Friday, June 30, 2006

Hamas Sets Conditions For Israeli Soldier's Release

From the AP comes this report:
Israeli warplanes struck the Palestinian Interior Ministry early Friday, setting it ablaze as Arab leaders tried to forge a deal that would halt the Israeli offensive and free a 19-year-old soldier held by gunmen allied with the ruling Islamic Hamas.

Well, there a host of things that can be said about this. But, the thing I want to highlight is this, Israelis do not play around, like the rest of the world does.
Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak said militants agreed to a conditional release of the kidnapped soldier but that Israel had yet to accept their terms, which he did not specify.

The rest of the world walks on eggshells becaue Arab oil has a stranglehold on the industrial powers of the world. But as we can see Israel gets results. Keeping in mind that nothing has been worked out yet, it is interesting to note that there is now talk that Hamas is more than willing to negotiate.
"The soldier will only be released unconditionally and there will be no negotiations with a gang of terrorists and criminals," Meir told The Associated Press. "There is nothing to talk with them about."

But Israel has chosen to balk, at least publicly they have. They are not wanting to tip their hands, because they are in control at the moment. They have 64 Hamas officials in custody. They are the keys to getting the man out of captivity, they are in the driver's seat.
"If the Palestinians act now to release Cpl. Shalit and hand him back to us ... we would immediately initiate a dramatic reduction in tension," Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev said. "He is the primary issue, he is the primary reason for the crisis."

After previous diplomatic efforts by Egypt, Jordan, France and other nations failed, Israel sent thousands of soldiers into vacant areas of southern Gaza on Wednesday.

But on Thursday, Israel decided to delay a further offensive into northern Gaza at Egypt's request, an Israeli official said on condition of anonymity because of the secrecy of the diplomacy.

Note, that after the 64 are taken into custody, we now have one more bargaining chip left.

Basically what Mr. Regev is saying is, give him up, we will give back your 64 creeps, and will not invade Gaza. Now we have word of the possibility of a settlement, which will feature Cpl. Shalit's release. It's amazing how dealing with thugs disproportionately, yields better results than just talking about it. Other nations failed to persuade the terrorists to give up the corporal, they could have allowed those nations to broker a deal. But they didn't. They played their hand and lost big, on this one.

The world could learn a lot from the Israelis.

Thursday, June 29, 2006

A PYY Correction

On Sunday June 25, I posted this piece about the Sun-Sentinels' article quoting Jack Murtha as saying, American presence in Iraq is more dangerous to world peace than nuclear threats from North Korea or Iran.

The blogosphere and some mainstream pundits have written about it. But yesterday, after much scrutiny of the article, the Sun-Sentinel posted a correction. It turns out that was not Murtha's comment, at all.

Therefore, it is imperative that I post a correction. PYY wants to be as accurate as possible when dealing with these kinds of things. I am very committed to that principle and apologize for the misinformation.

I will say further that I still stand by much of the commentary that resulted from that erroneous information. It is still the opinion of PYY that Jack Murtha is wrong on this issue and needs to re-think the repercussions of other irresponsible statements, he has made in the past.

Thanks to all of you that read PYY.

(HT to Info Zone for the correction page.)

Gaza Terrorists Claim Firing Of Chemical Tipped Rocket Into Israel

From Reuters:
GAZA (Reuters) - A spokesman for gunmen in the Gaza Strip said they had fired a rocket tipped with a chemical warhead at Israel early on Thursday.

Keep in mind that this has yet to be confirmed as fact, but it certainly does signal the beginning of an age that many have already recognized. Unfortunately, there are many that do not see this new age we live in, as a dangerous era. Then, there are those that recognize the fact that there is a clear and present danger, but assign the responsibility solely on the Israeli and American governments.

In all of the arguments made about this one way or the other, the important thing to note here is, neither the U.S. nor Israel (both of which have the capabilities) fired it. And while there is no verification of this event happening (at least at this time), the point I'd like to emphasize is, the claim is being made. Therefore, we must all ask ourselves the same question, "how long will it be, before this really does become a reality?".

Better yet, how long will it be before jihadis that are stationed in this country, claim they have a chemical, biological, and/or nuclear device ready to be activated? Or, will they not warn us at all and just detonate it?

Monday, June 26, 2006

Colorado University Set To Fire Ward Churchill

KMGH 7, the ABC affiliate in Denver is reporting that CU is ready to fire the outspoken professor, who has often made irrational and irresponsible statements that I can in no way, ever support. But being the proponent of free speech that am, I will not criticize him based on the utterly ridiculous claims, he has made.

He, like many others I criticize, has the right to say whatever he wants, even if it's dead wrong. But I, in no way, would accept academic fraud at any level. And that folks is precisely what he is being canned for. In all arguments, realize that one thing and all other arguments become null and void. No matter where you sit on the political spectrum, you cannot defend it. It goes against all rules of scholarship, academics, and performance. It is wrong. There are no, yes he was wrong, buts, here. There are NO excuses accepted. None, nada, nil, zilch, zippola, zero, cero, etc......

Besides that, he will be fine. He will get a book deal.

Cross posted at The Wide Awakes

The Truth Is Not Always Easy To Understand

For all of my European readers and the others too, I implore you to read this essay, reposted by Mustang over at Social Sense.

Some of you that read it, will certainly not agree with it. But that does not make it any less true. You can parse it, dissect however you want, and even call it an outright lie. But, that will not make any less true, either.

But if you already know and understand the events and principles put forth in this piece, you will find it an excellent review and very poignant commentary.

And if you are not sure or sit on the fence, you might learn something you didn't know before and have a deeper understanding of things that have not made sense,up to this point in your lives.

Sunday, June 25, 2006

More Murtha Mouth: U.S. More Of A Threat To World Peace Than North Korea And Iran.

Displaying his stubborn will, John Murtha has demonstrated once again that he just cannot keep his mouth from getting himself into trouble. Let's take a look at an article that is reporting more of the Murtha Mouth Syndrome.

From the South Florida Sun-Sentinel:

MIAMI — American presence in Iraq is more dangerous to world peace than nuclear threats from North Korea or Iran, Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., said to an audience of more than 200 in North Miami Saturday afternoon.

Here we have a veteran that is being exploited by the far left anti-war crowd, probably in the waning years of his life, making every speech he can an opportunity to do more damage than he has already been able to do. They snagged Cindy for a season, but now they do not need her, at least not for right now. Why not? They have someone right in the House of Representatives to handle the propaganda machine. Someone that can stir the pot on the inside.

Give them all credit, they do know how to strike while the iron is hot. They do know how to get the ball to the open man. Problem is, the open man cannot shoot and cannot score. They are being extremely irresponsible and Murtha is consenting to his exploitation by them, in exchange for help with future (ahem) goals and aspirations.

What are these goals and aspirations? Many can and do speculate on these kinds of things. There are a few theories that can be advanced, two of which may be reasonable to consider.

