Tuesday, February 28, 2006

Cheney To Resign?

WND is reporting that Dick Cheney will resign after the 2006 midterm elections. Now, I don't put stock into every story that comes from WND, but they have been known to be right. So, thinking that the MSM would be jumping on this to try and force him out earlier, I can't say whether this is an accurate story, or not. No other outlet is covering this yet, WND seem to be the only ones reporting this.

It's no secret that the Bush administration has really fumbled the ball on this Portgate deal. Even though it's a private deal with private companies involved and he hasn't much to say about it, even if it were to turn out to be a safe deal and the stink made about it was "much ado about nothing", they have some serious egg on their faces. That is why you see the numbers you do in these
latest polls from CBS.

Mr. Bush's overall job rating has fallen to 34 percent, down from 42 percent last month. Fifty-nine percent disapprove of the job the president is doing.

Even for a CBS poll this is low. An 8 percentage point drop is a lot, especially after he had been trending upward a little. This tells me that he has lost a few from his base and the only real big screw-up that has occurred, has been Portgate. Everything else has remained pretty much status quo.

But the President isn't the only one suffering from bad numbers.

Still, the incident appears to have made the public's already negative view of Cheney a more so. Just 18 percent said they had a favorable view of the vice president, down from 23 percent in January.

18%, just a meager 18%. This means Cheney has lost a lot of his base over this and other perceived blunders. The important thing to note that CBS (not being able to resist faulty assumptions) attributes his drop to the hunting accident. I don't believe it. But I think it does mean that he is a serious liability to the President, going into the elections, no matter what the cause is, real or imagined.

But the fact remains, Republicans desperately need some kind of boost. Their image is sadly damaged. They are needing something to perk up the electorate and get them believing in them again. Because no matter what the spin doctors say this has been a disaster for the Administration and the Dems are not going to be the answer. But they will be the ones that get the luxury of the spoils (by default not by choice), if the GOP doesn't get busy.

What are the Republicans going to do if the Dems don't nominate Hillary? What if they nominate a Mark Warner or an Evan Bayh? What if someone runs a campaign that advocates a closer look at how the borders are being patrolled? What if they run someone that will promise more money will be spent on domestic security? The experts think that Hillary is a lock for the nomination in 08. Karl Rove spends a lot of time talking about her, as if she is the one.


He wants her to get the nomination, she will be easier to beat than Democratic moderates Warner or Bayh. A moderate Dem may actually be able to come out more tougher on the border and other domestic security issues and force the GOP to debate it. This is something the GOP has been weak on and it certainly could be exploited by the Dems. But they won't be able to do it by putting a screeching Hillary, a screaming Dean, or a dull and two-faced elitist Kerry, on the ticket. Any Dem that presents a reasonable image and is close to the center, stands a reasonable chance of gaining back the White House, a radical will go down to defeat once again.

But as for Cheney, he isn't running again. And, you can bet that if something doesn't give soon, his resignation will soon be welcomed even by the bulk of the GOP base. Many may disagree, but I think it is a chance that they have to take. They cannot afford to take votes for granted, which is precisely what they will be doing, if they are so self-confident to believe that Cheney is no longer a liability.

As for me, as a moderate and an independent, my vote is not guaranteed to go to anybody. I will determine who is best suited to lead this nation in a time of war, and I will vote for the one that will be able to protect us, best. Because this war will not go away with the inauguration that will be held on January 20, 2009.

Monday, February 27, 2006

More Evidence That Shows Germany Helped U.S. In Iraq War

From the IHT comes this report, about how Germany (one country that publicly condemned Operation Iraqi Freedom) helped the U.S. in its quest, to rid Iraq and the world of Saddam.

I recommend this article as a prelude to a new book to be published in March.
"Cobra II: The Inside Story of the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq" will be published in March by Pantheon Books in the United States and by Atlantic Books in Britain. It was written by Michael R. Gordon and Bernard E. Trainor, a retired lieutenant general of the U.S. Marines and a former military correspondent for The New York Times.

I am sure that most can guess why the Germans were reluctant to support the war openly, yet quietly provide intelligence to the U.S. military.

The fear of what happened in France late last year, was in fact, a distinct possibility in Germany, as well. The Muslim population has swelled greatly since I lived there and I do not imagine that the German government wanted to deal with that kind of fallout, if there was any way to prevent it. In addition, the enormous number of leftists that supported Schroeder would have had a cow if they had only known this prior to the recent German elections.

But the fact that this information is now coming to light also tells me that some how, some way, they knew the German was Saddam was enough of a significant risk, if not removed.

Why Do Majority Of Hispanics Oppose War In Iraq?

Read this article at Social Sense. Mustang has been missing in action for awhile, but he is back now. If nothing else, welcome him back. But I think all would do well to read the article. It is demonstrates precisely how revisonist history can creep in subtlely, and in some cases virtually undetected.

Pretty soon jihadists will have some actually believing Muslims discovered America. (Don't laugh, there are theories being circulated on that very thing, right now.)

In case you do not read the comments section here is my comment that I left in response to the article:

How can you get through to people like Mr. Reyes and get them to understand that all empires during that period were brutal in their occupations of conquered lands? That's exactly why they called them the "dark ages".

Christianity as presented by the Holy Roman Empire was no different than any other imperial empire in that regard, that much is certainly true. But I think the fact that people like Mr. Reyes miss some basic principles in their presentation of Muslims as being a benevolent empire, may explain why they fail to fully understand how we are at this point, today.

The main point they miss is:

Christianity evolved out of the medieval mindset due to the Renaissance and the enlightment period that accompanied it. Islam never has had such a period.

They had periods where they weren't as brutal as others. They had periods where they made some discoveries in math and medicine, and they did a good job of preserving a lot of the architecture styles of the Byzantine period. (Notice how they succeeded in the concrete arts and sciences, but never in the abstract ones.)

But make no mistake about life under Muslim rule (under the Moors, Turks, or any others), it was a fascist rule. There has been to date no dominant Muslim empire that has permitted enough freedom of thought and expression enough, to question the doctrines of Islam. Any attempt that was ever made to modernize Islam into the modern age, has always been met with a strong counter-effort, to suppress that effort.

Today is no exception.

Jump into the fray that will likely develop, when everyone realizes that Mustang is back over at his place. If you are reading this blog and not reading Mustang's, you really must ask yourself, why not?

Around The Blogosphere

Here are a few things you may have missed around the blogosphere, this past weekend, especially if you were half as busy as I was:

I don't know how she does it, but
Always On Watch finds some very informative stuff like this piece called, Islamic Basketball. You have to check that one out.

AC at
Fore Left has some links and some thoughts on who just was behind the mosque bombing last week, in A Pact Of Honor.

