Blood and Guts Politics

Stupid news item of the week

2006-12-24T12:21:00.000-08:00

And my how stupid it is. This from MSNBC.

Making a movie in which evil teddy bears attack a teacher got two budding filmmakers expelled from their high school, but a federal judge says it was the school that was wrong.

Is my commenting on this passage even necessary? EXPELLED? How much money do you want to bet that their teacher is a whiney liberal fem-nazi?

The boys worked on the movie “The Teddy Bear Master” from fall 2005 through summer 2006. It depicts a “teddy bear master” ordering stuffed animals to kill a teacher who had embarrassed him, but students battle the toy beasts, according to documents filed in court.

I may not pay 8 bucks to see it in theaters, but it'd be worth a rental.

School officials had argued that the film was disruptive and that a teacher whose name was used in the movie found it threatening.

I agree. There seems a very real possibilty that the teddy bears could animate and come after the teacher in question. How exactly does one defend oneself from a gibbering horde of stuffed cuteness anyway? No doubt the same teacher will soon be suing for emotional damages.

Merry Christmas

2006-12-23T10:13:00.000-08:00

Good news for the season from Reuters.

U.S. forces said on Saturday they had killed the Taliban's military chief in southern Afghanistan, who had close links to Osama bin Laden and was heir to the rebel leadership.

See you in Hell, you bastard.

"Mullah Osmani is the highest ranking Taliban leader that we've ever killed," he said. "His death is very significant and will hit the Taliban's operations."

Chalk up one more villain blown off the face of this earth. I remain unconvinced, however, that his death will impact the Taliban in any significant way for very long. If our enemies are anything they are resourceful and flexible. They will adapt before long.
Of course, according to the Taliban the guy isn't even dead...

The Taliban said Osmani, anointed by the group's leader, Mullah Mohammad Omar, as his heir in 2001, was alive.
"We strongly deny this. He is not present in the area where American forces are claiming to have killed him," commander Mullah Hayat Khan told Reuters by telephone.

In other words, they haven't recovered a body? Hmm. Well let's look at the way in which we annihilated Osmani.

Osmani and two other guerillas were killed in an air strike on their car on an isolated desert road on Tuesday, spokesman for the U.S.-led coalition force, Colonel Tom Collins, said in Kabul.

Airstrike means ordnance. Ordnance means no remains. End of story. The U.S. military elaborates on the point.

Collins said Osmani's car was destroyed in the attack in Helmand and the U.S. coalition had taken four days to check intelligence and other sources to confirm his identity.
"We're sure that we killed Osmani," he said. "It's a big loss for the Taliban. But the Taliban is also fairly adaptive. There is no doubt that they will put somebody else in that position and we will go after that person too," he said.

Good enough for me. Another one bites the dust.

You wouldn't believe me

2006-12-21T11:27:00.000-08:00

Unless I showed you firsthand. Not only is this the caliber of modern reporting, but its absolutely hilarious at the 2 minute mark. Give it a chance and you'll see what I mean.

Not getting the point

2006-12-20T19:20:00.000-08:00

Christian Science Monitor brings us this.

Expanding the size of US armed forces could be an expensive and lengthy task - in essence, a redoubling of the national effort to grapple with the challenge posed by Islamic extremism.
The move would be irrelevant in the Iraq war, say some critics, because by the time more troops are recruited, trained, and deployed, the conflict there will probably be set in its course.
But in calling for such an increase, President Bush said the US military must be positioned to deal with terrorists for a generation to come.

I never think more military is a bad thing, being a militant nationalist conservative myself. However, I don't think increasing troops is really what we need. What good is an extra garrison of troops going to do us if they still have a seven step Rules of Engagement code at military checkpoints and a ban on going after al-Sadr? Then we simply have more men over there in danger because the politicians are rendering their warrior spirit impotent.

Instead, Bush billed a larger US military as essential for the security of today's children and their children.

That is patently true. Now we simply have to change our doctrine and subordinate the will of the Iraqi government to our own military strategy. We have to win before they can govern anything at all.

Democrats remain wary, however, that Bush's call for a larger military is a means to make more politically palatable a separate decision to increase troop strength in Iraq. That is a move many of them oppose.
"More troops would get us in deeper and is a military response to a political problem," said Sen. Carl Levin (D) of Michigan, incoming Senate Armed Services chairman, in a statement.

The Dems just don't understand a damn thing. We're already in deep, and the reason we have political problems, is because of POLITICIANS like Senator Levin looking over our soldiers' shoulders. They are trained to be vote whores, not to conquer.

Why is he still breathing?

2006-12-19T20:23:00.000-08:00

CNN blows our mind. Can you imagine a college professor doing such a thing?

A Florida professor admitted Tuesday he had been a Cuban spy for nearly 30 years, and his wife -- also a professor -- admitted she knew of his conduct, authorities said.

That should be the end of discussion. Death by firing squad for spies and traitors. Throw his wife in jail for being an accomplice to espionage.

But of course, where are our balls? Nowhere to be found it seems.

The couple entered their pleas as part of a deal to avoid a jury trial on previous charges of being Cuban agents who failed to register with the U.S. government, the Miami Herald reported Tuesday.
So not only are we not going to execute the traitor, but we're pleaing him down to a lesser sentance. Now he faces a mere five years? Wait, wait, wait! Stand by! Ironic statement incoming!

In Washington, Assistant Attorney General Kenneth Wainstein said the plea "demonstrates our firm commitment to protect our country and our citizens against the agents of foreign powers."

Yes! And that demonstration says the following: Spies beware! Here there be minor prison sentances! Dare to enact espionage on our great country, and you shall be forced to wait five years until you may return to your native country.

Gates sworn in

2006-12-18T17:40:00.000-08:00

And everyone talks of a new direction.

I couldn't be more in agreement. So far, the basic building blocks seem to be there. The man knows what a dirty word retreat is, and seems to have his head in a realistic place as concerns the consequences of such cowardice.

What concerns me, however, is whether or not he has the balls to execute this war like a war, and not a police action. Are we going to aggressively go after these desert rats or are we simply going to use the Vietnamesque tactic of containment and defensive, reactionary fighting. As far as Robert Gates is concerned, he hasn't let on one way or the other. With all his talk of change, there hasn't been a very concrete definition of what that's going to be.

Further, the word from Tony Snow is that the White House will not be releasing any sort of new plan until the new year. So will it indeed be a new plan, or the same strategy repackaged complete with stacks of bullshit recommendations passed forth by the Iraq Study Group?

What we need is a good old-fashioned, unadulterated American show of power. Our military functions best as a lean, fit fighting machine. We're adaptable, highly specialized in a variety of tasks and able to tackle any situation using the best technology on earth. What were are not is a wall designed to keep out the hun. If we are to win, we must kill. Men who oppose our establishment of Iraq's government must be brought immediately to the table or they must die. If you are not with us, you are against us. More importantly, if we do not win, we lose.

Though any sort of realistic, workable solution to the Iraq problem wil be crippled by constant media coverage and moral grandstanding.

Yes but...what does he DO?

2006-12-17T12:27:00.000-08:00

MSNBC giggles over Barack Obama with all the excitement of a 14 year old feeling his first female breast.

The hype about Barack Obama’s potential presidential candidacy is less about the freshman Democratic senator than it is about the public’s desire for a change from the polarization and paralyzation of American politics.

Right. So how is he any different? A glance at his voting record shows you he's from the left. Are we expected to believe that just because he hasn't had a chance to be a polarizing force yet (being a 1st term junior senator) that he's truly any different? With him we just don't know anything.

Nobody, not even the unusually self-aware Obama, knows what would happen if he entered the presidential race. But you can bet on this: Americans won’t settle for status quo, and if the two major parties don’t produce an authentic, optimistic change agent, voters will look beyond the Democrats and Republicans. They might even look beyond politics in 2008.

You heard it here first baby. We'll be looking beyond politics, and focussing instead on who makes the meanest omlette. What an assinine passage. When Americans get disenfranchised with the system, they don't vote AT ALL. They don't vote third party.

Republican strategist Joe Gaylord, an adviser to former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, said there is a big opening for a “can-do centrist” in 2008. “If there is a person who can not be from the left or the right, who has a track recover of solving problems and making things work, he or she would have a huge market for a third-party bid,” Gaylord said.

In other words, a candidate who can lie to the widest range of people simultaneously and still come across as believable will be elected. I also like the subtle implication that Obama is indeed a centrist. Again I refer you to his voting record.

“I definitely think that we need to think literally about who might run outside of politics and the traditional spheres, someone with a sense of leadership and public service,” said Washington consultant Nicco Mele, a senior strategist for Dean in 2004.

Alright, now this is perhaps my favorite quote today, in terms of sheer ridiculous hilarity. Read her quote, and then read what she did in '04. Oh me, that's a knee-slapper. I love irony.

I've said it from the start

2006-12-16T15:19:00.000-08:00

CNN can't believe it. Japan daring to have DIGNITY?!?

Japan's conservative government chipped away at two pillars of the country's postwar pacifism, requiring schools to teach patriotism and upgrading the Defense Agency to a full ministry for the first time since World War II.

Note the not so subtle dropping of the word "conservative" when describing this horrid practice of teaching patriotism at schools in Japan. What a primitive concept - being proud of one's nation. Everyone knows this only leads to the subjugation and oppression of gays, muslims, vegetarians, feminists, hippies, communists and other "intellectuals" and minorities worldwide. We cannot abide this!

The upgrading of the Defense Agency under the Cabinet Office to a full ministry passed Parliament without significant opposition, propelled by deep concern in Japan over North Korean missile and nuclear weapons development.

Excellant! The Japanese have balls, and now as one of our staunchest allies, it will be nice to spread the weight of keeping the psychotics of the world at bay.

