for comparitive purposes) that were all Democrats. I have also pointed out that the poster child for abortion support is Planned Parenthood ... an organization who's founder stated that the purpose was to destroy as many "undesirables" as possible ... blacks and hispanics (her words, not mine).

The Response from the Right

You know how you can tell things are really bad for liberals? People are calling on the conservative talk shows wishing that the hearings could go on for a long time, lamenting the fact that liberals were unsuccessful in postponing the hearings (i.e. get them closer to the elections), etc.

OUCH!!!!

I think that these Judicial Committee morons (i.e. Democraps) also painted their Comrades from less radical states into a corner ... the "moderate" Democrats (presently defined as just to the right of Mao) will have to vote for Alito or face the wrath of their constituencies. Money from George Soros is one thing ... but folks in Nebraska sure are not going to elect a guy that hangs out with (and vote with) the likes of Teddy and Shlummer.

Random thoughts : Alito

Just some random thoughts on the current stuff going on related to Alito

Ted Kennedy (a.k.a. the fat-drunk-murderer)

I am just wondering if anybody from the Democrap party realizes how the rest of the country responds when this idiot gets on the air. I mean, if the Republicans wanted to sweep every election in the country with the possible exception of the most blue-ist of the blue areas (which are few and far between), all they have to do is run 15 second spots with pictures of Teddy-boy.

AAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH! Sorry about that ... I just got a visual and I came this close to losing it!

Then in his opening comments, hiccup-Teddy pulls a "Bork" ... just pulls some of the most unbelievable stuff out of his butt (which is one in the same with MoveOn.org) ... Bush is spying on citizens, Bush is torturing and murdering, Bush is the ultimate evil in the world ...

Oh wait ... I think that was the communique from Osama bin Laden ... or was it? Nope, I guess it was Kennedy ... sheez, it sure is hard to tell them apart, isn't it?

The problem with the "Bork" approach, is that it happened ... you know, what 20+ years ago? ... back when Bork was a nominee? I realize Kennedy (and most Democrats) are too stupid to realize this, but the Republicans have been kicking their (democrat) butts all over the place, and they have been doing so because Republicans have learned the lessons from the past. The "Bork" attack was effective in its time because NOBODY would have expected it was coming ... that was a time when (generally) the Senate acted in a distinguished manner, and held each other to high standards. Now, however, nobody expects anything BUT the lowest, slimiest and most disgusting behavior from the likes of Kennedy and Schlumer ... so their tactics are anticipated and therefore ineffective.

Lindsey Graham

I think the reference is correct, maybe I am wrong. One of the Senators commented that at least 22 of the Democraps have no intention of voting for Alito, regardless of the hearings. That should send shockwaves through the American public, and should give the Republicans great pause. What it should do is resonate to the American public that the Courts really are the hammer that liberals intend to use to shove their deranged ideology down our throats. What it should say to Republicans is that we really need to re-think our policy of treating leftie liberal nominees ... like da Bader ... respectfully and with the only consideration for qualifications as a justice (vs an out-of-touch ideology and the willingness to rewrite the Constitution).

In the immortal words of Sly Stallone (in the movie "Cobra") : "as long as we have to play by the rules and they don't, we're gonna lose".

Chuck Schumer (a.k.a. "Chuckie")

Note: I heard the audio of the excerpt I am discussing on the radio ... not live nor transcript. I would guess it is mostly accurate. I really, really could not believe what I was hearing ... I mean the radio announcer set this up as being "funny" ... but I was just so blown away.

For those of you that did not catch it ... Chuckie literally walked Alito down this path that ... boy, how do I put this??? ... let me just repeat what was discussed (and this is a paraphrase):

Chuckie ... does the Constitution protect "free speech"
Alito ... duh (OK, not really, but wait ...). "Free speech is literally articulated in the Bill of Rights"
Chuckie ... so along those same lines, is abortion a right guaranteed by the Constitution?

People, I am not making this up ... I am not that clever. This moron literally led an argument down the path that compared the right to freedom of speech ... something that is spelled out word-for-word in the original document amendments by the original authors of the document ... to the "right" of abortion ... a ruling that is not even based upon anything remotely tied to a Constitutional specification, but an abstract (WAAAAYYYYY out there) extension of an implied right ("privacy") which in itself is a stretch of other abstractions.