One - Murtha wants to be House Majority Leader if the Dems win back the House. This is a risky bet, because despite the disillusionment with some at the GOP, that in itself, does not guarantee a Democratic victory. Maybe this was promised to him, after some meeting, some time ago, before he became a household name. They know that their arguments about Iraq have failed so far, mainly due to their lack of credibility on military issues. But if a Vietnam veteran would be more believable and it will carry more credence than those that never
thought about wearing a uniform.

Two - If the Dems win back the White House (especially if it's Hillary), he wants to be Secretary of Defense. Another risky bet. If this is true, he really is upping the ante and betting more than he can afford to do. Maybe this too was promised or at very least alluded to him, in another one of thise meetings, somewhere, at sometime.

But I think that people know irresponsible and much more so than many in the far left think. And Murtha has been highly irresponsible with his mouth. To make a statement like the one above, knowing the media would put this out, does much more harm than a lot of people may realize. I could go into a long rant about this, and this alone. But I can sum it perfectly with one glance, if you will look at this Cox and Forkum cartoon. (HT on this toon: Mark at Eclipse Ramblings)

Don't get me wrong here. I am not being critical of Rep. Murtha's right to speak and speak irresponsibly. I do not advocate silencing anyone, despite how ignorant they sound. But I can and will counter them with what is the reality of the situation, as I see fit. And in this moment I can honestly say that Jack Murtha (like the vast majority of the Congress) must be replaced. Some need replaced for other reasons, but they still need replaced and I believe that Murtha is at the top of the list.

The voters of his district must look at this man's behavior, past and present, and determine if this is the man they want to be representing them. They must make this choice, because otherwise this man will continue to be a loose cannon, as long as he honestly believes that he can and will win this argument. The left has him deluded and in the process, he has deluded himself. But are the voters of the
12th District of Pennsylvania?

Time will tell.

UPDATE 6-26-06 10:55 EDT

From the Opinion Journal (HT:RCP) comes this essay. Read it.

Who Will Be The Next French President?

France will hold another presidential election next year and the conventional wisdom seems to be that current President Jacques Chirac will not run. If he did, he would likely be embarrassed. Mr. Chirac has been the lightning rod for many things that have not gone well during this past term and I suppose that those that know France well enough, could write book chapter (or two) on the reasons. I would think that if you asked the French, themselves, they would all differ as to the largest single cause of Chirac's low popularity. But the thing to remember about this last term of his is this, he was the default candidate.

The runoff in the past election pitted Mr. Chirac against the right-wing, ultra-nationalist candidate
Jean-Marie Le Pen. Socialists and other left-leaning parties were not fond of the Gaullist Chirac, but they really abhorred Le Pen. So, the vote for Jacques was a vote against Jean. An interesting note on Chirac that many Americans do not know is, Chirac served as President Francois Mitterand's Prime Minister (a Socialist) from 1986-88, the same post he held from 1974-76. He was also Mayor of Paris and has held many other posts, as well.

So, don't feel too sorry for him, he has had a long political career.

He will be rememered for a number of things, but he will most likely be most remembered for his present term as President, which has been quite volatile. It has been marked by public opposition to the Iraq War (I still think he has has aided more in intelligence than he has been willing to say), immigrant and labor riots, and the big one: the French vote against the EU Constitution. Most French people stood with him on his public refusal to support the ouster of Saddam Hussein, but have turned on him in other areas.

His legacy now in question,
it has been reported that he is depressed. It just further solidifies my opinion, I don't think that he will run, again. His credibility took a nose-dive after that EU vote and it is doubtful he will be able to recover. France wants a new direction, which is the old one. The direction Chirac wanted to take France in, was that of Europeanization. Face it, France does not want to lose it Frenchness, for the greater good of the continent.

And honestly? I cannot blame them.

The EU is bogged down in so much elitist bureaucracy, I cannot see that it can accomplish much if anything at all, even if it were given a constitution. France is not the only country either. Holland and Poland are not too keen on the EU idea either.

So, who will France pick as their next leader? Who wants to step up to the podium to tackle the restless French people's problems.? Who wants to be the whipping post for whatever is irritating them at any given time. And better yet, who will they want for that job?

It's hard to say.

There isn't much coming out about the upcoming campaign, at least not in the U.S. media. Part of it may be, they don't have campaigns for nearly as long as we do here in America. Other than a few articles on posturing, there hasn't been much campaign news here in the U.S., at least not just yet. Whoever it will be though, may have to define themselves by where they sit on the issue of the EU. Does France really want to be involved in it, or not? That will no doubt be asked and will be one of the many factors the French people will have to consider, in their choice. That might be the hot button issue, much like the border is ours.

Le Pen is already a leading candidate, by virtue of having done so well in 2002. His ultra-nationalist ideology is what many people in France think the nation needs right now. But the socialists that have been a formidable force and the more moderate Gaullists have entirely different world views for what they feel France's image should be. Le Pen looks to keep France French, not mingle his culture with others. He is the Pat Buchanan of France. He is highly anti-immigration. He sees the problems that the country faces due to the massive immigration of Arab Muslims. He, no doubt, also sees how it endangers French culture and tradition. However, there are many that vehemently disagree with him, it will not be easy for him to ascend much further than to where he is right now. That is, unless there are more immigrant riots.

The big problem I see with him, is he is not the biggest fan of Israel, or Jews in general. Some have referred to him as downright anti-semitic. They also fear that he will isolate France more than it presently is and could be a catalyzing force in Europe. By that I mean, he would be more protectionist and Europe could see his election as a threat to the EU. And thus, tensions could arise that haven't been there since the end of WWII.

The more moderate candidate that seems to be the one that can take some of the edge off of Le Pen's harsh edge, yet maintain the Frenchness of France (all while making people think he is taking the country in a new direction) is
Nicolas Sarkozy. He has emerged as a leading candidate in "Union pour un Mouvement Populaire" (Union for Popular Movement) party, the party that backs Chirac (he is not a member). He has openly criticized the policies of Chirac and his PM, Dominique de Villepin. He wants to be the element of change within the party. To have any chance, he must prove to the people that he is not Chirac.

The up and coming Socialist candidate has been featured over at Super Frenchie's site. Her name is Ségolène Royal. She carries a lot of weight in the party because of who she has a civil union with and who is also the father of her children, Francois Hollande, who is the party leader. It sounds like she is waiting on former President Prime Minister Lionel Jospin to decide what his plans are, but has been stepping up the rhetoric against Sarkozy, in her speeches.

First and foremost, she is a socialist. And unless one is a socialist, they are not likely to appeal to moderates. But, she is a good looking woman and may win some support on sex appeal, alone. I am not being sexist here, it's just a fact that some men think in those terms, sad as it may be. The other thing to note in a supposed candidacy of hers is, to elect her means electing Hollande. Unless there's a falling out of the two, which is most unlikely, he will be in the mix prominently should she run and win.