Neal Boortz has
some thoughts on school vouchers that you should read.

Here's a very interesting article that
Gindy found, Diana Driver Was Working For French Secret Service. Just when you think you've heard it all, then comes this.

Well that's all we have time for today, it's time for bed, my eyes are beginning to cross.

Saturday, February 25, 2006

A 50th Anniversary That Many Will Not Remember

No, it's not my wedding anniversary, I am not that old. But, it is the 50th anniversary of Khrushchev's "secret speech" and the IHT has an excellent article just for the occasion. It's well worth the read.

You know, it's taken fifty years for the world to be able to see what the true extent of this event's impact. This was one of the riskiest things that a Soviet politician could have ever done, so soon after Stalin's death. Because the effects of a brutal empirical dictatorship last a long time, the influences were everywhere, both in sight and in mind. You never knew who was with you and who was against you. So, after being well schooled in the art of oppression and having witnessed some of the most ruthless purges of all time, you had to know that if it had backfired, it would have been death for Nikita.

(We see it today, with Iraq. De-Saddamization will take years.)

Maybe as time goes on, Mr. Khrushchev will come to be remembered for more than just the man who pounded his shoe on the table in the UN., the man behind the Cuban Missile Crisis, and the infamous phrase, "We will bury you!". Maybe he will be remembered as the man that started chipping away at the wall, albeit not intentionally. What he started was finally culminated with Gorbachev and had to go through a long hard process to get to that point. But he started that process, which was something that very few people had the guts to do at that precise moment in time.

He was forced out eventually. But had he failed at that moment in time, 50 years ago today, his demise would have been "death by gulag" at best, a firing squad at worst. Instead, he was exiled to live the life of a retired peasant, completely stripped of his power and authority. And for the Soviet Union of that day, that was some progress.

Friday, February 24, 2006

Some Thoughts By GM Roper

My friend GM Roper is a psychotherapist, cancer survivor, and a damned fine American. (And a Texas Longhorn fan, but three out of four ain't bad, is it?) He has a new post entitled, Thoughts on Mortality, Cancer and Life In General, and you won't want to miss it. Things you take for granted on a daily basis are so precious to someone that has a potentially terminal illness. So, give it a read, will you?

Partial Victory: Port Deal Is Delayed By UAE Firm

The AP has the story.

I say a partial victory because it is not completely dead. But, at least there is now more time to look at it, with an objective mindset. There is no hurry and those that have been elected can scrutinize it, more carefully.

I too, will keep an open mind. PYY will continue to follow this story closely in the coming days.

The Cause And Effect Of Radical Islam

It's my latest post at the Wide Awakes. Check it out.

Thursday, February 23, 2006

Is Iraq On The Brink Of Civil War?

When the debate on whether or not to go into Iraq was being played out, I didn't have a blog. However, I was playing around in the brutal world of political message boards and if you had read many of my posts, you would have read some pieces that conveyed my apprehension at the time, in the whole affair. (Not fear, but apprehension; there is a difference.)

In any intervention of any kind, there are potential side effects or unintended outcomes.

Many people before the war were focused on the gung ho aspect of it all, fully believing it was the right thing to do. But I think some people really did not think about the different scenarios that could play out, if things didn't go as planned. And I do firmly believe that there have been some significant things that have NOT gone as planned.

One of the those side effects made its grand appearance yesterday, as is reported by the AP, via My Way with the hat tip going to Drudge.

The attack on the Shiite mosque yesterday was designed and executed for the specific purpose of inciting a civil war and it appears it may be working. (The London Times thinks so too.) The violence is escalating, throwing the new Iraqi government into its first significant test as a nation. How they respond will be a key indicator as to how much longer we can expect to have troops in Iraq.

If they respond weakly, and Shiites feel they cannot be protected from radical Sunnis, they will begin to form militias. Militias aren't always well regulated and can, in and of themselves, spark more violence. If the government does crack down harshly, then we have a situation where Sunnis will pull out of the government and continue an internal insurgency against the newly elected government. There is a fine line that can be walked here and there is no clear solution.

Iran has weighed in, as they always seem to do in these cases. But in true hostile rogue state fashion, they have not been particularly helpful. For them to suggest that the U.S. or Israel had anything to do with this, is a typical response that one has to expect from an evil regime. Any opportunity to demonize the Israelis or us, is what the Iranians crave in their quest to incite worldwide jihad.

What I think has happened is one of two things. Either, the foreign fighters of al Qaeda (being Sunnis themselves and no big fans of the Shi'a) were responsible or the Iranians did it to incite a civil war, so as to draw the Iraqi Shiite population closer to Iran.

Tha bad news in all of this, is that continued instability will only delay the withdrawal of troops from that region. The good news is, the Muslim world shows no real signs of uniting for the big final, bloody, worldwide jihad, anytime soon.

But beyond all of that, one of the points I want to make is this:

Anytime a brutal and oppressive dictator has ruled a nation for as long and oppressively as Saddam did, the nation becomes a power vacuum after he is gone, unless a powerful, equally as oppressive government follows. Democracy for some is still an experiment, and Iraq is no exception. Just look how hard it has been to de-Stalinize the former Soviet Union. it still isn't completely de-Stalinized, even today. And what we are seeing now in Iraq, is more evidence of this theory coming to light and vaulting into full-fledged "fact" status.

Will there be a civil war in Iraq? Maybe. If it does happen, the only real answer may be to partition it off, into three autonomous regions: A Kurdish region, a Sunni region, and a Shiite region.

Iranian President Says U.S. And Israel Bombed Shrine

From the AP comes this report on the Iranian president's latest outrageous and provocative comments on the bombing of the holy Shiite shrine, destroyed yesterday.

So, let's see a show of hands here. How many are surprised?

Trying To Make Some Sense Out Of The Portgate Deal

At Boortz.com, Neal has desperately been trying to understand the rationale behind the White House's insistence that the Portgate deal be allowed to happen:

I've tried ... tried hard ... but it's no use. I just can't understand why George Bush is so invested in this idea of turning the operations at six essential U.S. ports, New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia, over to a foreign government ... and an Islamic foreign government at that.

And you know what? I can't make a lot of sense out of it either.

Since 9/11, I have been pretty much supportive of the President. Before then, I didn't much care about him, one way or the other. Since that horrible day, I have had a few differences of opinion with him. In some areas he hasn't gone far enough for my tastes and in others, he has miscalculated and/or underestimated some things. But overall, I do believe that he has done a much better job than either Gore or Kerry would have, had either one of them been elected. (With Wooden Al's reinventions and Kerry's vote for funding the troops before he voted against it act, who knows just what the hell they would have done.)