Critics, however, attacked the move as harkening back to Japan's war-era education system, in which children were instructed to support the country's imperialist military and sacrifice themselves for the emperor and nation.

Critics, meaning mother-whoring liberals no doubt. They see supporting their country as signing up for the kamikaze squadrons. The distinction is significant, if you have a brain.

That is a big if.

Anyone up for Waterboarding?

2006-12-14T13:52:00.000-08:00

I'd lay down money that the real thing is equally as funny.

Mushroon clouds a'bloomin'

2006-12-13T14:20:00.000-08:00

This from CSM.

Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad boasts that world powers are getting weak knees about stopping his country's nuclear program.
Is the fiery leader right?

Unfortunately, probably so.

The United Nations Security Council is considering a watered-down resolution of sanctions aimed at punishing Iran for pursuing its uranium- enrichment program - a process that could lead to development of a nuclear weapon. But with the United States seemingly occupied with Iraq, and with Russia and China still balking at any action that would suggest "humiliation" of a valued trade partner, doubts are rising over how much the Europe-sponsored resolution will be worth.

Resolutions don't mean a goddamn thing and Iraq proved that. They're nothing but a symbolic and dismissive gesture of disapproval that inevitably results in a larger problem further down the road.

On a side note, Russia and China aren't trustworthy anyway. Russia is led by a criminal and China smiles at us through dragon teeth.

Noting that Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries announced over the weekend their interest in developing a cooperative nuclear-energy program, former Middle East negotiator Dennis Ross said, "Who is that message for? Let me tell you, it's not for Iran. It was for us."
Ambassador Ross, now at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, also said at an event Tuesday that the Saudis are telling the US, "Stop them - or that [nuclear power] is the way we go, too."

That's a comforting thought. The most backwards cultures in the world (yes I said it) arming themselves with the most destructive weapons humanity has ever devised. I'm starting to get heartburn over here.

Others note that while the US goes along with diplomatic efforts to curtail Iran's nuclear progress, President Bush continues to insist that "no options are off the table" in terms of guaranteeing that Iran never develops the bomb. They speculate that if Iran continues its nuclear march, the US could take military action to at least seriously damage its program before the end of Mr. Bush's term, claiming it had favored diplomatic action until the risk dictated another course.

I don't much care for Bush, but I have to admit I find such strong words comforting. Let's hope he lives up to it. No doubt the U.N. will stand on the sidelines and wag their reproachful fingers at us. The U.N. is the most utterly useless and destructive bureaucratic body in existence today. Period. Their negligence borders on the criminal.

Well worth your attention

2006-12-12T12:47:00.000-08:00

Straight from the mouth of an American soldier, and exactly what I've been lamenting for three months on this blog now.

http://www.blackfive.net/main/2006/12/roe_rules_of_en.html

I stand by everything said. A military is designed to kill, not police actions and not "winning hearts and minds".

Na na na na, hey hey hey, goodbye!

2006-12-11T10:22:00.000-08:00

Fox brings us the tragic news that Kofi Annan plans to...wait for it...criticize us on his way out! I know, I know, can you believe it?

Outgoing U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan plans to offer a blistering criticism of the Bush administration's foreign policy in a farewell speech Monday to a crowd in Independence, Mo.
A copy of the speech obtained by FOX News, shows Annan is expected to accuse the U.S. administration of committing human rights abuses in the name of fighting terrorism, and of taking military action without broad international support.

Yes. Human rights abuses such as following the tenants of the Geneva Convention to the letter by NOT extending Geneva Convention rights to those who do not extend it themselves, or even meet the requirements set forth therein. And by the way, we didn't have international support because YOU did not give it to us. And now you want to lecture us on our actions, you who had no hand in the fighting?

"As President Truman said, 'The responsibility of the great states is to serve and not dominate the peoples of the world,"' Annan said.

Was that before or after he dropped two atomic bombs and annihilated two cities?

When "military force is used, the world at large will consider it legitimate only when convinced that it is being used for the right purpose … in accordance with broadly accepted norms," the speech says in reference to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

Unless of course you are Hezbollah and you are killing Jewish civilians, in which case you are simply a victim of your own tragic circumstance. In such cases, the UN will demand that you disperse and will slap you on the wrist. Not lightly either, we're talking a UN slap.

Goodbye Kofi. It's just too bad the UN isn't retiring as well.

Why bother?

2006-12-09T18:15:00.000-08:00

MSNBC carries this from Tehran:

Iran will only hold direct talks with the United States on Iraq if Washington announces plans to pull its troops out, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said Saturday.
Mottaki was responding to this week’s Iraq Study Group report, which recommended Washington should directly engage with Iran and Syria to try to stabilize Iraq.

Color me unmoved. The Iraq Study Group is a document that offers fluffy suggestions and tells us what we already know. A genuine waste of our time. Iran is using political opportunism to advance an agenda.

An agenda, mind you, to get us out of Iraq. I wonder why they want us out? Can anyone say power vacuum?

Washington blames Iran and Syria for stirring up conflict in Iraq nearly four years after the U.S.-led invasion toppled Saddam Hussein.
“The biggest help Iran can make is to stop what they’re doing in Iraq right now,” a senior U.S. military official, who did not want to be named, told Reuters.

Exactly, which is why talking is also a waste of time. Unfortunately, much else isn't much an option, as our military is stretched perilously thin. If only the UN was worth a damn, they could have this crisis resolved in a matter of months.

Bomb the nuclear labs into the stone age. Better yet, let Israel do it. They know how to get a job done.

We live in an age in which we are trying to negotiate with a psycopathic Hitler wannabe. What could he possibly have to offer us if we were to withdraw? Mahmoud would have the upper hand and we'd be in no position to negotiate anything. Meanwhile he'd unfurl his wings and spread his oppressive regime into Iraq and turn it into another Syria. Sounds appealing yes?

We need to step on this roach fast.

But on the bright side...

2006-12-08T14:53:00.000-08:00

CNN shares some tragic news with us. Tragic, at least from their perpective.

Coalition forces killed 20 people they identified as insurgents, destroyed weapons caches and arrested seven suspected terrorists in two security sweeps in Iraq on Friday, the U.S. military said.

Yikes. Let's see now, how can CNN spin this story to make it one more cog in the machine of negativity coming forth from Iraq?

The identities of those killed were in dispute, according to wire reports. The mayor and police in al-Ishaqi village, where one raid took place, said that civilians were killed -- including women and children, according to The Associated Press. Reuters also reported that police said 17 civilians were killed.

See, these are what I call "but" stories. "Yes yes, this went well but..." Never underestimate the tag-team champions of liberal bullshit, the AP and Reuters. When you look at the news story in context, this paragraph occurs directly after the one quoted above. So, though the headline is that our boys are making headway, let's take a nice long look at how the tone of the rest of this article goes.

Three U.S. soldiers were killed Thursday, all by roadside bombs, the U.S. military said. Two were part of a Multi-National Division -- Baghdad patrol that was responding to a report of a bomb south of Baghdad. A roadside bomb exploded, killing them and wounding two others, the military said. The military had earlier reported another U.S. soldier's death, when a roadside bomb exploded near his patrol in the capital.
Since the start of the war, 2,926 U.S. military members and personnel have died in Iraq -- 36 so far in December.

To be interpreted as "Reminder! We're losing, our soldiers are dying!" Hopeless, these journalists.

This is why we need unions!

2006-12-07T18:11:00.000-08:00

And the subject line is sarcasm.

This from Fox News.

About 1,000 nonunion workers, mostly Hispanics upset with the recent firing of immigrants for allegedly providing false documents, walked off their jobs at a Smithfield Foods Inc. slaughtering plant, a union spokeswoman said.

Good. Non-union. Fire them too. Then go down to the local unemployment offices and give the jobs to people who want to work.

About 600 workers were found to have unverifiable information. The company fired about 75 people for providing false information, he said.

And they should have been arrested to boot.

Smithfield spokesman Dennis Pittman said the company was only complying with a request from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement "This walkout — which apparently was instigated by the United Food and Commercial Workers Union — is totally unjustified," Pittman said. "If Smithfield were to do what the union is calling for, we would be breaking federal law by knowingly employing undocumented workers. The union should stop trying to pressure Smithfield to break the law."

Agreed. Rule of law must be maintained. If you are not properly documented, no job. Comprende? You go through the proper channels, or you simply do not work. End of story, turn out the lights.

And by the way...if all the able bodied people on welfare would get a damn job, we wouldn't have a need to hire those who stream across the border and rape our nation by violating its laws. Think about that.

There's something about Gates

2006-12-06T12:08:00.000-08:00

CNN gushes over him.

President Bush's nomination of Robert Gates as defense secretary headed to the full Senate Wednesday for approval, a day after it sailed through the Armed Services Committee.
Gates was confirmed by the committee 24-0.

Wow. Why migh this be?

When asked by Democratic Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, incoming chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, if he thought the U.S. was winning the war, Gates replied, "No, sir."

Oh. Yes I imagine Levin might have liked that answer. The funny thing now is that Iraq now has the Democrats' name on it, and they also have to take a bite of the sandwich if it's later found to contain shit.

Later, he clarified his remark, saying the United States wasn't losing either and that his comment pertained to Iraq as a whole, not just as a military endeavor.
"Our military forces win the battles that they fight. Our soldiers have done an incredible job in Iraq, and I'm not aware of a single battle that they have lost," he said.

If you are not winning, you are losing. There is no third direction. We are not losing militarily whatsoever. As Gates points out, we've never given ground to those bastards. What we are losing is our nerve as a public, but that's a rant found elsewhere.

Iran concerns Gates because "their capacity to potentially close off the Persian Gulf to all exports of oil, their potential to unleash a significant wave of terror -- in the Middle East and in Europe and even here in this country -- is very real," he said.
But, the nominee said, while the Islamic republic is working against U.S. interests, "I think they could do a lot more to hurt our effort in Iraq."