What kind of president France will choose next year is not an easy prediction to make. With all of the uncertainties that are present in today's republic, it's not going to be an easy thing to predict at this stage of the game. It's a less than a year away and a lot can happen, between now and then. But one thing is pretty assured, Jacques Chirac will not be the one to lead France, after his term expires. His era will soon be over.

If you are one that puts a lot credence in early polls and sees them as valid indicators so early in the season, an early poll released this past April shows, Sarkozy and Royal in a dead heat. The same pollsters also determined that in a runoff situation, Royal would win. But, as I have stated, it would be very premature to speculate at this point in time. So, I will refrain from making a guess and see what you think?

Will Sarkozy sell his new direction to the people, will the Socialists reclaim the Presidency, or will the nation swing a hard right to Le Pen? Or will someone come up out of the dust from seemingly nowhere to storm the French political scene?

Saturday, June 24, 2006

Some Posts I'd Like To Share

I have been very busy this week and haven't been able to post as much as I usually am able to. So, needless to say I am very spent out. But I have been working on some posts and hope to have one up very soon.

Until I can finish one of them, I would like to post some links to some of my readers' blogs for you to peruse, if you are looking for something to stimulate you interest.

Always On Watch, always seems to have something going on at her site that stimulates lively debate. Here, she notes a recently published article on how social isolation is on the rise in America.

AC at Fore Left has some thoughts on the latest furor over a surveillance program that looks at bank records. It's in his post, The war from within .

Jon at Q&O has a rundown on the possibility of a North Korean Missile test and the likelihood of a preemption, by the U.S, here.

Jason at Liberty and Culture has some criticism for Afghan President Karzai and the path his government seems to be taking in, Karzai is on whose side?

G at In The Middle Of America has an essay on Iraq entitled, The Iraq War, a Moral Essay.

AICS at The Logic Lifeline is irritated at the UN and Kofi Annan in particular. Get the scoop and his thoughts here.

Gandalf at Up Pompeii tells us how Ayatollah Khomeini's grandson is calling for the U.S. to overthrow Iran's present government.

And finally here is something I read over at Mustang of Social Sense posted recently. The words have been attributed to Dick Lamm. But it doesn't really matter who wrote them, I find them to be packed with truth. Read it here.

Well there are a few things to keep you busy, while I get other things together, both on and off the blog. Happy reading and thank you all for your patience during this busy time.

Thursday, June 22, 2006

Jack Murtha, Some Kind Of Hero

Jack Murtha, a House of Representatives Democrat, has been a very verbose critic of the war in Iraq. Mr. Murtha voted for the resolution to use force, if Iraq did not disarm or allow inspectors to verify that it had disarmed. But somewhere along the way, he became a mouthpiece for those that have never supported this action, and it is my estimation that they support no war of any kind, at any time. Which is fine and dandy, but the methods he has used have been highly questionable.

Not wanting to miss a golden opportunity to politicize the war with bad press (for the sole pupose of embarassing the President), the anti-war crowd has certainly made full use of his inconsistency and that he served in Vietnam, like it were some kind of honor badge that should automatically give him instant credibility. The man that voted for the operation and served in another, has not been shy about the publicity it has generated for him either. He has basked in the limelight for the sole purpose of gaining more power within the government, all while he has denigrated the mission and therefore encouraged the enemy to feel even more emboldened, in their cause.

That's politics, I guess. At least that's what it has devolved to, in this day and age.

But with that limelight (that a politician basks in when he gets a group of radical organizations and like-minded people that identify with that groups' ideology behind him), often comes scrutiny from those whose policies that you voted for and now condemn.

Take Mr Robert Novak for instance. He has an audience. Why? Because he makes sense most of the time. Here is his recent article entitled,
"Murtha's Second Act". (I suggest reading this one, it's good.)

Jack Murtha proves there are second acts in American politics. I had forgotten that federal prosecutors designated him an unindicted co-conspirator in the Abscam investigation 26 years ago. I was reminded of it after Murtha became a candidate for majority leader, not by a Republican hit man but a Democratic former colleague in the House. In a long political career, Murtha has made bitter enemies inside his party who are alarmed by his new stature.

Nothing happened 26 years ago, because he was a no-name. I do not remember him from then and I was a pretty astute follower of politics back then, too. Now that he is someone that has aligned himself with fringe elements and made accusations against the military (and the Adminstration), he himself has become a target of sorts. He got his favorable press from the MSM and the leftist think tanks, but now his actions will be looked at with even more scrutiny, than before. And Mr Novak has called him on it.

If that's not enough, let's have you take a look at this article from yesterday's Washington Times, entitled,
"The Real Jack Murtha".

Last June, the Los Angeles Times reported how the ranking member on the defense appropriations subcommittee has a brother, Robert Murtha, whose lobbying firm represents 10 companies that received more than $20 million from last year's defense spending bill. "Clients of the lobbying firm KSA Consulting -- whose top officials also include former congressional aide Carmen V. Scialabba, who worked for Rep. Murtha as a congressional aide for 27 years -- received a total of $20.8 million from the bill," the L.A. Times reported.

Sounds fishy to me, does anything remind you of anyone recently sent to jail and was a war hero?

Look, when you make noise, you attract attention to yourself. When you make noise about the wrong things, you get more scrutiny. And if you are looked at closer and it's found that your past is checkered, it doesn't look good on a resume, nor to others that already do not like you. In fact, let this be a lesson to all of those that want a future in managing campaigns and/or providing counsel to elected officials. Because if you do not heed this advice and throw stones while living in a glass house, your sin will find you out.

Mr. Murtha's dirty deeds may very well be about to come out, to the forefront. If he wasn't squeaky clean, he certainly had no business criticizing others. Because now, he is fair game. He has put himself on display for all to behold. He may have served honorably, but so what? And if this is true, ( I say if) what is the difference between him and Cunnigham?

Answer: Murtha has not been convicted, nor has he been charged, yet. It will probably need to be decided by the voters of his district, because unless the MSM starts to hound this like the Cunningham scandal, this may not have time to come to a head, by election day.

Tuesday, June 20, 2006

A Question For Any/All

First of all, I apologize for not keeping the pace I am accustomed to, in my posting and reading/commenting on your blogs. I appreciate everyone's readership, but there are times (like now) where I am busier than a one-armed wallpaper hanger.

I have to go out of town tomorrow (Wed, 6-21-06) for the day, I hope to have a new post up that evening. But for now, I would like to pose a question to all of you that care to take the challenge and answer. If you are a regular or are new, liberal or conservative, if you have commented here before or not, you are invited to participate. But, please note that I may use parts or all of your comments on a main post (or I might not). If no one comments, I can and will go on my own diatribe as I so often do.

Here goes:

The two missing soldiers were found today and there are signs that these men were brutalized before they died at their killers' hands. Why no outcry from the same people that loudly condemn the Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, and other such things? If one side is wrong for something, the vast majority of the time (the US), why is not the other side wrong when their atrocities are much more brutal?