Yet, with all of the things that he has done that have been positive and all of the things that he has been able to accomplish, he now has me thoroughly confused. I, like Neal, cannot process this data appropriately enough. This does not compute. Just what are they thinking? Do they not realize that people (including many people that voted for Mr. Bush) are a little more than apprehensive about this? Do they not care that free thinking and intelligent people are feeling alternating emotions, bewilderment and anger?

Trying to analyze this is difficult. Invitations to the inner circle meetings that deal with this issue may be in high demand, but the supply is low. Very low. But as always, there are prognosticators on both sides of the aisle with some unlikely alliances (courtesy of AC at Fore Left) and bitter/vindictive members of the media that have spent a lot of time and energy, dreaming up every kind of theory imagineable; which is evidenced by the angles in which they present their coverage, always looking for an anti-Bush spin.

Take for instance
this one theory offered up by a commenter on my friend AICS's Logic Lifeline blog, who calls himself, Bill Of Rights:

I say this is straight out of the Karl Rove handbook.

The Republican-controlled Congress passes a law banning the port transfers, citing national security concerns. Bush steamrolls members of his own party to push through a wildly reckless idea and issues his first veto ever. A veto that every American rightfully thinks could threaten national security. The Republican-controlled Congress responds with a veto-override and VOILA, they head strong into the mid-term elections claiming the banner of national security champions again (despite their original disdain for the countless Democrat-sponsored measures, including the Office of Homeland Security). They tout this in the run-up and through the midterm campaigns and on into 2008. Bush could care less because he's outta there in 2008 anyways, and it'll be his gift to the Party.

As much as I would like to think that we have a modern-day Machiavelli advising the President, this doesn't make a lot of sense. Democrats are leading the charge on this, already. And I suspect many GOP are only signing on board because they see the overhwelming opposition by their constituencies. Therefore, the Dems stand to gain more.

It's apparent that many on the left just can't have a simple debate about anything, without a good Karl Rove conspiracy theory being interjected to keep their whacked out base interested in the issues. Simple facts are just not dramatic enough.

Then we have the MSM mogul
the AP and their spin on the situation:

The Bush administration secretly required a company in the United Arab Emirates to cooperate with future U.S. investigations before approving its takeover of operations at six American ports, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press. It chose not to impose other, routine restrictions.

More believable than the first, at least it makes some sense. Secret deals for intelligence have been made throughout the course of history and this Administration has no doubt made them. And I do not fault them for doing it, when our national security is at stake. But this one has more potential to backfire, than many of those in the past.

But if that isn't enough,
Fox News has their version of how things have transpired:

WASHINGTON — President Bush was unaware that a controversial deal to sell shipping operations at six major U.S. seaports to a United Arab Emirates-owned firm was in the works until it was approved by his administration, the White House said Wednesday.

So, there we have it. We have a Rove plot, a secret deal, and no prior knowledge theories to chew on. Which one you choose to believe, will depend highly on what ideology you hold. MoveOn.Org cult types go for the gusto and jump on the Rove conspiracy bandwagon, left wing elitists see the secret deal as the answer, and Bush apologists are always ready with the White House didn't know, excuse.

What do I think?

I just think it's very bad idea that needs to be looked at more closely and if there is any doubt at all, it needs to be scrapped. I have heard many different arguments for and against. I believe that there is no way to guarantee upper echelons of the DP management will not become vulnerable to jihadist forces that seek information about our classified security policies and procedures that they will suddenly have access to. And that is a risk, none of us should be willing to take.

What about you?

Monday, February 20, 2006

Why The Danish Cartoons Were Published

I actually read this article this morning, but lacked the proper time to post a link to it.

From the WaPo comes this piece entitled, Why I Published Those Cartoons by Flemming Rose, the culture editor of the Jyllands-Post.

But, Jason at Liberty and Culture beat me to the draw. In spite of that, the interesting thing is, one passage stuck out to both of us. Here it is:
When I visit a mosque, I show my respect by taking off my shoes. I follow the customs, just as I do in a church, synagogue or other holy place. But if a believer demands that I, as a nonbeliever, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect, but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy.

What more needs to be said?

Read the whole article and it will help you understand better.

Sunday, February 19, 2006

King: Port Deal Lacks Sufficient Security

The ground is swelling. Rep. Peter King (R-NY) sounds like he is on board for taking a second look at this bad deal.

I know he tap dances around, as many in the government are now doing. Most politicians do when they are looking for an out, in order to save some face. It's their egos.

Now, I have heard almost every argument as to why this should be allowed to proceed. But for the life of me, I cannot see there is ANY good reason, whatsoever. What is amazing to me is how politically deaf the Administration has become, in this matter. This is like buying a state of the art home security system, then leaving home without turning it on and leaving the doors unlocked.

Here, we spend countless dollars trying to track down al-Qaeda, we beef up airport security, we start up and develop a new cabinet department, and we allow the sale of a company that provides port security, to a company from a nation that had ties to 9/11. I mean, just how damned hard can this Homeland Security thing be, that we even have to have this debate, in the first place?

Think Abu Ghraib Was Bad?

Well, take a look at what was done by the new hero of the American left. His image is on shirts everywhere, the kids think it's just, so cool. Carlos Santana even wore one to the Grammy Awards, last year.

But that's not the issue, right?

It's more important for the media to harp about Abu Ghraib, the wiretapping, and the Cheney accident. That means that Portgate, the cartoon riots, and the Iran situation all take back seats and get used as filler, when there isn't enough new dirt on the subjects that do not matter.

That's the issue.

It Was Only A Matter Of Time: Muslims Attack U.S. Embassy In Indonesia

From the AP comes this report.

It was only a matter of time before an American embassy was attacked. Most of us weren't fooled. We knew it was coming, we just didn't know when and where.

Besides Israel, America is the primary scapegoat for the jihadists' grievances. The ironic thing is, the American media didn't print the cartoons. So, one must be able to surmise that this is NOT about the cartoons. It is about the jihadists' desire to destroy western civilization and they will use whatever means necessary. Be it with bombs, riots, or propaganda, make no mistake. They do seek to destroy us. But we sit passively by and do little, except condemn with our words.

In fact, the world sits back and pretty much hopes this will go away. But it doesn't seem to, does it? In fact, it swells daily. Each day gets a little worse. But, the American media has their heads in their orificium rectus and can only focus on the Cheney accident, thinking that it is more important of a story, than this stuff.

It's only a matter of time for something else, too. At some point in time, ordinary Americans are going to get very fed up and it's not going to be pretty.

Today's Cartoon Riots Hosted By Nigeria

This week's carton protests turned riots has been sponsored and hosted by Pakistan, Libya, and now Nigeria. The AP has the report.