If you were on trial, would you want this clown as your attorney?

I could even see some Democrats turn away from their lunatic assertions that abortion is somehow a "right" that is somehow protected. Schumer's line of questioning was the perfect Constitutional case AGAINST abortion ... freedom of speech is articulated and therefore protected, nothing about abortion is remotely tied to anything that appears in the Constitution, and it is therefore subject to legislation (i.e. the voters can choose to create whatever boundaries around it they want).

There are two explanations of this "approach" ... either Schumer is so steeped in his ideology that he doesn't realize how deranged this line of questioning is (for a person that supports abortion), or else he thought he was setting a trap for Alito ("free speach is obviously a right, abortion is not necessarily a right"). Either way, Schumer walks away humiliated, as Alito dealt with this brilliantly.

Finally, Alito himself

Your first instinct would be to simply grant Alito massive kudos for his near perfect performance. Then again, perhaps not.

For a competitor to be judged in his excellence, he would actually have to come up against worthy competition. In the case of the Senate judiciary committee, particularly those on the Democrat side ... it is like an NFL team playing all out against a pee-wee league roster, with the NFL team having the complete playbook the pee-wee coach is using. Think about this folks, both Roberts AND Alito require absolutely no notes ... their biggest challenge is to actually try to look serious when the comedy team of Biden, Kennedy and Schumer start talking.

I will give him credit for that ... for literally keeping a perfectly stoic face knowing that the press is desperate to get any kind of picture that they can use to make him look bad. Again, think about that one folks ... could you imagine hours upon hours of this sludge, and you have to be *perfect* or else that one slip up is on the front page of a thousand newspapers??? Oy!

Louisiana Outrage

In the desperate situation that Louisiana now faces ... a devastated economy and tax base that has resulted in a $1 Billion deficit in state government ... the state government faces laying off 20% of its workforce and other drastic measures.

But that didn't stop the Blanco administration from allocating a good part of a million dollars to upgrade offices for Blanco's staffers to rather lavish status! Walnut panelling, flat screen TVs, Italian marble and new carpeting somehow managed to sneak into the post-Hurricane budget of the governor that is asking Americans for a quarter of a trillion dollars to turn her state back into the liberal utopia it once was.

So exactly who is "deranged", Nancy?

Remember in the few days after Katrina, when Nancy Pelosi called President Bush "deranged" for not responding to the horrible news reports by firing the head of FEMA? Ignoring the fact that the news reports turned out to be complete fabrications, and the problems in New Orleans (while certainly severe) were nowhere near as violent and criminal as the press was making up. I commented on the situation by pointing out that the failing of FEMA and the President was in not recognizing the fact that the state was run by Democrats, so by default it was going to be a complete disaster and the federal government should have simply taken over with no regard for what the idiots involved (Nagin, Blanco, Landrieu, et al) wanted or asked for.

We now see the root of what led to this disaster ... an "out of touch" (as Nancy would put it) Governor who is continuing to run the state as did her predecessor democrats ... filling their own pockets, garnering tax dollars to create lavish surroundings for themselves, blaming their problems on others, and a complete disregard for the well-being of their constituents.

Senator Mary Landrieu, who has threatened to punch President Bush in the nose for having concerns about corruption in Louisiana, does not seem to have any comments about how her fellow Democrat is allocating precious taxpayer funds. Go figure.

I am not at all surprised by any of this, of course. Democrats simply do not see their own faults, ever. Bill Clinton rapes women and molests young interns ... no problem. Radical left-wing organizations make a mockery of campaign finance reform ... earth to Senator Feingold, are you there? Democrats have been re-allocating federal money from levee reinforcement to build casinos (after all, gambling interests make much larger donations than levees) ... it is still GW's fault the levees gave way.

And on another note ...

The New York Times is busy putting together a story that it was really George W Bush that allocated the funds for Blanco's offices, against the wishes of Landrieu and Blanco. Of course they will hold the story back for a year or so until one of their writers can release a book on how Halliburton was the one that actually did the work on the offices using materials that they pulled out of the levees just before Katrina hit.