Monday, June 19, 2006

Newsweek Reverses Course In Duke Rape Case

The now famous Duke rape case prosecutor has committed himself to the black community, by trying to undo the injustices that were done towards blacks for years. At least that's what the Black Panther Militia would have us believe. That's the whole rationale behind their blind support of the accuser and why they will accept nothing less than a conviction. Others that want us to believe that they are sticking up for oppressed blacks on a daily basis (like Jesse Jackson and his peers) believe it too, despite the fact, they do not use the same exact inflammatory rhetoric of the militia. Radical feminists have used it to promote their agenda, as well. But in reality, Mike Nifong, the DA in this case, has willingly allowed himself to be sucked in by it all and the evidence is the case, itself.

Even liberal leaning publications like Newsweek have now began to question the validity of this case, as many in the blogosphere have done since the case garnered national attention, back in April. In its June 29, 2006 issue, there is an article entitled,
Doubts About Duke. In this lengthy and fairly thorough synopsis of the case, it examines the entire case front to back and draws the same conclusions that the crack staff here at PYY was inclined to draw, shortly after the case broke into the national media. (See: this and this) Subtle as it was, the article even implicates Newsweek, itself, in the mad dash to jump on this story.

From the Newsweek article:

The media coverage of the case has been enormous. NEWSWEEK put the mug shots of two of the players Reade Seligmann, 20, and Collin Finnerty, 19—on its cover the week after they were indicted. Some early accounts raised doubts about the guilt of the players, but the story more typically played as a morality tale of pampered jocks gone wild. Lately, as more evidence from police or medical reports have been filed or cited in court documents by defense lawyers, the national and local media have been raising questions about Nifong's conduct of the case and his motivations.

Just what are those motivations, you may ask?

Nifong is described by some lawyers as an adversary who gets dug in—and won't budge. But Nifong's motives may have been political as well. He was six weeks away from an election when the Duke case came up. Durham voters are almost evenly divided between black and white. One of Nifong's opponents was black and the other was white, but the white lawyer was much better known in the community, thanks to winning a high-profile murder case. (That opponent, former assistant D.A. Freda Black, became a bitter enemy of Nifong's after, she claims, Nifong fired her.) Nifong promised black voters that he would not let the Duke case drop. He indicted two of the players two weeks before the election. He won narrowly, taking a larger share of the black vote than the other white candidate.

Unless new evidence is found that reverses the vast majority of the present evidence, it is the opinion of this writer that the above snippet of this article is, in fact, the crux of this whole matter: Politics.

As the case has been unfolding in the media, it appears that three men, a university (to include an entire team of one sport), and black Americans everywhere have all been wronged by this one selfish stunt. The MSM jumped on it, the radical fringes previously mentioned jumped on it, and Mike Nifong (a candidate for re-election) jumped on it. This they did, long before all of the facts were known.

The three men that stand accused are being held in a state of limbo (while DA Nifong digs in and refuses to move, until well after the November election) and are facing serious charges that could severely impact their lives for a long time. There's no denying it. The university has lost an entire athletic program, with the coach being villified as a negligent enabler of Animal House antics by his players. When this is settled (by the charges being dropped or by acquittal if this case goes to trial), they will all likely recover, over the course of time.

But it is the American black community that will likely see the most damage, in that, future cases (that may actually have merit) could very well be minimized and disregarded, due to the prosecutorial misconduct by DA Nifong. A shadow of doubt can (and will likely) be cast on these future cases, all because a DA seeking re-election wanted to garner the majority of the black vote in his county. (See: The Boy Who Cried Wolf) Maybe victims will be hesitant to come forward, afraid that their story will not be believed, maybe the DAs themselves will be hesitant to go forward with some cases, because the fallout of another false accusation could be detrimental to their political careers. But no matter how it plays out in these future events, there will be some effects.

Anytime a politician or elected official chooses to play a race card or grandstands to win the support of any racial demographic, he/she bastardizes all legitimate instances of discrimination or any other form of racial bigotry that has occurred or will occur. And, when the media plays into their hands to generate a story, they must assume the risk having egg on their face, like Newsweek now has. But give them credit, they have stepped up to plate and accepted their share of the responsibility for their part in this, even though it is a subtle admission.

Be that as it may, the only one that has the ability to right this particular wrong, is Mike Nifong. But given his conduct up to this point, it's highly unlikely that he will reverse course, until well after the election. And it's a shame that the people of Durham County, North Carolina cannot see what his true motives are and vote him out, in November.

Hat Tip for the Newsweek article: RCP

Death Penalty For Repeat Sex Offenders?

According to an RCP article by Debra Saunders there are a couple of states that have governors that have signed bills to make repeated sex offense crimes against children punishable by death.

Now, I absolutely despise child molestors to the core. They are the lowest form of criminal, next to a murderer of a child. I have no problem locking them up in solitary confinement and throwing away the key. But Ms Saunders points out one very good solid reason as to why, the death penalty in this case would not be the wisest thing to do and would not protect our children any more than life in prison would.

Michael Rushford of the pro-death penalty Criminal Justice Legal Foundation in Sacramento, Calif., captured my thoughts exactly when he said: "It's like this. If you get a death sentence for raping a little girl, and you get a death sentence for a raping a little girl and killing a little girl, and the only witness to the crime is the little girl, why not kill them all?"

Many that read PYY know that I am no big fan of the death penalty and I have stated why that is, on a couple of occasions. But if you are going to have a death penalty, it must be used wisely. And in my estimation, these states have not used good sense, in this case.

Sunday, June 18, 2006

Happy Father's Day

To all that are fathers, grandfathers, step-fathers, or just father figures:

Happy Father's Day.

Anyone can father a child, there's no skill involved with that. But to be a father takes knowledge, understanding, wisdom, and patience. It is more than just making a living or paying support. It involves giving time and yourself.

So, to all of those that sought after these things in order to do the best job you possible could, PYY salutes you on this, your day.

Saturday, June 17, 2006

Amber Alert: When To Sound The Alarm

One the best things to come out of government in recent years is the formation of the Amber Alert System, designed to find missing children immediately after abduction. More often than not, the system has been successful in finding kids before tragedy happens.

Many times desperate parents are the guilty parties, many times the children are found unharmed. Most of the parents mean no harm, but allow their emotions to supercede their common sense and make a decision based on emotion. Many times, what they are doing may be due to a sense of hopelessness and an attitude of selfishness, but there are times when it is done solely for the purpose of getting even with the custodial parent. There are also times when a parent abducts a child, the outcome is not so happy.

Meet Katron Walker, the Terre Haute (Indiana) man that (allegedly) abducted and killed his four-year old son and tried to kill his two year old, because of a dispute with his wife.

TERRE HAUTE, Ind. -- A man faces murder and attempted-murder charges on accusations he took his two sons at knifepoint, fatally stabbed one of them and injured the other Tuesday following a dispute between him and his wife, police said.