Every time I start to get on the same page with this guy, he goes and craps out a stupid comment like that. Iran could be doing worse, so why bother with them? Wake up Gates! Read some of Churchill's letters! The same goes for our entire government, that Islamofascist government is invested in our failure and demise, and the extinction of the Jews. Accept the fact that we must go for their jugular in some way very soon.

For sake of comparison

2006-12-05T14:06:00.000-08:00

Conservatives have been attacked for calling the more liberal among us unpatriotic. After watching the above video, I'd like to paste the comments that followed on youtube.com. I'm sure you'll find them intellectually stunning in their brilliance.

1) Who needs America? they only helped the UK in WW2 after the Japs bombed Pearl Harbour. Till then they were happy to sit on their arse's and help no-one. They shouldnt be in Iraq in the first place, they only invaded for the oil, not to help the Iraq people. The Iraq's are kicking their arse, even with the yanks having all the high tec gear.Americans....who needs them?

2)AMERIKANS ARE GOING TO "CUT AND RUN" - pussysIF ONLY THEY COULD "STAY THE COURSE" - $500 billion wont do itTHEIR ALLY SADAAM HUSSIEN IS NOW MORE POPULAR POWERFUL THAN BUSHTHEIR OTHER CREATION ALQAEEDA IS NOW LEGITIMATE RESISTANCE + FREEDOM IN IRAQ + THE GLOBE MEHDI ARMY + IRAN ARE MORE POWERFUL THAN EVER- when SHIA speak the world shuts up and listens (+ bows down)ISRAEL the fuken whites who invaded and occupied North Afrika In 1948 are soon coming to their demise

3) UR LEADERS ARE JUST SERVING CORPORATIONS NOTHING TO DO WITH AMERIKAN PEOPLE U FUKERY DO PEOPLE LOVE TO SUPPORT CORPORATIONS WHO STEAL THEIR LAND / MONEYTHEN OVERCHARGE THEM FOR GOOD AND SERVICESTHEN THEIR GOVERNMENT THEY PLACED IN POWER OVER TAXES U WORSE THAN SLAVERYTHEN U SUPPORT THEM LIKE U SUK THEIR COCKS.. WISE UP FREE WORLDARABS/ASIANS/AFRIKANS = freedom slavesWESTERNERS= tax slaves

4) IMAGINE LIVING ON OCCUPIED LAND & BEING DECENDANTS OF COLONIAL SLAVE MASTERSHow EMBARRASSING & DISGUSTINGISRAEL(white Europeans)occupying NORTH AFRIKA SINCE 1948 (living embarrassments)AMERIKAN WHITES (export of BRITAIN IRELAND living on INDIAN land) trash & genocidal slave mastering cuntsAUSTRALIA & NEWZEALAND - (fukers are Britiain & Irelands old Prisoners - disgusting mentality they haveCANADA -- R European genocidal dikfaces living on Indians LandDown with ZIONISTS

You see? Take Marxism, add a healthy dose of anti-nationalism, a further dose of intellectual vanity and just a dash of typo, and you get this sort of thing. I rest my case.

Stupid news item of the week

2006-12-04T10:33:00.000-08:00

MSNBC shows why Kofi Annan is the unequivocal master of the obvious:

The level of violence in Iraq is "much worse" than that of Lebanon's civil war, outgoing U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan said in an interview aired Monday.

How illuminating.

Last week, when asked by reporters whether the fighting in Iraq could be considered a civil war, Annan said "almost."
"I think given the developments on the ground, unless something is done drastically and urgently to arrest the deteriorating situation, we could be there. In fact we are almost there," he said last week.

Please tell me when precisely the U.N. has attempted something "drastic" that has had a positive result? Let's see, how about when they made the drastic move to chastise Israel and castrate them in the midst of a purge against Hezbollah? Yes that was quite drastic. How about when they made the impulsive decision to intervene in the Rwandan genocide? Oh wait, they didn't do a damn thing.

In the BBC interview, Annan agreed when it was suggested that some Iraqis believe life is worse now than it was under Saddam Hussein's regime.

Let me spell out the subtext that the BBC reporter was trying to get across: Iraq is worse, and its because of the evil United States. Sure, in alot of ways things are more bloody and violent, but it is because of bureaucrats and the media tying our hands so we can't obliterate the murdering filth that festers in the Iraqi swamps. That's what so many of these liberals morons can't seem to get through their skulls.

Peace, but always through strength.

Analyzing the draft nonsense

2006-12-03T17:49:00.000-08:00

This from CSM.

Would reinstituting the military draft even things out, spreading the responsibility while influencing politicians to think twice before sending men and women into harm's way?

I think the way this question was posed goes beyond the simple issue of draft or no draft. Here's what I mean:

"I do think we need a draft," says Charles Moskos, military sociologist and professor emeritus at Northwestern University. "Our country is experiencing what I call 'patriotism lite.' Nobody's willing to sacrifice anything. We don't even have gas rationing. Congress votes to go to war, but won't send its own children. We don't have enough troops. We've used reservists and the National Guard in an unprecedented manner."

The fascinating subtext of what Moskos is saying is that we need a draft because of an absence of responsibility. No one is willing to die for what they believe in anymore, or even adhere to smaller sacrifices. A glance at the small sacrifices made by every American during WWII will demonstrate the contrast.

Now instead we sit back from a confortable distance and criticize and condemn. We bitch and complain about paying too much for gasoline. We watch the war unfold through the lenses of the media and act as though its outcome will have no effect on us.

We are comfortable. We are sanguine. We are weak, and we feel entitled.

How did this happen? Who is to blame? I could point fingers all day long. The 1960's seemed to have a large effect on the matter, as people started focussing more and more on a Millsean sense of individual entitlement and less and less on interfacing their wants and needs with the good of the American people. It is my estimation that we are no longer the lean and fit nation we once were in the early to mid twentieth century. We are as a bloated fat ass spread over too little barstool. We gorge ourselves on American Idol and shamelessly, SHAMELESSLY, vomit the problems of today onto our children. We allow the madmen of today to become the monsters of tommorrow, and we wash our hands of it all.

We do it so we can keep drinking our fill, and pushing the responsibility onto later generations. Our politics reflect it. We'd rather endure uneasy peace than suffer a war that secures our safety. Why? Because its easy.

I don't even mean to suggest that military service is the only way to purge ourselves of our apathy. I insist that still another way lies in our determination to put aside our intellectual vanity and self-guilt to instead embrace the old notions. What is good for America, is good for Americans. What hurts America, inevitably hurt Americans.

We need to awaken from our apathy. Wake up and smell the evil festering around you.

Race wars!

2006-12-01T21:23:00.000-08:00

First Michael Richards and now this? Is no black man safe?

The city's fire chief announced his retirement Friday amid a racially charged furor involving a black firefighter who was served spaghetti mixed with dog food.

You know, aside from the fact that I find that prank absolutely hilarious, I find myself asking what is racially charged about this particular prank?

The firefighter who was fed the spaghetti claimed that it was racial discrimination and that he was harassed after reporting it. But other firefighters insisted it was an ordinary firehouse prank with no racist intent. A department investigation suggested the prank was prompted by the way firefighter Tennie Pierce called himself the "Big Dog" during a volleyball game.

I'm still waiting for an instance of a racial slur, maybe a burning cross or something. So far none of this seems outside the realm of a bunch of guys bullshitting around and one guy taking things too seriously. Maybe it did go too far. After all, maybe this Pierce guy (Mr Victim) had been minding his own business and was unfairly targetted.

The council approved the settlement on advice of the city attorney before photos surfaced showing that Pierce himself engaged in crude firehouse hazing, smearing mustard and dumping water on colleagues.

Oh. So evidently Pierce is filled with blinding racial hatred that must be vindicated by the smearing of mustard and the dumping of copious amounts of water. We may have a race war brewing in our fire departments, ladies and gentlemen. I don't mean to alarm you, but it appears the racial wound created by Michael Richards is deep indeed, and is now festering even amongst our dearest institutions.

God help us all.

Like vermin

2006-12-01T05:57:00.000-08:00

Back to your holes.

"Alleged"

2006-11-30T16:20:00.000-08:00

Fox News carries this report.

Moroccan police have arrested a Muslim prayer leader who is suspected of recruiting young men to be suicide bombers in the insurgency in Iraq, a newspaper reported Wednesday.

Mmm. How suprising. What's the evidence?

Abdelilah preached at a mosque in Mezouak, a vast slum on the city's outskirts, exhorting Moroccans to "fight the American-Zionist occupation in Iraq," the newspaper quoted police as saying.
Two young men who attended the mosque carried out suicide bombings in Baquba, Iraq, last month, and a further five Moroccans linked to the mosque are believed to have joined the Iraq insurgency, the daily said.

Sounds to me like ther'e nothing "alleged" or "suspected". Lock, stock, the freaking lot. Send him to Cuba so we can shake him down, and find out if he was acting alone.

As for everyone crying that the Guantanamo detainees deserve trial, I couldn't agree more. Pump them for information, try them, and when we find them guilty, execute them so we can hurry up and piss on their graves.

As if to accentuate my thoughts, the television over my shoulder just aired a video of a terrorist who was bring interviewed. The subject? His admitted practice of beheading those he considered infidels. He remarked that he despised cowards, especially those who appear too nervous as they kneel waiting for the sword to take off their head.

What is that if not genocide?

Boom

2006-11-30T09:16:00.000-08:00

MNF-Iraq brings us joyous news.