By early next month, we will have seen the riots run the gamut of Muslim countries and a new schedule will need to be posted for the next round. As always, that schedule will be posted in the breakroom of every mosque, worldwide.

Who Needs Jesse Jackson, Bryant Gumbel, Or The Democratic Party?

From the RCP blog comes this article on the inroads that the Republican party has made with African-Americans.

It is no secret to those of the enlightened population (be they black or white) that the Reverend Jesse Jackson's whole function in the world is to stir up class warfare, by exploiting race as an issue. No black poverty, no need for Mr. Jackson.
Never was this more evident as it was, in the aftermath of Katrina. Any chance to turn something into a racial thing, will be capitalized on, swiftly and surely, with out so much as an ounce of thought, as to how hypocritical it may sound.

Bryant Gumbel, on the other hand doesn't need poor blacks to justify his existence, he just needs enough ignorant people to believe his bigoted views, in order to remain relevant in his own eyes.
By now, most know of his bigoted remarks made on his pathetic sports show about the Winter Olympics. Keep in mind that this is a show that is neither interesting, nor informative. But it has plenty of bias, which has been Mr. Gumbel's specialty, since he was lead anchor of the Today Show.

Since that time, he has made himself some self-appointed champion to right wrongs that have somehow (in his mind) befallen blacks, in this country and at the hands of white people. His ratings stunk on the Today Show, so they canned him. Then, he got his own show on CBS that was tailor made for him. He got much artistic control, but still he could not sway people into buying the snake oil, he was selling. They canned him, too. Now he is back where he started, in sports. But not to worry, Bryant still finds a way to alienate viewers in his usual bitter and bigoted way.

I remember one incident many years ago, with Gumbel. Ralph Fiennes, a talented British actor, played an evil Nazi concentration camp officer, in Schindler's List. Gumbel got him on the Today Show as an interview. He, then, tried to blind side him by trying a line of questioning designed to take the angle that somehow Ralph did such a good job in that role, because he himself, had those Nazi sentiments.

But these are the kinds of things that are beginning to open up some eyes, within the African-American community. The soft bigotry of low expectations that is promoted by the Jacksons and the Gumbels of the world, is being noticed by more and more people. And they are beginning to reject that message more and more, as times passes. Many have come to expect more from and for, themselves. They have discovered that they, themselves, hold the keys to their successes or failures.

Try telling Robert Johnson, founder of BET television network and all-around filthy rich billionaire that he cannot make it in America, because he is black. Then watch him laugh you right out of the room. Do that and you'll receive a brisk escorting out of his office, because he has way too much work to do, and he will not be inclined to allow you to waste any more of his valuable and precious time. You see,
Mr. Johnson just this week, picked up some more assets along the way with the purchase of some hotels, in the Indianapolis area.

The more blacks that can own their own business, own their own homes, and get a quality education by hard work, the less he will be needed to drive wedges between the races. The more blacks that realize this potential, the more they will be disinclined to buy into the sales pitches of the Reverend, and his brother in arms Gumbel.

The Democrats that have long had a lock on the black vote are now beginning to watch their support erode, more and more, each time a prominent Democrat opens his/her mouth. Robert Johnson, Oprah, or anyone else on
this list, did not need the Democratic party to achieve their wealth or success. They may vote Democratic, I don't really know. But they didn't need them. And, they did not need government to attain their status either. All they needed was an idea, a dream, a work ethic, and some courage to take risks. The rest is history.

Mansoor Ijaz Speaks Islamic Truths?

If you have never read Mr. Ijaz, click on the link to his latest article (thanks to RCP), entitled Islamic Truths, via the L.A. Times. I have read Mr. Ijaz's commentaries for several years now and he can always be counted on to write some very intelligent and in some cases, some very forthright things that need to be said.

Take this for example:

Muslims and Arabs have done pitifully little to help improve the capacity of the Palestinian people to be good neighbors to their Israeli brethren. Take the money spent by any Middle Eastern royal family at a London hotel or Geneva resort during one month and you could build enough schools and medical clinics to take care of 1,000 Palestinian children for a year. Yet rather than educate and feed Palestinian and Muslim children so they may learn to settle differences through dialogue and debate, instead of by throwing rocks and wearing bombs, the Muslim "haves" put on a few telethons to raise paltry sums for the "have nots" to alleviate the guilt over their palatial gilded cages.

Could he be talking about the Saudis here? They are by far the largest and richest of the middle east oil producing countries. The royal family sits in splendid luxury, they give tons of money to charities, yet their people sit in utter poverty, while being taught that they are suffering because Israel exists.

Bombs don't feed a lot people, they don't clothe them, and they do not educate them. The Palestinians are the Saudis' Arab and Muslim brothers, yet they are kept hungry for food, as well as knowledge and truth. They are lied to and being used as pawns in a struggle to move Israel.

I don't always agree with Mr. Ijaz, mind you. But overall, if we are to ever prevent an all-out clash of cultures, we will need guys like this man to be a voice of reason and win over some hearts and minds. We need someone to help usher Islam out of the dark ages. In every piece that I have read of his, he seems to sincerely want that for the religion of Islam. Whether or not he gets it, will greatly depend on how many others are willing to step up to the plate, be willing to speak for what is right, and to go against the grain without fear.

Give him a read.

Saturday, February 18, 2006

Schumer On Savage

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) was a guest on the Michael Savage Show, last evening. If you have ever heard his show, you would know that Sen. Schumer doesn't get a lot of positive press from Dr. Savage, on a regular basis. In fact, Michael said it best himself in his introduction of the Senator from New York, by quoting an old adage. Politics, sometimes, makes strange bed fellows.

Now first, let me say that I do not always agree with Michael Savage, I am not a sycophant of anyone (he isn't, either). In fact, I don't think I have ever linked to him before. He is based in San Francisco and is a moody talk-show host that gets angry and despondent at the drop of a hat, in true New York style (which is where he is from). He is on the fringe of the far right-wing about 15% of the time, sometimes to the right of Pat Buchanan. But, he gets it right on the borders, Homeland Security, and liberalism in general. He is a best-selling author of three books, The Savage Nation, The Enemy Within, and Liberalism Is A Mental Disorder.

But back to the guest.

Mr. Schumer seemed genuinely surprised that he was asked to be a guest, he has to know that Savage has called him a schmuck too many times to count. But the nature of this issue is too important to let politics get in the way. Many feel that way, I know that I certainly do. And so does Schumer. So, technically, I can now honestly say that there has been at least one issue that I have sided with him, Hillary, and a host of other Democrats that I usually disagree with, sharply.

As as I commented on The Logic Lifeline earlier today, a very very hot place, just just got very very cold, very very fast. To which he replied:

For one brief moment, the snowball has a chance.