The Indy News Channel article tells the story, but here is the interesting thing to note in all of this:

Family members were thankful for help from police, but
wondered why it took hours after the abduction before an Amber Alert was issued. The alert was issued shortly before 5:30 p.m. -- about seven hours after the boys were taken

I just spent some good money on an alarm system for my house. What sense does it make to have such a system, if I do not turn it on? The same goes for an Amber Alert. Why have this tool, if you are going to be shy about hitting the switch? Seven hours is a long time to have waited for this particular alert, to have been issued. At least it is, in my estimation.

Do not get me wrong, I have the utmost respect for the hard-working people in law enforcement that put their lives on the line, daily. Overall, they do a damned good job with what little resources they receive. They just do not get paid enough for what they face. It truly is a thankless and tireless job that has to be done. And while there are some bad apples that exist simply for the power that comes with it, the majority are not so. Today, some of them must look at themselves in the mirror and ask themselves, what took so long on this one? They are the ones must look at the process and see where it broke down.

Each state is a little different, but here is some criteria created by the U.S Justice System for issuing an Amber Alert:

1. Law enforcement must confirm that an
abduction has taken place.

2. The child is at risk of serious injury or death.

3. There is sufficient descriptive information of child, captor, or captor's vehicle to issue an alert .

4. The child must be 17 years old or younger.

Now, there is no guarantee that if the alarm had been sounded earlier, things would have turned out differently/better. Nothing is foolproof, nothing is a panacea. Systems fail and people that run them fail. That is an immutable truth.

But when something like this happens, there needs to be some serious reflection on: What happened, why it happened, and can it happen again? If the answer to latter is yes, then, some troubleshooters must look some things over and see where the deficiencies lie. If there was negligence, it must determined: Who was negligent and why? Those persons must be counseled, educated, and/or disciplined. If it is gross negligence, the same questions apply, but the difference is, they need to be terminated.

It does no good to spend millions of dollars to implement a tool for the greater good of society and not be willing to use it, or not know when to use it. The law enforcement community in Terre Haute needs to find out what went wrong, they owe it to the people of that community and that young boy.

But sadly, when they do, it will be too late for Collin Walker, aged 4. He is dead. His brother Monte, aged 2, will be traumatized (probably) for life. His relatives that loved him dearly, will grieve for life. His father gets a trial, he may get life or lose his life. The people responsible for not issuing the alert get counseling/discipline and the people of Terre Haute get the bill.

Little Collin gets a funeral.

UPDATE: 6/17/06 11:45PM

The Amber Alert Timeline

Friday, June 16, 2006

Status: Post Zarqawi

Buried in the depths of the AP was this three paragraph story about the status of raids conducted, as a result of information obtained from the files of Zarqawi.

American and Iraqi forces have carried out 452 raids since last week's killing of terrorist leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, and 104 insurgents were killed during those actions, the U.S. military said Thursday.

That's one paragraph and I do not want to spoil the ending by posting the last two.

Getting Zarqawi not only eliminated him from the equation, it exposed much information that has been wisely used to push the throttle down, a little further. Still, there are those that say we are losing and that Zarqawi's death means little. In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't mean the end of the war, there are still forces that seek to destroy.

But little by little, the terrorists are starting to weaken. The evidence is in the documents captured from Zarqawi. It's been slow going, but that's what happens when you fight a politically correct war.


When I linked that last link above this morning, it led to an AP story like this one. But if you click on the link now, it leads to the shoe bomber in the mosque article. Such is the world of the AP, that's the chance I take when I link directly to the AP.

The interesting thing to note is the nature of the article that the link was switched to. The positive story was switched to a negative one. The first link was to a three paragraph story that told of successes after the death of Zarqawi. The second, one that was obviously negative.

Now, I have no trouble with negative news, when there is some to report. That's the nature of life. There's good news and bad news. You win a few and you lose a few. But my complaint with the MSM, is that they focus too much on the negative. That, in my opinion, is the nature of the business.

Thursday, June 15, 2006

Scientists Discredit Gore Movie

From The Canada Free Press comes this article.
"Scientists have an independent obligation to respect and present the truth as they see it," Al Gore sensibly asserts in his film "An Inconvenient Truth"..

..With that outlook in mind, what do world climate experts actually think about the science of his movie?

This ought to be good.
Professor Bob Carter of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, in Australia gives what, for many Canadians, is a surprising assessment: "Gore's circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention."

(Emphasis is mine)

Well, that pretty much sums it up. You can read the rest, if you want.

The trouble is, there are countless other scientists that are of the same opinion. Yet, they rarely (if ever) get an audience with the MSM. They saturate us with the threat of global warming and anything that would point us in that direction. They focus on one side of the argument. They don't want you to form an informed opinion, they will tell you what you need to know.

How arrogant is that?

Let me modify Al's opening statement:

The media has an independent obligation to respect and present the truth as they see it.

Wednesday, June 14, 2006

Democrats To Roll Out Plan?

From the SF Chronicle comes this article about a forthcoming plan. Where have we heard this before? John "I have a plan" Kerry. He actually had a plan before he didn't have a plan, or is it the other way around? I can't keep up.

Let's look at this plan a little closer shall we?

Democrats will introduce a domestic agenda for the 2006 campaign this week, confident that their opportunity to pick up seats is the best in a generation, yet divided over how much an agenda will matter.

They are divided over an agenda. That means there are a significant number that say, "Agenda? We don't need no stinking agenda.". Evidently, they think their present course of attacking Bush is enough. It wasn't enough in 2002 or 2004, but somehow, miraculously it will be enough in 2006.

Solomon once said, "Where there is no vision, the people perish.". That statement is certainly applicable, in this case.

The Democratic program will consist of bread-and-butter priorities: increasing the minimum wage, cutting costs of prescription drugs, reducing interest rates on student loans, rolling back subsidies for oil companies, and pay-as-you-go budgeting, according to party officials.

Sounds like the same old plans from yesteryear (and the years before that too). It didn't help them then and likely will not help them now. They lose these arguments everytime, they bring them up. There's nothing new here.

They want to raise minumum wage, so that small business owners will be forced to lay off or cut other benefits. They want to set prices on drugs for the drug companies. Never mind that the drug companies spend lots of money to find new drugs and deserve to recuperate their massive investments. (Chemists do not work cheap.) To stop them from setting their prices, would slow research and therefore, new drugs would not be rolled out at the rate they currently are today. Incentive is what drives the market.

No. the more I hear from the Democrats the more I think about the old central planning economy that drove the Soviet bloc into oblivion. It didn't work for them, what makes them think it will work for us, now?

Tuesday, June 13, 2006

Bush's Visit To Iraqi PM: Thank You Or Intervention?

President Bush slipped out and headed to Iraq again, today. But as expected, the left has pretty much downplayed it.