Coalition Forces killed eight al-Qaida terrorists today in an early-morning raid near Baqubah. Acting upon numerous intelligence sources, Coalition Forces launched an operation to detain individuals running a known terrorist cell. At the objective, Coalition Forces received enemy rifle and machine gun fire. Due to the heavy volume of enemy fire, Coalition Forces also engaged the terrorists with aircraft. Coalition aircraft fired rounds neutralizing the enemy threat.

The only good terrorist is a dead one. That is how you fight a war. Your enemy hides in a building, you blow it to hell with air assets. Blammo, wrath of God, shock and awe and all that glory. They cannot stand against our technology and air superiority, SO USE IT.

Upon a search of the objective area, they found two female local nationals who were killed during the firefight.

A shame to be sure. Their blood is on the hands of al-Qaeda, we have only just begun to avenge them. God rest their souls.

Mucking it up already

2006-11-29T16:00:00.000-08:00

Originally from CNN:

Fresh from a defeat in her bid to appoint a controversial congressman as House majority leader, incoming Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Tuesday she will not appoint Rep. Alcee Hastings to head the House intelligence committee.

My my my. Dare I suggest that already Pelosi is spending valuable political capital just to keep her side of the aisle on her side? I've often laughed, knowing the immense strain she'll have trying to simultaneously retain the monetary support of the psychotic leftist interest groups and maintain the facade of moderation before a greater American public. I honestly have to say though, I didn't expect her to trip this early in her congressional appointments. Not that I mind.

It also came fewer than two weeks after Pelosi's colleagues tapped her as the first female House speaker, then quickly snubbed her in her bid to propel longtime ally Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania to the majority leader post.
Murtha, also the subject of a federal bribery investigation in the 1980s (he was never charged), lost to Rep. Steny Hoyer of Maryland for the post in a vote by the party caucus.

Promising to clean up corruption and then appointing Murtha is like promising marital fidelity and frequenting the Red Light District. So, since her decision makes no political sense, can we infer her choice of Murtha, and later Hastings, are the result of some unseen political force? Perhaps some unscrupulous arm-twisting, back-scratching and jockeying for power? It's a safe bet.

"Sorry, haters, God is not finished with me yet," his [Hastings] statement said.

He later added, "Now where are my playahs up in this bitch?"

I couldn't stop laughing

2006-11-29T10:22:00.000-08:00

I'll have you know, that's how terrorists actually talk.

Not suprisingly

2006-11-28T17:33:00.000-08:00

Misha over at Anti-Idiotarian does a fine job bringing this latest piece of filth to us from the mouth of Charlie Rangel.

I'd comment on Rangel's idiocy, but Misha does an adequete job, as always.

Some notes on 2008

2006-11-28T09:07:00.000-08:00

Sorry for the lack of posts yesterday. This from CNN.

Democratic Sen. John Kerry, considering a second bid for the U.S. presidency, finished dead last in a poll on the likability of 20 top American political figures.

Really? To quote Fight Club, "I am Jack's complete lack of suprise."

The survey asked respondents to rate 20 political figures on a "feeling thermometer." The warmer or more favorable they felt toward a person the higher score they gave them on a scale of zero to 100. Respondents were given the option of saying they did not know enough about the figure to offer a rating.
In the current poll, former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, a Republican, ranked first with a mean score of 64.2, followed by Democratic Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, 58.8, and McCain, 57.7. All three are potential presidential candidates.

And of the three, only Giuliani passes muster as a defense candidate. What the hell has Obama done anyway, to have gotten so popular? He's a junior senator! Look at his voting record, he's done almost nothing.
Though there's nothing new here. We pretty much knew that these wold be the big ones for 2008. As things look now, no candidate is particularly great, but Giuliani's crim-fighting spirit could prove useful in our war on terror.

Stupid news item of the week

2006-11-26T11:15:00.000-08:00

According to MSNBC, Michael Richards is even falling on his knees before Jesse Jackson now. Excuse me, the Reverend Jesse Jackson.

Richards appeared on the Rev. Jesse Jackson’s nationally syndicated radio program, “Keep Hope Alive,” as a part of a series of apologies for the incident. He said he knew his comments hurt the black community, and hoped to meet with the two men.

It won't do any good. Your career is still ruined (what was left of it), the two "victims" are going to sue your ass off and we're all still laughing at you.

He told Jackson that he had not used the language before.

Bullshit, please continue.

Richards’ publicist, Howard Rubenstein, said Saturday that Richards has begun psychiatric counseling in Los Angeles to learn how to manage his anger.
“He acknowledged that his statements were harmful and opened a terrible racial wound in our nation,” Rubenstein said. “He pledges never ever to say anything like that again. He’s quite remorseful.”

Ugh, this is what I'm talking about. One man, one washed up comedian, opens up a "terrible racial wound in our nation"? I'm sure it does so much more damage than affirmative action does when a poor white student can't get into a college because a less qualified black student is needed to fill a quota.

Michael Richards is a has-been, and he's been relegated to doing standup. If his comments (which I don't condone by the way) can cause so much damage, than maybe the black community should check the behavior of Dave Chappelle, Chris Rock or others who frequently use racial humor. I personally don't mind it but apparently its damaging me more than I know.

Weak. We're becoming weak.

The horror...the sheer horror

2006-11-25T15:34:00.000-08:00

Reuters almost made my eyes fall out, as I was rolling them so hard.

Former U.S. Army Brigadier General Janis Karpinski told Spain's El Pais newspaper she had seen a letter apparently signed by Rumsfeld which allowed civilian contractors to use techniques such as sleep deprivation during interrogation.

Who...the hell...cares?

"The methods consisted of making prisoners stand for long periods, sleep deprivation ... playing music at full volume, having to sit in uncomfortably ... Rumsfeld authorized these specific techniques."

There may even be unconfirmed reports of tickle torture exacted with a feather-duster. God Almighty, what a glorious waste of time this all is.

The Geneva Convention says prisoners of war should suffer "no physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion" to secure information.

Please read the actual document, you morons. Nowhere does said document protect members of a resistance who do not adhere to the rules of war, among them displaying a fixed sign of allegiance visible at a distance. Hence, no protections. None. In the words of Willie Wonka, "You get NOTHING! You LOSE! Good DAY sir!"

Why are we still crucifying Rumsfeld anyway? The man is stepping down, and we can all sleep better at night knowing there will be no more "having to sit uncomfortably" for those who want to kill us.

Jesus Christ. Find your brains for GOD'S SAKE people.

Animals.

2006-11-25T12:55:00.000-08:00

CNN's dealth cult brings us this one.

Sunni gunmen stormed two Shiite homes in Diyala province overnight and slaughtered 21 men in front of their families, Diyala authorities said Saturday. Since the Sadr City attack, enraged Shiites have retaliated by burning people to death and torching Sunni mosques, witnesses told CNN.

I don't care what someone's greivance is. This method of warfare is completely lacking in any sort of honor. I don't want to hear about other cultures. Human beings do not execute fathers in front of their children or burn people alive. There is something fundamentally wrong with these people, and it stems from a lack of humanity.

A simply disgusting display.

Reverse Racism

2006-11-24T13:10:00.000-08:00

If a white man had said the same of blacks, he'd have been arrested for inciting racial violence. A black man spews his hatred, and he recieves applause in the capitol building. Sort of makes you feel like you're the only person with a brain.

See, its not racism unless it comes from the majority. Don't get me wrong, racism is the product of ignorance and blatantly wrong thinking. But no matter who the racism comes from, its ugly and disgusting, and frankly makes the person spouting the hate speech look extremely stupid.

Further, as you can probably see from the captions in the video, the overall subject was Hurricane Katrina Relief for African Americans. Seems to me that Hurricane Katrina was a disaster for Americans in general, not just the blacks. The media (and a certain Ray Nagin) is responsible for making this into a racial issue and further dividing the nation, rather than providing the solidarity we need to deal with such disasters.

The guy in this video, all the counter-racism racist civil rights lawyers, the KKK and the skinheads of the nation are pollutants and stains on the flag.

A fair criticism

2006-11-23T16:07:00.000-08:00

I've recently discovered the blog Southern Appeal, and I'm liking what I see. Today they presented a post discussing the discrepancy between classic conservatism (the only way to go in my book) and the mess it has turned into these days. You can find a brief analysis, and a link to a larger editorial, here.

True conservatism, at its heart, has its premise grounded on learning the lessons of the past, and not deviating from the status quo without careful consideration of the consequences. That doesn't seem to be what's been happening lately. Draw your own conclusions.

Should I be worried?

2006-11-23T13:15:00.000-08:00

According to Fox News, we're about to have a sitdown with the insurgents in Iraq. Well, Prime Minister Maliki is, anyway.

Nouri al-Maliki’s government has asked insurgent leaders to send intermediaries to a national reconciliation conference, marking a new domestic drive to bring peace to Iraq.

I have to admit, when I first read this I was already getting fired up. We're negotiating with the enemy now? Then I read the following:

The summit will not include outside terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda. It will address the question of Shia militias, but controversial groups such as Al-Mahdi Army will not be included — because the Shia-led government believes that it can deal with them within its own communities.

That's at least one point of relief. At least we're talking about the sectarian violence and not the goat-molesting 12th century barbarians that are streaming across the border. I'm still worried that certain concessions will be made that won't bode well for the sovereignty of the new nation, as I can't imagine mere words will stop the fighting, or even abate it.

Mr. al-Hakim, an agricultural engineer who belongs to perhaps the most influential Shia party in the government — the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq — said he wants to intensify the dialogue with the Baathists.

Whoops. There goes my cautious optimism, flushed right down the toilet. Read over the name of that guy's party. Alright, now what other nation do you know of that experienced "Islamic revolution"? I'll give you a hint: it's lead by a genocidal madman with a penchant for brown coats and nuclear weapons.

I don't think I'd be hugely out of line by saying that this looks bad indeed.