Anyway, here is what Schumer plugged, straight from his website. Here is the beginning:

On Monday a $6.8 billion dollar deal put the operation and control of the major New York and New Jersey ports in the control of a firm in the United Arab Emirates and owned by the Government of Dubai, Dubai Ports World. Today, Senators Chuck Schumer, Tom Coburn, Frank Lautenberg, and Chris Dodd are being joined by Reps. Chris Shays, Vito Fossella and Mark Foley in sending a letter to Treasury Secretary John Snow urging him to review the deal immediately.

I urge all people that think this is just about as stupid of an idea that could ever be had, to get behind these men and get this thing stalled, and eventually stopped. We cannot allow something like this to be ramrodded through without more review and more debate. This is just too sensitive of an issue. This is an issue that both conservatives and liberals can and should agree on. But to make it work, we need everyone that wants this stopped to make some noise and let the President, our representatives, and our senators know that we want this stopped, and we want it stopped now.

Portgate Deal Needs To Be Stopped

The Washington Times has finally weighed in on this disaster waiting to happen, now known as the Port Deal. I don't know about you, but I am still a bit amazed at the relative lack of coverage this has gotten by the MSM, long before now. In fact, ABC Radio White House correspondent Ann Compton was caught off guard about this story, while she and other member of the WH Press Corps were screaming "conspiracy" on the Cheney incident.

Reuters is reporting that legislation will be introduced to block this idiotic venture, by two Democratic Senators.

There are a few other articles on this. If you search hard enough, you can find them. But the media seems to be more enamored with the Cheney incident and the wiretapping issue. They focus on what has happened and what it happening, rather than what may happen in the future. They would rather be reactive than proactive.

NewsMax seems to be leading the charge on this. Even World Net Daily, which usually covers these kinds of things pretty thoroughly, only has one link.

So, what does a person have to do to get informed on this?

The blogosphere seems to be abuzz.

AICS at The Logic Lifeline, shows the dots connected.

Cubed at the Sixth Column has a post, as well.

And as always, you can always count on Always On Watch to be watching.

My plan is to keep harping on this as it develops, until it is stopped. Part of that plan is to write my congressman, both of my senators, and the White House. I will make my voice heard.

How about you? What will you do about it? Will you just blow it off? Or will you get engaged and do something about it and make your voice heard?

How to contact the White house.

How to find out who is your Representative and contact him/her.

Don't just sit there and bitch about it. Do something now.


Alpha Patriot has a good post on this with lots of links and quotes.

Wednesday, February 15, 2006

Someone Needs Called In On The Carpet On This One

AICS, my friend over at the Logic Lifeline has posted something very disturbing to me and should be quite disturbing to most people, Democrats and Republicans alike.

Once again, the NY Post is playing point guard on the the purchase of a London company by a United Arab Emirates company that gives responsibility over the security details of 6 major sea ports in our country.

Read the rest, it's not long at all.

But know this, this is a grave error in judgement and needs to be looked into, as of yesterday. This cannot happen, it makes no damned sense, whatsoever. I cannot think of one good thing that can come of this.

My question in all of this would be, where is the media when you need them? They spend countless hours trying to grill the VP over the shooting, they stew and boil about being left out of the loop, and they do everything to embarass the President in things that don't mean a damned thing, in the larger scope of things. But here is a disturbing lapse of judgement and they are AWOL, demanding answers about why they were not told about the shooting, in a more timely fashion.

It's called straining at a gnat and yet, swallowing a camel.

UPDATE - Always On Watch is covering this too.

What's The Real Story?

It's time for Dick Cheney to face the press. The people of the United States of America must know just how the VP could accidently shoot a friend of his, while hunting quail. Mr. Whittington is a private citizen and his rights to privacy are to be damned. We must know how this act that happened on private property and on his own private time, occurred. It's in all of our best interests, to violate the rights of a man that was the unintended victim of an accident, in order to know what the real story behind this mishap was. All because the perpetrator, is a public figure.

Sarcasm aside for a moment, he does need to anwer the questions that these over-inflated egos want answered, just so they will shut up and go on to more pressing issues that concern more Americans, especially when their safety and security is at stake. But hey, that's just me.

As rich and as powerful as Mr. Cheney is, I cannot imagine this is a man that has no feelings. You cannot convince me that he doesn't feel like a real heel, right about now. Most people would. You cannot persuade me to believe that this was in anyway intentional, so what's the story here? What's the big issue here? Do public figures owe an explanation to the press anytime they are involved in an accident? As long as they speak to the authorities that have jurisdiction, who says they have to speak with anyone? Who says they need to contact David Gregory and release information, immediately after the fact so he can get a scoop.

As I said earlier, the sooner the VP talks about this, the sooner this thing can die and go away. The sooner he does so, the sooner the Whittington family and everyone else held hostage to this unnecessary power struggle, can go about their daily lives and put this behind them. It's time to speak about the incident, admit any failures, and then move on.

The big concern right now, should be the health and recovery of Mr. Whittington. Therefore, that should be the primary focus of the vulturous press corps and not, how this White house keeps more secrets than any other, in the modern age. This isn't about policy or other official business, this is about an accident. It's about the recovery of the unintended victim and the rest is between Mr. Whittington and Mr. Cheney.

Meet The Fourth Branch Of Government

That's the title of my latest post on my other part-time home, the Wide Awakes . Check it out and be sure to read some by the other members, while you are at it.

But whether it's here or it's there, thanks for reading.

Tuesday, February 14, 2006

More Evidence That Shows Precisely Why Turkey Should Not Be Allowed Into The EU

Enter into the record in the court of public opinion this story from the IHT. Here is a brief excerpt:
Sam William Marshall, played by Billy Zane, is portrayed as a sociopath, killing people without a second thought and claiming that he is doing God's will, a thinly veiled reference to statements by President George W. Bush about America's "crusade" for democracy in Iraq and the Middle East.

So, tell me. What happened to Turkey being pro-western, being more European than Asian, and having the values of a freedom-loving European society, despite being predominently Muslim?

I cannot say that this doesn't surprise me, though. The leftists in this country have paved the way for this kind of attitude, with Hollywood being one of the chief catalysts in this reaction.

Hanson: What Will Europe Really Do?

Victor Davis Hanson from RCP, asks this very question in this well thought out and well articulated essay.

Europe is at a fork in the road. They must choose the path they must take, and there are many considerations that must come with their choice. But in all of their considering, the one thing that they must absolutely consider is this point made by Mr. Hanson:

If the most liberal and tolerant states in Europe such as Holland and Denmark have the most problems with Islamic radicals, then what does that say about the continent as a whole?

That's the whole sum of the matter and should be given the bulk of the consideration. Everything else is secondary.