Bush said he wanted to speak to the Iraqi PM and thank him for his support, and his efforts in building a stable democratic republic. But what do you want to bet that the subject of Maliki's recent remarks about U.S. troops committing daily atrocities came up? Do you think that maybe this was mainly an intervention to those remarks, as I described in this post?

Was Zarqawi Assassinated?

I cannot count how many times I have heard the death of Zarqawi, referred to as an assassination. It comes up in the most casual of settings, but, this is not a valid term that could/should be employed, in this case.

Let's look at this a second, starting with a dictionary definition. Let's take the word, assassinate. Shall we?

It simply means:

To kill somebody, especially a political leader or other public figure, by a sudden violent attack.

Note, there are two prominent words that appear in that definition, political and public. And then be sure to note that Zarqawi wasn't either.

He wasn't political in the sense that he governed anything. He ruled nothing, except a bunch of common street thugs that use fear and intimidation as a weapon, along with the bullets and explosive devices. He was not elected to any office, nor did he overthrow any government.

He wasn't a public figure, either. He existed in the dark underworld of Iraq and did not show his face very often, except on a couple of rare occasions in a video. He was wanted. To be a public figure, one must assume that someone has to be out in the public, on at least a semi-regular basis. The person goes to work, goes shopping, visits places, makes appearances, and so forth. Zarqawi was wanted and stayed hidden most of the time.

If you are still skeptical, think about it a second and ask yourself: Was John Dillinger assassinated? He was on the lam, just like Zarqawi was before his death at the hands of the U.S government. He was wanted for a host of crimes, just like Zarqawi, but we didn't hear the term assassination used in his case, did we?

The point I am trying to make is this: Zarqawi was killed in a military operation. Most victims of assassinations are not armed and openly waging war against the people that surround them. He was a commander of a para-military unit that was actively fighting a war with American and Iraqi forces; and was targeting innocent civilians, when he could not get to those forces. He was a war criminal on the loose and he deserved to die, as such.

To make this out to be an assassination is nothing more than an attempt to cast a dark light on an otherwise impressive military operation, which was successful. And the anti-war left is working every possible angle so they can to do just that, starting right here, with their choice of words that simply do not apply. They cannot stand it when the military has a success, they demonstrate it every time. In this case, they seek to do it by confusing terms. Sadly, some people are buying into it.

But it doesn't work with me. How about you?

Cross-posted at The Wide Awakes

Medical Update

Most of you know that a couple of weeks ago my mother-in-law fell and broke her hip. Then without warning in a surreal moment one week later, my mother fell and broke her hip. It was tough going with mom-in-law, at first. But now, both are doing better and both are now in rehab.

But if that wasn't enough, my very best friend from high school flunked a cardiac stress test Friday and had a heart catheterization yesterday. So, the biggest part of the day yesterday, was spent in the hospital with him and his family. His coronaries were fine. It must have been a false positive, which sometimes is the case with stress tests.

Whew! Close one.

Well, now we will see if he modifies his modifiable risk factors. But then again, I am not one to talk.

Now that everyone is doing better, I am back.

Friday, June 09, 2006

Light Blog Alert

I want to take a moment to announce that I will not be blogging much over the next few days. (If at all) I do very much appreciate everyone's interest here at PYY, I hope you can keep the place warm by reading the archives or visiting someone on my blogroll.

I have a lot to do this weekend and thinking about blogging is not going to be at the forefront of my activities. I do hope to be back at it, somewhere around the first of the week.

Thank you all for reading and have a wonderful weekend.

Check This Out

Here's something neat.

Here is what my blog looks like in French.

(At least it looks like French)

Haditha Buried By Zarqawi Story

The "blame America for everything" crowd isn't happy about Zarqawi being killed, because it took Haditha off the front page for the day, yesterday. Much of the day was devoted to the reporting of the termination and neutralizing of a military commander. And that hasn't set well with many.

They wanted another day of non-stop Haditha coverage. They'll get it back, when the Zarqawi story starts to die down. You can be sure of that. But until then, I recommend you educate yourself on what conditions are truly like in Iraq by reading this piece from Michael Yon's Online Magazine, on Haditha and many other subjects. In fact, feel free to read other articles at his site, as well.

Although I doubt the hardcore leftists that hate America will have the guts to read it objectively because their minds are already made up, maybe there are a few that are unsure and will read it with an open mind. So if you are a leftist that blames America for everything, do not even waste your time. You will dismiss it almost immediately, which shows just what you know.

But do not worry, the media will soon be squawking the Haditha story ad nauseum real soon. In fact, I bet they'll start heading back towards it today. So be patient. Your heroes, the MSM, will be back at it, shortly.

HT: Mustang of Social Sense for sending me the article.

Thursday, June 08, 2006

Dallas Takes Game One

Dallas has beaten the Heat 90-80, in Game One of the NBA Championship.

It's not over, but the Mavs did look determined. They played great defense and seemed to control the game, most of the way. They never seemed to lose their composure, even when they got down. This team has good chemistry and will be hard to beat. But as I said, it's not over yet. They must win three more.

I would expect some adjustments by Riley, on Sunday.

Severe Agitation Can Bring Change

I think it only fair to enter in on the record publicly that I am not happy with Blogger anymore.

I have resisted bitching, because after all, it's free. Beggars can't be choosers, can they? Most of the time it's there when I want it, but the last two days it has been on and off. Sometimes it goes off before I can save a post. In fact, I will be surprised if I can get this posted before it shuts down on me again.

At any rate, I would not be surprised if others are agitated, like me. It would be interesting to see if WP or Type Key get a little surge in business, after these past twos days of Blogger uncertainty. In the meantime, I will be contemplating if I want to live like this or pay for another site and move.

Whatever I decide, will be decided over the next few days. the thought of moving the blog does not set well with me. But I will, if this keeps up.

We will see.

AP: Zarqawi Killed In Air Raid

The Associated Press is reporting that Public Enemy #1 in Iraq, has been killed in an air raid.

We have been led down this path before. I can only say that I hope this is correct. But for now, I must caution against over-jubilation because this campaign is about much more than one man. There is always another one waiting in the wings to take over as PE#1, in any society, anywhere. Even if bin Laden were to be killed or captured, the war would continue.


All major news organizations are reporting that Zarqawi has been positively identified as one of the dead. There are reports that al-Qaida has even confirmed this story.

This gives a big boost to the President and is a morale builder for the troops and the Iraqi people. But as I said earlier, despite the fact that the news media will devote most of the day to analysis and prognostication, the struggle will continue. This is not the end of anything, except Zarqawi's life. But, hopefully it will be the beginning of the end.

Canadians Shocked At Terror Plot

Over at RCP is an article by Jack Kelly entitled, Canada's Tolerance is No Deterrent to Terrorism. I recommend reading it. I especially suggest that those who think pacifism makes a civilization safe to take a good look at the situation that has surfaced in Toronto.