Happy Thanksgiving

2006-11-23T13:13:00.000-08:00

Here's your cliche' festive, holiday post. Happy Thanksgiving to all those who regularly read this blog, or to those who just stop in from time to time. I for one am thankful to my right to free speech, that allows me to run this blog at all.

Go eat some turkey, you bastards.

Well said

2006-11-22T12:55:00.000-08:00

Misha over at Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler posted this. It doesn't get any more "blood and guts" than that. Well said.

Seems we still have Marxists to worry about

2006-11-22T12:26:00.000-08:00

As you might have guess by the graphic on the left, this bad boy comes from the Associated Press, who seem to be up to their necks in this story.

Police arrested 29 leftist activists who broke into The Associated Press office in the capital Monday to protest alleged mistreatment of prisoners in Turkey, authorities said. There were no injuries.

Leftists in this context refers to Marxists, as is pointed out later in the article. Pay close attention to how hard the AP comes down on the socialist bastards who took their own workers hostage. (That was sarcasm)

Shortly before police swarmed into the office, protesters coughed and leaned out of the windows to escape the effects of the gas. They had unfurled banners from the windows but were unable to secure a live interview on Turkish television as demanded as part of their efforts to publicize their cause.
The group often stages demonstrations against alleged torture and other mistreatment of prisoners in Turkey. It says it was formed after a military coup in 1980 as a voice for prisoners' rights, and claims that more than 100 prisoners have died in riots or hunger strikes in high-security prisons in the past decade.TAYAD has campaigned on behalf of families of jailed members of the Revolutionary People's Liberation Party-Front, or DHKP-C, a banned Marxist group. The DHKP-C, which is leading the strike, has claimed responsibility for a number of assassinations and bombings since the 1970s.

So since they found themselves unable to publicize their cause by forcing a broadcast from the AP building, the AP decided to do it for them in text form following the incident. Notice the above reporting slants sympathetically towards the hostage takers? It just goes to show that even in the face of coersion that the mass media still favors Marxist causes ever since their little darlings in the Soviet Union went under.

Now to be fair, a spokesman for the AP stated:

"We strongly protest this incident and we believe that journalists should be allowed to do their work without interference."

Translation: "All you guys had to do was ask us politely and we would have given you all the airtime you desired. We're on YOUR side!"

To be interpreted as "bang bang, love Iran"

2006-11-21T13:20:00.000-08:00

A Lebanese cabinet Minister was assassinated today, according to Reuters.

Gunmen on Tuesday assassinated Lebanese Christian cabinet minister Pierre Gemayel, an outspoken critic of Syria, plunging Lebanon deeper into a crisis over ties with its dominant neighbor.
At least three gunmen rammed their car into Gemayel's vehicle near Beirut, then leapt out and riddled it with bullets, firing at Gemayel with silencer-equipped automatic weapons at point-blank range in a Christian neighborhood, witnesses said.

Let's see what those animals in Hezbollah have to say about the attack.

"Syria strongly condemns the killing," the official Syrian news agency SANA said. The Shi'ite group Hezbollah also condemned the "low criminal act" and urged an investigation.

As low as, say, using civilians residences as firebases for their missile strikes against Israel? No, certainly not THAT low, but pretty damned dishonorable nonetheless. I also remind everyone that Hezbollah is a strong supporter of Syria, so draw your own conclusions.

Gemayel, 34, was rushed to hospital where he later died of his wounds. Hundreds of angry and weeping family members and supporters gathered at the hospital.

Wow, do you see that? They gathered and wept and mourned and...nothing else. They didn't flip over cars, throw stones or light flags on fire. In a world where nothing negative can be said about Islam without rioting on a global scale, this is encouraging. A peaceful show of resistance to a regime that is perpetually suckling the tit of Iran. I imagine their hands aren't entirely clean either.

War is NOT an X-box game

2006-11-20T11:20:00.000-08:00

*May be disturbing*
It's cruel, and brutal and dark. Listen as the marine prays for deliverance and he and his budies and holded up. I can only guess as to what that horrible crumping noise is outside the building.

That is what our guys are facing over there. It's no movie, and its no game. Out there, you can feel the devil bite your ass. So, if you see your congressman or senator voting to defund the war, remember that they're taking protection and equipment away from these soldiers, and be sure to vote their asses out so quickly their head spins.

Stupid news item of the week

2006-11-19T14:14:00.000-08:00

Well well, stupid shit coming out of Charley Rangel's mouth. Is anyone suprised? Fox News picks it up:

A senior House Democrat said Sunday he will introduce legislation to reinstate the military draft, asserting that current troop levels are insufficient to sustain possible challenges against Iran, North Korea and Iraq. At a time when some lawmakers are urging the military to send more troops to Iraq, "I don't see how anyone can support the war and not support the draft," he said.

Let's see. Isn't it plausible that Rangel is just proposing the draft to foment further anti-war feeling? His last quote is especially telling, almost tongue in cheek.

Repeated polls have shown that about seven in 10 Americans oppose reinstatement of the draft and officials say they do not expect to restart conscription.
Outgoing Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld told Congress in June 2005 that "there isn't a chance in the world that the draft will be brought back."

No shit. It's nice to know that Rangel is wasting our time over in the House though.

You have to admire this guy

2006-11-19T13:32:00.000-08:00

CNN brings around this story.

It was not a laid-back Turkish holiday. The citizens of the proud, predominantly Muslim nation had no love of Popes. To the East, the Iranian government was galvanizing anti-Western feeling.
The news reported that an escaped killer was on the loose, threatening to assassinate the pontiff when he arrived. Yet the Holy Father was undaunted.
"Love is stronger than danger," he said. "I am in the hands of God."

I could end the article right here with applause and leave it at that. Brave words from an admirable man. This, however, refers to John Paul II back in the 70's. What does Time Magazine think about the Holy See these days? Why, they do nothing but foment trouble!

Instead, Benedict, 79, will arrive carrying a much different reputation: that of a hard-knuckle intellect with a taste for blunt talk and interreligious confrontation. Just 19 months into his tenure, the pope has become as much a lightning rod as a moral leader; suddenly, when he speaks, the whole world listens.

He spoke out against religious violence, for God's sake. The response? Violence. Violence on the part of barbaric neanderthals who, when challenged to clean up the image of their own religion, respond by murdering Catholic clergy worldwide.

The topic is extraordinarily fraught: there are, after all, a billion or so nonviolent Muslims on the globe; the Roman Catholic church's own record in the religious-mayhem department is hardly pristine; and even the most naive of observers understands that the Vicar of Christ might harbor an institutional prejudice against one of Christianity's main global competitors.

Give me a break. The medieval injustices done by the Church were left in the MEDIEVAL AGES, where they belonged. The ash-heap of history! As for these billions of nonviolent Muslims, the pope wasn't even speaking in regards to them. (By the way, where are their voices of protests when the extremist take it upon themselves to butcher innocents?) The final line reveals the greatest misunderstanding that these secular liberal pricks can't seem to get out of their skull: THIS IS NOT A CRUSADE.

Look, I'm not saying Islam is inherently a bad religion that promotes violence, and neither does Benedict. Instead, what he is saying is that Muslim leaders MUST rise to the occasion to condemn violence, just as it would fall to the pope to do the same if it were Christians blowing themselves up around the world. Muslims will not find acceptance until they can clean up the disease that's eating away at their faith.

Benedict won't back down, and he shouldn't because he's 100% correct.

Torture/Coercive Techniques

2006-11-18T16:00:00.000-08:00

A friend of mind recently asked me to enumerate what acts in Guantanamo I considered torture. The answer is simple: so far none of them.

Waterboarding? That's the worst people can bring up. It's essentially simulated drowning for the participant in a controlled environment. The question is, who are we using it on? US citizens? Nope. Foreign nationals? Negative. The upper brass of our detainess who we believe are holding critical information and are refusing to play ball? Check. I frankly couldn't give a damn if some uncooperative little shit gets the life scared out of him if the information breaks up cells and saves lives. So far, every person waterboarded has yielded such information.

Sleep deprivation/sonic assault/temperature manipulation/forced standing et al: don' make me laugh.

What DO I consider torture?

-Savage beating
-Burning
-Cutting
-Forcefeeding
-Sexual assault
-Mutilation of any kind
-Humiliating treatment that you would not subject your dog to.
-Bone breaking
-Disfigurment
-Flagellation
-Anything that looks like it belongs in a Clive Barker film

This isn't an exhaustive list, but you can see how I'm categorizing things. Fill in the blanks.

A little humor

2006-11-17T13:53:00.000-08:00

Whether Democrat or Republican, I think you'll get a kick out of this! A little boy goes to his dad and asks, "What is Politics?" Dad says, "Well son, let me try to explain it this way: I am the head of the family, so call me The President. Your mother is the administrator of the money, so we call her the Government. We are here to take care of your needs, so we will call you the People. The nanny, we will consider her the Working Class. And your baby brother, we will call him the Future. Now think about that and see if it makes sense." So the little boy goes off to bed thinking about what Dad has said Later that night,! he hears his baby brother crying, so he gets up to check on him. He finds that the baby has severely soiled his diaper. So the littleboy goes to his parent's room and finds his mother asleep. Not wanting to wake her, he goes to the nanny's room. Finding the door locked, he peeks in the keyhole and sees his father in bed with the nanny. He gives up and goes back to bed The next morning, the little boy say's to his father, "Dad, I think I understand the concept of politics now. " The father says, "Good, son, tell me in your own words what you think politics is all about." The little boy replies, "The President is screwing the Working Class while the Government is sound asleep. The People are being ignored and the Future is in deep shit

Not for him, not unless you have to

2006-11-16T09:40:00.000-08:00

Sorry for the inactivity as late. I'm back with this from CNN.