Iran: A Typical Timeline

MONDAY: Enrichment begins. The EU Calls for talks with Iran.

TUESDAY: Iran agrees to talks. Announces suspension of enrichment.

WEDNESDAY: Iran postpones talks with EU. Enrichment begins.

THURSDAY: Iran suspends enrichment, seeks talks with EU.

FRIDAY: Muslim Holy Day. Iran restarts enrichment process.

SATURDAY: Jewish Sabbath. Iran condemns Israel for existing.

SUNDAY: Christian Sabbath. Iran condemns western civilization.

MONDAY: Russia seeks talks with Iran. Iran announces enrichment suspension.

TUESDAY: Iran postpones talks with Russia, seeks talks with EU, begins enrichment.

WEDNESDAY: Iran suspends talks with EU, restarts thinking about talks with Russia, announces suspension of enrichment.

THURSDAY: Iran restarts enrichment.

FRIDAY: Muslim Holy Day. Continues to enrich. Blows off talks with EU and Russia.

SATURDAY: Death To Israel Day. Suspends enrichment. Sends payment to Hamas.

SUNDAY: Death To America Day. Hate Christians. Restarts enrichment.


Tick tock, tick tock, tick tock.

Sunday, February 12, 2006

Gingrich To Run For President In 2008?

From the AP and hosted by the Indianapolis Star comes this story on how Newt Gingrich is rejuvenating otherwise lethargic conservatives . These are those that have stood with the President, but have felt that not enough has been done to advance a true conservative agenda. They have had some differences with Mr. Bush on some things, but have stayed clear of too much criticism on him, because the Democrats have been slaughtering him relentlessly. They have stood with him in his efforts to fight terrorists, but some believe he has not done enough, or has not done it as smartly as he could have.

Newt had the world by the tail, when he and many other Republicans rode the "Contract With America" to victory in 1994. However, his style at that time was considered brash, arrogant, and harsh. The battles drawn up against President Clinton were perceived by many as mean-spirited. In fact, after the loss of the White House in 1992, many GOP were unexpectedly bitter and took every opportunity to demonize the President. There is nothing wrong with battling over policy, but the battles grew very personal with many.

But those mistakes aside, there is not a more intelligent person that can articulate his ideas as well as he can, in the GOP. And, there is no one else that is the embodiment of that conservative agenda that was laid out, in those 94 mid-terms. Communication and the ability to communicate well, are the two of the main essentials that determine whether or not, someone is electable. Despite his polarizing style in the 90s, he may be able to win over some that first thought him to be nothing more than a partisan hack. If you can ever listen to some of his observations and his ideas, you will soon come to realize that he has some good ideas and is more than capable as a thinker, analyst, and communicator.

This is not an endorsement of any kind, this is just an observation. It is a long time until November 08, and I have a lot of time to make up my mind.

Saturday, February 11, 2006

Another No Inspiration Day

I find that once again I have no real passionate rant pent up inside of me. Usually, any one subject can usually set me off into a complete diatribe, but this has been a very stressful week and my brain is performing like the neurons are either missing synapse, or are completely deadened.

So as is customary at PYY (when that happens) I will post a compilation of some of the things I have been reading. Because the one thing I love to do is read, I don't mind sharing that which I have read, with my readers.

Ralph Peters at Real Clear Politics has an outstanding article entitled, Survival Strategy: Middle Eastern Islam, Darwin, & Terrorism. It is very much worth a look.

AC at Fore Left prognosticates on the future of Saddam. He outlines two possible paths this whole circus could take.

Les at Living In The Surreal World has a link and comments on the latest leftist delusion. For some the delusion is real.

AICS at The Logic Lifeline has links and comments on the ever diminishing marginal utility of the UN.

Mustang at Social Sense talks about Final Judgement, but don't worry there will be no passing of the offering plates and no altar call, at this one.

Always On Watch poses a interesting question in her post, How Far Along Are We? If you are at all interested in what is in the minds of our enemies, this is for you.

Super Frenchie speaks about a potential candidate for the French presidency, that has apparently slipped in under the radar, at least in the American media. Which to me is amazing, in itself, because she is a socialist and not a bad looking one either. And we all know how well sex and socialism sells in the American media, don't we?

Shah Alexander at Global American Discourse has two recent articles worth reading. One is on Palestinian Democracy and one is on Russia. Be sure to check them out too. Both are worth the read.

Gandalf at Up Pompeii is agitated again. And with good reason from the sounds of things.

And add to all of this, Jason at Liberty and Culture talks about truth and liberty .

Happy Reading all.

France Upgrades Nuclear Arsenal

From the Guardian comes this story about France announcing some upgrades to its nuclear weapons for the purpose of adding both range and accuracy. Which means greater assurance that they can hit Iran, if the need arises.

Pouvoir la vie de France longue et prospérer.

Thursday, February 09, 2006

The State Of The Democratic Party Is NOT Sound

From the LA Times comes Jonag Goldberg's, "One sorry mess of a party". This piece is a well-written examination of the current plight of the Democratic party, today.

Angry and desperate are two words that come to mind when, discussing the behaviors and reactions of Dems over the last five years. When faced with repeated failure, many will resort to displays of anger. Case in point, liberals starting name calling the moment their argument is challenged to the degree that they cannot defend their weak and faulty claims, in an intelligent and eloquent manner. When found to be consistently losing the war of ideas, they become desperate, as we see when they stage stunts or make outrageously controversial statements, a la Howard Dean.

One could write a whole book about many instances when Dems shoot themselves in the foot, time and time again. The most recent display of childish foolishness was the inappropriate political commentary forcefully injected to what supposed to be eulogies and remembrances of Coretta Scott King. Instead of making it a funeral, some tried to turn it into a campaign stump speech, because they believe that it is what Mrs. King would have wanted.

These things do hurt the Dems, and much more than many Dems are willing to admit. But the thing that hurts them most of all? Clearly, it is the lack of ideas. And until they come up with some, they will continue to lose elections. Because, no matter how they skew it and twist it, they ARE LOSING elections.

Tuesday, February 07, 2006

News In Brief

Since I am finding no particular inspiration to write an in-depth essay on any particular topic, I thought that instead of putting up a series of posts, I would just summarize some of the stories that are out there, on a slow news cycle day.

Sensing that European-American relations are starting to improve, Peter van Ham, head of the Global Governance Program at the Netherlands Institute of International Relations, just has to make one last desperate attempt to drive the wedge in further with this op-ed piece in the IHT.