Never mind that when we want lessons in pacifism and the outcomes of such a policy, all we need to do is look at Neville Chamberlain. This lesson comes from the here and now, not some past bygone day, one that the revisionists have tried to downplay for three decades now. As Mr. Kelly alludes to in his essay, the Canadians have the opportunity to see first hand that positioning itself against the Bush administration, does not exempt it from being the target of evil people that care nothing about Canada, or its citizenry.

But, whether or not eyes get opened will depend on whom you talk to. The left in that country (and in this one) will no doubt spin it to be Bush’s fault. They usually do. Try convincing a leftist that Islamic jihadists hate all of western civilization, not just Americans. It always comes back to George Bush and Iraq. Somehow, I can envision a conversation with a leftist twenty years from now and hearing GWB’s name, coupled with Iraq.

But to those with an objective mind, to those that can set politics aside, and to those that can see reality plainly, you can see that there is no respecter of persons in this dark and hate-filled movement. They have yet to bat an eye over killing fellow Muslims, what makes anyone think they would not look to hurt countries that have been critical of George Bush over the past few years? Western civilization is western civilization. And freedom is not conducive to their goals and objectives.

To think that being a critic of the American government somehow guarantees safe passage in the onslaught they wish to commit shows a deep lack of critical thinking skills, at the very least.

Wednesday, June 07, 2006

Busby Loses CA-50 By Slim Margin

From Human Events Online, via Drudge comes this column by Robert Novak entitled, Culture of Corruption' Failed Democrats in House Race.

The outcome proves that even with corrupt former Republican Rep. Duke Cunningham’s name fresh in the news, low turnout, a weak candidate like Bilbray and dissension within the GOP ranks (that led to negative Republican campaigning against Bilbray), Democrats cannot win here. Even here, where it should have mattered most, the “culture of corruption” mantra wasn’t enough to convince voters to pull the Democratic lever.

Bob thinks the “culture of corruption” strategy is what caused Ms. Busby’s effort to fail. I think that was part of it. But I also think that
her reckless remark about not needing papers hurt her severely, in the last hours before the election.

I don’t know about you, but I wouldn’t vote for anyone that makes a highly irresponsible statement like that. It’s to the point that we have the lesser of two evils to vote for in this country. No matter the level of government, more and more are we looking at, who will screw up the country, state, or municipality worse, instead of the best person for the job.

After the Duke Cunningham scandal this district should have gone Democratic. The demographics, the mood of the people, and the intangibles all pointed towards Busby. That is until she was caught in a moment of “misspeak”, it was hers to lose.

Bilbray, a lobbyist, is no winner. He just won because he didn’t make the idiotic remark. In a sense, he won by default. He was the lesser of the two evils, yesterday. (And by quite a slim margin.) He is nothing to jump up and down about, he represents the what is wrong with government, not what is right.

The sad thing is, they get to do the whole thing over in November.

So, the significance of this race will be spun endlessly in the coming months. Dems will say it was close and therefore claim a “moral victory” based on that, and that alone. They have to, that’s all they have. The GOP will use it to convince people they are still the choice of the people and hold the majority. Neither is the case. People just did not have much else to choose from. It was a lobbyist versus a school board member that would have been very beholden to the illegal immigration lobby. Some choice.

Plea Deal In Works For McKinney?

Drudge is reporting about a possible plea deal with Cynthia McKinney in her battery case.

Federal prosecutors investigating the confrontation between Rep. Cynthia McKinney of Georgia and a Capitol police officer have been talking privately with McKinney's office in hopes of resolving the case without the spectacle of an indictment and trial, the ATLANTA JOURNAL CONSTITUTION reports on Wednesday.

We all know Matt sometimes gets it wrong, but sometimes he gets it right too.

If this is the case, I have to say that I believe it to be highly unacceptable. Because we all know that whatever charge she wants to accept, will be one that will not be a felony and will let her keep her seat. This is why the majority of the people are fed up with this kind of shenanigans.

Let the average citizen do the same thing and see what happens. How fast would you be whisked off to jail, your whole life and life's history will be investigated? Life, as you know it, will be over for awhile and that's to say the least.

Look, if the people we entrust to enforce our laws won't do their job and prosecute all offenders (regardless of political party, position, and/or affiliations), we have to vote the offenders out. They may walk free, but their power will be gone, their influence will be greatly diminished. They will not be allowed to dip into the public till, allowed to be in charge of such a great task of governance, and will have to do their dirty deeds back in the private sector.

This needs to be done en masse and this year. By starting with this year's mid-terms, the groundwork can be laid for 08. If we do not send the message now, we will be floundering come 08 time. It will give the newly elected lawmakers time to think about the votes they make between now and then. Those that miss the cut and do get re-elected may very well get the message too. They will know that the same electorate that put them in, will put them out, if they do not keep straight.

Tha ballot box could very well be the best prosecutor, judge, and jury, ever designed.

Tancredo Wins Michigan Straw Poll

From Human Events Online comes the results of a straw poll held in Michigan, Monday night.

Tom Tancredo won.

I, for one, am not surprised in the least. I have been saying for the past year that the border will be the hot button issue and now we see this playing out.

Just a straw poll, you say? You would be right.

But now, money will start to come in in order to compete with the GOP establishment candidates. And might I remind everyone that Bill Clinton won a straw poll in Florida, two years or so before the 92 election. Before that, he was a virtual unknown that gave a long boring speech at the 1988 Democratic Convention. So it's not so far fetched of a notion to think of Tancredo as the front-runner.

Earth to Washington, earth to Washington. Come in Washington. We have a message for you, Washington. Do you copy?

Tuesday, June 06, 2006

Patrick Kennedy Exits Rehab

In his bid to become a clean and sober citizen worthy of his calling to the fine and upstanding institution known as, the House Of Representatives, Patrick Kennedy has left rehab after three grueling weeks of intensive rehab.

Man, that must have been hard.

What a brave and courageous man he must be, to have the courage to admit himself voluntarily for substance abuse treatment, after committing actions that could have killed an innocent person (or more). Not only that, the Mayo Clinic must be wonder-workers of the first degree. Short of laying their hands on him (and commanding him to rise up and walk without his chair), their program must be nothing short of miraculous.

Think about it.

Years of substance abuse issues suddenly gone after just three weeks. Three weeks and he's a new man, fit to be back out on the road and conducting the public's business in a fine ethical institution like Congress.

The Kennedy tradition of privilege, continues.

Hirsi Ali On Europe

Hat tip goes to Booker Rising for the link to this London Times article, "You won't beat terror with tolerance".

If you do not know who Hirsi Ali is,
read this.

Do some reading on this brave lady and you will soon see just why I fear for Europe. In fact, just read this Times article and you will know why.

Ms. Ali:
“You pretend it’s fine, you laugh about Londonistan, but you have all these terrorists who don’t accept basic British values. And you don’t really talk about it.”