The 2008 race for the White House intensified Thursday as one of the big name Republican players, Sen. John McCain, threw himself into the fray.

Forgive me for not leaping for joy, but I like the fact that coercive interrogation saves lives and thwarts attacks. None of which, when closely examined, has any meaning when compared to his Vietnam POW stint, before you bring that up.

Registered Republicans surveyed in an October CNN poll about their 2008 presidential preferences put Giuliani and McCain at the top of the heap, well ahead of other possible contenders.

That's because nobody else has any name recognition, not because they are the more moderate/socially liberal candidates, as CNN would have you believe.

He angered conservative opponents of immigration by co-authoring a bill with Democratic Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts that would allow illegal immigrants to become guest workers. The idea is for illegal immigrants to work their way toward citizenship.

You sign anything with Ted Kennedy, and you are on my shitlist. Here's hoping we have a slate of conservative candidates that have bigger balls than McCain and further to the right than Giuliani. I oppose McCain's candidacy, and it remains to be seen if Rudy can court my vote.

More demagoguery from the left

2006-11-12T11:47:00.000-08:00

CNN carries the following story.

Joe Klein of Time Magazine says about the elections:

This was a big deal. Certainly, it was the end of George W. Bush's radical experiment in partisan governance. It might have been even bigger than that: the end of the conservative pendulum swing that began with Ronald Reagan's revolution.

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. There was no liberal victory here. None. Here there was only punishment of Republicans for not adhering to Reaganite conservatism. Period.

In fact, if there was a common strand in last week's Democratic victories and Republican defeats, it was the ascendancy of realists. The architects of the Democratic victory, Sen. Charles Schumer and Rep. Rahm Emanuel, had calculated with cold-eyed efficiency which candidates the party would support, regardless of the extent of their orthodoxy.

Neither of those pigs should ever be associated with anything approaching realism. They pray for more bloodshed in Iraq to use it as a tool to further their own power.

But the administration's stubbornness on Iraq, neatly symbolized by Rumsfeld's detachment from reality, certainly didn't help the GOP cause. Of course, it is assumed by most people in Washington that bipartisan efforts on even the smallest matters, much less the war in Iraq, will be near impossible.

The only stubborness they can be accused of is of not taking aggressive action to route out the murdering bastards over there. That's not the type of stubborness I feel the Times is alluding to. Sounds to me like the want retreat. Yes, we are stubborn in the face of opposition because we have the world's biggest sledgehammer, and none can stand against it when it falls. We just need to USE IT.

The question now is whether "winning" means blocking the president or demonstrating the ability to govern. It probably means a little of both, but I suspect the Democrats will be better served by proving they have the maturity to do the latter.

Don't hold your breath. The Dems won't be able to resist impeachment proceedings and generalized dick-headedness once the ball gets rolling. They'll show their true colors before long, and hopefully this will revitalize the conservative element in Congress.

World's Finest

2006-11-11T15:03:00.000-08:00

There's no reason why we can't win over there.

The Democrats have fans

2006-11-10T14:59:00.000-08:00

This is telling, and it comes to us from WorldNetDaily. A series of quotes from various friendly neighborhood jihadists

-"Of course Americans should vote Democrat," Jihad Jaara, a senior member of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror group and the infamous leader of the 2002 siege of Bethlehem's Church of the Nativity, told WND.

-Muhammad Saadi, a senior leader of Islamic Jihad in the northern West Bank town of Jenin, said the Democrats' talk of withdrawal from Iraq makes him feel "proud."
"As Arabs and Muslims we feel proud of this talk," he told WND. "Very proud from the great successes of the Iraqi resistance. This success that brought the big superpower of the world to discuss a possible withdrawal."

-Abu Ayman, an Islamic Jihad leader in Jenin, said he is "emboldened" by those in America who compare the war in Iraq to Vietnam.
"[The mujahedeen fighters] brought the Americans to speak for the first time seriously and sincerely that Iraq is becoming a new Vietnam and that they should fix a schedule for their withdrawal from Iraq," boasted Abu Ayman.

So surely the terrorists have misjudged the Democrats, right? Surely they're not weak-kneed, naiive little children with no grasp on how to wage war. Pelosi illuminates us:

In a recent interview with CBS's "60 Minutes," House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, stated, "The jihadists (are) in Iraq. But that doesn't mean we stay there. They'll stay there as long as we're there."

Idiot bitch alert. Maybe she's right. Let's ask one of our camel-humping friends what he thinks.

Islamic Jihad's Saadi, laughing, stated, "There is no chance that the resistance will stop."
He said an American withdrawal from Iraq would "prove the resistance is the most important tool and that this tool works. The victory of the Iraqi revolution will mark an important step in the history of the region and in the attitude regarding the United States."
Jihad Jaara said an American withdrawal would "mark the beginning of the collapse of this tyrant empire (America)."
"Therefore, a victory in Iraq would be a greater defeat for America than in Vietnam."

That's the whole point. You fight fire with fire, and meet strength with strength. If you fail, you die. That is the nature of war. It is also worth noting that an al-Qaeda leader recently remarked in an audio tape that the jihad would not stop until the White House was destroyed. Stick that in your bong and smoke it, you hippies.

Why we fight

2006-11-10T08:08:00.000-08:00

This from Fox News:

British authorities are tracking almost 30 terrorist plots involving 1,600 individuals, the head of Britain's MI5 spy agency said, adding that many of the suspects are homegrown British terrorists plotting homicide attacks.

And I'm sure the Brits have no qualms about invading the "privacy" of these militant loonies in order to stop their carnage.

"It is the youth who are being actively targeted, groomed, radicalized and set on a path that frighteningly quickly could end in their involvement in mass murder of their fellow U.K. citizens," Manningham-Buller said. "Young teenagers are being groomed to be suicide bombers.
"Today we see the use of homemade improvised explosive devices, but I suggest tomorrow's threat will include the use of chemicals, bacteriological agents, radioactive materials and even nuclear technology," she added.

So given this information, what, can we surmise, is the extent of the terrorist threat in the United States? After all, we have a gaping hole in our border that our government doesn't seem to give a shit about. With everyone crocking about "alarmism" in our nation, this news story should serve as a firm, open-palmed slap in the face.

The Visigoths are here, and they want to burn Rome to the ground.

New Defense Secretary

2006-11-09T11:51:00.000-08:00

Let's hope this guy has more balls than Rumsfeld.

I don't know what to make of him. The Christian Science Monitor says the following about him:

And in this case, a change in style might result in a change in substance. Skilled at building consensus, a realist who adapts to conditions as he finds them, Mr. Gates might find it easier to urge a change in course in Iraq than did Donald Rumsfeld - who was a chief architect of the administration's Iraq policies, after all.

Vague.

Next year Democrats are likely to push legislation calling for a yet-unspecified troop withdrawal from Iraq. They may add bills calling for more money for veterans and special forces, and for the repair of military equipment damaged in Iraq fighting.

Why is it that the Democrats always seem to try and shore up their hawk resume by working for veteran's benefits? They support the troops so long as we never have to use them to bloody the nose of our enemies.

Look all's I'm saying is that the Dems seem to like this guy, and that worries me. Let's face it, the modern Democratic party is NOT centrist. It is led by and largely made up of the far left. Leftists are known to be squeamish about using any sort of military action (see Vietnam, Mogadishu) and this adorable sort of naiivete is dangerous.

Listen not to what they say, but watch what they do.

Sweet Jesus

2006-11-08T15:50:00.000-08:00

Save us all.

Nancy Pelosi has taken leadership of the House. Hold your children closer to your chests and lock your doors.

But seriously, I found it illuminating that when asked LAST NIGHT by Wolf Blitzer what the Democrat plan for Iraq was, Dean said it was "too soon to be thinking about that."

What?

His party is about to own the House, and has extended their influence in the Senate, and he says its too soon to think about that? I say its about freaking time you started thinking about that Howie! Moreover the Democrats have two years now to convince the Americans that they can win this thing in Iraq, and that they're not the gutless cowards they've shown themselves to be. We do need change, but not like the liberal Democrats have been saying. We hit HARDER in Iraq, not withdrawl.

If any good came from last night, its that hopefully Republicans will take this as a chastising of their vote whoring to the illegal Mexican population and their compromising with those who wring their hands over the "torture" of our enemies. This, I hope, will lead to a resurgence of conservative voting, better spending and a harder line of military matters by the Republicans. That would render their defeat into a lesson to be learned from, hopefully resulting in the victory of an '08 presidential candidate with a set of Reaganesque balls.

A few positive words

2006-11-07T22:35:00.000-08:00

No, the election didn't largely go my way ideologically. Trust me, I'm going to cut into this election with a chainsaw tommorrow.

Tonight however, I'd like to remind everyone, conservative or liberal, that once again the United States has had another peaceful transition in power. We live in a nation free of military coups and dictatorial control of the polls. We should count ourselves fortunate to be blessed with such a great nation.

Calling fans of 24

2006-11-07T15:19:00.000-08:00

If you like to watch terrorists get shot to pieces on 24 as much as I do, you'll want to check out Blogs4Bauer. Also be sure to support the show by buying seasons 1-4 on dvd.

Recommended candidates

2006-11-07T08:15:00.000-08:00

Below is my slate of recommended, pro-defense candidates. My list is free of partisan bias. Vote by the issues.

If you haven't voted yet, get off your ass.