Drudge has linked to John McCain's site which has posted this letter sent to Sen. Barack Obama. Here is an excerpt:

I would like to apologize to you for assuming that your private assurances to me regarding your desire to cooperate in our efforts to negotiate bipartisan lobbying reform legislation were sincere. When you approached me and insisted that despite your leadership’s preference to use the issue to gain a political advantage in the 2006 elections, you were personally committed to achieving a result that would reflect credit on the entire Senate and offer the country a better example of political leadership, I concluded your professed concern for the institution and the public interest was genuine and admirable. Thank you for disabusing me of such notions with your letter to me dated February 2, 2006, which explained your decision to withdraw from our bipartisan discussions.

Ouch. It seems now that the Democratic party's "golden child" has forgotten his centrist appeal that he so carefully worked, to get elected. Is Barack just another Democratic hack that is beholden to the socialist elitists? Or is someone from the Deaniac/Kennedy/Kerry wing leaning on him? From the looks of this letter from the moderate senator from Arizona, he is beginning to look like it's one or the other (or maybe even both).

From Reuters comes this story about New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin soliciting for aid from other countries. God forbid that we would want the people of Louisiana and New Orleans to ante something up for the reconstruction. But wait a minute, I guess I forgot. Both the Governor and the Mayor are Democrats; both believe that the world owes them something and that they bear no responsibility for their own recovery or their own destiny.

They desperately need the relocated African-American community vote to stay in power, which is what this is really all about. Get them back as quickly as possible and make deals with whomever, to expedite it as soon as possible before Election Day.

And also from Reuters comes this story about Denmark's protest of attacks on its embassy, in Iran. Let's see, the Iranian president that once was (more than likely) involved in the illegal takeover of the American embassy in 1979, is supposed to guarantee security for the Danes?

And finally from the Associated Press comes this piece about the hearings in the Senate Judiciary Committee, concerning what many are convinced is the illegal wiretapping of al-Qaeda members' phone conversations. Let's see if we can keep this straight. It's illegal to listen in on an avowed enemy of the United States of America? What do you want to bet this is going on in France and nobody but the extreme hard left gives a damn?

Iran Announces Holocaust Cartoon Contest

News.co.au has this story.

IRAN'S largest selling newspaper announced today it was holding a contest on cartoons of the Holocaust in response to the publishing in European papers of caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed.

Iran has no other choice but to blame the Danish cartoons on Israel.

You see, Iran is no different than a school yard bully. He gets beat up by someone he CANNOT whip, so he takes it out on someone he thinks he CAN whip. This is fine display of what true cowardice is.

Son Of Jimmy Carter To Run For U.S. Senate

Reuters is reporting that Jack Carter, son of the former President, has announced he wants to run for the Senate.

You know what they say, the apple doesn't fall too far from the tree.

Look out Nevada, there's an unrealistic bleeding heart liberal's son among you and he wants to be YOUR Senator. But then again, you all elected Harry Reid. What's to say, you won't want to outdo yourselves on this one?

Monday, February 06, 2006

New Blog Added To The PYY Blogroll

I'd like take a moment to present a new blog, you will now find in the PYY blogroll, Super Frenchie. And as you may guess, he is French. His site offers a perspective from a Frenchman living in America.

As he and I have already found there are some differences of opinion in some areas, but that isn't the important thing. The thing to note is, we have many areas where we agree. Most of you that read this blog with any regularity at all know that I am no fan of communism. And neither is he. Check out his post, Commy Frenchies.

You won't find more of an international focus in a blog as you do here. We have a good mix of nations represented. Just take a look at this:

Global American Discourse

BRITAIN - Up Pompeii, EU Rota, The Road To Euro Serfdom

GERMANY - David's Medienkritik

IRAN - I doubt these guys are in Iran, but at A Daily Briefing On Iran, you can get up to date news and information on the activities inside the world's most dangerous theocracy.

And now, FRANCE is represented well, too.

So give Frenchie a look. And give these others a look too. There is much to learn from and about each other. And this forum can be one of the many methods used to seek out a better understanding of one another.

Europe's Awakening

The search for excellence continues daily at PYY and today is no exception. At Real Clear Politics , there is an outstanding commentary, entitled "A European Awakening Against Islamic Fascism?" by Victor Davis Hanson. And, if you read nothing else today, you really should, read this intriguing and poignant article. It is a well written piece with some refreshing perspectives on the recent chain of events, in the European theater.

Over the last four years Americans have played a sort of parlor game wondering when—or if—the Europeans might awake to the danger of Islamic fascism and choose a more muscular role in the war on terrorism.

In my my recent essay, "Are France And America Allies Again?", I stated that I believe we may have been closer than what was once portrayed, by both medias and to some degree, both governments. I know that many might disagree (my new blog friend Super Frenchie is one) with this assessment. But we must all remember that we as Americans and as French (or other Europeans) are not privy to the most secret of conversations and subsequent deals made by our leaders, when in private. We only have access to the facts and opinions that are made public, usually by way of the news media and more recently by way of the blogosphere.

From there, our opinions are formed. From there, the facts are presented, either accurately or inaccurately. And then, we as free-thinking individuals are free to analyze those facts, sort through the rubbish and discard it, and establish within ourselves some form of opinion, which in turn becomes part of our overall belief system.

So unless a secret fact comes to light, as a result of a leak or a forthcoming change of heart, we only know what we know. And, from all appearances, it looked like Europe was not getting it, and most of it was due to the disagreement on Iraq. But from what we are witnessing from our European counterparts today, is either a complete reversal of philospophy/ideology or it is simply bringing to light, that which, has been kept off of the radar for very specific reasons, up until now.

Imagine a conversation between Bush and Chirac taking place, whereby, Bush explains what he wants to do with Iraq, and why. Chirac tells him that his country cannot support an invasion at this time and the reasons are, the numbers of disaffected Muslims that live in France and how they fear chaos will erupt if that happens. He wants Bush to clearly understand how vulnerable the republic would be, if they openly backed "US imperialism" in a Middle Eastern country. He further explains to the American President that he must overtly criticize the operation and make appearances that he is overtly against it. But covertly, he offers any help that they can, secretly and quietly. (This may account for the Bush Administration's lack of willingness to overtly criticize Chirac or his government, during all of this.)

But now, things are different. Why? Let's read what Mr. Hanson has to say:

The Madrid bombings, the murder of Theo van Gogh, the London subway attacks, and the French rioting in October and November seem to have prompted at least some Europeans at last to question their once hallowed sense of multiculturalism in which Muslim minorities were not asked to assimilate at home and Islamic terrorists abroad were seen as mere militants or extremists rather than enemies bent on destroying the West.

You can now add to that the attacks on the Danish and Norwegian embassies in Syria and we can plainly see that the safe route, the quiet route, was not working and likely will never work.

But, in all of this, let's not forget this one point:

Whether the Europeans were really on our side in Iraq or not, is not important now. That is the past. The important thing to note is, they certainly appear to be on our side now. In fact, they seem to be taking the lead in the "guts" department, in this cartoon flap. And, they are doing it much more so than the American media or government is willing to do, at this point in time.