Tolerance for others is one thing. I see nothing wrong with respecting another person's social mores and traditions. But when that person's mores and traditions call for the destruction of mine, I tend to draw the line, right there.
She insists her new employer, the American Enterprise Institute, will let her stoke such dangerous fires, unlike timid old Europe: “I think it is why Europe is going down the drain. The United States seems more comfortable with competing ideas.”

Ah but, there are many in this country that do not like competing ideas. Try having an opinion different from them and you'll hear how insensitive you are, how intolerant you are, and yes, how racist you are.

It may not be as bad as Ms. Ali describes the scene in Europe (yet), but if we are not careful, we will allow ourselves to go down that same path. Europe may be home to many of our ancestors and much of our present-day culture has been derived from theirs. But, I would strongly caution against using the Europe Ms. Ali has experienced, as a model for this country.

Sunday, June 04, 2006

Iraq Prime Minister Maliki's Blunder And The Intervention It Requires

This week, Iraqi PM Mouri Maliki made a highly erroneous assertion that multi-national troops are committing daily atrocities against the citizenry, in Iraq.

RCP comes this essay found in today's Chicago Sun-Times.

You would think the prime minister of Iraq, now that one is actually in place to assert leadership, would do so. As difficult as it may be for him to keep the different factions in his coalition from each other's throats -- the incessant squabbling has kept him from filling the two top security posts in his cabinet -- you would think he would resist the temptation to play up to anti-American hostilities in his shaky government on the part of the Sunnis and some others.

I will take this a step further.

Just as I asserted in my previous post that exposes a congressional candidate's true colors (through a highly irresponsible statement to an already highly irresponsible media), we have another statement that may very well show the true heart and intentions of the current Iraqi PM. It may very well be that his sympathies lie with the terrorists that constantly are looking for ways, to de-stabilize the young democratically-elected government, or maybe he is just not well-adept at leadership-like statements to an overly critical and biased news media.

To make such an irresponsible statement and risk all that has been accomplished (as slow and tedious as it has been), clearly demonstrates to me, an anti-American attitude, which can be an indicator of how he will run the Iraqi government. It also shows to me, just what this guy is made of and what his inner core values are.

If I had any say in the U.S. State Department, the official American position on this would be, "knock it off and knock it off now". "Free speech is one thing, but stick to the points that are proven/true and leave the conjecture to the investigators."

I would also remind him that he is not ready to assume security of the young republic at this particular point in time, and that I would not hesitate to start an early withdrawal, leaving him to deal with the power vacuum that would most certainly be created by the abrupt absence of all multi-national forces. I would explain further to him that I would not be willing to sacrifice one more American life towards a government that puts out what is clearly, an irresponsible piece of politically charged and biased rhetoric, especially in the face of an enemy that knows all too well how to use the news media, to spread their lies and deceits.

At the same time I would let the Iraqi people know and let them pressure their government, too. Most Iraqis are fearful that a withdrawal now would mean an exorbitant increase of violence, and a return of oppression under a ruthless government, probably even worse than Saddam's. The average citizen is not as anti-American, as the MSM would have us all believe.

His unsupported claim is untrue. He needs to acknowledge that and apologize for his incompetent statements, immediately. If he doesn't, I would then put him on notice.

The Busby Blunder

From the San Diego Union-Tribune comes this article about a recent statement made by Francine Busby, the Democratic candidate for California's 50th District. Here is how it begins:

If an election can turn on a sentence, this could be the one: “You don't need papers for voting.”

On Thursday night, Francine Busby, the Democratic candidate for the 50th Congressional District, was speaking before a largely Latino crowd in Escondido when she uttered those words. She said yesterday she simply misspoke.

Misspoke? Yeah, and my uncle plays lead guitar for The Who.

Actually, this statement and this article just further solidifies the argument that the Dems are for open borders, solely because they want to win elections. They need votes. Never mind the ramifications. They show desperation at many a turn these days, and this statement was just one more piece of evidence (in the midst of many) that supports this claim.

I cannot imagine how these people expect to earn the trust of anyone, when they say and do, the things they do. Are they just too ignorant to know that the media is far reaching and too astute to miss something like this? Or do they just not care? Do they not know that in this age of media and information, the press will not miss idiotic blunders like this? Or do they just thumb their noses at everyone, because of their over-inflated sense of importance?

But, know this. It's one thing for her to say something stupid like this and it's another, to try and tap dance her way out of it without looking like a liar and a fool. (And she did both) I am not nearly as angry with the original statement, itself. I fully expect Democrats to want illegals voting. This is nothing new, it's been going on for ages. It doesn't surprise me, in the least.

What I really resent is, when they insult the average American's intelligence, by coming up with the old "I misspoke" defense. They take the people for utter fools.

She meant what she said, or she would not have said it. And as I said earlier, she was even more foolish to try and reverse course. But the question I have is, will the illegals listen to her and vote her in? What a travesty it would be, if that were the case.

HT: Drudge

Friday, June 02, 2006

Unity 08: Waters Being Tested For Possible Third Party

Here is an article by Peggy Noonan found in today's Opinion Journal, entitled Third Time. (HT: RCP)

Unity 08 sounds like it is intended to explore the possibility of launching a bipartisan third party, if neither of the two major parties, is willing to listen to the will of the people. I am not sure if they are the answer or not, but it's being looked at as an option for disgruntled voters.

As you know the crack staff of one here at PYY has been posing the question about both the possibility and the feasibility of a viable third party, for some time now.

Is It Time For A Third Party?

2. What It Takes To Build A Viable Third Party:

Part I, Part II, and Part III.

And what issue is primarily driving this restlessness and disillusion?


Homeland Security and the passive manner in which this war in Iraq has been conducted are also important. But immigration is the hot button issue that really resonates with 80% of the population.

Here are some observations by Peggy worth mentioning:

The partisanship has gotten deeper as less separates the governing parties in Washington.
Poignant, very poignant.

Although the parties aren't much different (we see that in the ourage shown by members of Congress over the Jefferson office raid by the FBI), they are more polarized than ever before. And it does get serious, at times.

The fact is, they are closer in ideology than they present to be.

...people see the Republicans as incapable of managing the monster they've helped create--this big Homeland Security/Intelligence apparatus that is like some huge buffed guy at the gym who looks strong but can't even put on his T-shirt without help because he's so muscle-bound. As for the Democrats, who co-created Homeland Security, no one--no one--thinks they would be more managerially competent. Nor does anyone expect the Democrats to be more visionary as to what needs to be done. The best they can hope is the Democrats competently serve their interest groups and let the benefits trickle down.

That's the dilemma we face. It's a toss-up at times.

The GOP isn't doing what it promised to do, but the Dems are not stepping up to the plate and capitalizing on their ineptness and open refusal to listen, to the people that put them there. The Dems are actually scarier than the GOP, otherwise, midterms would be a slam dunk. Both are incompetent, but one is much more incompetent than the other. Both are not good for America, right now. But one will screw it up slower than the other.

It ought not to be that way.