-Randy Graf (R) 8th District Arizona House (Democratic opponent is a pacifist coward)

-Doug Lamborn (R) 5th District Colorado House (Democratic opponent is pro-defense, but more watered down)

-Jon L. Kyl (R) Arizona Senate (Democratic opponent is a pacifist coward)

-Rick O'Donnell (R) 7th District Colorado (I especially like this guy)

-Joe Lieberman (I) Connecticut Sentae (Lukewarm on interrogations, but his opponent is clearly a coward)

-Jim Marshall (D) 8th Georgia District (Both candidates viable, but Marshall gets the endorsement for supporting benefits for disabled vets)

-Jim Talent (R) Missouri Senate (Democratic opponent is a pacifist coward)

-Rick Santorum (R) Pennsylvania Senate (Mainly because Democratic opponent is a partisan sycophant)

-Bob Corker (R) Tennessee Senate (Both candidates seem to be partisan hacks, but his Democratic opponent has a bad defense track record)

-Thelma Drake (R) 2nd Virginia District (Both candidates lukewarm, but Drake at least supports defense in rhetoric, while her opponent is silent)

-George Allen (R) Virginia Senate (Very strong candidate. Highly endorsed.)

If any of these men or women are in your area, put your vote down for them so we can butcher the murderous barbarians that camp at our gates.

**And yes, I primarily endorse Republican candidates this go around. Democrats seem to have no balls these days. Show me Democrats like JFK and you'll see my support for them rise.

Useful ego

2006-11-06T07:48:00.000-08:00

Alright everyone, this is my lecture to all of you, and my effort to get you to get out and vote.

I know you're tired of Washington. I know sometimes you feel as though your vote means nothing. Maybe it doesn't, but your vote attached to mine and mine attached to a hundred others DOES mean something. Changes at the aggregate level begin with the individual, and change is sorely needed.

You may tell me that electing new politicians will only bring more of the same, and I can't really promise that this is untrue. What I can tell you is that politicians are motivated by self-interest and ego, and this ego can be sharpened and used by us as a weapon. You want to affect change? You hit the politicians where it hurts. Go to the polls, if not to support a candidate, then do it to punish one. Tell him you disapprove of his tactics by stripping away his power, and send a message to the fellow that beats him that he's next. The alternative is you sit idly by and give silent consent to that with which you disagee.

This is most important of all: no matter what your views on welfare, abortion, gay marriage or what have you, you NEED to vote for defense candidates. No other issue matters if you're dead. This is not a Republican scare tactic. If a Democrat is a better defense candidate, vote for him. Make no mistake, our enemy wants us dead, and IS capable of killing you and your entire family.

I'll say that again. He is willing and able to kill you and your entire family.

The only thing standing between you and the jungle is the world's finest military. Unfortunately, its hands are tied by the politicians. Thus, fill the chambers of the legislature of men who will wield our military like the finely-honed weapon it is. Men who will bring pain and death to our enemies before they bring it to us.

Stupid news item of the week

2006-11-06T06:35:00.000-08:00

Reuters graces us with this glorious waste of time.

Did a clairvoyant help U.S. commandos ferret Saddam Hussein out of his hiding place in Iraq three years ago?

I'm having a hard time stifling my laughter.

Israeli-born celebrity psychic Uri Geller, best known for his spoon-bending antics, says the power of the paranormal led U.S. troops to the fugitive Iraqi ex-dictator.

Spooky huh? What's more, evidence is beginning to surface that Jesus actually piloted the UFO that shot down flight 93 on 9/11.

You remember when they found Saddam Hussein in Iraq? A soldier walked over to a rock, lifted it and then found a trap-door and found him in there," Geller told Reuters.
Geller, who says he worked for the Central Intelligence Agency during the Cold War, said his information came from a high-level source involved in U.S. paranormal programs.

This source was later confirmed to be none other than Sasquatch, who is covertly working alongside the United States as an outside consultant on all things paranormal. The woodland beast has since been dismissed for his lack of discretion.

"Peace through strength"

2006-11-05T19:22:00.000-08:00

The Christian Science Monitor carries this one.

In a new thread to the North Korean bomb saga, arguments over Japan's nuclear ambitions are becoming the focus as prominent politicians from the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) continue to raise the issue.

Any objections yet? I thought not. On we go.

Security experts say that nukes would be of little or no benefit to Tokyo - neither politically nor in military terms - and that the recent statements are mostly bluster. Yet the continuing, very public discussions underscore how regional security threats are deepening the anxiety among Japan's conservative political set.
"Alarmist views have been continually wrong in the past and they are wrong again now," says Shunji Taoka, a defense writer and former professor at Tsukuba University.

Why is it that the fruitcakes in academia seem to label every threat "alarmist"? The threat posed by terrorists and wide-opened borders? Alarmism. They haven't the stomach nor the substance to prepare for war, and it is this preparation that is the surest road to peace. You keep the other dogs from biting you by ensuring you have the sharpest teeth.

"Nuclear deterrence will not work against an irrational or desperate opponent" and would be unlikely to prevent the desperate last acts of a North Korea on the brink of collapse, says Taoka.

Neither will screaming and running to the UN for shelter. And I'm not entirely convinced that painting a giant red target on Kim Jong-Il's palaces wouldn't grab his attention. If anything, he's self-interested.

Some victims of Hiroshima and Nagasaki still bear physical scars, and the moral implications of the US decision to use nuclear weapons haunt a generation.

Then I'm sure they will agree, it would have been to their advantage to have nukes of their own at the time. Too harsh? *shrugs*

While we're at it, let's remove the restrictions on Japan's military. With China rising in power, Russia hiding their cards up their sleeves and North Korea's leader showing his ass, Japan seems to be our best friend over there.

He got off easy

2006-11-05T13:45:00.000-08:00

CNN carries this article proclaiming the coming demise of Saddam Hussein.

This particular death sentance comes as a result of our friend's heavy-handedness with some folks who tried to kill him many years ago. So now the butcher gets his appeals process, and afterwards we get to lynch the bastard right?

Not quite.

Hussein is also in the middle of another trial involving the 1988 Anfal campaign, the government offensive in the country's Kurdish region. Hussein is charged in that case with genocide.

Which means we have to try him again to get another death sentance so we can hang him twice. Just you watch, my prediction is that he'll die in prison before the bureacracy gets around to stringing him up, much like Milosevic.

Oooh, maybe we can make the execution a live pay-per-view event, and use the proceeds to buy humvees with better armor so our guys don't get their legs blown off by IEDs? It would be ironic yeah?

No, this is not real.

2006-11-04T18:17:00.000-08:00

But by God, its funny.

Iraq's Atomic Weapons Program?

2006-11-04T16:43:00.000-08:00

Before you start lambasting me as a Bush lackey, read this New York Times piece. I encourage you to read it in its context so you're sure not to miss anything.

At first the article reads like a chastising of Congressional Republicans for forcing these documents to be publicized. Fair enough, draw your own conclusions. What interests me is paragraph fourteen, which reads as follows.

Among the dozens of documents in English were Iraqi reports written in the 1990s and in 2002 for United Nations inspectors in charge of making sure Iraq had abandoned its unconventional arms programs after the Persian Gulf war. Experts say that at the time, Mr. Hussein’s scientists were on the verge of building an atom bomb, as little as a year away.

Now if I'm reading this correctly, AFTER Desert Storm (meanings, as seen above, 2002) documents were written up that indicated Saddam had an a-bomb program, one that we narrowly prevented from reaching fruition? Look, if you're a Republican stop cheering and wagging your finger, and if you're Democrat quit your pouting. Looking at this information objectively seems to raise some serious questions.

Chief among them is why the Times buried this story in the fourteenth frigging paragraph, and ONLY in the fourteenth! Everything else is an attack at placing nuclear blueprints on the internet, with paragraph fourteen consisting of two lines. If we rule out incompetence, it might be suggested that the Times has an agenda.

Once more: Iraq was close to developing an atomic bomb in 2002, a little a year away, which would have put them in control of one circa 2003. We invaded in 2003. I'll let you connect the dots.

Please Refer to Article 4

2006-11-03T19:23:00.000-08:00

I've noticed alot of people seem to be misinformed about Geneva Convention rights, asserting time and again that those held in Guantanamo are entitled to them. The actual official document as it relates to prisoners of war can be found here.

As the title suggests, Article 4 is the crux of the issue. It states captured prisoners consisting of a defeated standing militray force, as well as organized resistance members are entitled to these rights. HOWEVER, resistance fighters must meet the following requirements.

(a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
(b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
(c) That of carrying arms openly;
(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

(Emphasis added) Feel free to read more of the document to get this in context.

Our enemies seem to fail both of the bold-faced criteria, if ot one of the other criteria as well. Thus they truly are entitled to even less than we're giving them.

I know this will create alot of feedback, and I welcome it. This is an important issue.

Journalismo

2006-11-03T15:03:00.000-08:00

How true. The other element holding our boys (and the Iraqis) back is the death cultists in the media. Credit for this cartoon goes to Larry Wright.

Ready The Salvos

2006-11-03T11:05:00.000-08:00

You know, I was recently accused of attacking Democrats to the detriment of my non-partisan crusade against the politicians.
It just so happens that I stumbled across this Reuters article this morning, and it provides the perfect opportunity to parry such claims. *gives the nod to that poster*

One look at the title should make you do one of three things: laugh, weep, or just puke. We have the Commander-in-Chief challenging his opponents for a plan. I'll say that again and take care not to have an aneurysm. Our President is defending the conduct of the Iraq War by pointing out that his opponents can do no better?

"Truth is the Democrats can't answer that question," he said. "Harsh criticism is not a plan for victory." says Bush.

No, it isn't. And neither is the half-assed containment policy we're enacting over there. So we have the two major powers in this country, and each when asked for their plan screams bloody murder "I don't know, but it beats the other guy's plan". In the midst of all that, our boys die daily. No, I don't want to leave Iraq. The job isn't done. Regardless of anyone's personal views on how we got there, most will agree that the job needs to be finished, and finished effectively. Our handling of the war stinks of tip-toeing around the media and taking care not to lose too many votes.