And we need that right now. We need each other, we (along with Australia) ARE western civilization and our unity against dangerous islamofascists will ultimately determine whether that civilization will survive, or not. It does not matter how and why the Europeans have awakened (or if they were ever asleep), the important thing to note is, a sleeping giant is now awake and wants the enemies of freedom and liberty to know that they are awake.

And I, for one, am glad.

Sunday, February 05, 2006

Steelers Win Fifth

Even though I am probably one of the few people that still watch the Super Bowl for the game itself, and not the commercials, I'd like to say, congratulations to the Pittsburgh Steelers for winning their fifth Super Bowl.

There is no doubt that they deserved it. They won seven straight to win it all and won every playoff game on the road. They beat the numbers one, two, and three seeds in the AFC; then in the big one, they beat the number one seed of the NFC. They earned it, they are the champs.

Seattle had every opportunity, but they seemed content to shoot themselves in the foot at the most inopportune times. Penalties, dropped passes, passes thrown out of bounds, all killed Seattle's momentum several times duting the course of the game. All in all, I think it was the experience factor. Pittsburgh has been in the playoffs in the last few years, Seattle has not. Take nothing away from the Steelers, but the Seahawks' nervousness showed.

But just so the record is straight, Pittsburgh has traditionally been one of my least favorite teams, the other two that hold that distinction are Dallas and San Francisco. So there is no celebration here. On the other hand, it's going to be hard to feel sorry or shed any tears for the Seahawks, since they made more money in tonight's game, than most people make in a year.

But hey, this year belongs to the Steelers organization. They overcame a shaky midseason (with Roethlisberger's injuries) that could have caused them to tank out and quit. But they didn't. And now, they have the trophy.

For them, the celebration begins. For the other 31 teams, there's always next season. For the stars of the game, there's next week's Pro Bowl. But for me, the NCAA tournament is just around the corner.

Friday, February 03, 2006

Cartoon Protests Spread To Asia

From the IHT comes this report.

JAKARTA - Hard-line Muslims stormed a building housing the Danish Embassy in Indonesia on Friday and burned the Danish flag as Islamic outrage over cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad spread to Asia.

Protests also erupted in Malaysia, where fundamentalist Muslims shouted, "Destroy our enemies!" at a rally outside the Danish Embassy in Kuala Lumpur, and in Dhaka, the capital of Bangladesh, where about 500 Muslims rallied to protest the publication of the cartoons.

"The whole Muslim world is shocked and outraged," Mohiuddin Ahmed, a leader of the hard-line Islamic group Hizbut Tahrir Bangladesh, told supporters at the Dhaka rally.

The Pakistani Parliament unanimously passed a resolution Friday condemning the cartoons and the Pakistani president, General Pervez Musharraf, also expressed outrage, saying their publication could not be justified as freedom of expression.

As offended as all of these people may be, there is no turning back now. If any media outlet that has taken this stand and either printed or shown these cartoons, backtracks now, there will be no end to the pressure and attacks on free speech as we know it, today. Not only will Muslims be emboldened to contest each and every criticism leveled at it or any of its followers; any other religion/belief system can and will be able to exert pressure. And, they will do it with the expectation that they will be able to censor, whatever they deem offensive whether it's true or not.

Over at Always On Watch and at Liberty and Culture there is more coverage and thoughts about this situation. (Don't let the size of Jason's post fool you, read the comments for the meat of the debate)

In fact, most of the blogosphere and the MSM there has been much debate about this subject, whether the outlets and blogs have actually published the cartoons, or not. Why? Because no matter how offensive something may seem to a given group, the right to freely express oneself is at stake here. Freedom of speech is the one thing that defines whether a society is truly free, or not. Take that away and you have the equivalent of a Stalinist, Maoist, Fascist, Communist, form of political system that oppresses and strips the people of the pursuits of life, liberty, and prosperity.

Now before I go any further, I want to repost one comment I made on Jason's site, with some additional emphasis in italics:

I do not condone trying to offend anyone, but the freedom of expression must at any and all costs, be protected.

I seem to remember some kind controversial art display at a museum in NYC, where an image of the virgin Mary had dung all over it. (Or something like that.)

Anyway, there was an outcry for a short while. I am sure that many Catholics as well as many non-Catholic Christians were very much offended. They said their piece about what they thought of it, as was their right. But unless I missed something, no one threatened to bomb the art gallery.

That said, I do not think it is wise to inflame these already rabid dogs, especially at this point in time, just for the hell of it. I do not think it is particularly wise to do it just because you can. But make no mistake, the right to freely express oneself is a right that should never be infringed on, in any way.

If Muslims would do in the case of these cartoons, what many Christians did, when that art display came out; if they would simply ignore it, it would go away much faster. No one, I repeat, no one can offend you without your permission.

How did the art display offend the virgin Mary? It didn't. She's dead and even if she were alive, it would not have hurt much of anything , except her maybe her feelings. How did it hurt me? It didn't. It did not shake my faith, one iota. I'll simply let God judge the matter, as He sees fit.

But what did offend me, was the fact that it was displayed in a gallery that receives government funds. I don't think the government should be in the arts business, anyway. Remember, since Bush became President, the homeless suddenly reappeared after eight years of bliss under Clinton. Couldn't that money used to subsidize "shitty" art, be better used to feed the starving masses that Bush has created?

Bottom line here, Muslims should understand that the bigger stink they make about this, the bigger it will become. The more they attempt to censor, the more we that cherish freedom of speech, will dig in and fight.

I also would admonish Muslims, that "if you really want to stop this kind of stuff, you should set an example and not publish the crap you publish about Christians and Jews. Because it is just as offensive to them, as these cartoons are to you. But you do not police yourselves, so how can you expect the same courtesy here?"

In short, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If Muslims or any other religious group insists on publishing hateful and offensive material about Jews, Christians, or any other religious group, they must expect that at some point others will do the same with their belief system.

Free speech works both ways. We cannot have one group dictating to the others, what they can print, say, and think; all the while saying and doing whatever they want, because somehow their way is far greater and should somehow be elevated above the rest. (SEE: Hypocrisy)

Too many people died for that right, and I will be damned if I let it happen during my lifetime. This is something that should transcend partisan politics and should unite both the left and the right, if only for one brief and shining moment.

Remember, jihad is not just a one-pronged operation. It involves much more than bullets, bombs, and innocent deaths. It also involves propaganda spewed by special interest pressure groups like CAIR and the ISNA, as well.

Here are a few other sites that are in on the fray and are well worth checking out:

Up Pompeii



Fore Left