Bush said Democratic claims that the tax cuts would hurt the economy were wrong.
"Well, if their election forecasts are as good as their economic forecasts, we're going to have a great day on November 7," he said to cheers.

Maybe you will. Maybe the Republicans will hold their ground and it will be a day of celebrating for the GOP. Maybe, on the other hand, the Democrats will sweep both chambers, and it will be a great day for them. What about us? What about our soldiers? What about America? When is her great day coming? If you see that great day coming, please tell me, because I sadly do not.

We Just Don't Get The Joke

2006-11-02T21:34:00.000-08:00

That is, according to Keith Olbermann. Thanks to a friend of mine for bringing the link to my attention.

"The context was unmistakable: Texas; the state of denial; stuck in Iraq. No interpretation required.
And Mr. Bush and his minions responded by appearing to be too stupid to realize that they had been called stupid."

Yes Olbermann. Bush felt that way, members of Kerry's own party felt that way (including Hillary), millions of Americans felt that way. We all must have been too stupid to interpret such a clever joke in its correct context. Would that we could drink from the same font of knowledge that you and Kerry do.
*sigh*
Olbermann continues:

"This president must apologize to the troops for having suggested, six weeks ago, that the chaos in Iraq, the death and the carnage, the slaughtered Iraqi civilians and the dead American service personnel, will, to history, 'look like just a comma.'"

Yes, by God, because we cannot abide optimism. Dammit we won't STAND for it. Bush has time and again validated their deaths by speaking of the legacies they are helping to build.

"This president must apologize to the troops because the intelligence he claims led us into Iraq proved to be undeniably and irredeemably wrong."

And so must all of the senators and representatives (the democratic ones among them) who voted for the resolution. While we're at it, let's have the CIA apologize too.

The fact is that as you read Olbermann's article, he uses the same devisive language that he blames Bush for. Republicans are Bush minions. They make fun of "cripples". Blah blah blah. I have little if any respect for Olbermann, and not because he is a dissenting voice. It is because he's an ignorant jackass that IS the partisan hack he claims to rail against. Hypocrisy is disgusting whether you are a Republican or a Democrat.

Mortal Threat

2006-11-02T11:55:00.000-08:00

There is no reason not to vote. Not ever.

This video was originally found at The Political Pitbull

**EDIT- I endorse this video only insofar as it shows the nature of our foe. I do not endorse the partisan leanings contained herein*

Soldier Still Missing

2006-11-02T09:45:00.000-08:00

Ahmed al-Taie, a 41-year-old linguist and U.S. soldier, is still missing after being kidnapped by gunmen while attempting to visit his family ten days ago. There's been absolutely no dialogue between his kidnappers and the U.S. military.

Does the Iraqi government (whom we've liberated, founded and propped up) care about our plight? Not enough to allow us to conduct roadblocks to try and locate our soldier. Why was this move made?

Take a look at this Reuters article.

It seems the city in which these roadblocks took place is under the influence of al-Sadr's lot. For the uninitiated, al-Sadr is the Shi'ite pile of dog feces that's operating (it's suspected) as a proxy of Iran and is leading one of the three major factions opposing the Coalition. What does that have to do with Maliki's call for the dismantling of the roadblocks?

Power. The cleric controls a faction that holds political sway in the new government, and Maliki wants an ally. His justification?

Asked about U.S. policy toward Sadr, whose supporters rose up against U.S. forces on two occasions in 2004, Caldwell said: "He's a part of this political process. From the comments he's made recently he wants to see violence reduced. He wants to see greater peace and security for Iraqis."

Screw his recent remarks. You are defined by your actions. al-Sadr is a man who compells his followers to acts of cruelty and barbarism, and is a barbarian himself. I say we go door to door in Sadr City, asking for leads on our soldier, always with the polite reminder that if we don't find him in another week, we're going to level that festering sore with carpet bombs.

You take one of ours, we kill one hundred of yours. That has to be our policy. KEEP POLITICIANS OUT OF WARS.

The Least He could Do

2006-11-01T22:12:00.000-08:00

The Associated Press has run a story that seems to suggest that, in spite of showing his ass at the press conference yesterday, Kerry is finally issuing something approaching an apology. All of us were calling for it, and we've at least now recieved a baseline show of regret to our troops.

That's not to say I'm letting Kerry off that easily. Read between the lines. Had this not been an election year, there never would have been an apology. It's clear that behind the scenes, Kerry's softy buddies were wrenching his arm for making them look bad (as though making them look worse were possible) and in the process made him come to the table for the good of the Party of Opportunists.

So what's the lesson to be learned here? Nothing matters unless its election currency. An apology to the troops? Only warranted for purposes of Democrat damage control. Voting for the Iraq War Resolution? Only if they think they can bag a few votes. Turn around and start calling for redeployment and phased withdrawls? Again, wait until the political weather is right before making a move.

So Kerry. Thanks for the apology. Now piss off.

Interesting Tidbit

2006-11-01T18:34:00.000-08:00

This was recently brought to my attention in an email.

"The company is owned by PDV America, Inc., an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A., the national oil company of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela."

So as I understand it, Citgo is indirectly under the control of the Venezuelan government. That is to say, a government head up by a man who called our president Satan in front of the U.N..

Take that into consideration next time you dump the contents of your wallet into your gas tank.

The Biggest Reason to Vote

2006-11-01T14:41:00.000-08:00

This was posted over at Wide Awakes Radio. In a nutshell, this is why we have to go to the polls.

Unless you look forward to Miss Speaker of the House Pelosi?

Biting the Hand that Feeds

2006-11-01T13:38:00.000-08:00

This from the Christian Science Monitor:

"Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki on Tuesday ordered the dismantling of US and Iraqi checkpoints surrounding the area."

And why might that be?

"The checkpoints - manned by US and Iraqi troops for a week in an effort to find a kidnapped US military translator of Iraqi descent as well as snare an alleged death-squad leader - had snarled traffic and bred growing anger in the slum."

We're concerned about traffic delays and pissed-off motorists when the country is infested with guerilla fighters and murdering jihadists? This smells more of a power play to me.

"The Americans agreed with Maliki's decision to leave Sadr City because of the US elections," says a driver with the nickname Abu Haidar. "If they let [the unrest] continue, it will spread. Moqtada [al-Sadr] and Maliki played it very well."

And there is the crux of it all, boys and girls. We acquiesed to the demands of Maliki because it was a good decision tactically right? Because we want our translator back? Not so much. Turns out our withdrawl was politically calculated, just like this whole damned war.

Bottom line, politicians cannot win wars. Generals, soldiers and specialists do. Politicians are spineless slaves to opinion polls, and its nauseating. The last time politicians got too involved with a war, we had Vietnam. Get the message?

Bush Goes for the Throat

2006-11-01T08:26:00.000-08:00

You know, often George and I don't see eye to eye. This case is an exception. Finally Bush sounds sutibly forceful. Not as forceful as I would have liked, but still high calibur. Notice how he didn't stoop to calling anyone stupid? Instead, he just showed Kerry for the snake-in-the-grass, villainous turd sandwich he is by quoting his own words.

It sounds distateful even still, and I still fail to see the humor or "botched joke" behind the senator's comments. Thank God that man never became president. He would have been commander in chief to a bunch of brave men and women that its clear he has no respect for. Say what you will about Bush, and the way the war is being executed. President Bush at least has a human compassion and genuine respect for our soldiers.

The most important part of Bush's comments are contained in the end of his speech. Regardless of party affiliation, we should all have a baseline of respect for our soldiers. Period, end of story. It takes alot of guts to be a soldier, and their choice to serve had nothing to do with test scores.

Kerry'd Away

2006-10-31T20:45:00.000-08:00

Calm down everyone! It was only a "botched joke", according to our good friend John Kerry. Everyone has had one of those moments when we screw up a joke...right? C'mon, you've never been standing around with your friends, commenting about what a bunch of illiterate, uneducated morons our soldiers are, and screwed up the punchline?
Honestly, if you watch the clip it becomes obvious that there was nothing even remotely funny about this long-faced, disrespectful putz's comments.
Despite Kerry's claims that he was demonstrating disapproval in Bush's "failed Iraq policy", an analysis of his words reveal that his comments could only be taken one way by any rational person. He postulates that if you study hard, you can go far. True enough. Then our botox buddy states that IF YOU DO NOT, you end up in Iraq. IN other words, those who are in Iraq are there for lack of intelligence and effort. This premise has zero to do with President Bush.
Our boys overseas were owed an apology, at least. Did Kerry give them one? Hell no. On JohnKerry.com, the word from the horse's ass seems to be:

"This is the classic G.O.P. playbook."

Demanding an apology for our brave men and women, who you so carelessly labeled (accident or no) morons and illiterates? Somehow, the fault lies with the Republicans, despite the fact that Kerry's big mouth spewed this filth?
We got no apology, and instead were given a spoonful of defiance and smokescreening. More of the same.

We Have Liftoff

2006-10-31T18:56:00.000-08:00

Welcome to Blood and Guts Politics, a politically right-of-center weblog devoted to spouting the truth as it relates to national defense, national offense, and everthing in between. At times, you the reader will hate me, revile my comments and leave me bilious feedback. I welcome it. Other times, you will find that my words will stir within you a righteous indignation that you felt you had lost forever in this turbulent America. I welcome that even more.
A brief note about myself. My age, race, gender, religion are irrelevant. They are about as pertinent to you as whether I prefer Pepsi or Coke. I am an American, and I am an outraged patriot. This blog is my pathetic attempt at influencing this backward nation. I don't care if I am successful, and if I change even just one mind, then by God that's enough.
This is Blood and Guts Politics, named after my personal hero, General Patton. As its name suggests, I will take no prisoners. I will respond to feedback with heat, so be prepared. This blog will live up to its name.